We're looking at the possibility of displaying a player's standard deviation at some point along with their rating. In the mean time, the higher a player's rating on average, the smaller their standard deviation. A player will shoot 2/3 of their rounds with a rating within +/- one standard deviation of their rating. The range of standard deviations for player over 1000 is about 20-30. That means a 1000 rated player might have 2 out of 3 rounds with a rating between 975 and 1025. For 950 players, the SD is 25-35. For 900 players it's around 30-40 and below that it's 35-50+. But there are exceptions at every level with players who are wilder or more consistent than other players in that ratings range.

I noticed that the new ratings (March-09) included rounds from the Memorial, and for some divisions those rounds are rated significantly lower than they were initially (unofficially, I guess). I was wondering why the Open Men's rounds are rated differently than the Open Women and Masters players, even though they played the same courses on the same days from the same tee-pads? Is that right? Shouldn't those all be factored together, since they played the same course?

We normally separate them since they don't play at the same time due to tee times. The changing winds are always a factor there and we've separated those divisions regularly for official ratings. We sometimes do it for the Gentleman's Club also. It's still not ideal since actual round start and end times gradually change even within divisions with tee times. My preference would be to never do ratings for tee time rounds. But the PDGA has decided to do them with division groupings where possible, more as a customer service decision versus slightly better ratings calculations.

Someone just told me that the Voodoo putter by Gateway is not approved. I've been using the Voodoo for some time and I don't believe him...Is the Voodoo approved? If so, what was the date? Thanks Chuck!

The approved list of discs is under the About Discgolf / Rules tab above. And yes the Voodoo is not on the approved list as of 3/1/09.

http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/PDGA_approved_discs_30109.pdf

Approved Discs and Targets under this submenu: www.pdga.com/tech-standards (http://www.pdga.com/tech-standards)

Approved Discs and Targets under this submenu: www.pdga.com/tech-standards (http://www.pdga.com/tech-standards)


The Voodoo is not on the list. Is this simply a matter of Gateway not sending it to you guys, in which case I don't really have to worry because this can be easily remedied, or are there other issues preventing approval that would make me reconsider using it? I have to admit it irks me a little that I have been using discs in competition for months that say "PDGA APPROVED" on the back, but have in fact not been approved.

What an interesting piece of information. I have friends that absolutely LOVE their Voodoos, and this will certainly put a twist in things.

I checked with Homburg and Gateway has not sent in the paperwork and fee to get the Voodoo approved yet. Same story on getting the Titan basket approved. Sounds like players need to contact Gateway to encourage them to get going on those approvals.

Chuck, Do you think my 905 rated round from the Atlanta Open will be counted on the next update?

Unlikely. Any round under about 925 would probably be dropped based on your stats.

thanks, you the man!

Hey Chuck,

I've been a member for around 2 years and have noticed when ratings go from Unofficial to Official that they typically drop between 1 and 2 points and never go up. Is this the case due to rounding up durring the origional tabulation?

I'm really asking because I shot a unofficial 1002 this weekend in Yucaipa and was wondering what the chances it would stick over 1000 come May.

Any insight will be great.

Actually, the numbers sort of average out. The online program doesn't combine scores from all of the rounds played on the same course. It calculates unofficial ratings only from the players on that layout that round, and that's if the TD does the course layouts properly. So when multiple rounds get averaged, the ratings for one round will likely go down a few points and those in the other will go up the same number of points. So your experience of seeing them go down is coincidental and not automatically going to happen going from unofficial to official.

So if it was the only round during the tourney on that course set up it will most likely stay the same?

Keep up the good work,

Bart

Yes. It should stay close. However, sometimes the pool of propagators changes between the time of the event and doing the ratings officially, especially this time of year when players are not current at the event and have renewed before the official ratings are done.

The ratings look a little low for the Open men in that event...Hopefully they go up since the intermediates and below did not play the course at the same time. In fact, I'm not sure they even played the same layout...

Don't rely on unofficial ratings unless you know the TD got the course layouts entered properly.

The ratings look a little low for the Open men in that event...Hopefully they go up since the intermediates and below did not play the course at the same time. In fact, I'm not sure they even played the same layout...



I inputted the course information and scores for the online scoring for the event. All divisions played the same layout in rounds 1 & 3. The Int and Rec played a different layout in round 2. BTW, I would love to see the ratings for Round 3 go up - as maybe I could get my first 1000 rated round!

Chuck, would the fact this was a 20 hole course affect the ratings - or make them appear low as Cent suggests?

Looking at the ratings, I suspect the official ones will be very close to those posted, especially if you keep the ratings processing for R1 & R3 separate (and it looks like they should be). Considering there were just six players with ratings over 999, it's not unusual for just seven round ratings to be over 999 in R3. So the ratings don't appear low. However, the more holes played, the round ratings range tends to narrow.

if i play a tournament, but DNF on the second day, how will that affect my rating, and will my rating for the 1st day's rounds of said tournament still count?
thanks

Ratings will be calculated for all completed rounds even if you DNF.

Looking at the ratings, I suspect the official ones will be very close to those posted, especially if you keep the ratings processing for R1 & R3 separate (and it looks like they should be). Considering there were just six players with ratings over 999, it's not unusual for just seven round ratings to be over 999 in R3. So the ratings don't appear low. However, the more holes played, the round ratings range tends to narrow.



Were the intermediates rated with the pros for rounds 1 and 3? We might have played the same course but at completely different times, and the ratings are the same...

Yes. At least the way the TD entered the course layouts for the unofficial ratings. If it was a "tee time" round, the TD can submit the TD report to the PDGA as if some divisions played one layout and other divisions played another in the same round simply due to the difference in conditions at different times of the day. We do that for events like the Gentleman's Club and Memorial when it looks like that's necessary, even if the TD doesn't submit the report that way.

OK, maybe Suzette will do that then...We played our rounds 3+ hours apart, wind was definitely a factor. Suzette might just get that 1000+ rated round after all.

OK, maybe Suzette will do that then...We played our rounds 3+ hours apart, wind was definitely a factor. Suzette might just get that 1000+ rated round after all.



It was sunny and warm all weekend. sorry, but I didn't experience any big change in winds at all on Saturday, even with the Round 1 start at 9:00 and Round 2 at 3:00. And the Am played in between those two times.

While it was sunny on all weekend, there was definitely a difference in wind speed...

While it was sunny on all weekend, there was definitely a difference in wind speed...



I will ask Kerri make a note in the report. Please help us estimate the wind speed for all the rounds.

Here is what I would estimate were the temps. Feel free to change these as well.

Round 1 Pros/Adv 9:00 Start 60 - finish 70
Round 1 Int/Rec 12:00 Start 70 - finish 72
Round 2 Pros/Adv 3:00 Start 72 - finish 70
Round 2 Int/Rec 9:00 (different layout than Pro Round 2)
Start 60 - finish 70
Round 3 Pros/Adv 12:00 Start 70 - finish 72
Round 3 Int/Rec 3:00 Start 72 and finish 70

While it was sunny on all weekend, there was definitely a difference in wind speed...



I will ask Kerri make a note in the report. Please help us estimate the wind speed for all the rounds.

Here is what I would estimate were the temps. Feel free to change these as well.

Round 1 Pros/Adv 9:00 Start 60 - finish 70
Round 1 Int/Rec 12:00 Start 70 - finish 72
Round 2 Pros/Adv 3:00 Start 72 - finish 70
Round 2 Int/Rec 9:00 (different layout than Pro Round 2)
Start 60 - finish 70
Round 3 Pros/Adv 12:00 Start 70 - finish 72
Round 3 Int/Rec 3:00 Start 72 and finish 70



Here is the data from weather.com...I just think the other divisions should be rated separately. We played at totally different times of the day, and in different conditions, whether great or small.

