DGPT: 2021 Ledgestone Insurance Open Aug 5-8

[teemkey]

Did you mean "hurling" (the team sport) or "curling" (the duo/trio sport) or hurdling (the individual sport)?
Just curious.

I meant hurling (as a pun) to set up the Beavis & Butthead reference.

 

[teemkey]

For Q#2: There performance awards are determined by their sponsor. That is up to them.

As far as counting for ratings, you asked in Q1, "is the data valid for those players who did complete 13 or 18 full holes even though others didn't?" I just want to be sure that is the question-- because that is the one I am answering.

As I understand ratings, the answer is no. Ratings is a norm-reference construct in statistics (meaning is it based upon a comparison of a group). When that whole group is no longer the whole group, then the internal reliability of the set of data is no longer there.

Chuck has stated many times on this forum that as long as a minimum number of propagators complete the round, the rating system is accurate.

I'd like to challenge you to distinguish between the subgroup of players that didn't finish the round due to weather and the subgroup of players that DNF'd (re your "whole goup" argument).

The rating system is controlled by the rule. "last completed round". [see below]

Ace pools, CTP's, employer contracts are not within the scope of the PDGA. The tournament and/or sponsor either have verbaige in the contract or should address these issues with the players they impact.

For the other questions [see the below.] (1)...No. (2)....PDGA rewards??? No. Outside entity awards, I don't know....they should ask those entities. We are not availed, nor entitled to that information.

And that's the problem. I checked both the PDGA page and Udisc, and MPO round 4 is gone -- like it never existed. How then, does a player negotiate a reward with any entity?

"All suspended rounds shall be completed, unless conditions exist that make it impossible. If such conditions exist, the results shall be final as of the last completed round as long as the necessary round requirements are met. (Refer to PDGA Mid-Event Suspension and Cancellation Policy)."

We could argue what "impossible" means, but I'd rather focus on the definition of "completed round" for the individual player.

The players with earlier tee times did complete their round. Their performance data was recorded. I'm not convinced that throwing it away is in any way beneficial (and may be harmful) to the players.

 

[ru4por]

Chuck has stated many times on this forum that as long as a minimum number of propagators complete the round, the rating system is accurate.

I'd like to challenge you to distinguish between the subgroup of players that didn't finish the round due to weather and the subgroup of players that DNF'd (re your "whole goup" argument).



And that's the problem. I checked both the PDGA page and Udisc, and MPO round 4 is gone -- like it never existed. How then, does a player negotiate a reward with any entity?



We could argue what "impossible" means, but I'd rather focus on the definition of "completed round" for the individual player.

The players with earlier tee times did complete their round. Their performance data was recorded. I'm not convinced that throwing it away is in any way beneficial (and may be harmful) to the players.

Round 4 is gone. By the rules, it is wiped out. Very old rule to protect the safety of players, spectators and staff. "Impossible" is not a great debatable concept here. If lightning is present, it is impossible to play...period. Other events could constitute impossible, but that is not the issue here. (war, flood, active shooter...) A completed round, for a tournament is 13 holes by everyone in a division. If not, the tournament reverts to the last completed round. I am not sure I can explain it any differently.

How an employee, that I don't know, negotiates part of his contract, that I know nothing about, with an employer, that I don't know, is not my concern. Nor should it be the concern of the PDGA. Debating supposition, conjecture and innuendo is very difficult for me.

I have been in a couple tournaments that were cancelled, due to lightning. The various nuances of some players playing well and other not? Well, it provided nothing more that interesting post round beernicking fodder. Awww shucks, I was three down through four.....I am certain the tournament was mine!!! Group response.....laughter and groans.

 

[araytx]

Chuck has stated many times on this forum that as long as a minimum number of propagators complete the round, the rating system is accurate.

I'd like to challenge you to distinguish between the subgroup of players that didn't finish the round due to weather and the subgroup of players that DNF'd (re your "whole goup" argument).


...

Like many rulebook issues, teem, it all starts with definitions my friend, definitions. Chuck is right. As long as a minimum number of propagators complete the round the rating system is accurate.

Unfortunately, what you saw on DGN and/or the DGPT's YouTube channel yesterday afternoon did not meet the definition of a "round."

 

[BogeyNoMore]

People: stop defibrillating this horse.

I'm calling it: time of death: 16:39.

 

[_MTL_]

Just because something may work for ratings doesn't mean it works for competition.

