Just shoot like crap everytime you are having a bad round. SHoot so bad that you force the PDGA to throw that round out. Becuase if you are shooting bad, chances are that round will now stay in your rating, but if you really screw up, that round is gone. Now, instead of a like a 900 round, you got an 850 round.

It's bad enough when a worse shot is in bounds and the better shot is out (like when a basket is next to a sidewalk and you are on the sidewalk ob, but the person who is 20 feet from the sidewalk on the wrong side is in bounds), but now yo can shoot worse and increase you're rating!

Sound dumb to anyone else??

Won't that make your SD go up and eventually bring those bad rounds into inclusion?

Better is to just DNF. :)

Or you could just put a positive spin on it like I did at the Points Bonanza at Sugaw: start ace running everything. A $150 ace pool is better than missing cash by a stroke or 2.

And...you might end up getting your round rating dropped (I am hoping my 864 round gets dropped - might be close with my new 942 rating).

I think if I am ever shooting bad I will just walk off the course and not have that round rated. Then Ill just show up for the next round and play it like normal. Its as easy as that.

Everyone knows that this new system is WHACK and the people who are defending it are just walking blindly into the dark and are just HEAR NO SEE NO SPEAK no evil type people who dont want to admit that the PDGA and ratings gurus messed this one up big time and have ultimately promoted and made SANDBAGGIN easier then doing what its supposed to do and eliminate sandbagging :eek:

This thread was my way very sarcastic way of saying I'm not a big fan of the new ratings system, or ratings in general

I have a better one.

Freakin go out and practice.

Get consistent and better.

Play more tournaments.

Get a life because ratings don't mean squat when you are out on the course.

or just turn pro, cuz then you're rating WILL go up.

or just turn pro, cuz then you're rating WILL go up.



Good, then in Janurary my rating will go up. I can wait until then. Until that time I will hang out and stock up on plastic so that if I plunk one into the lake I will just shrug my shoulders and move on. :D

or just turn pro, cuz then you're rating WILL go up.



Why is that? Mine did climb a little with the last 2 updates.

Since ratings are calculated by what everyone else shot at the same time (which is dumb), by playing pro, your rating goes up.

If a 1000 rated player (aka a pro)shoots a 49 on a course with an SSA of 49, and you shoot a 50, chances are you will get at least a 990 round rating for that.

But if a 920 guy (aka an am) shoots the same round, then the course "plays easier" and your 50 is probably around 975ish.

I can't wait until after worlds I will have 15 rounds averaging 937 dropped and replaced with 22 rounds averaging 983 and then whatever I shoot at worlds. Also i will be playing with My_hero so yet again another boost. :D:D

I can't wait until after worlds I will have 15 rounds averaging 937 dropped and replaced with 22 rounds averaging 983 and then whatever I shoot at worlds. Also i will be playing with My_hero so yet again another boost. :D:D



Suh-Weet! :D

I can't wait until after worlds I will have 15 rounds averaging 937 dropped and replaced with 22 rounds averaging 983 and then whatever I shoot at worlds. Also i will be playing with My_hero so yet again another boost. :D:D


I will show you how to start and finish a perfect round on the NEW wilmonster
Suh-Weet! :D

:D:D:D

Why is it that I have 128 rounds counted toward my rating and only one of them is not used.
Barry has like 94 rounds and he has 2 that are not used.
pretty much Everybody that has played less counted rounds than me that is rated higher than me has 2 or more rounds not counting for them.
I dont understand at all.

The more consistent you are, the smaller your Standard Deviation is. The smaller your SD, the easier it is for bad rounds to get dropped. Have too many bad rounds and your SD will get bigger and then the bad rounds won't drop.

Those guys are more consistent than you.

Why not just count all the rounds, If you shot a poor round than deal with it.
Why Sugar coat the ratings?
What you shoot is what you shoot.

That would accurately pin your average; the way it is now >>> your median, or "typical" round.

