MTL, whats Lil Wig Doin

no clue, im not there.

got the strep throat and couldn't go.

oic

Lil man shot a 58 first round.
Barry 48

He (Lil Wig) shot a bigger number in the afternoon. I think his total is 118. McCracken is leading Master with Stan, Dean Tannock and Joe Mela also on the first card.

Pro Tee Times Renny Gold

Mandi Hofmann 9:10am
Babette Martin 9:10am
Chris Foley 9:10am
Robert Kegaris 9:20am
Glenn Patterson 9:20am
Rick Tortone 9:20am
Mark Muren 9:30am
John Porter 9:30am
David Wiggins 9:30am
Mark Beasley 9:30am
Brian Wilson 9:40am
Craig Whitney 9:40am
Jim Conrad 9:40am
John Sheffield 9:40am
Ron Pannesi 9:50am
David Eilers 9:50am
Eric Williams 9:50am
Henry Childres 10:00am
David Wiggins Jr 10:00am
Robert Norman 10:00am
Brad Benton 10:00am
Anthony Whisnant 10:10am
Craig Wesnofske 10:10am
Hunter Todd 10:10am
Jason Clark 10:10am
Randy Fortenberry 10:20am
Brian Jones 10:20am
Derek Britt 10:20am
Max Kuller 10:20am
Daniel Medina 10:30am
Zach Newhouse 10:30am
Zeb Campbell 10:30am
Bard Soleng 10:30am
Tripp Cole 10:40am
Mike Hofmann Q 10:40am
Tradd Rodenberg 10:40am
Marshall Christie 10:40am
Brad McCoy 10:50am
Will Schusterick Q 10:50am
Craig Gangloff 10:50am
Alex Wells 10:50am
Rusty Earle 11:00am
Zach Rogers 11:00am
Tom Kim 11:00am
Sjur Soleng 11:00am
Jack Schmalfeld 11:10am
James Conrad 11:10am
Jonas Card 11:10am
Naved Hasnain 11:10am
Buddy Tritt 11:20am
Mike Jackson 11:20am
Billy Rossini 11:20am
Kris Orrick Q 11:20am
Anthony Gale 11:30am
Alan Beaver 11:30am
Rob Kelly 11:30am
Dan Sisk 11:30am
Brian McRee 11:40am
Stan McDaniel 11:40am
Joe Mela 11:40am
Dean Tannock Q 11:40am
Matt Peckham 11:50am
Nick Schneider 11:50am
Caleb Wood 11:50am
Jeremy Koling 11:50am
Brian Schweberger 12:00pm
Barry Schultz Q 12:00pm
Michael Johansen 12:00pm
Ken Franks 12:00pm

yea scores should be up later on today



someone beat you at Ho's nest?

Has that ever happened?


yea it happens every once in a while. schweb shot a nice round second round . and i dont mind if someone plays well to beat me

i hear ya - I feel the same way.

Any updates on the am's

mjo, schweb, tank, gangloff, nate krahn



Nate Krahn qualified last weekend at the Pennsylvania State Disc Golf Championships.

Ams...
Dennis Young - 115
Sandy ???? - 116
Dee Silver - 119
Stack - 120
Monty - 120
Wheeler - 120

interesting tid bit.... 7 am scores were added wrong from the morning round!!!! crazy!

good luck all today... stay dry and keep it in the fairways!

i hear ya - I feel the same way.




Then why the temper tantrums on the course when you do poorly?

i hear ya - I feel the same way.




Then why the temper tantrums on the course when you do poorly?




U have to play with me all day @ renny ;)

i hear ya - I feel the same way.




Then why the temper tantrums on the course when you do poorly?




U have to play with me all day @ renny ;)



Despite the four of us earning our tee-time, I see no problem with integrity and self-humility. Do you want to consolidate bags so that we don't have to carry as much this morning? :D

And I sure hope Nick S. pulls through with a spot in the USDGC, as I have confirmed he has no future in the sport of darts. ;) Who would have thought hitting a dollar bill from 5 feet could be so tough. Six times in a row!

Great times in Charlotte last night! Max put out quite the spread, and was seranaded with lots of frosty malt beverage. Thanks to Warren/Ashley/Nick B. at EB's for the hospitality!

Despite scores, everyone appeared to be having a blast! Tear it up today everyone!

Any word on the am's scores being posted so those of us not able to get there can see how our bro's are doin.

Is Jeremy Koling bringing the smack. The Kid will represent at Am Worlds, go getem JK :)

Live scoring for the top 5 cards at Renny Gold!!

http://www.charlottedgc.com/clash08live.htm

18 people are battling for 5 USDGC spots!!

For those who have not seen or played the course, I will be doing some commentary, mainly b/c I'm sick and bored.

