Ask Chuck Kennedy

[bruce_brakel]

Kelsey's rating at Wingnut went up quite a bit when the Friday afternoon rain soaked round got factored in. The low scores shot by the rain squall pool boosted ratings for the pools which played in the sauna rounds. Although she'd like to have a 1030 round in her database, the ratings elves might want to separate the the Friday afternoon round.

[steveganz]

For divisions that have multiple pools, the only rounds that are accurate are the semi-finals. For divisions with a single pool, like FPO, the ratings are accurate for all rounds.

[keithjohnson]

Originally Posted by steveganz

For divisions that have multiple pools, the only rounds that are accurate are the semi-finals. For divisions with a single pool, like FPO, the ratings are accurate for all rounds.

I would hope when all is sorted out that the final round at Idlewild will NOT be counted for the GM pool as playing over 2 days with some people completing their rounds in the dark with flashlights, some players NEVER restating at 7PM, and others playing some holes - there is no way that the ratings form those scores are reflective of those conditions being played by all the players on the same course at the same time.

[JenniferB]

Originally Posted by JenniferB

My whole card of two complete women's divisions quit because we all thought it was unsafe to continue, but the TD saw no problem in trying to throw from dirt tees in knee deep flowing water (flash flood warning) with the ground lighting up around us from lightning overhead. My understanding is that he called it for a while, and we were too far from HQ to hear the horn, and decided to go in. On the way in, we heard a double horn blast as we got close to HQ, which it seems was his signal to restart. So when we got there, he was telling everyone to go back out and finish or take 7s on every hole they didn't finish. Everyone in my division and in the other women's division decided not to finish, and just take the 7s. I think maybe if the other division had known a DNF was on the line, they would have finished, because the second round took one of them up into a tie for first. The awards have been completed based on that and everyone was happy, I think. Those low round ratings from taking all those 7s will probably be low enough to be dropped for most of us. So if I ask the Tour Manager to look into it, it could really upset some stuff, but I'd like for this TD to understand the rules properly. Could he simply put in the actual scores for the second round for the ladies as on a different layout, or does he really have to DNF everyone? And what happens to payout when everyone DNFs?

Heard from someone close to the TD today that the TD knows he's not allowed to do that, but he plays his tournaments, and he did it to boost his own round ratings. I don't believe it either, but it's just too funny not to share. ;-)

[munky]

when i played a 9 hole course, it wouldn't give a round rating because it says there must be at least 12 holes. but what if there is duel tees? any way to play a round from each set of tees and get an 18 hole rating?

[JenniferB]

Originally Posted by munky

when i played a 9 hole course, it wouldn't give a round rating because it says there must be at least 12 holes. but what if there is duel tees? any way to play a round from each set of tees and get an 18 hole rating?

You can look up the course lengths on DGCR to get the total length, and then estimate the scratch scoring average (SSA) as:

(Course length/285)+1.67 * Number of holes

Then, to derive your personal round rating estimate, determine y as the rating-change-per-stroke, using x as the SSA:

For SSA's above 50.3289725:
y = -0.225067 x + 21.3858

For SSA's below 50.3289725:
y = -0.487095 x + 34.5734

Or you can just spitball it by subtracting or adding ten points per stroke above or below the SSA. For some more accurate spitballing, you can use ten points per stroke for a 50 SSA, and more like 13 points per stroke for a 44 SSA, and 6 points per stroke for a 68 SSA.

That should get you a reasonably close estimate for average vegetation and wind. I don't know for sure, but I think the PDGA app uses a formula much like this one to calculate round ratings for courses when tournament data is not available.

If you look the course up on DGCR, it has a calculator that implements this formula (with crude adjustments for vegetation) to automatically produce scratch scoring estimates on the course pages. So you might just be able to look it up there for each layout separately. I don't think they have a function for calculating round rating yet, but maybe if you enter your scores it does that. I don't know.

Another thing that might work is to go into the PDGA course directory and add that 18 hole layout for the course. If you can do that, then I think the PDGA app will pull that layout as a selectable option and produce round ratings based on whatever default formula it uses when there are insufficient tournament results for a layout to use tournament data. However, I just took a tour of the editing interface in there and, while it lets you add an alternate course length, there is no way I see to add layouts having different numbers of holes. It looks to me like you'd have to change the default number of holes to 18, which would make it provide inaccurate information about the course, and produce incorrect results for the 9 hole layouts.

[jconnell]

Originally Posted by JenniferB

Heard from someone close to the TD today that the TD knows he's not allowed to do that, but he plays his tournaments, and he did it to boost his own round ratings. I don't believe it either, but it's just too funny not to share. ;-)

Wait, so he intentionally inflated scores by assigning erroneous par+4 penalties instead of DNFs in order to inflate his own rating for the tournament? That is a laugh. It's also pointless. Even if any of those affected players are propagators, their high scores pretty much ensure they will be thrown out of the SSA calculation process, so the ratings for the event will be 100% UNaffected by their scores.

What a dope.

[Jeff_LaG]

Originally Posted by steveganz

For divisions that have multiple pools, the only rounds that are accurate are the semi-finals. For divisions with a single pool, like FPO, the ratings are accurate for all rounds.

Indeed, just a reminder that for the following divisions where there were pools, your unofficial online ratings are no longer accurate:

Pro
Open Division MPO Pools A,B
Masters Division MPM Pools D,E

Amateur
Advanced Division MA1 Pools K,L,M,N
Advanced Masters Division MM1 Pools P,Q
Advanced Grandmasters Division MG1 Pools R,Z

Every other division which did not have multiple pools should have accurate unofficial online round ratings.