Saturday 3/28
ROUND 1 AM1 and OPEN
9:05 AM Sunny 57�F CALM

10:05 AM Sunny 65�F CALM

11:05 AM Sunny 72�F CALM

ROUND 1 OTHER DIVISIONS
12:05 PM Sunny 76�F CALM

1:05 PM Sunny 78�F CALM

2:05 PM Sunny 79�F From NNW 8mph


ROUND 2 AM1 and OPEN
3:05 PM Sunny 80�F From WNW 8mph

4:05 PM Sunny 81�F From WNW 6mph

5:05 PM Sunny 78�F From WNW 13mph

6:05 PM Sunny 78�F From WNW 13mph


Sunday 3/29
ROUND 2 OTHER DIVISIONS
9:05 AM Partly Cloudy 53�F CALM

10:05 AM Sunny 58�F CALM

11:05 AM Sunny 62�F CALM


ROUND 3 AM1 and OPEN
12:05 PM Sunny 65�F From S 3mph

1:05 PM Sunny 68�F From SE 8mph

2:05 PM Sunny 71�F From SE 10mph


ROUND 3 OTHER DIVISIONS
3:05 PM Partly Cloudy 71�F From SE 10mph

4:05 PM Mostly Cloudy 70�F From SE 12mph

5:05 PM Sunny 65�F From WNW 10mph

6:05 PM Partly Cloudy 62�F From NW 9mph

Wow - I suck at guessing temperatures and wind speed. All I know is it was a little chilly in the morning and most excellent in the afternoon.

Congrats on (maybe)getting your first 1000 rated round. Way cool!

Shooting 55 on that layout was definitely 1000+, very nice round...

Here is what I would estimate were the temps. Feel free to change these as well.

Round 1 Pros/Adv 9:00 Start 60 - finish 70
Round 1 Int/Rec 12:00 Start 70 - finish 72
Round 2 Pros/Adv 3:00 Start 72 - finish 70
Round 2 Int/Rec 9:00 (different layout than Pro Round 2)
Start 60 - finish 70
Round 3 Pros/Adv 12:00 Start 70 - finish 72
Round 3 Int/Rec 3:00 Start 72 and finish 70

Those of us in Michigan hate you. :D

Hey, Chuck!

At Bowling Green they created a gator-free division of 40 players. They put all the unrated rec men and sub-800 women together in one pool. Will the PDGA make gators out of some of those women, or use other rounds and pools to rate these players or what? I found it amusing to see an entire pool of 40 players with no gators!

I saw that looking at results last night. Gentry is there to help. I'm hoping other gators will be playing the same courses and the weather is similar enough to combine rounds so they get ratings.

What is the mininum number of holes required for a round to be rated? The TD report says 13, but some others have told me 15.

13. However, only rounds of at least 18 holes can ever be included in the top 10 best rated rounds ever.

In ball golf it's completing at least 14 holes to get a round included in your handicap.

Thanks Chuck!

Hey Chuck, does my 9 down at Renny Gold from 2nd round of Carolina Clash rank pretty high on the rounds in that SSA range? Just wondering. It was rated a 1048, which seems low to me...

Matt Peckham

The Renny Gold SSA is about the same as Winthrop Gold which is near 69. A 61 is very good but not like the sub-60s you see every year at USDGC. So that 1048 will probably be within a point of the official rating.

I believe the best round of disc golf in tournament play has occured this past weekend in Clearwater, FL at the fun n' sun. The Champ shot a -23 in 24 holes. He missed his birdie on the first hole and proceeded to card 23 straight birdies! a couple years back, Bubis shot a 38 on the same course and it was 1099. Kenny got 17 of the 18 and then all 6 of the additional holes. This round has to be close to 1120. The next best round was -13 by Johnny McCray. What do you think Chuck? It was at Coachman park.

Wow.
Kenny Climo, still the man...

Sounds very promising. Let's see what the unofficial results show when they're posted.

That might take a while... results from this tournament aren't posted very quickly.

Chuck, At the TX women's championship the pro and advanced played a 4th round. The results page has it listed as a final and doesn't show round ratings. They played the same course/layout as the 3rd round. Can you possibly fix it, I'm very curious to see what the final round ratings are.

If it's the same layout, then just look at the 3rd round ratings to see what they would be. If they are slightly different, both of those rounds will be averaged together anyway so the R3 ratings should be close to the official ratings.

(I can't fix it easily without the Excel file)

Hey Chuck I see my rating was updated today. It was because of the Columbus Ice Bowl. The only problem is that the 2nd round ratings are not correct. The pros and advanced played the long tees. The intermediates, recs and Pro Women all played the short tees the 2nd round. So the ratings are off for that round.

I saw that after Roger and Dave did the correction update. So Roger is fixing it tonight for Dave to upload a correction tomorrow.

Chuck,

Quick question, None of my early 2009 round ratings have changed but I dropped 4 rating points. Why is this? My guess is that I had some good rounds not double weighted anymore, but that does not seem to add up if no new rounds were added to take there place?

Thanks for any insight.

I've gotten some emails from some others on ratings changes that seem suspicious with this simple corrections update. We're looking into it.

You the man!

It looks like everyone went back to there "End of 2008" ratings

I checked about 20 people. And everyone just went back to that.

Yeah my rating dropped back 15 points! I have played well above my rating! I would like to know what is going on..everyone else I have looked at has also went back to the March update?!

Take a look. I believe Roger and Dave got it fixed. Roger originally sent the wrong Excel file for Dave to load today's correction update.

That might take a while... results from this tournament aren't posted very quickly.



This always sadden's me, because if you use the TD report, it is literally as easy and copy and paste.

Check out this tournament:

http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=8787&year=2009&include_ratings=1#O pen

Everyone played the same course at the same time with one difference. On hole 13 Intermediate and below played the short tee and Advanced/Open played the long tee. That is the only difference between the two divisions, yet the ratings difference is about 40-30 points depending on the score. hmmmmm, I think I know why this happened, but any idea if the ratings will change once 'official'?

Not sure but we'll take note to look at it when the official ratings are processed.

Chuck,

I played in a an ice bowl a couple months ago where people were buying mulligans left and right (some bought 30!!). I was wondering if those rounds would be included? (it was the "Dream Factory Ice Bowl" in Bowling Green KY)

Thanks,
Kevin

Not sure but we'll take note to look at it when the official ratings are processed.



Thanks Chuck! Ratings seem to be skewed for this tourney due to the one alternate tee pad. I'd rather have played the cement:-) The change didn't seem to add any strokes to the layout. Thanks again! Joe

I believe the best round of disc golf in tournament play has occured this past weekend in Clearwater, FL at the fun n' sun. The Champ shot a -23 in 24 holes. He missed his birdie on the first hole and proceeded to card 23 straight birdies! a couple years back, Bubis shot a 38 on the same course and it was 1099. Kenny got 17 of the 18 and then all 6 of the additional holes. This round has to be close to 1120. The next best round was -13 by Johnny McCray. What do you think Chuck? It was at Coachman park.



The results are now posted, but I never got to see the unofficial ratings! Anybody know yet what the -23 was rated at?

Not sure but we'll take note to look at it when the official ratings are processed.



Thanks Chuck! Ratings seem to be skewed for this tourney due to the one alternate tee pad. I'd rather have played the cement:-) The change didn't seem to add any strokes to the layout. Thanks again! Joe

Not sure but we'll take note to look at it when the official ratings are processed.



Thanks Chuck! Ratings seem to be skewed for this tourney due to the one alternate tee pad. I'd rather have played the cement:-) The change didn't seem to add any strokes to the layout. Thanks again! Joe





seeing as i misplayed that hole both rounds, i imagine my ratings are pretty accurate as is. thanks again, joe.

I couldn't seem to find an answer to this, so I am sorry if it has been answered before. For tournaments to be dropped from the ratings, what is the cut off date? Is it the date of the actual Rating update? Or the submission deadline date? Thanks.

i think they have to be submitted by may 5th.

So if you don't think the TD has submitted his report and cash, this is the weekend to follow up to make sure it will make the next update.

Chuck,
Are the ratings for the Lemon Lake spring open correct? it doesnt look that way? will those be changed anytime soon?
thanks!

Contact the TD for corrections when ratings are still unofficial. I don't know who played what courses.

Well, i know for a fact that the intermediates and pros and other divisions didnt play the same courses, but their ratings are all the same across the board. A '51' in the first round in pros is rated the same a '51' for intermediate. its the same second round and the same for all scores.

Hey Chuck,
where would i find the posted minutes form the PDGA summit meeting?

Hey Chuck,
where would i find the posted minutes form the PDGA summit meeting?They won't post minutes until sometime after they become official. When there is a need to formalize minutes quickly, they approve the minutes by e-mail a little while after the meeting. Otherwise, the minutes don't get approved until the next meeting. The minutes are posted on this website. Start by hovering over PDGA HQ and then click on Organizational Documents.

Now Chuck can copy and paste:

"What Bruce said."