As you can see, hole 1 is not a difficult par 4. I am very surprised to see Barry take worse than a 4, as no one in the other 19 did. There is a small gap you have to hit off the tee and some nasty rough to the left. Also, there is some OB on this hole on the right as well. However, anything worse than a 4 here is pretty bad.

A good drive leaves a very simple upshot.

First thing about hole 2 is I see Matt Peckham took an eagle 2 on it. Very impressive. He has a cannon and the shot is a big righty hyzer and I'm sure he could get a lot on it flexing it.

To me, this is one of the easier par 4's if not one of the easier holes on the course. The drive requires to player to throw big right to left shot over the parking lot around a big grouping of trees - I'd say roughly 300 to get around them.

The player then lands in a field area that is about 150 feet wide to a huge drop off. The pin sits built up on a little green overlooking this big drop off.

Any putt on this hole is a pucker putt, but usually the upshot is only 100 feet or so, so its pretty easy to get close.

Not surprised to see lots of 3's on this. Peckham's 2 is really huge.

Hole 3 is a very technical hole. Even though it is probably only 400 feet, it is not a simple 3.

The drive is a right to left shot where the disc needs to flatten at the end of its flight - lots of trees to contend with as well. Anything too tight is trouble and anything to wide is worse. There is a fence running along the fairway about 275 feet up it on the right side that provides even more trouble for a player who goes to wide.

From a good tee shot, the player has a very technical 100 foot left to right approach shot. The pin is guarded between two pine trees leaving even 15 - 20 foot putts as sometimes tricky ones.

Lots of players throw a sidearm on the 2nd shot, I believe Schwebby throws a thumb roller on it. It is very easy to go long on it.

The links now have videos of the holes.

Schwebby takes another birdie to take a 2 shot lead over Johansen.

The 6 from Koling and the 7 from Jackson jumps out, however, it is so easy to take a big number on this hole. I am surprised to not see more 3's out of the top 8, I will say. This hole usually provides greats score separation, as you can tell it is today.

Hole 4 is the toughest par 4 I've ever played. There are already 4 6's reporting in just 3 groups, including from Dean Tannock and Joe Mela.

The tee shot is about 300 dead straight to a super small gap - anything early left or right is trouble. From there, the hole turns about 45 degrees straight own hill for about 250 feet. The basket then sits back up the side hill about 40 feet.

3's are amazing on this hole and 4's a good too.

Peckham goes eagle birdie to jump into 4th.

Schwebby is on fiyah!

He is -5 through 6 holes and the only par he has made on the very very tough 4th.

Not a single birdie on this hole from these 20 players.

scores now reporting through 6.

5 is not a very tough hole, but can get that way quickly.

The tee is buried in a ditch and you immediately have to throw over the top of the ditch. It isn't difficult to do, just a mental thing.

The hole is only 400ish, but straight uphill. After a tee shot that hopefully lands in a narrow fairway, most players have a stand still lie (b/c of the consistent uphill fairway) and a right to left shot to the pin.

The pin is a big drop off and roll aways on this hole happen quite a bit.

6 is a tricky par 3. The hole is about 270, but after 5 par 4's, it sure seems shorter than that.

The pin is tucked to the right after a narrow fairway. There are two "field goal" goal trees about halfway that some people, esp those with side arms and thumbers, actually play to the left of down an alternate backdoor gap.

The basket sits on a huuuuuuuuuuge drop off and there is OB at the bottom of it. I've taken a 7 on it putting for birdie before.

Peckham takes a 7 (ouch) on 4 to fall out of the 5th USDGC spot, putting Schneider into it.

To me, 7 is really the perfect hole to describe this course. Tricky tee shot required, accuracy off the tee is a must and then the hole turns 90 degrees and leaves the player with a very uphill 2nd shot.

The tee shot is about 330, but plays downhill. Even someone like me who maxes out with a midrange at 330 throws a midrange off the tee here. I remember watching Cam Todd throw a challenger off the tee on this hole - the disc gets really really good carry from the tee.

Big numbers come from those who don't get down the fairway here. Anyone in the woods early right should pitch out, but most don't and thats where the 6's and 7s will come. I predict at least 2 numbers in that range from these 20 players.

The second shot has two fairways - down the middle and then around the trees that go up the gut of the fairway. If you have an absolutely perfect tee shot, you can go right up that gap to the basket - only about a 200 foot shot and the basket is clearly visible as it sits in a grassy field.

However, most tee shots don't give you a good look at this gap and more players play a big left to right shot over the road and around the trees.

This hole really is all about the tee shot. A good one leaves you a pretty simple 3 or 4 and and a bad one leaves you struggling for bogey.