Why not just count all the rounds, If you shot a poor round than deal with it.
Why Sugar coat the ratings?
What you shoot is what you shoot.



That's not a bad idea. Super High rounds are not dropped, so why not super low rounds. So I shot an 877 round during my only tournament since the last update...sucks that it is double weighted, but it is what I shot, no one else played for me. I still just think that using 2.5 is too big for MOST people.

I think if I am ever shooting bad I will just walk off the course and not have that round rated. Then Ill just show up for the next round and play it like normal. Its as easy as that.


I doubt you'll be able to show up for the next round after walking off if the TD has any knowledge of the rules at all.


803.12 HOLING OUT
A. A player who fails to play any hole or fails to hole out on any hole during the round may be disqualified, at the discretion of the director, using the following guidelines:...
(3)Intentionally failing to hole out (emergency, injury, plane flight, etc.) constitutes withdrawal from competition. The player shall be withdrawn from competition and officially listed as "Did Not Finish" on the scorecard and in the event results.



If you are that concerned with what your round will be rated, while you are on the course, you've got your priorities out of whack. The formula isn't that hard to follow...the more consistent you are, the more bad rounds will be eliminated. If you want a good rating that isn't dragged down by a bad round here and there, then play better and more consistent golf so your standard deviation number is smaller. Otherwise, who cares? It's just a number. It isn't going to win you anything.

--Josh

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why not just count all the rounds, If you shot a poor round than deal with it.
Why Sugar coat the ratings?
What you shoot is what you shoot.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



That's not a bad idea. Super High rounds are not dropped, so why not super low rounds. So I shot an 877 round during my only tournament since the last update...sucks that it is double weighted, but it is what I shot, no one else played for me. I still just think that using 2.5 is too big for MOST people.






Bagger deterant. There has to be some way to atleast limit how much someone can purposefully tank their rating.(Yes people WILL do that)

As far as high not getting dropped.... It takes skill to shoot a high rating, a 900 rated player cannot at anytime they wish just plop out a 1000 rated round, it takes playing well to do that and should count, while a 900 player CAN at anytime he wishes come out a plop down a 700 rated round to tank.

Why not just count all the rounds, If you shot a poor round than deal with it.
Why Sugar coat the ratings?
What you shoot is what you shoot.



The reason we have to have a formula for dropping exceptionally low rounds is that there are situations where a really low score is due to something other than the player's skills (or lack thereof). The most common case is the player missed one or more holes and received "7"s for those holes. Another case is where someone gets hurt, and struggles through a round to finish, possibly playing opposite-handed.

You might argue that those rounds should be included, but we don't think they should, as they really don't contribute to an accurate portrayal of that player's skill.

The only simple and reasonably consistent mathematical way to identify those rounds is using a formula incoporating the standard deviation. The mulitplier of 2.5 was determined through some extensive analysis by Chuck and Rodney Gardner, another math whiz that understands our ratings system intimately (he was on the ratings committee for a long time, including through the initial launch).

Some of the discussion on the board has been about tweaking the multiplier, possibly dropping it to 2.0. We debated that and did some spot-checking. All it did was increased the number of rounds dropped, but in looking at the data, it looked like most of the rounds being dropped would be legitimate rounds - ones that were not affected by 7s, injury, etc.

-Theo

How about using the floor of the cube root of the number of rated rounds played in the last 2 months as the factor?

1-7 rounds: 1
8-26 rounds: 2
27-64 rounds: 3

This would allow players who only play in rare tournaments to include the most data points while as your number of rounds played per given time increases, the more it would zone in your rating.

Floor drops the decimals.

Another possibility is to modify this so that we can include half way points. Something like:

1-3 rounds: 1
4-7 rounds: 1.5
8-17 rounds: 2
18-26 rounds: 2.5
27+ rounds: 3

I don't forsee anyone playing more than 64 rated rounds over 2 months. That would have to be 8 rated rounds a week for 8 consecutive weeks.