 

[Steve West]

Says who? The system wasn't designed that way. That's like saying caloric intake is huge in weight loss as is grams of carbohydrates, so there should be a way to compare 25 carb grams to 200 calories. You can't. Those are as different as apples and oranges.

A better analogy would be to say AHagglund thinks we should be able to compare the calories in a bowl of sugary cereal to the calories in a hunk of beef jerky.

OB, putting percentage, all that would be other things related to disc golf skill. Those would be your carbs and stuff. But, scores are scores. Only scores and player ratings go into ratings. We should be able to compare round ratings across all types of courses to know which score was better.

Again, says who? The disc golf ratings system is absolutely perfect mathematically for what it was designed to do. Everyone who complains about it wants the system to do something it was NEVER designed to do. If you want a system to do the things you want, get with your local statistician/mathematician system creator and design the heck out of your system.

Uh, no, the system is not mathematically perfect. Especially in regard to dealing with dispersion of scores. It can get messed up by courses with wildly different average scores and, to a lesser extent, by courses which spread vs. concentrate scores.

There are mathematically correct ways to deal with these issues, but the current ratings system uses a practical, non-theoretically based fix. Which has worked surprisingly well.

Any fix should be done by mathematicians who would be paid to do a professional job. As with election procedures and dividing non-fungible items fairly into more than two pieces, there is provably not a perfect system. Merely choosing which trade-offs would be preferable would take a lot of high-level math work.

 

[dehaas]

What are the odds those who are saying it's no big deal to make up the round on Monday have never TD'ed an event?

 

[the_lung]

What are the odds those who are saying it's no big deal to make up the round on Monday have never TD'ed an event?

Probably greater than 99.9%.

 

[sidewinder22]

People: stop defibrillating this horse.

I'm calling it: time of death: 16:39.

 

[teemkey]

Just because something may work for ratings doesn't mean it works for competition.

And vice-versa

 

[teemkey]

This discussion reminds me of when I was with a group of Marines on a USN ship being transported from SE Asia to California. When moving east, crossing the date line means that the same date occurs two days in a row. With typical USMC efficiency, that meant the duty roster for the first day was repeated for the second day. Why make life difficult?

 

[rjnoodlearm]

This is the internet, no tree were killed in the making of this thread.

This thread is giving me a headache. This is a pretty old PDGA rule, in place for very specific reasons. Perhaps when disc golf reaches the ax throwing, spikeball level of "big time", the rules should be looked at again.

No surprise here, not controversy, no possible changes.....see why I have a headache?

Its kind of interesting to me that the same handful of posters go out of their way to bellyache about what other posters want to discuss. If the thread bores you or gives your precious head an ache then don't read the thread.

 

[Hampstead]

Speculate your way to nowhereville, rj.

Won't change a thing.


But I do applaud your determination to accomplish nothing.

 

[txmxer]

Speculate your way to nowhereville, rj.

Won't change a thing.


But I do applaud your determination to accomplish nothing.

Shutup stoopid!

 

[Audentity]

Does anyone have a screenshot or some record of the fourth round scores when play was suspended? The suspense is killing me

 

[Flick Maniac]

Kyle Klein was leading by one, but of course having more holes played than the lead card.

 

[biscoe]

What do you all think about the 90 degree turns at Northwood? Where the landing zone is really very small. Seems there were several there, and some players, even landing in the fairway, but just short of the turn, had nothing but 50' pitches to turn the corner.

Fair for top players, or over the top?

No fun to watch, no fun to play, stifles scrambling creativity,hard for the sake of being hard. One would have been sufficient. These types of holes often wind up developing "new fairways" from players cutting the corners as the course beats in but it will take a looong time for that undergrowth to be beat in in this particular case.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Love to jump in and add a few facts to this mix of facts and opinions, but I'm still on a 4-disc-plus course bagging trek with JK #100 on my way back home from Master Worlds. Today's menu, Echo Valley (8900') and Caesar Ford (10K') in SW Ohio.

 

[Steve West]

Love to jump in and add a few facts to this mix of facts and opinions, but I'm still on a 4-disc-plus course bagging trek with JK #100 on my way back home from Master Worlds. Today's menu, Echo Valley (8900') and Caesar Ford (10K') in SW Ohio.

Too bad you don't have access to internet so you could make us envious (perhaps jealousy might come into play, too).