Also, the player faces something for the first time in 7 holes, a windy putt.

Just got the payout via email - man I wish I wasn't sick, b/c man, that is a HUGE payout! I guess that is what 5K added does to a purse.

Open
1 $1,500
2 $1,010
3 $750
4 $630
5 $530
6 $445
7 $410
8 $370
9 $335
10 $305
11 $280
12 $250
13 $235
14 $220
15 $205
16 $190
17 $180
18 $170
19 $155

Masters
1 $800
2 $535
3 $400
4 $320
5 $255
6 $200
7 $170
8 $140

and we have a severe thunderstorm warning for Charlotte - the weather here in NC is just nasty today.

The storm might be hitting the course in 10 min, so a weather delay could be happening.

SPITN OUT

wow schwebby is now -9 through 10. This is crazy.

RAINING NOW

POUR N

to the best of my knowledge, the record on this course is 60 (-10) by Ron Russell.

I've heard of rounds in the 50s casually, but am pretty sure that no one has ever hit the 50s in tournament play.

LOOKS LIKE SOME BANDS COMIN THROUGH

early tee times are coming in now.

Craig Whitney in masters has the hot round so far of 69.

Thanks for the updates MTL and Charlotte Disc Golf Club! I had to work all night 7PM to 7AM in a busy ER and it was even busier than usual. No rest at all, just the opposite. Typical knife wounds etc and to top it off, as I was leaving, a patient coded and I had to attend to that getting out 45 minutes late.

Well, given that I was dead tired myself and the fact that it was mother's day I felt it best not to risk the drive and to devote some time to the non disc golfing side of the family.

Anyway, I'd like to thank the guys in Charlotte for all their work and apologize for not being there today. Life is full of choices for us old guys I guess. I wish it weren't, but it is. The scoring updates are the next best thing to being there. Thanks again.

GOOOOOO TThe Pro

-11 through 13.

He's missed one of the hardest par 4's and one of the hardest par 5's in the world.

14 is a dueceable par 4 - I played the course with Feldberg a few years back and he deuced it. Also, in the clash DVD, I think both teams deuced it.

Schweb has a chance at 54 if he can finish perfect and if he gets the big duece on 14 and then finishes perfect, would put a sick 53.

However, I see him coming in around 57 or so.

This is awsome Robert, thanks for the updates. Does Koling have any chance at making a qualifying spot?

right now it looks like..

Schweb and Johansen are locks
McRee is pretty safe as long as he doesn't blow up.

Here is how it looks for qualifying with all golfers through 13 holes...

Schweb -30
Johansen - 22
McRee -19
Peckham -14
Schneider -13
__________________________________________________ __

Ken "Tank" Franks -12
Stan -11
Joe Mela -9
Koling -8
Buddy Tritt -8
Billy Rossini -8

Rusty Earle is also in the "clubhouse" so to speak at -8, but I don't see him in the running simply b/c all those people would have to fall. The -8's listed are still on the course and can make birdies.

Look at the battle for the 4th and 5th spot!. The Pro is bringing the smack down.......I taught him LOL :p

scores just updated again.

schweb needs a birdie 4 on 18 for 56, yes, that is -14.

looks like schweb johansen mcree and peckham are all in.

With 18 to play, Stan and Schneider are tied at -11. Koling is one back, Franks is 2 back. Mela is also 2 back, but still has 5 holes yet to be reported.

yeah I just saw that through 17 holes, Schweb has picked up 17 on Barry.

Good.

God.

yeah I just saw that through 17 holes, Schweb has picked up 17 on Barry.

Good.

God.




Barry must be killing it. :D That guy must hate NC.

looks like Stan will get that 5th spot.

Carolina sweep!!!

I can't get live scoring anymore, what ahppened on 18?

not sure whats up

final scores.

http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournamen...eRatings=1#Open (http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=7324&year=2008&incl udeRatings=1#Open)

MTL, what would be your educated guess on the rating of 56 on that course?

well it ended up being a 57.

It came in at 1075, 2 points below his 45 at hos nest.

Def. proves a flaw in the ratings that a 57 at Renny Gold is the same thing as a 45 at the nest.

57 on gold is stupid good.

Does that mean The Pro bogeyd the last hole? :eek:

no, 18 is a par 5.

He took a par.

The Pro has been playing great (er) lately, think Barry will return for Sneeky Pete?

think Barry will return for Sneeky Pete?




haha no

There's no flaw. If anything, it shows the difference between ratings ranges on courses 16 SSA points apart. A 1077 on Hornet's is 15 points below the 5th best round ever on courses in that range. The 1075 ties Climo for the 4th best round ever on courses with SSA of 66+. A 56 would have put Schweb with the best round ever on 66+ SSA courses.