Just throwing a thought out there. I think this is more of an effort than would be needed.

Why not just count all the rounds, If you shot a poor round than deal with it.
Why Sugar coat the ratings?
What you shoot is what you shoot.



I also agree, I only have 1 dropped round . . . 945 and it was a well deserved 945, there's no reason that round shouldn't have counted. I don't see why they would want to reward players for shooting an "extra" bad round by not including it in their rating, they shot it, they deserve it to bring down their rating. I think it's kind of dumb that if I would have played a little better and made one extra putt, the round WOULD have counted and it would have made my rating WORSE!, Not that smartest idea I have ever heard of.

Don't play a tournament sense the last rating update and STILL have your rating go up 1 point (964 to 965)

If you want a good rating that isn't dragged down by a bad round here and there, then play better and more consistent golf so your standard deviation number is smaller. Otherwise, who cares? It's just a number. It isn't going to win you anything.



The thing is if you play better as you say then your standard deviation number will be higher which means if by some odd chance you do shoot a really crappy round (which EVERYONE does) then it is more then likely going to count in your rating. Im not saying it shouldnt count but your rating is what you would typically shoot on any given day. I have 3 sub 900 rounds that count in my rating. Oh well I shot those rounds but its not a representation of what I would typically shoot. It was a bad day so for that bad day to be factored in when calculating my typical score doesnt make very much sense either.

All would be eliminated if they just used the 30 most recent rounds and updated the ratings every 2 weeks to a month or in real time.

As of this last ratings update I'm a 946 rated disc golfer that is shooting 970s golf which would be 985 golf if I was a pro, so how does that 946 represent my current skill? Answer it doesn't it represents how I play over a year's time not how I've been playing. If I took my most recent 20 rounds that are being used in my ratings then I would be playing 959.75 golf.

The pimp would be shooting 947.3 if we counted his most recent 20.

As of this last ratings update I'm a 946 rated disc golfer that is shooting 970s golf which would be 985 golf if I was a pro, so how does that 946 represent my current skill? Answer it doesn't it represents how I play over a year's time not how I've been playing. If I took my most recent 20 rounds that are being used in my ratings then I would be playing 959.75 golf.



Wow - looking at your ratings you have improved tremendously over the winter! Great job! By the looks of things, your rating truly does have a ratings lag as you suggest.

The good thing is that with the new system this lag is less accentuated since your most recent 8 rounds are doubled - all of which are above your average.

BTW, in the old ratings method (lowest 15% dropped - thats the lowest 6 of your 40 rounds), your rating is still 946.

Thanks for the complement.
I have no problem with the current rating system I would just like to see a more current rating like they talked about last year I think it was call the hot rounds or the players to look for.

The pimp would be shooting 947.3 if we counted his most recent 20.



Are you counting Firefighters DGLO and Hambrick???

No just the rounds that were used in the last update? I know that your rating would probally go up if I had used those rounds but I don't know the Hambrick might have still pull your rounds form the DGLO back down.

The rating arn't up for the DGLO any more :mad:so I can't add them in any way.

Im not saying it shouldnt count but your rating is what you would typically shoot on any given day. I have 3 sub 900 rounds that count in my rating. Oh well I shot those rounds but its not a representation of what I would typically shoot. It was a bad day so for that bad day to be factored in when calculating my typical score doesnt make very much sense either.



Looking at your last year of data, you shot 6 rounds under 900. You shot 5 rounds over 985. If you argue that those sub 900 rounds should not count, you need to be be consistent and say that your >985 rounds should not count either.

939: Averge of all rounds in the last year
945: Average of all rounds except the 6 <900
940: Average of all rounds except the 6 <900 and the 5 >985
952: Average of last 10 rounds
947: Average of last 20 rounds
944: Average of last 30 rounds

You are spending an inordinate amount of time worrying over 6 ratings points! Why?

