Chuck- Have you or Roger ever done any stats on which areas of the country have players generally playing in the correct ratings division and which suffer from the idea that they need to play up only to play in a division of their peers anyway?

For example: a couple random events in Utah that I've looked at have 0 MA2 players playing in MA2. The winner of MA2 only had to play MA3 golf.

No, we haven't done a study like that. it might be interesting to do so. I'll check with Roger to see what might be involved.

I looked at that several years ago. What I found was that the fewer the number of high rated pros, the more players played up. I also noticed that playing up seemed to be connected to southern culture or values more than to northern culture or values.

How many propagators are needed to determine the SSA of a layout, and subsequently the round ratings of players for the layout?

For example pool B will use a shorter layout compared to pool A. Pool B consists of Rec and Adv Grandmasters. There are 0 propagators in Rec and 2 in Adv Grandmasters, plus 2 non-propagating PDGA members in Adv Grandmasters. Will the four Adv Grandmasters get rated rounds?

In an FAQ about WGE the answer is 3. Does that apply to non-WGE tournaments too?

3 is the number for unofficial ratings of any tournament.

How many propagators are needed to determine the SSA of a layout, and subsequently the round ratings of players for the layout?

For example pool B will use a shorter layout compared to pool A. Pool B consists of Rec and Adv Grandmasters. There are 0 propagators in Rec and 2 in Adv Grandmasters, plus 2 non-propagating PDGA members in Adv Grandmasters. Will the four Adv Grandmasters get rated rounds?

In an FAQ about WGE the answer is 3. Does that apply to non-WGE tournaments too?
We produce official ratings with the help of TDs for every player even if they play a layout with no propagators. However, to produce unofficial ratings online, a round must have at least 3 propagators.

Chuck, can you take a closer look at Rd5 in http://www.pdga.com/tour/event/17030 ?

Official ratings for that round are 20+ points lower than the unofficial ones were.

Average PDGA rating of the five props is 901; average Rd5 rating of the five props is 878.

That round/week was a unique course/config that should not have been combined with any other rounds/weeks. However, the SSA for Rd5 seems to be 50.4 which is the exact same as Rd2 & Rd8. Rd2 & Rd8 were the same config and should have been combined with each other, but not with Rd5.

Thanks.

The ratings for the 36th Annual Norman Pro/Am are messed up. Intermediate and rec divisions played different courses than the pro and advanced divisions. Could this be corrected please.

�Date: 24-May to 25-May-2014
�Location: Norman, OK, United States
�Tournament Director: Kathryn Schwartz
�Phone: 802-578-5956
�Email: soonerdiscgolf@gmail.com

Norman Pro-Am was reported and fix is being confirmed for July ratings update. The only mistake appears to be R4 where Advanced was erroneously indicated as playing same as other Ams instead of with pros like the other three rounds.

actually R1 and R2 are for sure incorrect. It shows all divisions playing the same course, which they did not. I believe that Int. and Rec played a shorter version of the same course in R1 and a different course in R2.

I believe it's being checked. According to report no one played Griffin and yet it's listed as a course.

Chuck, can you take a closer look at Rd5 in http://www.pdga.com/tour/event/17030 ?

Official ratings for that round are 20+ points lower than the unofficial ones were.

Average PDGA rating of the five props is 901; average Rd5 rating of the five props is 878.

That round/week was a unique course/config that should not have been combined with any other rounds/weeks. However, the SSA for Rd5 seems to be 50.4 which is the exact same as Rd2 & Rd8. Rd2 & Rd8 were the same config and should have been combined with each other, but not with Rd5.

Thanks.
Chuck, any word on this?

Haven't heard back from Roger. I just reminded him to take a look.

Chuck, any word on this?

Roger adjusted the SSA up about 2 after looking closer so you should see the adjustment in the next update.

More and more new players think ratings are cool. They like to see their progression.
Our league is not big, and averages 12-20 players.