It didn't happen this time but there was general agreement that the proceedings next Summit might be posted like a blog while it's happening.

summitt twitter!

it looks like The -Sioux Passage Open (http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=8481#Open)- was not included in the current ratings update. it hasn't yet shown up in my player profile and I can still view the ratings (unlike most tournaments that are used for ratings updates). is there a reason for this? my rating will be hurt without this tournament included.

All events received by the deadline (May 5) got processed. Contact the TD to ask why the delay in reporting. Fortunately, your actual playing skill should remain the same even if your rating didn't get a boost from an event that didn't get rated...

it was reported at the same time as the jefferson barracks open, which was included. otherwise i wouldn't have asked.

like most people with ambition, i have goals, chuck. one of those goals is to continually bring up my rating. why don't you just stop doing ratings if you believe that they mean so little? and by all means, continue to respond with sarcasm when someone asks a simple question. we all love it.

i'm sorry that you're stressed out. i wasn't trying to add to your problems. i thought maybe the tournament was looked over by mistake and that no one else had mentioned it yet. next time i'll just shut my mouth.

it was reported at the same time as the jefferson barracks open, which was included. otherwise i wouldn't have asked.

like most people with ambition, i have goals, chuck. one of those goals is to continually bring up my rating. why don't you just stop doing ratings if you believe that they mean so little? and by all means, continue to respond with sarcasm when someone asks a simple question. we all love it.

i'm sorry that you're stressed out. i wasn't trying to add to your problems. i thought maybe the tournament was looked over by mistake and that no one else had mentioned it yet. next time i'll just shut my mouth.Sounds like Chuck was just having a little fun, and someone else is a little stressed out.

If you track your ratings this closely then you realize by now that we've been processing every report we get on time over the past several years and sometimes more. If we don't have it, then the TD is the one to contact, not me nor the PDGA. Not sarcasm, just tweaking some serious ratings watchers. If you were a newbie, I would have "softer balled" my answer.

If you want to track your rating progress more closely, I recommend copying and pasting your round ratings from each update into a master spreadsheet organized by date and updating that file by inserting the results that don't come in until a later update so you can really track your trends including graphing without double weighting. I know several players doing this due to the problems witrh some late reports getting their rounds out of sequence.

Sounds like Chuck was just having a little fun, and someone else is a little stressed out.
noted. thanks for chiming in. (<--- i'm taking "fun" lessons from chuck.)

chuck, i still haven't heard from you that the issue has been looked into. thats all i want you to say. so far, it sounds like you're just assuming that no one on your end screwed up. if you say "okay, i looked into it and we definitely did not receive anything regarding that tournament," then i forget this whole thing and move on. somehow, i don't think that will happen (at least, not if you actually look into it. i guess you could just lie).

the issue i have is this, chuck. the tournament has been viewable and the ratings have been up for about a month and a half. if the ratings are there, why can't you just copy and paste? is that not what you do for every other tournament? i don't see how that's the TD's problem. THE TOURNAMENT HAS HAD RATINGS POSTED FOR WELL OVER A MONTH. MAY 5TH WAS NOT OVER A MONTH AGO. THANK YOU.

YES, NOW I'M GETTING STRESSED.

There is no connection between the unofficial online stats posted by the TD and the official TD report sent to PDGA HQ. We don't even look at the stuff posted by the TDs because it's unofficial and many times incomplete info for doing official ratings. Plus there are things like PDGA memberships and financial info that need to be processed in the official report. I can confirm that Roger and I are processing every report we've received from PDGA HQ that was received by the May 5th deadline.

The fact a TD has uploaded unofficial results means they probably have the Scores page of the TD report completed. But there are several other things the TD needs to fill out to complete the report and pay the fees they've collected before the results get processed for official ratings.

Chuck, this doesn't have anything to do with you officially, but I got a good laugh out of it and since you're the ratings guru I figured why not post it here.

http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=9079&year=2009&include_ratings=1#Open

Anything look a little fishy? That is one mean rec division, and apparently the leader in intermediate just shot one of the greatest rounds of all time!!

I don't know. We DO have an excellent development program here in MN-WI area... ;-)

There is no connection between the unofficial online stats posted by the TD and the official TD report sent to PDGA HQ. We don't even look at the stuff posted by the TDs because it's unofficial and many times incomplete info for doing official ratings. Plus there are things like PDGA memberships and financial info that need to be processed in the official report. I can confirm that Roger and I are processing every report we've received from PDGA HQ that was received by the May 5th deadline.

The fact a TD has uploaded unofficial results means they probably have the Scores page of the TD report completed. But there are several other things the TD needs to fill out to complete the report and pay the fees they've collected before the results get processed for official ratings.

Thank you! a little explanation saves everyone a lot of trouble. this is what i was looking for.

You can tell it's update time, when for the one million, one hundred seventy eight thousand, six hundred thirty ninth time somebody who's been a member for years asks the same question. :)

So at this tournament:

http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=8737&year=2009&include_ratings=1#Open

only the intermediates and recreationals played short tees in the first round, and the 19 of them only had two or three gators among them. So they are not showing any unofficial ratings for those players. In the afternoon all amateurs played short tees so the intermediates and recs got rated off the advanced division.

The pros played long tees both rounds and you can see from their scores that the afternoon breezes accounted for no more than a one-throw difference from their morning rounds. So the weather was not much of a factor, and the pros show how much of a factor it was.

Knowing all that, do you think you'll be able to generate official ratings for the first round for the lower amateurs? Kelsey played 950ish golf in the morning and she was really hoping it would count toward her rating.

All scores on the same layout regardless of round will get the same ratings when the official ones are done unless the TD says otherwise due to large wind differences (none have ever done so yet). We now look at breakouts of SSAs by round when there are enough props in each round to see if the SSA varies by more than 1.5. Then we consider rating the rounds separately on the assumption that wind really produced different SSAs.

You can tell it's update time, when for the one million, one hundred seventy eight thousand, six hundred thirty ninth time somebody who's been a member for years asks the same question. :)

i can think of approximately a billion things i'd rather do than search for old questions and pay attention to every word written here. but you keep at it, man.

Fortunately, you don't have to search but can now read the FAQs, and if necessary, some of the ratings documents. For example, on your issue:

http://www.pdga.com/faq/ratings/unofficial-versus-official-ratings-and-results

i can think of approximately a billion things i'd rather do than search for old questions and pay attention to every word written here. but you keep at it, man.


As Chuck has pointed out all those people asking questions for the most part did NOT have to ask anything if they spent 30 seconds looking at the documents that were written to AVOID someone having to read every word in every thread or to ask the same questions every 3 months.

That's why it's so fun to come on this thread around ratings time, because it's just like Old Faithful.

I don't need to keep at it, because it ALWAYS happens, and I can just look every 3 months and it would be EXACTLY the same. :)

Thanks for your time to reply though, I'll see someone else like you in 3 months and I can add another number to the above quoted one. Check back in yourself to see what I mean.

Fortunately, you don't have to search but can now read the FAQs, rl]
notice the highlighted portion. it hasn't always been that way, according to chuck. so much for being the guy who pays attention to everything.

The FAQ may be new, but the explanations have been on the board LONG before the switch, which is what I'm talking about. The FAQ just gives people like you NO excuse going forward, no matter how lazy you may be. :)

Anyways, I invite you to tune in 3 months from now and watch the next guy ask.

thanks for your time and attention to detail, at least you can read and respond, which is better than most.

no matter how lazy you may be.
you just dont get it. i could explain it a thousand times. i am a busy person. i only have about 2 minutes to respond to you right now. laziness is playing on the computer all day. if you have a job, like chuck here, that's a different story. you haven't even added anything constructive to the conversation yet. just a bunch of "look at these dumb, lazy people." very insightful. we get it... you're smarter than everyone else.

this is the last time i waste 2 minutes on you.

you just dont get it. i could explain it a thousand times. i am a busy person. i only have about 2 minutes to respond to you right now. laziness is playing on the computer all day. if you have a job, like chuck here, that's a different story. you haven't even added anything constructive to the conversation yet. just a bunch of "look at these dumb, lazy people." very insightful. we get it... you're smarter than everyone else.

this is the last time i waste 2 minutes on you.

Posting once at midnite is playing on a computer all day...you are brilliant! :)

It now takes less than 30 minutes to read all the new posts that happen between midnite to midnite these days, where 10 years ago it would take you 30 minutes to read ONE Nick Kight post. :)

I'm not saying I'm smarter than anyone else, I just have been involved in the PDGA and reading the message board for 14 years - and since ratings started, that covers alot of ratings updates.