Cut the numbers up any way you like (I have done it for you) and you are still a 940-950 level golfer who is rapidly improving in skills and consistency. You have won 2 A-Tiers and will be going Pro soon.

Why are you so obsessed with trashing the ratings system?? I have proven to you that the numbers do not lie. In fact, the new ratings system that has you at 946 treats you generously even by your own suggestions on how to compute a player rating.

Granted, realtime ratings would be a very cool feature. But the reality is that all you would see is a typical variance of 5-15 rating points from what we have today. Big whoopeeee - that is about 1-2 strokes per round.

Please stop your whining and keep up your winning. That will make everyone much happier. :D

When the official ratings for DGLO go up I will have prolly averaged over 1000 for the tournament so I dont think that 860 and to 945s will bring it down that much :D

Cut the numbers up any way you like (I have done it for you) and you are still a 940-950 level golfer who is rapidly improving in skills and consistency. You have won 2 A-Tiers and will be going Pro soon.



You are incorrect because the ratings on the site are not my most recent ratings. Which is exactly what I am talking about. Your still using OLD rounds. I have 8 more rounds that are more recent then those and for 3 of those I averaged 1000. So using the ratings that you can see your correct but if you really use ALL my rounds then you will see that the ratings are inncorrect. And its because they lag behind.

Please stop your whining and keep up your winning. That will make everyone much happier.



Ill just agree to disagree and compute my rating for myself.

Cut the numbers up any way you like (I have done it for you) and you are still a 940-950 level golfer who is rapidly improving in skills and consistency. You have won 2 A-Tiers and will be going Pro soon.



You are incorrect because the ratings on the site are not my most recent ratings. Which is exactly what I am talking about. Your still using OLD rounds. I have 8 more rounds that are more recent then those and for 3 of those I averaged 1000. So using the ratings that you can see your correct but if you really use ALL my rounds then you will see that the ratings are inncorrect. And its because they lag behind.



No. You are incorrect. Just because you had 1-2 good tournaments does not mean that you are suddenly a better golfer by 20-30 points.

Mark my words. Take a snapshot of the latest 30 rounds (as you suggest) going back from today when they become available. You will see that your rating will not go up by more than 10-15 points from the latest published 30 rounds (944).

If when the next ratings come out and your rating for the 30 rounds prior to 7/21 is 960 or more (as your footer claims), I will send you my new tie die deLaVeaga collectors item Buzzz. :D

What will you send me if you loose this bet? Any Innova CE plastic would work for me.

Why let mathmatics determine your skill? Baggers will always be around! You cant stop them! The Respect of your local golf community is worth more than a rating! If Bob the Am is baggin let it be known to all in the community! That allows him to deal with the lost respect of the community! Dont let the ratings "numbers"
define you game! Let Your game define you game!

I have a new rating of 900! It went down 12 points! I also moved up to advance this year. I am capable of shooting 965-985 golf. I know that I am an advanced player! Even though my "rating" tells a different story! The key here is understanding yourself, and your game! Thats it!

good thread Rob!

Please stop your whining and keep up your winning. That will make everyone much happier.



Ill just agree to disagree and compute my rating for myself.



Bravo, this is what we are doing. If they want to implement a better system we will have one available in time.

Why do we need other people to tell us how good we are? If you need the confidence boost, look at tournament finishes, and tell yourself you're better than everyone that placed lower than you. Thats way more accurate than ratings.

My rating - 958
Rating with last 20 - 970
Rating in original formula - 962
Number on rounds I have thrown out - 0
Number or rounds counted - 123


Just some interesting numbers I'd throw out

A person cannot know what mathematics can prove to be false.

For example an advanced player is a player rated higher than 914 under the current system. Therefore a player rated less than 915 cannot know that he is an advanced player. He can only be in deep denial about being an intermediate.

No. You are incorrect. Just because you had 1-2 good tournaments does not mean that you are suddenly a better golfer by 20-30 points.