It was close, The Pro only won the last round by 8 strokes?


Must be the Pizza

ratings = stupid

that is my official stance :D

Put another w in the books for schweb! Has he lost yet this year? Is sergio going to win the Players? I have two kids!

Put another w in the books for schweb! Has he lost yet this year? Is sergio going to win the Players? I have two kids!



The answer to both those questions are yes!

What PDGA's has schweb lost this year?

CONGRATS BS.#1, MJ, PECK, MADAWG, MULE

The SSA with new #18 should go up IMO. Way Freegin harder! Watched several double circle 7+'s today! Cheeseburger's round was sick! Played with him on Thursday when he shot a 59 with several mistakes. Looks like he corrected them! ;) :cool:

i would have to say from witnessing both of Schweb's last two rounds that his round today was far and away the better round. His 57 is one of the best rounds of golf i have witnessed.
mj

What PDGA's has schweb lost this year?



Crosstown

The Pro coming in rounds 2 and 3 with a 1077, and 1075 means he needs to move up, but Where?.. :cool:


Mini Thumber, a Pretty good Rec player,

1075
booo. Nice cash Crusty and Billy

1075
booo. Nice cash Crusty and Billy



Ditto team LARS!

Way to go Schwebby!

TTeam TTrunk!

Am scores going to be posted??

They are up sorry for the delay just some local miscommunication, :o :o :o

Thanks to all that came out. Points Bonanza in a month with another USDGC spot up for grabs!!!!!! Club members only!!!! Anyone interested just PM!!!!

WOW congrats schweb those are some smoking rounds ... nice win

congrats Derf!!!

Thanks!!

Who gets the spots? Anyone already have a spot up high in the cash? Nice shootin Brian!

Spots -

Schweb
Johansen
Peckham
McRee
McDaniel

Thanks everybody, it was definitely a good weekend for golfing, and we were definitely lucky to only get rained on for 2 holes.

Chuck! Chuck! Chuck!

What the bleeeeeep? Schweby beats the field by 8 and most by 10+ and all your silly equation gave him is 1075???

I'm calling B____S ! :D

Nice shooting MULLET

Chuck! Chuck! Chuck!

What the bleeeeeep? Schweby beats the field by 8 and most by 10+ and all you can give him is 1075???

I'm calling B____S ! :D

Nice shooting MULLET




Seems like I told Chuck pretty much the same thing last weekend. :D

Chuck! Chuck! Chuck!

What the bleeeeeep? Schweby beats the field by 8 and most by 10+ and all your silly equation gave him is 1075???

I'm calling B____S ! :D

Nice shooting MULLET

Thanks Kev, nice shooting yourself this weekend.

I had a blast. had no idea I could shoot so well in my home town. Thanks to all who helped get this one put together. And thanks to all the sponsors for all the added cash! Best Charlotte payout yet!

I was finally able to close out a tournament at Renny strong!

Hope my eagle made the highlight reel with my perfect sidearm into the camera lens. Crazy and funny stuff!

Way to shoot one of the "good" 1075 rounds. The ones on easy courses don't count. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif


Not a bad payday either.

Thanks MaTT

i just want to figure out how 70-1002 rated and a 57(13 strokes better) is only a 1075????
also i gotta thank the Charlotte Disc Golf Club, the best club in the World, for running a spectacular event. I am so proud to call the CDGC my home club. And am a proud rep. of North Carolina Golf. Amazing shooting this weekend Brian, not many people beat me in my hometown and i am fine with you wiping our asses this weekend with the way you shot. nice playing, atleast i could help to break up a sweep though.
mj

What the bleeeeeep? Schweby beats the field by 8 and most by 10+ and all your silly equation gave him is 1075???


I don't understand why some of you are ragging when it's one of the best rounds ever on courses of that SSA. 1078 is the best ever and with a 56 he would have had the best.

i just want to figure out how 70-1002 rated and a 57(13 strokes better) is only a 1075????




No because you have to beat Barry by 20+ to shoot 1100. :confused:

no i just dont think you understand what any of us are saying at all Chuck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Way to shoot one of the "good" 1075 rounds. The ones on easy courses don't count. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Not a bad payday either.



I 2nd this and the comment about the ratings should be 'fixed' for that round... 1075 doesnt do it justice... also amazed the SSA was so low... really thought it'd be ~71 w/ the way 18 played.

Congrats NC on the sweep of USDGC spots... lots of out of staters coming in trying to take our goods... way to hold strong Schweb, MJ, Stan, Peckham, Mcree

~1055 for the weekend Schweb?! Amazing!