Remember, the next PDGA Player Ratings Update is scheduled for August 14th, and your official round ratings for your rounds WILL be accurate when the next ratings update goes through.

[JenniferB]

Originally Posted by jconnell

Wait, so he intentionally inflated scores by assigning erroneous par+4 penalties instead of DNFs in order to inflate his own rating for the tournament? That is a laugh. It's also pointless. Even if any of those affected players are propagators, their high scores pretty much ensure they will be thrown out of the SSA calculation process, so the ratings for the event will be 100% UNaffected by their scores.

What a dope.

I don't believe for a minute that that's the real reason. I just think he thinks that's the rule. And who knows. Maybe it is the rule.

[daomac1000]

Will AM Nationals ratings be included in the August update?

[cgkdisc]

Don't know for sure yet but I expect it will be in there. It should have been in the last update. I won't see the event files until the PDGA office sends them to Roger and me next Friday.

[keithjohnson]

Chuck - PLEASE make sure that the round 6 PRO GM scores from Worlds are NOT included in ratings due to the circumstances of that round not making them accurate.

Thanks in advance,
Keith

[bruce_brakel]

It's nice to see the PDGA elves working on the weekend!

[cgkdisc]

Keith - Not sure yet but we may only do ratings for the GMs who finished their round 6 on Friday night if we can identify which cards and players finished.

[jimimc]

How would that make sense? More groups didn't finish than did. Some of the groups who finished knew players had walked off without playing a hole after being sent out. Those groups where furious and the round was effected by it. So what your saying is if your group was having a bad round you would have be better off quitting. This is exactly why this whole round should have been thrown out or replayed. This one round completely changed the entire outlook of the worlds for many of the players involved.

[cgkdisc]

We'll look at all the numbers but the only group that initially makes sense to rate is those who finished on Friday night since their rounds were all under the same conditions. In a way, this round is like a tee time round where some groups finished at different times under different conditions.

[JoakimBL]

Chuck I have a question about the unofficial ratings for a tournament i just played.
http://www.pdga.com/tournament_results/85425
I have no issue with it, but I thought there needed to be 5 propagators for the ratings to be calculated. The women, Grand Masters and Ams, played the same layout, but I can only count 4 propagators. What am I missing?

[cgkdisc]

The minimum propagator count to calculate and display unofficial ratings was moved down to 3 from 5 after the Women's Global event.

[bruce_brakel]

Hey Chuck, I did not know who to send this to, so maybe you could forward it?

Thing 1: In my stats it is showing that I played the Rocky Mountain Womens Disc Golf Challenge. I did not play that. If you click on the link to that in my stats, it links to a tournament I DID play, but has it misnamed as the Rocky Mountain Womens Disc Golf Challenge. I don't know what tournament that is the stats for. Maybe Mount Pleasant? I was distraught over the death of a friend and did not play well at Mount Pleasant, so I'm guessing that is the JBird Mount Pleasant Open tournament.

Thing 2: If you click on Membership, Player Statistics and the search for Amateur Grandmasters, sorting by points, my name does not appear. Maybe because I played the Rocky Mountain Women's tournament I've been disqualified from Men's Amateur Grandmasters? I don't know what is going on there, but with 4,000 points, I should be somewhere near the top.

[Martin_Bohn]

bruce if you did play the rocky mountain womens challenge, your definitely taking sandbagging to a whole new level

[steveganz]

Originally Posted by bruce_brakel

Hey Chuck, I did not know who to send this to, so maybe you could forward it?

Thing 1: In my stats it is showing that I played the Rocky Mountain Womens Disc Golf Challenge. I'm guessing that is the JBird Mount Pleasant Open tournament.

Bruce, I just looked at your stats and I don't see the Rocky Mountain Womens Disc Golf Challenge. I do see the JBird Mount Pleasant Open though.

Thing 2: If you click on Membership, Player Statistics and the search for Amateur Grandmasters, sorting by points, my name does not appear.

Hmmm. I see you right up there at the top of the list.

[Fats]

Chuck, who do I contact for the following?
There's a tournament where the unofficial results were fine - I tied for last and split the last-place money. But the official results have the other guy winning all the money and me none. I mean, it's not a huge deal, but it is definitely weird.

edit: this question may be redacted, as I realized that even though the results are official, they aren't a part of the ratings update, and it's possible it could change before then. However, in the event it doesn't, you could always answer anyway.

[cgkdisc]

Contact Andrew at asweeton at pdga.com whenever there are errors or oversights in official results.

[ERicJ]

During a sanctioned round if a player plays poorly enough relative to their player rating such that the round's rating will be dropped from their personal rating... is that player's score still used to calculate the SSA, i.e. everyone elses' ratings?

[cgkdisc]

Any propagator who shoots more than 60 points below their rating is not used to determine the SSA.

[futurecollisions]

Does that mean playing poorly is essentially the same as dnf?

[cgkdisc]

Not being used as a propagator with a weaker round rating is not the same as tanking or DNFing.

[Cyoda44]

I noticed that this event was not included in the last update. Will it be in the Aug 14th update?

Event date: May 12th 1012
Battle of the Big Dawgs II sponsored by Dynamic Discs

Thanks you for the help... I have asked the TD but have not received a response.

[cgkdisc]

You can tell if an event will be in the next update if you look at the event on PDGA and it says "Official Results" (and there are no ratings shown). If it still says "Unofficial Results" or you see no scores at all, then the PDGA has not received the report from the TD yet.

[Cyoda44]

It has been showing "Unofficial Results" since May. I have contacted the TD 3-4 times asking him to please finish the official report or anything that he needed to do.