Mark my words. Take a snapshot of the latest 30 rounds (as you suggest) going back from today when they become available. You will see that your rating will not go up by more than 10-15 points from the latest published 30 rounds (944).

If when the next ratings come out and your rating for the 30 rounds prior to 7/21 is 960 or more (as your footer claims), I will send you my new tie die deLaVeaga collectors item Buzzz.

What will you send me if you loose this bet? Any Innova CE plastic would work for me.



They way I calculated it and I said this from the start was last 30 rounds and drop the low 3. Thats where I got the 960 from and if I give myself 945 rounds for FireFighters and I count my Hambrick rounds its 960 and Im pretty sure one of my FireFighters rounds will be almost 990 :D

So if you want to make the bet the way I calculated it as you said them im down :D

For example an advanced player is a player rated higher than 914 under the current system.



Thats a GREAT point that I hadn't thought about. A 915 player now is better than a 915 player a few months ago, therefore there will be MORE bagging in both intermediate and in Adv.

Infact, I think this affects open players the most. The 955 rule will really come into effect. I know I saw quite a few NC pros drop below the mark with this update.

I shot a bunch of rounds better then my rating, only one worse (and not by much) and my rating went down. This sucks. But it aint going to stop me from improving. I want my two points back.

[qoute] The thing is if you play better as you say then your standard deviation number will be higher which means if by some odd chance you do shoot a really crappy round (which EVERYONE does) then it is more then likely going to count in your rating.

[/QUOTE]

Hi Steve et al.,

Although it's been a while since I took stats, the quoted statement above is not true. The standard deviation (SD) is a measure of dispersion--in this case, about the mean (a measure of central tendency). Variance (SD squared) is the sum of squares divided by the degrees of freedom (for a sample). That's the cocktail version (as my professor said!). It means this: take each observation, subtract the mean from it, then square it. Add all those up (there are "n" of them). Then divide that sum (aka the sum of squares) by n-1. That is the sample variance. Square root that for the sample SD.

Using Excel, I have a few examples:

Ex 1: 3 rounds are used, 950, 960, and 940. The mean is 950 and SD 10.
Ex 2: 6 rounds used, 950, 950, 960, 960, 940, 940. Mean is 950 and SD 8.94.
In this example, I simply doubled the round scores. Note the mean did not change but the SD decreased.

Ex 3: 9 rounds used, 950, 950, 960, 960, 940, 940, and 960, 960, 960. Mean is 953.3 and SD is 8.66. The first 6 rounds are the same except our player is getting better, and shot three additional 960 rounds. Thus the mean creeps up and the SD continues to decline relative to Ex 2.

Ex 4: 12 rounds used 950, 950, 960, 960, 940, 940, 960, 960, 960 and 960, 960, 960. Mean is 955 and SD 7.98. Our player has hit a (nice) plateau at 960, and his/her rating is moving up AND the SD is declining.

So if a person is shooting well, their mean will increase. Depending on his/her consistency, this may lead to a decreased SD. What seems to get lost in this discussion is the fact that as the mean moves, so does the cut off point for including/excluding rounds.

So, this was just an example to provide more food for thought. It does not reflect what typically happens, but does illustrate the math behind means and SD. I hope it helps.

And finally: IMO, the rating should include a running mean that covers the last 20 rounds you played. There should be no wieghting, no dropping, etc. If you played the whole round, it counts (even if you showed up late and had three sevens on the card). They are official rounds--use 'em!

Cheers,
Steve

I see what you are saying. The thing is its a mean of your last 12 months worth of scores and If you are shooting 20-30 points above your ratings at the time would your SD still go down???

No. You are incorrect. Just because you had 1-2 good tournaments does not mean that you are suddenly a better golfer by 20-30 points.

Mark my words. Take a snapshot of the latest 30 rounds (as you suggest) going back from today when they become available. You will see that your rating will not go up by more than 10-15 points from the latest published 30 rounds (944).