Congrats to Derf on the Am side and thanks to all the guys I got to play with this weekend... glad to just be able to play this weekend... it will def. be worth not touching a disc for the next month or so.

Chuck, take it from someone who has shot a 1081 round before in tournaments, Schwebs round today was way, and i mean way, better than my 1081 that i shot. and that was not on an easy course either.
mj

I have played both Renny and Vista del Camino.

Schwebby's round at Renny is much more impressive than the Borg's round at the Memorial but yet it's 20 points difference.

I would give it 1111

I have played both Renny and Vista del Camino.

Schwebby's round at Renny is much more impressive than the Borg's round at the Memorial but yet it's 20 points difference.


thats, similar to what i am thinking kevin?

How far off perfect is it? If it is around 53 like MTL said I would have to say it has to be low due to the fact he only shot 4 off of that score.

I have seen quite a few 1070+ rounds by players and in many of those they missed a few putts or an easy hole which caused them to shoot at least 4 off perfect yet they somehow still get rated higher even when the percentage of "missed opportunities" was higher dues to a lower SSA.


Anyway If it was only 4 off perfect then perfect isn't even 1100.

personally, having seen the round, i can come up with 1 mistake and 1 misfortunate roll.

so chuck, what about splitting the ratings into 2 fields, those who had to play once the front came through, and those who didn't? Would that change the scores? Schweb and us were up "On top of the world" during all the crazy rain and wind. While everyone else escaped the nasties we got dealt.

Well, the first group of the Masters also dealt with it, maybe the second.

Sorry boys but you just can't compare them. The "perfect" round rating gets lower and lower as the SSA increases. That's the way it is. However, it doesn't mean you can't shoot your rating on average. No one shoots better or worse on higher versus lower SSA courses. They still shoot their average. The only thing that changes is the range of your possible round ratings gets smaller the higher the SSA.

so Schweb would've had to shoot a 53 or 52 to be ~1100?!

ok , whatever chuck, as always you see that your point of view is always right. not the fact that this is one of the best rounds shot ever, period. and that doesnt include the inclement weather today!

Chuck ... any idea on the highest rated back to back rounds... some quick searching by one of our guys (marchant) looks like Schweb's 1076 avg would be it (appears he'd also have 2nd on the list)

here's his post on our local discussion bard...

Here is what I see in skimming over recent history for the top players:
1076 = 1077 & 1075 - Schweb (today -unofficial)
1075.5 = 1077 & 1074 - Schweb (Costal Plains Winter Open 02/08)
1075.5 = 1070 & 1081 - Doss (Memorial 03/08)
1073 = 1075 & 1071 - Climo (USDGC 10/07)
1070.5 = 1083 & 1058 - Rico (Evergreen Open 04/07)
1070.5 = 1080 & 1061 - McCray (Labor Day Luau 0907)
1068 = 1080 & 1056 - Anthon (Memorial 03/08)

Interesting that Schwebby has the top 2 spots and he is the lowest rated player on that list.

see Chuck... you should've included Charlotte on your road trip!! coulda been in on the action today and seen it live!

Chuck ... any idea on the highest rated back to back rounds... some quick searching by one of our guys (marchant) looks like Schweb's 1076 avg would be it (appears he'd also have 2nd on the list)

here's his post on our local discussion bard...

Here is what I see in skimming over recent history for the top players:
1076 = 1077 & 1075 - Schweb (today -unofficial)
1075.5 = 1077 & 1074 - Schweb (Costal Plains Winter Open 02/08)
1075.5 = 1070 & 1081 - Doss (Memorial 03/08)
1073 = 1075 & 1071 - Climo (USDGC 10/07)
1070.5 = 1083 & 1058 - Rico (Evergreen Open 04/07)
1070.5 = 1080 & 1061 - McCray (Labor Day Luau 0907)
1068 = 1080 & 1056 - Anthon (Memorial 03/08)

Interesting that Schwebby has the top 2 spots and he is the lowest rated player on that list.




Tied with Schweb but possibly wins by default Niceness (http://www.pdga.com/tournament/player_ratings_detail.php?PDGANum=23651&sort_style =Rating&sort_ascending=0&show_excluded=1)

wow... 3 1076s and a 1030 in the same tourney?... solid!

Schweb's score should have earned him a 1100 rated round. That score on Renny is just "wow."

I had a ton of fun even though I shot horribly. Was so tired on the way home that I had to stop at a rest stop and take a nap.

congrats to Virginia's own Jim and James Conrad on cashing in some stout pro fields this weekend

Clash was a blast. The courses and player's party were great as usual. Charlotte knows how to host a great event. Thanks to my lodging sponsor and great friend night owl for amazing hospitality and memories. See you all soon.