It is nice that you can see my one post responses to you everyday at midnite that try to inject some humor into the super serious ratings thread are really meant to aggravate only you, and your translation of my thoughts into "dumb, lazy people" is even better.

Keep up the good work, as it at least gives me something to look forward to tomorrow at midnite.

I hope your life gets easier so you can maybe find 3 minutes to respond instead, and can come up with something better than wrongly translating my thoughts. I have confidence in you!

Keith

It now takes less than 30 minutes to read all the new posts that happen between midnite to midnite these days, where 10 years ago it would take you 30 minutes to read ONE Nick Kight post. :)


A single Nick Kight post could generate more postings that this site gets in a week.

What did you east coasters do to him, anyway?

chuck,
any chance the ratings get updated early this time?

Could be this morning unless Dave gets sidetracked.

I'm just sitting here hitting the refresh button and not getting any work done...

:D

I'm just sitting here hitting the refresh button and not getting any work done...

:D

So what else is new?

s timm

update update update

how about an e-mail to the membership to alert when the update happens?

how about an e-mail to the membership to alert when the update happens?
You could get a twitter thing going for those who are into that.

Me saying it's ready on here just isn't sufficient or fast enough?

No, because mine's updated already. :-)

(I already knew they were up when I made the last post :))

Chuck I still have a round rating that is 100 pts below my average rating, was it supposed to drop off?

The 100 pt calculation to see which rounds might drop is done before the double weighting occurs. So there are a few people with rounds that might be a few more than 100 pts below their weighted final rating if they have been improving recently and get a boost from the double weighting effect.

How can rounds get rated when tee times are used. Isn't the intent behidn ratings that all propogaters are playing the same course under the same conditions (not the same holes under the same conditions but the same course)? I played this weekend at a tourney that used tee times. The pros tee first and played the entire round under no wind or rain. The advanced played half in a torrential down pour (and i mena torrential) with 20 - 30 MPH winds. The int and rec divisions played the entire round in those conditions. During the round the course chagned dramatically with a creek that normally runds dry turning into a whitewater caliber river 10 feet deep in some places. How can that "one" round be rated the same?

The rounds aren't necessarily rated the same. We now check what the ratings are by division if there are enough propagators to see how close they are. If the SSAs are within 1.5 shots, we combine the numbers so everyone gets the same rating for the same score. If the spread is bigger than 1.5, we assume the wind and conditions differed enough that we rate the groups separately.

I think everyone would do well to remember two things: (1) mostly what ratings are used for is to move lower rated amateurs along in the skill based divisions to reduce any bagging that might be going on. If you aren't a lower rated amateur who wants to bag, it does not matter if ratings are a rough measure. They beat having nothing. (2) One less accurately rated round is not going to have much effect on your average if you play as few as five tournaments. Suppose the wind came up and the course played 2 throws harder for the people with late tee times. The people with early tee times might get an extra 20 rating points for that round than they deserved. Average that in with nine other rounds and it will swing their rating by two points. And here is a bonus third thing: (3) If you regularly play tournaments with consecutive starts, those kinds of effects are going to average out. Unless you have truly ****** off God, in which case you have bigger worries than your rating. :D

Chuck - Thanks ... that makes sense and is good to know. In the case of COTO I think you'll a huge difference in pro ratings compared to Ams.

Chuck-


The round ratings for the Emporia Kansas Glass Blown Open seem to be off. When they went from Unofficial to Official they jumped all over the board.

It also seems now that ratings for different courses are the same. Different divisions played different courses at different times.

Don't really know what is going on.

Thanks-
Smitty

I don't either. Roger and Dave weren't happy with the numbers and they're checking into those to make adjustments in the corrections update within a month.

Thanks Chuck, I guess?? :)

Looks to me, like the courses played is messed up. The way it is listed now scores have the same rating no matter which course was played. I know that the third round dropped 44 points for one of the Masters players (Iqbal). He is the person that brought this to all our attentions here in Kansas.

Any reason my rating has not been updated? I did not have any new rated rounds this period, but I am current.

It was updated. But the date on your rating and your rating itself only change if you have new rounds.

even if rounds used are dropped due to the 12 month usage?

Please read the Ratings FAQ: http://www.pdga.com/faq#278n761

Everyone's 12 months is based on the date of their most recently rated round. No new rounds, your 12-month period remaions the same. It doesn't change because time moves on. Players who stopped playing tournaments in 2002 still have the same rating.

Please read the Ratings FAQ: http://www.pdga.com/faq#278n761


Keep that link on a quick template, because you'll probably need it again soon. :)

No other words necessary, just answer with quick templates, and by 2073 you'll have covered every question known and every player still in the PDGA will not have to ask anymore :)


Now it's time for "readytostabme" to come in a say I'm a meanie, because I have a sense of humor and he's too busy to have any fun. ;)

Chuck, where on the site can you find where you are ranked based on rating in your state? I could find points but not rating. Thanks!

http://www.pdga.com/player-ratings-search

A. Chuck were the ratings updated yesterday?
B. If they were why was my rating not updated, I have played seven rounds since the last update.

Thanks
Zach
#37950

Just playing the rounds doesn't mean your rating will be updated if the TDs for those events didn't turn in their reports by the May 5th deadline to get processed. TDs have 30 days to turn in reports so in some cases, they may not have been late. TDs who are late get regular notices from the PDGA to get reports turned in.

Thank you for taking the time to answer questions, it is greatly appreciated. Here is a scenario that happened to my friend recently. He recently joined the PDGA and then entered a PDGA B tier event. The event happened about 8 days before the TD report deadline (MAY 5th). He shot a 998, 856, and 942 rated rounds. The TD apparently didn't turn the report in on time. First question: Had the TD reported it on time would the 100 pt below rule drop the 856, so his rating would be around 970? Question 2: If the TD reports it by the next update deadline will those ratings still be used? I remember reading somewhere that the TD has to report it in a timely fashion or they won't count. Again thank you for your time and happy golfing.

hey chuck,
for events immediately following an update such as this week's virginia open stuff what is the rule for players whose rating has risen out of the division they registered for?

A TD missing the deadline only means the rounds won't get processed in that update. But they will get processed for everyone who played in that event once the report gets turned in.

For new players, we don't drop any rounds until they have played at least 8 because we really don't know what's "normal" for them yet. So that 856 will likely count toward that player's rating unless he plays more before the next update and has at least 8 rounds to consider that average above 956.

hey chuck,
for events immediately following an update such as this week's virginia open stuff what is the rule for players whose rating has risen out of the division they registered for?

Players have a 2-week grace period following the ratings update to remain in the division they pre-registered for as long as they did it before the ratings were posted. Once the ratings are posted, TDs of events within 2 weeks afterward have the option to allow players to enter the division of their old rating or they can require them to enter their new division. TD choice.

. TDs who are late get regular notices from the PDGA to get reports turned in.

Is this something new? It doesn't seem like this has happened in the recent past....

That's the policy. Not sure how well executed since my reports haven't been late to test their procedure. I can say though that for the past several years now, all reports for a year have eventually gotten done in time for the yearend ratings. Several TDs took up lots of PDGA office time contacting them by phone and email to complete the reports.

will we see an amendment to the last update for the glass blown open ratings or should we just expect to see the change in the next official update?

There will be a correction run to deal with Glass Blown and a few other items to be posted in mid-June.

Chuck,

Can you tell me why when I'm in the state of Georgia do I throw ~1000 rated rounds only when it doesn't matter? :)

I don't seem to have this problem in other states where I usually will make money shooting 1000 rated rounds.

ok i know these rounds are not offical but i had a question about them anyways

ok during the Hall of Fame classic this weekend the advanced and open player that shot the same score on the jim warner course had a ratting higher than the MA2/MA3 people that also had the same score

for the first round MA1 played the warner course then open players play the same course the second round and MA2/MA3 played the third round
http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=8592

i was wonding how there can be an almost twenty point swing when the weather was pretty much the same the whole weekend

We now combine all scores from all rounds played on the same layout to calculate official ratings unless the weather is different. So everyone who played the Warner will end up with the same rating for the same score. Same thing for Headrick and Jackson. The software for the unofficial online calculations wasn't programmed to combine rounds on the same layout so you see the differences.

As a general note, the higher the rating of the player pool, the more accurately ratings are produced because the range of their scores are tighter and more consistent. Even though 20 points seems like a lot, it's less than 4% variance from the higher rated pools.

The higher rated pools also tend to have less players that are underrated. Rapidly improving players can depress ratings.