If when the next ratings come out and your rating for the 30 rounds prior to 7/21 is 960 or more (as your footer claims), I will send you my new tie die deLaVeaga collectors item Buzzz.

What will you send me if you loose this bet? Any Innova CE plastic would work for me.



They way I calculated it and I said this from the start was last 30 rounds and drop the low 3. Thats where I got the 960 from and if I give myself 945 rounds for FireFighters and I count my Hambrick rounds its 960 and Im pretty sure one of my FireFighters rounds will be almost 990 :D

So if you want to make the bet the way I calculated it as you said them im down :D



I did the math the way the you proposed. This is what you wrote above in the train of thought that I was responding to:


You are incorrect because the ratings on the site are not my most recent ratings. Which is exactly what I am talking about. Your still using OLD rounds. I have 8 more rounds that are more recent then those and for 3 of those I averaged 1000. So using the ratings that you can see your correct but if you really use ALL my rounds then you will see that the ratings are inncorrect. And its because they lag behind.



Notice the use of the word "ALL". Suit yourself, you can choose any numbers you want to make yourself feel like a 960 player and advertise yourself as such to the world. No one is stopping you from your false advertising of yourself. :o

If you want "typical" and that means dropping atypical rounds, then lets drop the top 3 and bottom 3 rounds of your last 30 rounds before 7/21. My bet still holds for this. What are you putting on the line? :p

THEY ARE JUST NUMBERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LET IT GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

maybe its a midlife rating crises or they are compensating for other shortcomings

j/k :o

No Worries..........my bookie has better numbers !!!! :eek:

Just kidding !!!! :D

Why not just count all the rounds, If you shot a poor round than deal with it.
Why Sugar coat the ratings?
What you shoot is what you shoot.



That seems to be a simpler, less is more approach to each player's rating. We don't throw out a .300 hitting MLB player's bad games when they go 0 for 5. In addition to a rating based on an average of all of the most recent year's rounds, maybe more complicated formulas could be used to rank Pros. Not ranking AM.s might help encourage the really good ones to move up faster. I'd also like to see amateur competitions limit the entry fees and payouts such that players wanting to win substantial material prizes must play Pro.

Another thing I wouldn't mind seeing is AM.s subsidizing the Pro payout (where a few dollars from each AM entry goes into the Pro purse).

That seems to be a simpler, less is more approach to each player's rating. We don't throw out a .300 hitting MLB player's bad games when they go 0 for 5. In addition to a rating based on an average of all of the most recent year's rounds, maybe more complicated formulas could be used to rank Pros. Not ranking AM.s might help encourage the really good ones to move up faster. I'd also like to see amateur competitions limit the entry fees and payouts such that players wanting to win substantial material prizes must play Pro.

Another thing I wouldn't mind seeing is AM.s subsidizing the Pro payout (where a few dollars from each AM entry goes into the Pro purse).



I agree about the avg ... why not count everything. And tough s*** if you sucked before but are playing good now, would you be singing the same song if you started great but went into a slump? Does a MLB slugger complain that his avg isn't high enough because he started the season bad? I think they concentrate more on performing each time @ the plate.

And as an Int/Adv player on the issue of $ from the ams going to pros... I agree totally! I actually thought/assumed that this was the way it was already. It only makes sense to take some of the money and put it in the Pro pot.

You guys you MLB as an example. Thats great but they also calculate those averages for each series, before and after the all star break. For that season. For the players entire career. For that month. We only keep track of 1 thing. An average of a years worth of playing. In the MLB batters dont get placed in a different division depending on thier bating average. They are all play PROFESSIONALY so it doesnt matter what their average is.

Maybe if we had a year long rating and a most recent month rating and a since your last A Tier rating then it would be fine and dandy but ratings are putting people in specific divisions based on how they play and if the ratings lag behind by months on end then the people who are supposed to be playing in a higher division are dominating the lower division and the one who are getting worse and prolly should be playing down a division get stuck up in the higher division because the ratings are laging so far behind.