I apologize for missing the awards, I hung around for almost an hour after my round watching the final groups come in and the word I got was last cash was 3 better than me so I started driving home slightly sullen. I got a call near Columbia that I made some money and I got happy. :)

Those guys that finished on top are awesome. Sloppy 5 on the last hole Schweb. :p

Both CDGC's rule!

Take a look at a different way to rank the best rounds ever on a new thread under the Ratings topic called Best Rounds Ever - New Calc. I think it's more accurate and easy to understand than trying to compare ratings on courses with wide ranging SSAs.

Here is what I'm thinking about the ratings.

First off, I understand why the ratings set up like they do. Simply b/c on a course like Renny Gold, it is much easier to beat someone by 5 - 6 shots than it is on a course with a lower SSA. Barry got beat by Schwebby by 16 in the last round. On a course with an SSA of 50 or so, this would NEVER happen.

However what this does is it truly doesn't reward a good round. Take Mikey Jo's 64, that is a GREAT round and surely is much better than the 1030 something rating it got. I cannot see even the games elite averaging a 64 on this course. Sure, they will shoot them left and right, but averaging them includes shooting as many 60's as they do 70's, which won't happen.

My main issue with the ratings process on courses like this that test even the games best (Barry shot a freakin 73) is with the current process, the "best" round ever will NEVER be shot on a course like this. Never.

Now personally having played many rounds at Gold and at the Grange, I still believe Skinner's round is the best ever and is a better round thant Schwebby's 57 simply b/c I can see a 57 happening again, but NO ONE will ever come close to a 41 at the Grange.

But if Schwebby would have gotten a 54 or even a 53, we are "only" looking at a rating of roughly 1093 - 1101. A 53 / 54 on this course would CLEARLY be the best round ever shot, but its score would barely crack the top 10.

Now I understand Chuck's forthcoming argument of "you can't compare rounds on different SSAs" which is load of horse crap if you ask me because we do it everyday!

One of the best things about ratings I feel is it allows players who have never played a course to understand what is a good round there and compare course to course. I can tell everyone that I shot a 51 at Hornest's Nest but unless they have played it, they don't really understand what that means. Then I can add that it was rated in the 1030 range and they can then say "wow, thats a good score".

The main issue we have regarding things like this is we don't have any kind of standardization of par and even when par is a consistent 54, that still doesn't really give you an idea of what you should shoot on the course to be competitive. 57 at Renny Gold is SMOKING and I can think of many many courses where 57 would be a newbie score, a bad round, a decent round and a great round.

At least ratings should be able to let you know what a good solid round on the course is.

Also, Chuck says we can't compare them but we do simply b/c we average all our rounds out to come up with our own personal player rating. If two players only have 10 rounds rated even if player A is a better player than player B, player B is likely to have a higher rating than player A if he plays courses in the SSA 50 range as comared to player A only playing courses in SSA 66 range.

So if we need to seperate them based on SSA's, shouldn't we have 4 or 5 differnt player ratings? If I suck on high SSA courses (and man do I), shouldn't I be rated lower when I play those? What if a 965 player who has taken cash excels at SSA 48s. Should he be allowed to play am at those events?

My whole point behind this is if we are going to use our personal ratings as an average of all rated rounds which include SSAs all over the board, shouldn't the rounds be rated a bit more evenly so we can get a true player rating for that player? Now I don't give two flips what my rating is. At only 982, I know I have the shots, tools, skills and desire to win every tournament I go to, my rating would say otherwise. With that in mind, I could never see myself dropping back to advanced even if my rating allowed it.

Since we are going to make rules of elidgability based on ratings, isn't it kinda important to get them correct?

My next point is this. Schweb shot a 1075 final round. 1075 rounds get shot every weekend at every NT. That means that an NT field at Renny Gold should have 5 - 6 57's shot. Get. Real.

My final point is simple. Ratings are confusing enough for us. Heck, I still don't have a clue how they work and just when I do, something changes that makes them seem even dumber. Imagine trying to explain to the media or general public about how ratings work. They then get it and see Schweb shot a 1077 and a 1075. Well naturally 1077 is better than 1075. Imagine trying to explain the next part to them....

My final point is simple. Ratings are confusing enough for us. Heck, I still don't have a clue how they work and just when I do, something changes that makes them seem even dumber. Imagine trying to explain to the media or general public about how ratings work. They then get it and see Schweb shot a 1077 and a 1075. Well naturally 1077 is better than 1075. Imagine trying to explain the next part to them....

[/QUOTE]

explain the next part to me because I don't understand at all!

If two players only have 10 rounds rated even if player A is a better player than player B, player B is likely to have a higher rating than player A if he plays courses in the SSA 50 range as comared to player A only playing courses in SSA 66 range.