We now combine all scores from all rounds played on the same layout to calculate official ratings unless the weather is different. So everyone who played the Warner will end up with the same rating for the same score. Same thing for Headrick and Jackson. The software for the unofficial online calculations wasn't programmed to combine rounds on the same layout so you see the differences.

As a general note, the higher the rating of the player pool, the more accurately ratings are produced because the range of their scores are tighter and more consistent. Even though 20 points seems like a lot, it's less than 4% variance from the higher rated pools.


ok it was just kind of a surpise when i see the round ratings at the IDGC and see that my 68 was rated lower than a 70 the day before on the same course

but your saying is most of the round ratings will change with at least one round being higher

Now it could have been that the Hall of Famers playing it Saturday left a lot of good karma out there for your divisions and the course played two throws easier...:)

Now it could have been that the Hall of Famers playing it Saturday left a lot of good karma out there for your divisions and the course played two throws easier...:)


I think i might have had to much karma for that course with the hall of famers, helping put in all the tee signs and got a little from feldberg with him telling me i was going to putt well but a 940 round rating would be really nice

but thanks for the expliantions

Chuck...what is the highest rating that a player has started with?...we have a local with 1009 as his first player rating....of course it will be lower than 1000 after the next update

We don't really track that info. However, when we calculated the first ratings after the 1998 Worlds, Climo "started" with a 1032.

The mathematical effect identified by Krupicka is probably more significant than the one identified by Chuck, and probably more likely to explain the difference at this tournament.

You can see the same ratings skewing effect in rounds 1 and 2 of the Stateline this past weekend, comparing the ProAdv pool to the Int pool. Par averaged 932 for the lower pool and 950 for the upper pool. Same courses, and over two rounds, same average conditions.

We are looking into the possibility of selecting props to use for a round based on their standard deviations rather than rating. If we have enough props (30+?) with SD under say 30, then we won't use props with SD over 30. We would only use the higher SD props when needed for rounds where we had fewer than 30 total props. This should reduce the differences we might see in official ratings and account for the under rated up-and-comers depressing numbers. But it still wouldn't be programmed into the online unofficial process, at least for a while.

We now combine all scores from all rounds played on the same layout to calculate official ratings unless the weather is different. So everyone who played the Warner will end up with the same rating for the same score. Same thing for Headrick and Jackson. The software for the unofficial online calculations wasn't programmed to combine rounds on the same layout so you see the differences.

As a general note, the higher the rating of the player pool, the more accurately ratings are produced because the range of their scores are tighter and more consistent. Even though 20 points seems like a lot, it's less than 4% variance from the higher rated pools.

Even though Chuck didn't answer my question, I'll help him out with yours. :)

The MA2/3 were supposed to play the shorter tees on the Warner course, acccording to what Jason said on Saturday morning - so if they did that might account for it. I personally don't know if it stayed that way or if they played longer tees as I was to busy figuring out a way to get a throw through 80 foot wide openings, after last week not having too much trouble getting the discs through only 12 foot wide openings. :(

If they did play a shorter layout, Jason did not enter a separate course layout to use for calculating their unofficial ratings.

They may have all played same pads in the C pool, as I said I wasn't really worrying about them, even though I was playing worse than an AM3. :(

I noticed the unofficial ratings changed for the Summertime Open but the total under/over par hasn't. The upper course was par 60 and the lower course was par 54. Both courses were played twice by all players from the same tees. Would the official ratings possibly end up being higher because of this?

If the Unofficial ratings are not done properly then it's very likely the Official ratings will be different. Different par values won't make any difference as long as the correct number of holes was entered for each course.

I noticed the unofficial ratings changed for the Summertime Open but the total under/over par hasn't. The upper course was par 60 and the lower course was par 54. Both courses were played twice by all players from the same tees. Would the official ratings possibly end up being higher because of this?

The results/ratings for Summertime Open have now been updated. Each division should now be showing the proper (unofficial) ratings for the courses they played.

Pool A played Round 1 on the Upper course, Round 2 Lower, Round 3 Lower, Round 4 Upper and Pool B played opposite.

Pool A consisted of Open, Open Women, Advanced Men, Advanced Women and Intermediate Men. All other divisions played in Pool B.

is there a page on this website that will tell me how round rating are calculated and what it takes to (#of rounds etc.) to make your rating rise.

I think my problem is that i joined the PDGA when i was a newbie and i started off in the 800's, now im finally a 912, my last 6 rounds have been a BSF 949,939,880(ouch) 914,939,911. i did the math by adding all together and dividing by 6 and come up with a 922. so does this mean my rating should go up a little, or do other past rounds have to drop off before.

Confused in Boise......

http://www.pdga.com/faq
http://www.pdga.com/ratings

Just curious why these stats have not been added yet to our current profiles?

http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=8740

Look under the name of the event and you can see the results are Unofficial. That means the TD hasn't submitted the report to the PDGA yet.

I see. Is there anyway you can send a heads-up to the TD to do so?

TDs have 30 days from the event to turn in the report and I believe the PDGA sends a reminder sometime within the next few weeks after that as a reminder and continues to do so if it continues to be late.

The results/ratings for Summertime Open have now been updated. Each division should now be showing the proper (unofficial) ratings for the courses they played.

Pool A played Round 1 on the Upper course, Round 2 Lower, Round 3 Lower, Round 4 Upper and Pool B played opposite.

Pool A consisted of Open, Open Women, Advanced Men, Advanced Women and Intermediate Men. All other divisions played in Pool B.

There were a couple of Advanced Men players that played in Pool B due to the size of the field.

Chuck,
The Duncan Lake Hillclimber Open changed some ratings around this Okla-North Texas area.
The Advanced Grandmasters played in the same flight as Open/ADV but in rounds 2 and 4 they did not play from the same tee boxes. Their setup was much easier. As a result, they got some ungodly high ratings and it depressed the ratings of the rest of us.

The Advanced GM played the same layout for R 2 and R4 that the Rec and Intermediate did in R 1 and R3.. so their ratings should be similiar to those.
I'm sure it was just a paperwork error by TD. My first post on this thread, but want to thank you for all the help with PDGA that you've done for years.

There were a couple of Advanced Men players that played in Pool B due to the size of the field.Wow, that would be unfortunate if the TD split divisions between pools. I don't know if the ratings system can handle this type of situation - at least the unofficial ratings can't. How many Advanced players were in the B Pool and do you know ANY of their names? You can PM me.

Chuck,
The Duncan Lake Hillclimber Open changed some ratings around this Okla-North Texas area.

The Advanced GM played the same layout for R 2 and R4 that the Rec and Intermediate did in R 1 and R3.. so their ratings should be similiar to those.
I'm sure it was just a paperwork error by TD. My first post on this thread, but want to thank you for all the help with PDGA that you've done for years.

The TD did indicate that the Adv GM played the same in R2/4 as the Rec and Int did in R1/3 as you indicated but not a shorter layout than the Open/Adv played on the temp course. According to the report, there were no short tees played on the temp and everyone played the same tees. Are you saying there were some short tees on the temp course?

Wow, that would be unfortunate if the TD split divisions between pools. I don't know if the ratings system can handle this type of situation - at least the unofficial ratings can't. How many Advanced players were in the B Pool and do you know ANY of their names? You can PM me.

We can handle it as long as the TD breaks out the results, by person, who played in which pool.

There were no short tees on the temp course. However, that was round 1 and round 3 for the Open division and all divisions in our pool.
In Rounds 2 and 4 is where the ADV grandmasters played a far easier layout and scored big ratings at the expense of the rest of us. You'll notice that last place in ADV GM shot a 67 in final round, the same as the best score in ADV master. And about half the field in ADV GM beat Coda Hatfield in Round 2. Although in theory it could happen, this time it was because they weren't on the same tees.

In Rounds 1 and 3, the ADV GM shot the same temp course we all shot so those should be fine.

There is also a crazy outlier in ADV master though I'm not sure where he goes -- Sonny Lieb -unrated -- I'm doubting someone with his final score shot a 52 in the wind on the big course in round 4, but I don't know for certain. Being there, I didn't hear of it. I think he would have been bragging. That score could be off by double digits, but Joe would have the facts.

The TD did indicate that the Adv GM played the same in R2/4 as the Rec and Int did in R1/3 as you indicated but not a shorter layout than the Open/Adv played on the temp course. According to the report, there were no short tees played on the temp and everyone played the same tees. Are you saying there were some short tees on the temp course?