I could care less about my rating because my record speaks for itself and the only place I can go is pro and no one care force me to move up. Although I will be at the end of the year.

Thats what I have to say. Ill continue to take my most recent 30 rounds and drop the low 3 too see how I am playing at the time. You guys can do what you want with your ratings but I know that the last 30 rounds will be the most accurate description of what skill level I am at when the ratings do get published.

Thats what I have to say. Ill continue to take my most recent 30 rounds and drop the low 3 too see how I am playing at the time. I know that the last 30 rounds will be the most accurate description of what skill level I am at when the ratings do get published.



Why would you drop the low 3?

Why would you use the last 30? Why not 20? 25? 15? 35?

Genius.

I used to have a junior membership at local golf club...they used a common system of calculating a players handicap that keeps MOST sandbaggers at bay.

Once you log a certain number of rounds the club would drop HALF of the rounds you played and base your handicap on your best "top half" rounds...this eliminates "padding" a handicap because all or most of your bad rounds are gone...the same can be applied to player ratings, it's a very simple system that our sister sport has been using for years.

It's bad enough when a worse shot is in bounds and the better shot is out (like when a basket is next to a sidewalk and you are on the sidewalk ob, but the person who is 20 feet from the sidewalk on the wrong side is in bounds

Sound dumb to anyone else??



This situation is [I'm a potty-mouth!] poor course design :eek:.......Sidewalk AND BEYOND should be OB to make it fair (or tougher) :D

Why not just count all the rounds, If you shot a poor round than deal with it.
Why Sugar coat the ratings?
What you shoot is what you shoot.



That would be WAY TO SIMPLE, Schwebby :)

Why not just count all the rounds, If you shot a poor round than deal with it.
Why Sugar coat the ratings?
What you shoot is what you shoot.



That would be WAY TO SIMPLE, Schwebby :)



:D

Like my Pop's used to say " They would complain if you hung them with a new rope ". :eek:

Some were born to cry , some cry when they are born.
Some will always cry. :( Oh.......poor babies !!!!!! :D

Good rounds and Bad rounds are Now all relative.

No problem. Just don't have crappy rounds !!!! :D

If you do , end your life then !!!!! :eek:

Just kidding !!!!! Play Hard !!!!!!! :mad::D

why are we wasting banadwidth and server space on this JOKE we call RATINGS???? :confused:

I used to have a junior membership at local golf club...they used a common system of calculating a players handicap that keeps MOST sandbaggers at bay.

Once you log a certain number of rounds the club would drop HALF of the rounds you played and base your handicap on your best "top half" rounds...this eliminates "padding" a handicap because all or most of your bad rounds are gone...the same can be applied to player ratings, it's a very simple system that our sister sport has been using for years.



This is how the USGA calculates handicaps for ball golf. They use the top HALF of your 20 most recent scores. They want handicap to be a measure of potential, not average. I would love to see this be the case with us also, but it would require updating the ratings more often. I see no reason we couldn't use the top half of a players 40 most recent rounds. Talk about getting rid of your baggers and making you play in a division where you have to play well to cash.

... I will never understand this whole ratings thing.

Yesterday the Pro A-Pool played Nocka in the morning

62=1027
66=1001
71=969

In the afternoon the B-Pool played Nocka in really hot weather

62=1021
66=994
71=960

I don't get it....Same course, same day.... A B-pool player with the same score gets a lower rating for the round.

It's just weird, since I thought the conditions were worse in the afternoon, because of the crazy heat. But then again, they had some rain early in the morning.

To be honest, that really isn;t that bad of a variation.

If it were ams playing in the afternoon, the variation would have been 10-20 points for the same score.