Except this isn't true. We took players rated rounds in all five ranges and compared them to their rating. And on average, no one shoots better or worse than their rating in any of the five zones. If in fact that were true, a player who only played low SSA courses would have the highest ratings. However, it doesn't happen. Climo and several other top rated players have played higher average SSA courses than most players and yet their ratings are still on top. The only thing higher SSA courses do are narrow the range of round ratings you're likely to shoot both higher and lower than your rating. But players of all ratings will still be able to average their rating at all SSA levels.

The flaw in the ratings system that CK seems not to want to acknowledge is the basic value system attributed to holes/courses that require multiple shots to get to the basket. Why is it that a course with a lower SSA (one which by definition has more opportunities for duece) has a default higher rating attributed to low score?

CK has even given us a revised look at what he considers "best rounds". Logic might suggest that if we need a "new way" to look at and evaluate the best rounds - that the reason is because the rating system used to evaluate them in the past is flawed. Course difficulty obviously plays an insufficient role in determining ratings. When course records on high SSA courses don't get high ratings................ hello
McFly - I thought I told you not to come in here anymore McFly!! The formula is obviously just wrong - but I've been harping on CK about this for years - so I wouldn't expect it to change.

probability. period. exclamation point!

Can't the TD alter the spreadsheet to factor in the weather or change the par to give Schweb the rating he deserves?

"Course difficulty obviously plays an insufficient role in determining ratings"

Words of wisdom Craiger, especially with the number of courses that are trending to Par 4's & 5's.

The fact that players can still average their rating at all levels of SSA validates the basic ratings calculations. The fact that they can't shoot exceptional rounds as easily doesn't negate the math. It just means the standard deviation is lower at higher SSA levels. And Biscoe's probablity concept is a red herring because the probabilty of any round score is relative to a player's rating not an absolute value. A 1030 player has no trouble shooting a 1030 round on any course. However, that same score is virtually impossible for an 800 player to throw and highly improbable for a 930 player to throw and likely to be thrown by a 990 player about 1 in 6 rounds.

As this thread has been hijacked by the ratings bashers just a quick clarification . . .. is there money tied to these ratings that arent's advertised? Is someone getting a "highest rated round ever" bonus from a manufacturer or something? It just seems like you're splitting hairs with the 1075 versus 1100 discussions -- either way it's way high. The math involved doesn't seem that outrageous and it seems pretty accurate especially when you look at tourney results and how more often than not they mimick the ratings going in . . . ??

Am I missing something when it comes to money?

It could.

Innova at one time would not consider people for sponsorship unless thier rating was over 1000.

Chuck do you subscribe to the Frequentist or Bayesian probability school of thought?

Functional Stats 101.

I don't even know why I try.

Here is how ratings discussions work.

Someone comes up with a very logical reason they have a problem with the system and explains why.

Chuck tells them they are wrong.

Everyone defends the original post.

Chuck tells them they are wrong.

More comments.

Chuck tells them they are wrong.

good point MTL... and also i know this might come as a shock but $ isnt always THE only motivating factor

I am a big fan of a curve system. It will probably make a few more players in the 950-1000 range, and the very top players may get closer to 1050, but it seems that with every additional birdie, you achieve a greater percentage of perfection. Since there is no upper limit to round perfection (except, say, 18 aces), it seems that with each stroke under par, you have achieved a little bit more perfection. Just as our payouts have a sliding curve, so should these ratings.

I've said it before, especially at a course like Renny, the difference between an 96 and an 88 should not be the same as the difference between a 57 and a 65. Ratings points should be smaller as the scores go up, because less skill is represented by each stroke. But as you get closer to perfection, more skill is represented by each stroke.

It's like building a jenga tower. Is it the same skill to go from a 10 row tower to a 12 row tower, as it is to go from a 20 row tower to a 22 row?

I think not. A lot went into every aspect of the game to get to that 57.

Disc Golf and Jenga. Can you find a weirder comparison that shows the same basic theories of skill factor?

I think the issue here is subjectivity vs objectivity. Chuck knows his statistics and he knows he is right, and according to the math he IS right. A round that is more standard deviations from the norm will receive a higher round rating. Harder courses have higher standard deviations therefore, for example it is harder to shoot a round rated more than 2 standard deviations from the norm because two standard deviations for the harder course is a higher number than 2 standard deviations for a lower course.

Ok as far as it goes, but "quality" is not simply an objective term. Zirconimum is the same as diamond more or less, but a diamond is valued much higher than a zirconium because a diamond is harder to make.

Athletes and humans in general equate stellar performance with difficult performance. Sports as different as rodeo and diving take this into consideration calling it "degree of difficulty".