Chuck, can I register my left-handed alter ego with her own PDGA number and rating and return to the am women field playing exclusively left-handed?

C-tiers would then once again become attractive events with bigger fields and fierce competition.

There were no short tees on the temp course. However, that was round 1 and round 3 for the Open division and all divisions in our pool.
In Rounds 2 and 4 is where the ADV grandmasters played a far easier layout and scored big ratings at the expense of the rest of us. You'll notice that last place in ADV GM shot a 67 in final round, the same as the best score in ADV master. And about half the field in ADV GM beat Coda Hatfield in Round 2. Although in theory it could happen, this time it was because they weren't on the same tees.

In Rounds 1 and 3, the ADV GM shot the same temp course we all shot so those should be fine.

Acording to the TD report, Open/Adv played the permanent course in R1/3, not the temp course and Adv GM played short tees. Then Open/Adv/GM played the temp course, all the same tees in R2/4. It sounds like all of the course codings might be wrong?

Yes, appears the TD report just had the rounds mixed up. I'm certain we (Open) played temp on 1 and 3 (I aced during round 3 so it was memorable, round two I tried to forget).
This is a good TD, it just got mixed up somewhere.

Chuck, can I register my left-handed alter ego with her own PDGA number and rating and return to the am women field playing exclusively left-handed?

Nope. But you could apply for reinstatement as an Am and see what Gentry says.

I would like to be able to choose which division to play based on attendence in each division...... the pro women's divison has been completely onerous lately at smaller tournies.... doesn't the pdga support calculated betting?

You could play the events in Maryland that have sliding entry fee scales. Certainly you can play in a few different Mens Am divisions with larger fields when Pro Women doesn't look appealing. You just need to supplement your income and winnings by selling discs you both purchase wholesale and might win in those Am mens divisions.

hey Chuck, my son and I are going to compete at Worlds this summer. He was born 11/17/95, he is 13. Doesn't he get to play in the <13 boys division? Or can he not be 13. The pdga put him in the <16 boys division. There is a fricken kid with a 997 rating in there, holy cow.

Thanks in advance, sons name is Jerry Brown 34382

Check out page 5 that has the age breaks for all divisions:
http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/09TourStandardsV1-2.pdf
Looks like he was born a few months too early to make the 13 and under division.

The Swedes have an excellent youth development program and usually send some strong Junior players. They don't have much amateur activity there and you rarely see the Juniors from Sweden enter am divisions at Worlds. Typically, their top Juniors with ratings over 970 will go straight to pro after finishing in the top or winning one or two Am Worlds.

Hey Chuck, I played in an event, the 4th Annual Great Chili Cookout B Tier on May 2nd. My name is on the results list, but it's not bold and blue, and my pdga number is not listed. How can I make sure these rounds count toward my rating?

~Jeff Walker
#35267

Contact the TD to make sure it's on the report he sends to the PDGA. If he's already sent it, then contact the PDGA office at: [email protected] to make sure it's on there before we process it for ratings starting later this month.

Chuck do you know if the Wham-O "Heavyweight" 200 gram Frisbee is legal for Super Class? It is not listed but it seems like it would meet the specs.

Thanks.
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

The Ching "Heavy" is legal but haven't heard of the Wham-O Heavyweight by name. However, look at the Wham-O mold number on the disc. If it is on the PDGA approved list, then it would be legal at 200g and lighter weights.
http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/PDGA_approved_discs_41609.pdf

Thanks Chuck! I have one on order. If the mold number is discernable I'll post it here.

Chuck,

I just played in the Treebash Open in Flagstaff.

The field was split into an A pool (all pro divisions) and B pool (all am divisions).

Two courses were used on Saturday with the A pool playing Thorpe in the morning and the B pool playing McPhearson the same time. Pools switched courses for the afternoon round.

McPhearson's layout was a bit different depending on the division played. All A pool divisions, Advanced Men, and Advanced Masters Men played a longer layout for 4 of the holes, whereas the remaining B poolers played the shorter layout. All pools played the same layout at Thorpe.

When I compare round ratings between the A and B pools for playing the same course/layout, the A pool scores rated consistently higher than B pool scores. That seems can a bit silly to me. Can you help me understand why it came out that way, or will the final ratings will be adjusted?

Thanks!

The higher rated pools tend to have less players that are underrated. Rapidly improving players can depress ratings. For official ratings, rounds on the same layout are combined to calculate ratings. The unofficial tool does not do this. Chuck, this should probably be added to the FAQ somehow as it is a recurring question.

Part of that answer is in the FAQ but I'll add the rest as Krupicka suggested.

Chuck, does the PDGA have any plan in place to counter the diminishing pro women's fields?

With such tiny fields at even A-tiers (only 2 women pre-registered for A-tier DGLO this weekend), has the PDGA ever considered that it's policy of "if you don't like it, don't play" has perpetuated dropout, or at the very least failure of viable ams to move up?

Has there been any brainstorming on this problem at any of the summits attended each year? Is there an end in sight to the 2 - 3 woman pro fields? With your ratings system, statistics indicate where an 840 woman might finish when playing two 940s, and $75 - $100 is a lot of money to gamble with those odds. Faced with this, how does the PDGA expect its pwo fields to increase?

Will anything ever change? Will there ever be cashless pre-reg for women at the very least? Shouldn't there be a plan in place if a division can't even get 4 players to nudge borderline ams to move up without losing their shorts??

The PDGA Womens Committee should be the ones to answer those questions but I haven't heard about anything they are doing. If you notice, there are no specific programs to increase men's participation, just programs to increase participation among everyone. If more women aren't showing up, that seems to be their choice. I don't see any discriminatory practices against women's participation (other than some venues not having restrooms). If anything, policies are in place more favorable for women such as higher proportion of added cash, allowing small divisions and allowing women to enter men's divisions.

There are way more women participating in Ultimate than disc golf. We created the Super Class program to provide an opportunity to attract ultimate players to crossover and practice their throwing skills in SC events. This is a bridge program that has much potential for increasing the number of women but we have yet to see our DG women pursue this avenue by running SC events and seeking ultimate player participation.

It seems to me that ratings might be part of the "problem." Before we had ratings, women went pro around 850 and they had no idea that Elaine was 10 throws better than them per round. Now an 850ish woman can look at Elaine's rating and think about how good that 950 guy is who does well in Advanced and then see that there are eight or ten women that good. It all gives her reason to wait a bit. If you look at the amateur women ratings, it seems a lot of women are waiting a bit longer before going pro.

The other part of the problem is the same problem that Grand Master men and juniors and every other micro division player faces: with so many tournaments, the odds of everyone showing up for the same tournament are kind of slim. Unless you coordinate things, like Peter Shive is doing for the Pro Seniors, it is hard to get everyone at the same tournament. A woman who cares enough would do well to promote a Women's Tour of existing tournaments that offer added cash for pro women and the other features that women want.

Well put Bruce, and I personally see nothing wrong with it (that lots of people (woman OR men) are 'waiting' to go Pro). Why is it so important to have ANY one group (read: Pros) of people large? What's important is that collectively the entirety is growing!

Karl

The High Plains Challenge ratings are wrong. The ams played the opposite course as the pros for all 3 rounds. But all the ratings are the exact same for everyone. Just wondering if you could look into that. Thanks

That's a TD thing to correct.

looks like they fixed it. thanks

That's good. Lots of TDs are getting better at uploading and getting the course layouts set up correctly for more accurate unofficial ratings.

Chuck,

There is a tournament this coming weekend that is a two day event...

I can only attend the first day.

I assume I will get ratings for the rounds played, but obiously no points as I will not complete this event.

Would you concur?

Also, I want to make sure that there are no repercussions of not attending day two, as I know in advance.

Erick

Yes, you get ratings for all completed rounds in an event even if you DNF. You do not gets points as you noted. It's good that you can tell the TD ahead of time for planning that you miss the second day.

I played in a one-day, two round event this year, and the second round ran much later than I had hoped, and I had to leave. I received no points for the event, but my first round was rated and used to generate my current rating.

Back in about 1984, I played in a two-day tournament in North Little Rock, AR, at My Park (u can figure out what I mean by that), and had decided before hand to do something else on Sunday, and I let the TD know that straight up.

Wouldn't you know that, after the first two rounds, I was leading the event! Just one more page in my DG Hall of Shame.

Back in about 1984, I played in a two-day tournament in North Little Rock, AR, at My Park (u can figure out what I mean by that), and had decided before hand to do something else on Sunday, and I let the TD know that straight up.