Can you help with a few questions and how I might best use the info to get more propagators of a more diverse scoring spread.

http://www.pdga.com/tour/event/17981

1- propagators are only in bold type (if you hover over the mouse over a players rating on the results a yellow box displays "propagator" , well that box can hang around on the screen and some league players think some if our players are propagators when I think they are not)

2- Do more propagators make for better round ratings?

3- if we had not only a good minimum of propagators and of more of our advanced players were current, would this make for more accurate round ratings?

4- Does having high level propagators influence results?
(When Simon Lizzotte and Avery Jenkins played in our league overall ratings seemed higher than same setup, same conditions (no rain) from a precious league round where we did not have 2 propagators who were 1000+ rated players ?

5 - Would not <850 rated players benefit if some of our higher rated (920+) players were current?

Thanks !

1 - sganz at pdga.com
2 - not necessarily better but more consistent.
3 - doesn't really matter
4 - Yes, if they are not local, they usually can't shoot as sufficiently good score to match their rating which can boost the SSA in a small field of propagators.
5 - We use the ratings of non-current propagators in the calculations and their rating will change even though they can't see it.

Thanks Chuck!

Just curious:

Why do we have a system that allows a 984 rated AM to exist? I understand that there is a requirement to take cash but it seems odd that it is acceptable to let a player that is rated 984 SMOKE the AM Masters field by 19 strokes so he can get some free gear.

Is it possible that a rating cutoff for AM is a reasonable consideration?

Thanks for your thoughts. I just saw how AM Masters shook out and it seemed pretty unfair to the field to have an Open Master (at least in rating) playing in their division robbing them.

It boils down to whether Ams should be forced to turn Pro. No other sport does it that the PDGA could find. Now whether our Ams are truly Ams in the traditional sense is another discussion. But at least at Am Worlds since 2013, this event is attempting to operate as a true amateur event with no merch payouts.

It boils down to whether Ams should be forced to turn Pro. No other sport does it that the PDGA could find. Now whether our Ams are truly Ams in the traditional sense is another discussion. But at least at Am Worlds since 2013, this event is attempting to operate as a true amateur event with no merch payouts.

we are now doing trophy only for AM'S in Charlotte with sweet trophys and many amenities such as nice players packs, players party, supplying lunches etc. it has been received quite well so far!

It looks like the last ratings update dropped all of my ratings from 2013, not just the ones 365+ days older than my last event. I should have a lot more than 7 rounds in my current rating.

I've got Roger checking on it.

Mike, here's what happened:

For tournament # 17084 "Oswego Spring Handicap League", the TD report has round 8 listed as 6/5/2015. This date from the TD report was used in the ratings. Since it is a 2015 date, and since ratings go back one year, this affected the ratings for those players.

This will be corrected for the August ratings update.

Doh! Looks like Roger may want to add something to detect official results from events that happen in the future. :)

Predictive ratings will be coming in the future, of course. ;)

Test

Hey Chuck, somebody must know where worlds players can get their shoe vouchers. Are you in the know? KL

Not in the loop on the shoes. I wouldn't think anyone at PDGA would know, just the local core team in Portland.

Ratings update timeframe is posted on the faq, but what is the deadline for each ratings update? Is it two or is it still three weeks before?

Three weeks before.

I'm the TD for a ratings based tournament and looking for insights, discussion, on what people have done in the past. Not finding anything when using the search feature in the Discussion board. ... Pros/cons, insights would be helpful. Is there a place to look for more info?

What types of questions do you have?

I'm expecting 20 to 40 players, it's a small C tier that was quickly put together to fill a gap in the schedule and take advantage of the sudden change of weather.

So people registering as Pro receive cash, or register as Am and receive a certificate for merchandise. In other words, the first place in the <970 division could be a pro and get cash, the second could be an Am and get a certificate, the third be a pro and get cash.

Any issues with that payout plan?

I'm expecting 20 to 40 players, it's a small C tier that was quickly put together to fill a gap in the schedule and take advantage of the sudden change of weather.