When players as well as those who commented here state unequivocally that a certain round was not rated highly enough and the explanation seems to be the mathematics by which the rating is calculated, perhaps it is time to think about a correction factor based on difficulty, i.e. SSA.

My initial thought on this is that such a correction factor would make rounds above the ssa higher but would also make rounds below the ssa even lower - something lower rated players might not relish. Anyway it is something to think about.

Without a doubt the ratings as they are are **** GOOD!, Otherwise, no one here would be paying any attention to them - a situation similar to the "points standings". When one compares tournament results with player ratings, the correlation is excellent - definitely within the margin of error. Perfect no, **** good, hell yes. So lets give credit where it is due while we try to make constuctive improvements.

FWIW, the same standard deviation issues arise in the ratings of players who are improving rapidly. Their standard deviation of round scores is higher. So consequently, lower rated rounds are included in their player rating instead of getting excluded, thus lowering their player rating. All this is contrary to the fact that their "real" rating is actually ahead of their "actual" rating because they are improving.

PS - congrats Schwebby - you SLAYED them man!
PSS - totally agree with what Matt wrote - meshes with my thoughts

...matt is right... must bite tongue...

on another note...

Thanks to all attending and supporting disc golf in Charlotte! sorry you didn't make it Robert... house just wasn't the same.. ;) but all who attended the house... you guys are welcome anytime !! most that could be said about this weekend, has, so I'll just end in saying Thanks to all for the hard work and patience that went into making this tourney one of the best ever to attend! had a blast... and cashed!!! what a weekend. :)

way to finish Wit. STRONG!

interesting note from the Am side... there were 7 scoring miscalculations/penalties doled out in the morning round on Saturday!!!

'only' 2 in the afternoon

and funny but technically there were none in the final round on sunday but one card did have the wrong total for the front 9 (2 strokes worse than the guy actually shot) and the wrong total for the back (2 strokes better) so his total was still correct and he got lucky!

interesting note from the Am side... there were 7 scoring miscalculations/penalties doled out in the morning round on Saturday!!!





ams....

on another note...

Thanks to all attending and supporting disc golf in Charlotte! sorry you didn't make it Robert... house just wasn't the same.. ;)



Yeah I hated to miss it. Thanks for volunteering to put me up.

I had a surprise for you and the wife, I guess I will just have to wait till the Points Bonanzas to let you on it!

Great playing this weekend, keeping with those 4 digit legends!

good job to whoever does the NC points series... they already have this event in the points series!

Also interesting to see this event changed the race on the pro side greatly... 4 of the top 6 are qualified for the USDGC which opens up things a little for others.

Is there any way to get a Q next to the guys names who have qualified for the USDGC so its easy to tell who isn't going after the state spot?
(btw... is there a thread already started for this somewhere?)

Mike Norris does this.

If you look at the USDGC rep list (a different link) you will see the players who are already qualified sorted to the top.

Right now Dave Jr. is winning the USDGC spot, with me 40 or so points back and Darrin Presley 70 or so back.

However, I have withdrawn my name from accepting the spot, so its just down to those 2 guys.

thanks... i forgot there are particular events for the usdgc spot... thanks

http://www.ncdiscgolf.com/results/usdgc08.pdf

Go Wiggins!!!! GET THAT SPOT!!!!

If Jeremy wasn't tearing up SC he would probably be pretty high up there too

Schweb, It was awesome to play with you and Mikey Jo that 2nd and 3rd round. Thanks for breaking up the sweep and costing us our bonus Jike Mohanssen.

Another reason why we need more people like TThe Pro on tour. Your no longer "TThe Pro", Your now "TThe Course record"

Always a pleasure to see you buddy...

you forgot about Peckham breaking up the sweep as well

ya'll get bonuses on top of bonuses for sweeping? cool stuff!

and good seeing ya Tank

always a pleasure to break up a sweep, its gonna be interesting to see how many i can break up this year. So when you gonna be back in the Cakalak there Tank?

a video put together from the clash (shot, edited, produced by Joe Jackson @ www.shoelessworks.com (http://www.shoelessworks.com))...

clash video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z56KJnsQF-E)

crazy spin on big jerms disc ~1:!2 in... and @ 1:41 peckham finally gets to see where he pegged the camera

Sweet

SOLID!!!

got my leopard shot on 5?

Thanks Shoeless Joe

Nice shooting Brian.....solid. I see you got yo bush cuTT also.

Thanks PaTTy, yeah 2 weeks after VTTI

Finally....after the 1st draft got somehow deleted

Check iTT ouTT (http://www.zonedriven.com/schweb/)

Hope you all enjoy

Niiiice!

good stuff Schweb... good to be able to get in your head some and go hole to hole with you and the lead cards during the rounds.