Wouldn't you know that, after the first two rounds, I was leading the event! Just one more page in my DG Hall of Shame.
Sounds like it still "burns" even today...;)

Chuck, the CSX Open stats are still not included? I talked to the TD and he said everything has been submitted?? Any idea why these scores/stats have not been entered into the PDGA.


So far, only 5 of the 8 events that I have played have been entered into my tour stats. Kind of annoying when the one event was well over a month ago and he had the scores turned in that night???

Doesn't matter when he turns in scores. He has to turn in a TD report for you to get the tourney in your stats. Nothing Chuck can do about it.

Sounds like it still "burns" even today...;)

Groan...

When I see you in KC, I don't know whether to slap you or to kiss you. :confused: :D :eek:

Maybe I'll just "chuck" you into the nearest large body of water.

Chuck, for Fire in the Sky 09 there were only 5 open golfers playing the long set of tees. As a result, no ratings in the unofficial stuff. Now I know you tend to combine rounds when they're very similar in SSA but the average round for the first round was a 69 and the next a 67... with a difference of two strokes there's a chance the SSA will also be off by a good margin. However there really was no difference between the conditions, players simply golfed better. What are the odds these will be combined to get ratings in the end?


-Chris.

Thoes results will be automatically flagged for our manual review of borderline situations and a determination made whether to manually assign separate SSAs to each round or combine the two rounds for one SSA. Either way, official ratings will be assigned.

I have looked all through this board and can not find the answer to this question. We had an event this past weekend that had a small turnout. The Rec divisions and lower played a shorter layout than the other divisions. There were only 5 rec players that finished the event and one Rec woman. Three of them were playing in their first PDGA. Will they get a rating for this event?

Howdy Chucker

I have a technical question about ratings concerning Standard Deviations (SD). Suppose a player shoots a fairly tight range of scores with a couple of outlayers. When the SD is calculated one of the outlayers is more than 2.5*SD from the average, so I assume it is dropped. This results in a new average and a new SD. Is the process then repeated until all scores are within 2.5 SD of the recalculated average and SD??

Cheers, DD

You need 5 propagators in one round or 3 props playing the same layout twice to get round ratings. A propagator is a member who has a rating over 799 based on at least 8 rounds. So I would suspect these players will not get ratings based on what you said. It's up to the TD to recognize this situation and adjust things so that enough props play the same layout as the new players at least once during the event. We can sometimes piece enough info together working with the TD to come up with a way to do the ratings even with no props.

The SD is first calculated excluding the lowest rated round so if it's really low, it won't abnormally increase the SD. Then, this SD is used to potentially exclude any rounds in the whole set, which may be more than one round although that's unusual.

Thoes results will be automatically flagged for our manual review of borderline situations and a determination made whether to manually assign separate SSAs to each round or combine the two rounds for one SSA. Either way, official ratings will be assigned.
I just read your more recent response to someone else... when did it change that you only needed 5 props in one round or 3 playing twice? I had always thought that it was 8 total props either in one round or two rounds with very close SSAs.


-Chris.

Never was 8 props. The only 8 value involved with ratings is the number of included rounds a person has to have to be a prop. Perhaps that was what you were thinking?

No, I knew that was why 8 was important there... For some reason I'd thought that 8 props was also important. Guess I just misheard you way-back-when when you explained it, or I "mis-remembered" things. :) Gotta work on that part where I listen to important things.

Is there some where on the site that lists the player rating update dates and deadlines for this year?

The "When are ratings updated" FAQ:
http://www.pdga.com/faq#278n755

The deadlines for TDs are essentially two weeks in advance of those dates.

Chuck,

Saturday was the "Am" day and Sunday the "Pro" day at Iron Hill in Delaware. Everyone played the same lay out the first round Saturday and Sunday so you can compare the "Am" scores to the "Pro" scores.

As you can see here (http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=8849&year=2009&include_ratings=1#Advanced) a 68 shot in the first round on Saturday was rated 968 while a 68 shot on Sunday (http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=8850&year=2009&include_ratings=1#Open) in the first round on the same layout was rated a 989. The weather conditions were the same. Isn't a 68 a 68?

A 68 will get the same rating when the official ratings are done (even though a 68 is not really the same even on the same day). There are many subtle course differences (maybe not 20 points worth) but players don't feel it's fair so we average the scores together so everyone gets the same official rating.

Chuck,

This isn't a ratings based questions, just one about upcoming elections. How many spots are there to fill on the board this year, three or four? I didn't see the information on the webpage with all the voting information. Thanks!

Chris

Well, since 4 incumbents are running, there must be 4 spots to fill.

It's still on the front page here:
http://www.pdga.com/2009-pdga-elections

Five candidates with all four incumbents running for their four spots with Feldberg tossing his hat in the ring this time.

hi chuck, I love the job billy crump does commentating on the MM video, what do you think? Now, if we can just get 2 camera angles.....

That wasn't his regular videographer from what I understand. Additional cameras have added cost unless someone with a good camera and skills is donating footage like they've done at the Maple Hill/Vibram NT for Dodge to use.

Just curious, played the Roscoes Revenge this weekend. Shot a 60 all 3 rounds. All 3 rounds had exact same conditions (wind,temp,players,etc.) Though all 3 rounds are rated different. Why, and will they be combined for the official update to be more accurate. I would have to say all 3 rounds should be rated exactly the same. It just doesn't make sense any other way.

Rounds are NEVER exacty the same. The sun is in a different position each round and when your group plays each hole. Dew might be there in the morning for a while. Players' foot traffic moves elements of the course around. Say you allow 3% variance. On 1000 rating, that's 30 points. Any variance less than that is statistical noise. But "yes" those rounds will automatically be combined even though they aren't really the same. Looks like the second round ratings will be the closest to the official values.

Chuck,
If a tournament is to be included in this next update, when is the latest we might see that on our player page? Just trying to get an idea if a couple of tournaments were submitted, but just haven't shown yet.

Thanks.

All tournaments that were submitted should now show results as official with no ratings if they will be included in this next ratings update on July 21.

Any chance that a Tournament being held this Sunday(7-12-09) be included in the next update?

No. All events are in the middle of being processed now. Largest batch ever with 279 events. Good thing we added two more update periods this year.

Do you believe the day will come that we get updates monthly or bi-weekly some day?

We likely will not even if we could. Ratings don't change that fast and members on average don't generate enough new rounds to do them more than every two months. And TDs have to do the paperwork beyond just posting scores. Some take more than 30 days to do their reports. What will get better is the unofficial round ratings process and leaving them up before the event becomes official. That will provide better and faster information.

The Ching "Heavy" is legal but haven't heard of the Wham-O Heavyweight by name. However, look at the Wham-O mold number on the disc. If it is on the PDGA approved list, then it would be legal at 200g and lighter weights.
http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/PDGA_approved_discs_41609.pdf

Unfortunately I couldn't find the mold number. Any idea where to look?

If there's no mold number, either in the flight rings on top or around the bottom, then you may need to contact Wham-O to find out what the mold number is and/or if it was approved. There's no Wham-O Heavyweight approved by that name but that doesn't mean the mold itself may have been approved.

Given a rim diameter of 27.5 cm I'm thinking it may be a "Master" mold. The point is probably moot because it says 200+ grams on the front which would be over the limit. Also, I can't throw the trash can lid worth beans. I'll stick to an Utrastar for my deep dish throws.

I've tried out several Super Class discs and my favorite all around is probably the Zephyr. I also like the Te Moko which seems even more stable. For maximum glide without being too flippy the Fastback Eurablend dog disc is a good choice. It's a bit heavier and a bit more stable than a standard Fastback. The plastic also seems extremely durable.

We had a Super Class Division with 8 players in a local mini and played Super Class skins this Tuesday. I think it's catching on with both older and younger players. We'll probably try a sanctioned event in November.

I just saw a Wham-O Heavyweight at a sporting goods store the other day, but I didn't think to look for a mold number, I just "assumed" that if it was 200g, it would be legal.

It looks nothing like a Master, at least the old Masters that had the cupola. It was yellow, but looked very similar to the old World Class 165g 8# mold series discs.

That's good to hear. I use a warped 184g Star Superhero for putting and drive with Zephyrs. Use the Te Moko when I need some help dealing with wind.

The Wham-O heavy weights start at 200 so unless they are marked you should assume that they are illegal for SuperClass even if they are an approved mold.