So people registering as Pro receive cash, or register as Am and receive a certificate for merchandise. In other words, the first place in the <970 division could be a pro and get cash, the second could be an Am and get a certificate, the third be a pro and get cash.

Any issues with that payout plan?

Shouldn't be an issue as long as your report to the PDGA is clear and detailed as far as who received merch and who received cash. Last thing you want is an Am being paid in merch getting credited as taking cash and forced into becoming a Pro.

A new TD report template for handling Ratings based event divisions has been completed and is being tested. Check the PDGA site for download by the time of your event or check with PDGA HQ if you can't find it.

Got the new sheet today and am doing some testing. Thanks CK!

Hey Chuck,
I see there was an update, but our Q1 League Results/Ratings are still unofficial (Port City Disc golf League).

Were the results sent by the March 3rd deadline? Far as I know, all reports received by the deadline were processed.

Is 888 applicable for players that are a no show for tournamets (registered and payed in advance, but not letting the TD know that they will not be attending) or are players not throwing a single throw just left off the report completely?

Is 888 applicable for players that are a no show for tournamets (registered and payed in advance, but not letting the TD know that they will not be attending) or are players not throwing a single throw just left off the report completely?

Not Chuck but.....

It tells you on the TD report how to handle them (just filled it out on MON)

You don't include and 888 is explained also on scores tab.

Keith

Not Chuck but.....

It tells you on the TD report how to handle them (just filled it out on MON)

You don't include and 888 is explained also on scores tab.

Keith

Thanks, but I do know how to read. :) The information on the report is conflicting. It says not to include players that don't throw a throw. It does also say that players that do not show up for a scheduled round without giving notice should get an 888. So which is it?

Enter 888 when a player has not notified the TD they will not be playing the next scheduled round
Do not include players who registered but did not show up or make a throw in the tournament

A player who does not show up to start the tournament should not be scheduled for a round since they did not check in. Doesn't matter that the TD put them in a group on the starting board. No conflict. Now if the player checks in but then does not show up in their group to start the round and left for some reason without telling the TD, they should get the 888.

Exactly what I said......

Chuck, I'm able to see my new rating which was updated yesterday 3/22, but I'm not listed anywhere in the Player Statistics. I've only played 1 event in 2016, of which was included in yesterdays update, but I declined a cash earning....does that have anything to do with it? Thanks! #45903

Looks like your stats are there now. Sometimes players will see their rating update before all of their supporting details get displayed. It takes several hours for all of the updated files to get uploaded and linked.

Looks like your stats are there now. Sometimes players will see their rating update before all of their supporting details get displayed. It takes several hours for all of the updated files to get uploaded and linked.

I don't show up anywhere when you look at North Carolina AM's or Pro's, when looking at Statistics. I've only played 1 event this year, won a B tier in Masters division but didn't accept cash. Does that have anything to do with it? Thanks!

You don't show up in the stats for the current year until you have played an event this year that has been reported to the PDGA and processed for points and ratings.

You don't show up in the stats for the current year until you have played an event this year that has been reported to the PDGA and processed for points and ratings.

I played a B tier in February, and the round ratings are currently included in the most recent ratings update last week, but no points because I turned down the cash. I'm guessing that's the reason, no big deal, just thought it was odd. Thanks for your time!

You're listed as an Amateur and you played in a Pro division. You earned pro points but because you're an amateur, you won't show up in the pro points rankings. You still have not earned any Am points yet this year so you're not in the Amateur standings yet.

Chuck,

Got a points question.

I just renewed my membership for this year and will be turning 39. I am wanting to play at Worlds next year in the Quad Cities in the Advance Masters division since I will then be 40.

Would I be eligible to do this if I were to earn enough points this year playing tournaments even though I can't play Masters this year? I wasn't sure how that worked with age protected divisions.

Thanks for your time.
Jason

Those who graduate to the next age division can earn their points in the younger age division(s) to meet the minimum points requirement to get an invite.