DGPT: 2018 Discraft Ledgestone Insurance Open

[davetherocketguy]

Its right there after you first nice it

I C WUT U DID THUR

 

[robdeforge]

i laughed when nate called ledgestone one of the biggest stages in disc golf

 

[brutalbrutus]

we really need an "unnice" button.

How about "Nice Layup" in the sarcasm font...

 

[Alexplz]

So stoked for Nate to take another big win, this time a DGPT. Seeing the guy tour and put on clinics with his family, and seeing Coraline get bigger, born a little under a year after my first child, has been an inspiration. Sounds corny maybe, but corn me up. I've never really been able to relate to a pro athlete on this level, it's pretty cool overall.

 

[jvphobic]

Personally, I think this has become one of the better courses on the major tours. Idlewild, Maple, Beast, Milo, DeLa?, Some people don't like the aesthetic of the ropes, but one of our most prestigious events in Rock Hill does the same thing.

I really like the fact that aggressive players can be rewarded or punished. Very few "Penalty 3s" on this course. If you go OB, odds are you are taking a bogey. There isn't a chance to save your par by going OB 40 feet from the basket and hitting that long putt. I have said before I like that our DG season is mostly broken up by early season open bomber courses, and later season wooded accuracy driven courses. Best of both worlds in our sport.

One of my few qualms is hole 13. I would personally move the tee box across the water and play from there. The 13/18 interchange is congested and could help out with flow, plus that drive might be a little too harsh on Lefties.

 

[elmexdela]

Personally, I think this has become one of the better courses on the major tours. Idlewild, Maple, Beast, Milo, DeLa?, Some people don't like the aesthetic of the ropes, but one of our most prestigious events in Rock Hill does the same thing.

I really like the fact that aggressive players can be rewarded or punished. Very few "Penalty 3s" on this course. If you go OB, odds are you are taking a bogey. There isn't a chance to save your par by going OB 40 feet from the basket and hitting that long putt. I have said before I like that our DG season is mostly broken up by early season open bomber courses, and later season wooded accuracy driven courses. Best of both worlds in our sport.

One of my few qualms is hole 13. I would personally move the tee box across the water and play from there. The 13/18 interchange is congested and could help out with flow, plus that drive might be a little too harsh on Lefties.

best of both worlds would be a course with a mix of wooded and open holes short and long

 

[Coldpunk]

I watched the F9 of the CCDG coverage this morning and I am positive you are well in the minority on that opinion. Don't like it? Turn the freaking sound off. I found some of the TD's comments insightful and interesting especially where it relates to the course layout and why he did what he did. Your post is more a commentary about you rather than the TD.

At least I'm not attacking someone over the interwebz because their opinion doesn't jive with mine.

I'm sure Heinhold is a great guy, and he runs a decent event that I look forward to on the schedule every year. I just don't need to hear him fishing for compliments on his course design each round or hear about the latest conditions of the ice sheets masquerading as tee pads. I'd rather hear the usual commentating teams give their opinions on the current course layout compared to previous layouts and how the new changes influenced their play this year.

 

[Steve West]

...

One of my few qualms is hole 13. I would personally move the tee box across the water and play from there. The 13/18 interchange is congested and could help out with flow, plus that drive might be a little too harsh on Lefties.

For 13, did they at least let the next group throw while the just-threw group was walking around the lake?

 

[krupicka]

Occasionally we did have two groups throw on 13 to break the backup.

 

[ToddL]

For 13, did they at least let the next group throw while the just-threw group was walking around the lake?

The Leapfrog Maneuver. Absolute lifesaver for TDs with backup holes.

Group A throws. Group A walks to their discs. Group B throws while A watches. Group A throws their 2nd shots while B walks. Group C throws while B watches and A is taking their 3rd shots.

 

[jvphobic]

best of both worlds would be a course with a mix of wooded and open holes short and long

What I meant was best of both worlds for the entire tour. Not one course particular. Sorry that wasn't more clear.

 

[Steve West]

Here's how the holes performed for the MPO finalist.

Using each player's 4-round total, we can compute how many different scores the hole gave out. This is measured by scoring spread width. Holes that give out wider scoring spreads have the potential to better sort players by skill.

With four rounds of data, we can also compute a measure of consistency from round to round. A perfect hole would give out only one of two numbers that bracket the average score for that player. This would result in an average scoring spread width of 1.5 for the scores given out to each individual player over the course of four rounds.

A hole that gave out scores by the throw of a tetrahedron shaped die would give out any one of four different scores. This would result in an average scoring spread width of 2.6 for the scores given out to each individual player over the course of four rounds.

So, 1.5 is perfectly consistent, and 2.6 is as inconsistent as possible.

Here are those two values plotted on a chart. The size of the bubble indicates the average score for the hole. Farther up and right is "better" performance. A larger average size generally makes it easier for a hole to have a wider scoring spread. A larger average size also generally makes it harder for a hole to have good consistency from round to round.

None of the holes could be said to be notably consistent. Holes #5, #11, #14, and #17 stand out for being more consistent compared to their scoring spread width.

Not only is #9 the most inconsistent hole, it is more inconsistent than the holes which changed their pin positions (#6 and #13). Hole #9 was almost as inconsistent as a roll of a die. This doesn't mean the hole did not distinguish among players. It's possible each player was throwing their own custom die with four different scores matched to their skill.