Chuck, how much % of our entry is going into the payout in EDGE? Doesn't matter as much now but I wish it would have been posted since often a good bit goes to EDGE.

I will let you know of another game that you might like and if so I will run it with 50% of the entries going to a charity/club of my choice.lol

I don't think the payout will be any better than usual from a percentage standpoint. I'm taking my instructions for running it from Lyksett. I think we'll have more baskets than some years to help with flow. Maybe you won't care about this but I'm working on lining up two different Hall of Famers each hour to help entrants learn the throws and get them started. The Champ came onboard tonight. Hopefully that will be a bonus for the Ams doing the EDGE event.

Always fun to have a chance to show up the champ when you are an AM. I have a picture in my room from 04' with the champ and I wherein my Trophy was twice as big. lol Also got him in 02' by parking a hole twice with an Eagle that he had just missed in practice with a few throws.

That's about all I got though but maybe in 10 years I will be able to take him down half the time.

Funniest thing was probably in 07' when Nikko asked Ken what year was he in his Prime...........and Kenny thought about it then said 95' because he won 28 events with only one loss which was 2nd place. I figure that is pretty good.......................he did lose that ONE time. lol

Chuck,

May 2-3 in Edmond, OK.. the Tye F. Cunningham tournament has official results, but no ratings? is there a reason there are no ratings?

I did notice it still says sanctioning pending, but the tournament was a long time ago, what causes a long wait on the sanctioning?

Thanks

The report probably was received at PDGA HQ just after the deadline for this ratings update. That means it will be in the next update around Sept 1.

hi chuck..

wondering if the ratings get rounded up or down.
if i add up all of my included rounds, double the recent 25% and divide by total rounds...
my rating should be 994.2 about. they have my new rating at 995.
was wondering how its figured as far as rounding is concerned.

Is there a way to find out how many tournaments are held every year for the past 6 or 7 years?

Just interested on how many more tournaments and being held every year!

hi chuck..

wondering if the ratings get rounded up or down.
if i add up all of my included rounds, double the recent 25% and divide by total rounds...
my rating should be 994.2 about. they have my new rating at 995.
was wondering how its figured as far as rounding is concerned.
You also need to weight every round by the number of holes played.

Chuck, why is it that my rounds that get dropped from my ratings average 1008 and my rounds coming in average 1013.5 yet there is no change in rating? Normally I take the difference of the two and divide by 4 since there are 4 updates and it gives me an answer within 1-2 points.

I figure just like last year though if I keep averaging 1012+ per update I am bound to get there by the end of the year.lol

wondering if the ratings get rounded up or down.
if i add up all of my included rounds, double the recent 25% and divide by total rounds...
my rating should be 994.2 about. they have my new rating at 995.
was wondering how its figured as far as rounding is concerned.
<!-- / message -->

We do the ratings on a "per hole" basis in the database and then convert the number to the rating you see. So due to rounding and truncating, many people won't be able to exactly calculate their ratings because each round rating has been rounded and the overall rating truncated.

Is there a way to find out how many tournaments are held every year for the past 6 or 7 years?
Just interested on how many more tournaments and being held every year!
Try this:
http://www.pdga.com/documents/event-growth-chart

Try this:
http://www.pdga.com/documents/event-growth-chart

Thanks!

### of Sanctioned events jumped BIG time after 2002 and pretty good jump from 07 - 08!

Will be interesting to see 08 - 09!

Got another one for you Chuck!

Why is it that the SSA at Grandview this past weekend was 3 strokes higher than when the Jr division played it in 04? In 04 a the SSA was 46 and now the same score is 1037........................can't be because of the players and their ratings can it?

No. But the course changes and weather can affect that. Plus we didn't have the adjustment factor for lower rated pool averages in the calculations then which has been added. The other factor is the number of established props and there were not as many in the Juniors which can produce a wider variance in any round.

chuck, is there a site for disc golf world records?

i think longest tourney ace is the 726 foot in montana at the X

wasn't there a booming 1 at the toboggan course where dudes wife kissed the disc before he tossed it and said "get an ace babe"?

well, last week, lane mason canned a ~500 foot THUMBER ace at willamette pass to deflate nate sexton and win by a stroke.

gotta be a record there.....

Don't believe that there are official disc golf world records, but you might try Hosfeld's website www.frivolist.com (http://www.frivolist.com) to see if he has any DGWR links.

Yep, just checked it - it's there. Darn, I'm good!

thanks , there's some good stuff in there, a little outdated, but fun. unless schweberger has hit a longer one, lane's 500ft thumber ace should be on that site, i'll shoot miniac an email.

"Chuck Kennedy #4949, Riverside Park #14, St. Cloud, MN, May 1998, Roller went uphill 130 feet, hit a tree and rolled back past tee, went another 100 feet, then over cliff down 50 feet landing 5 feet from Mississippi River."

thanks , there's some good stuff in there, a little outdated, but fun. unless schweberger has hit a longer one, lane's 500ft thumber ace should be on that site, i'll shoot miniac an email.

"Chuck Kennedy #4949, Riverside Park #14, St. Cloud, MN, May 1998, Roller went uphill 130 feet, hit a tree and rolled back past tee, went another 100 feet, then over cliff down 50 feet landing 5 feet from Mississippi River."

My brother used to be on the dishonorable mention list for most broken bones and lost discs on one hole (2+5). Someone PDGAish prevailed upon Hosfield to remove that because it made the sport look bad.

Hey, Chuck: Will there be an update of the PDGA World Rankings

for men and women soon, or are those elves busy with Worlds?

Hoping to post PDGA World Ranking updates tomorrow.

2+5, did he finish the hole bruce?


saw a dude in mass empty his whole bag, one by one (10 i think) into the drink on
a (supposed) simple hyzer 3/4 island hole.

he couldn't retrieve them, so somebody loaned him a disc, he made it on the first shot!!


i'll bet there's more dishonorable records than honorable.... just a hunch.

You have to lose at least one disc and break at least one bone to be eligible for the record.

Yeah, he finished the hole. He lost all the discs off the tee. He was quite certain he could reach the basket throwing an anhyzer over the river, so certain that after he lost his driver he borrowed four of mine. And lost those too. The river was deep and fast, besides. The discs were not merely o.b. but lost. They were all Phantom Deuces back when the Phantom Deuce was a driver. So when he was lying 12 next to the basket I asked him to backstop my birdie putt, to which he replied, "I'm lying, um, um, um, 12?!?!, and you want me to backstop your birdie putt?" And I say, "Well, you just lost all the discs I just bought yesterday so, yeah, you could backstop my putt." The putt lips off a nub and is rolling kind of parallel to the river. He is trotting beside it and does not see this drop off in the weeds at the edge of the green. He went down hard. By the time we got to the next hole he was starting to get shocky and he realized his wrist was seriously bad.

He had driven 300 miles for a four or five day weekend of frisbee golf and he broke his throwing arm in two places on like hole 10 of round 1. Whatever hole that was at Riverbends back then. On top of all that, he could not go home right away because his car was a stick shift!

Hey Chuck,

In a recent tournament, in the first round everyone played from the short tees; in the second round Am2 and lower played shorts again (exact same layout) while the Pros and Am1 played the long tees. In round 1, a 54 was rated 980 while in round 2 it was rated 995. Is there any reason the SSA was not averaged for the two rounds? IIRC there was not a significant change in the weather from R1 to R2.

http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=9013&year=2009&include_ratings=1#Open

Thanks

i don't think they get averaged until the official ratings are processed.

The unofficial software TDs use for posting isn't programmed to combine scores on the same layout in different rounds the way we do for official ratings (like John posted).

Those are the official results, I believe. The ratings were counted in my last update.

If the SSA is more than 1.4 different between rounds on the same layout, then that's considered enough difference in conditions that they do not get averaged. Looks like that event was right on that boundary if you look at the course stats.

Chuck,

A question about the ratings from Worlds.

As the different pools, play different courses; P-Swope, Q-Cliff Drive, round one. Are the ratings that populate on the results page close? If not will they be sorted by results from like courses... just curious, my first round (70) collapse was mostly nerves and rain, but I was wondering how it compares to the rest of the MM1 field.

Thank you for your consideration.

The normal procedure is to combine all am and pro scores at Worlds on the same course so everyone will eventually get the same official rating Sep 1 for the same score on the same course. The only question that might be discussed is whether the conditions on Tuesday at any course means it should be rated separately from the other days. But that will be checked mathematically in addition to TD perception.