Yeah. I remember at Worlds in Iowa JJ shooting a 1 down at DMACC and getting a 1017 rated round and then I shot the same score later in the day and got a 989 rated round :eek:

If you look closer the A pool has much higher propagators, so they will have higher rated rounds.

If you look closer the A pool has much higher propagators, so they will have higher rated rounds.



I don't see that as being a true statement.

I shot a 53 at Tinicum playing in the B pool and the rating was 1017,if i am reading it right a 53 in the A pool was 1009 that same day.

Ok here's another one,1011 is what a 53 got both pools on Tuesday at Tinicum??????? :confused:

This is all rediculous. Who cares???? It's just to give you an idea. I love the ratings system it gives me a chance to see what other players are at. I've shot as high as an 890 round and as low as a 759 round. I know I played well in the first, and the second sucked. Who cares if they were a 910 and a 720? Who cares if I win a tournament with a 820 rating waaaaaaaaaaaaaah. All ratings are there for is to give you an IDEA of where you stand. Nothing is going to matter until you actually show up to the course and play. In my observations, the people that take longer to move up, get better much slower. Step it up to open, and consider your entry fee going to a private lesson from the pros. I would be willing to play pro just for a chance to watch Des and Juliana throw, and hopefully learn a thing or two ;)

Please tell me how I can get my rating to go up! I've went up 1 point in the last 7 updates haha and I play 30-35 tournaments a year.

here's how. Get one REALLY good tournament in, then do a Costanza, head for the door!

In a few ratings updates that one kick ***** round will be all that is left, and your rating will start to go up.

That, or make more putts.

Please tell me how I can get my rating to go up! I've went up 1 point in the last 7 updates haha and I play 30-35 tournaments a year.



Yeah, that is pretty crazy!

Please tell me how I can get my rating to go up! I've went up 1 point in the last 7 updates haha and I play 30-35 tournaments a year

quit playing so much. :D

Look at my rating. I have not played a PDGa event sence Feb and my rating keeps going up :D

or just turn pro, cuz then you're rating WILL go up.



My highest rating ever was when I was an AM.

Oh ya, and it's "chastity". Are you sure you are going to graduate?

or just turn pro, cuz then you're rating WILL go up.



Only if you play tournaments with good pros. Playing a C tier with 45 AMs and 15 Pros all playing the same layout, none of whom have a rating over 980 will not help your rating go up.

That's why I'm going to tour all next summer!

or just turn pro, cuz then you're rating WILL go up.



Only if you play tournaments with good pros. Playing a C tier with 45 AMs and 15 Pros all playing the same layout, none of whom have a rating over 980 will not help your rating go up.

That's why I'm going to tour all next summer!



Try moving to TX

From what I have read and understand, the best way to get an accurate rating is to play tournaments where your competition has played many rated rounds. The more rounds that you have rated the more accurate the rating will be. This is why the top pros rating rarely change, and if so by only a few points. This is probably why there is a difference between ams and pros in ratings, because it isn't unusual for an am to improve by 3 or 4 strokes in 6 months, however if you are a 1020 rated player you'd be lucky to improve your game by a stroke a round.

Please tell me how I can get my rating to go up! I've went up 1 point in the last 7 updates haha and I play 30-35 tournaments a year.


I'll tell you how to get your rating to go up, but you have to tell me how to get mine to a 1015 ;)

deal

Please tell me how I can get my rating to go up! I've went up 1 point in the last 7 updates haha and I play 30-35 tournaments a year.


I'll tell you how to get your rating to go up, but you have to tell me how to get mine to a 1015 ;)



Change your name to Chris Heeren :D

Scooter's at 983 now! Time for fatman dancing to quit eating jelly doughnuts, quit having kids, get a divorce, find the fountain of youth, and play more than 1x a week. :eek: :p

Nice kiddo!

Thanks I should go up a point or two next week when they fix the mid nat ratins. I just want to reach my 985 goal for this year. Next year it will be 1000 :D:D:D