Another measure of performance is how well the hole handed out lower scores to those who deserve them. Two ways to determine who deserves a low score are to look at who has the highest rating, and who got low scores on all the other holes.

Those correlations are shown below. Up and right are better. A larger average score makes it easier for a hole to have better correlations.

Hole #2 had weaker correlations (around 20%) than other holes with similar average scores, which are clustered around 40%.

It would be fun to speculate why some holes show a stronger correlation with ratings than they do with other holes, and vice versa. Also for fun, we can compute how "Eureka-ish" a hole is by the ratio of correlation to other holes divided by correlation to ratings. The top 3 are #1, #17, and #3.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Steve, did you do these charts for Toboggan? I think it would be interesting to overlay non-OB course hole stats with the top OB course of the season so far. I know Toboggan was only three rounds so I suppose you would need to use only three rounds on Eureka. R1 had the highest penalty count as one might expect.

 

[notroman]

Hole #2 had weaker correlations (around 20%) than other holes with similar average scores, which are clustered around 40%.

It would be fun to speculate why some holes show a stronger correlation with ratings than they do with other holes, and vice versa.

I'll start. That's a hard hole. The goal on every tee shot is to land in bounds, then depending on where you land you decide on what to do with your second shot.

Hole #2 is so hard that people with lower ratings probably already accepted the fact that birdie 3 brings in more risk than they're willing to take so they play it for a 4. Players with higher ratings have the skills required to get to the green in 2 shots on a pretty consistent basis, so they play the hole for a 3. That second shot is no joke with all the OB tightening up around the green combined with trees scattered on the approach. If the lower rated players were playing this hole for a 3 they probably would have scored some high numbers to even out the correlation, but I have a feeling after practicing the hole many were content with just playing for a 4.

 

[Steve West]

Steve, did you do these charts for Toboggan? I think it would be interesting to overlay non-OB course hole stats with the top OB course of the season so far. I know Toboggan was only three rounds so I suppose you would need to use only three rounds on Eureka. R1 had the highest penalty count as one might expect.

The consistency measure is the only one that can be fairly compared from course to course no matter the actual mix of players, but it needs four rounds.

The others depend on the mix of players. At the end of the season I'll be trying to come up with some way to compare course performances.

I'm looking for a practical way to get hole-by-hole-by-player penalty data.

 

[davetherocketguy]

At least I'm not attacking someone over the interwebz because their opinion doesn't jive with mine.

I'm sure Heinhold is a great guy, and he runs a decent event that I look forward to on the schedule every year. I just don't need to hear him fishing for compliments on his course design each round or hear about the latest conditions of the ice sheets masquerading as tee pads. I'd rather hear the usual commentating teams give their opinions on the current course layout compared to previous layouts and how the new changes influenced their play this year.

 

[Consult20]

I'll start. That's a hard hole. The goal on every tee shot is to land in bounds, then depending on where you land you decide on what to do with your second shot.

Hole #2 is so hard that people with lower ratings probably already accepted the fact that birdie 3 brings in more risk than they're willing to take so they play it for a 4. Players with higher ratings have the skills required to get to the green in 2 shots on a pretty consistent basis, so they play the hole for a 3. That second shot is no joke with all the OB tightening up around the green combined with trees scattered on the approach. If the lower rated players were playing this hole for a 3 they probably would have scored some high numbers to even out the correlation, but I have a feeling after practicing the hole many were content with just playing for a 4.

I was following McBeth's card on Saturday when he threw OB twice on that hole. His first throw went OB to the right. He then tried to cut the OB corner with a forehand but unfortunately got it up in the air too high and hit tree branches and it dropped straight down for his second OB. After that he didn't try to cut the corner on his next shot. He probably cuts that corner 8 out of 10 times, but it just must have slipped out of his hand because it was way too high to have any chance of getting through. As you said, very tough hole.

 

[Steve West]

I'll start. That's a hard hole. The goal on every tee shot is to land in bounds, then depending on where you land you decide on what to do with your second shot.

Hole #2 is so hard that people with lower ratings probably already accepted the fact that birdie 3 brings in more risk than they're willing to take so they play it for a 4. Players with higher ratings have the skills required to get to the green in 2 shots on a pretty consistent basis, so they play the hole for a 3. That second shot is no joke with all the OB tightening up around the green combined with trees scattered on the approach. If the lower rated players were playing this hole for a 3 they probably would have scored some high numbers to even out the correlation, but I have a feeling after practicing the hole many were content with just playing for a 4.

That's a nice piece of speculation, but hole 2 is one of the holes where the correlation with ratings is better than the correlation with the other holes. Both are really low, though.

 

[takman]

I can't think of a course that I would struggle more on than Eureka Lake. Can't imagine playing 4 competitive rounds there.

 

[LetsPlayGolf]

The consistency measure is the only one that can be fairly compared from course to course no matter the actual mix of players, but it needs four rounds.

The others depend on the mix of players. At the end of the season I'll be trying to come up with some way to compare course performances.

I'm looking for a practical way to get hole-by-hole-by-player penalty data.

Hi Steve- I would be very interested in looking at those numbers if you find a way. "End of the year Compare Course Performance".

Thank you-

Brad Pietz
Disc Side of Heaven
Jonesboro, Arkansas