DGPT: The Memorial Championship presented by Discraft 27-Feb to 01-Mar-2020

[Steve West]

I like it!
Maybe put a mark for each hole, where official tournament par was set? Like a vertical black stripe through the color where par was set? Just For reference, so you can see the over/under relative to the empirical data.

I want to. Can't figure out the formatting. Meanwhile, see the Par Talk thread for an updated version with confidence intervals and the numbers re-scaled to be less dramatic.

 

[ThrowBot]

I want to. Can't figure out the formatting. Meanwhile, see the Par Talk thread for an updated version with confidence intervals and the numbers re-scaled to be less dramatic.

Lol, I could do that interval in Excel.
You need help, Steve?

Might have to do a new dataset per hole, which is time consuming. I understand. Not trying to heckle.

 

[Flick Maniac]

Psssht i can draw the lines for you in Paint

 

[Jolt]

Paige was the ONLY FPO player to birdy 15, 17, 18 . . .. 1021 rated round with 3OBs that turned in to bogeys?!? 1021!!

And Paige at 100% C1x putts. . .Cat at 50%
But again, Paige had more OBs than the next four players combined

OBs is Paiges weeknes. . .C1 is Cats

 

[Ryan P.]

Paige was the ONLY FPO player to birdy 15, 17, 18 . . .. 1021 rated round with 3OBs that turned in to bogeys?!? 1021!!

And Paige at 100% C1x putts. . .Cat at 50%
But again, Paige had more OBs than the next four players combined

OBs is Paiges weeknes. . .C1 is Cats

OB is Paige's known risk that doesn't outweigh her strength. She's said time and time again that she loves running long putts and usually ignores the consequences. Could she score better running less long putts? Maybe. Maybe not.

What I'm saying is that it may be her weakness, or it may be that it's just a side effect of her "go-for-it" style. Cat's C1 putting is certainly a weakness.

 

[brutalbrutus]

The ratings at Fountain are inflated because there is a glitch in the rating system. There is no way that shooting -12 at Idlewild should be 1071, if shooting -15 at Fountain on a more or less calm day is 1092... and it's not like Idlewild doesn't have enough OB to help inflate ratings like Fountain has, there is OB all over that course... not to mention these things called trees.

 

[sidewinder22]

The ratings at Fountain are inflated because there is a glitch in the rating system. There is no way that shooting -12 at Idlewild should be 1071, if shooting -15 at Fountain on a more or less calm day is 1092... and it's not like Idlewild doesn't have enough OB to help inflate ratings like Fountain has, there is OB all over that course... not to mention these things called trees.

The problem is rating compression as the real or mathematical "par"(field average number of throws - despite what Steve West wants to believe) increases which devalues each stroke. It's as easy to shoot a really high rated round as a really low rated round at Fountain, where it's as hard to shoot a really high rated round as a really low rated round at Idlewild.

-12 Idlewild - 1071
-12 Fountain - 1062

Even 68 Idlewild - 997 (61 of 120 players over course par)
Even 56 Fountain - 941 (27 of 165 players over course par)

+9 Idlewild - 948
+9 Fountain - 849

+20 Idlewild - 873
+20 Fountain - 700ish

 

[Jolt]

looking at the top FPO and MPO it looks like "1 throw better = 10 rating points"

One odd thing. . -8 was 1021 rated for both MPO and FPO...but they did not play the same layout, two holes are shorter for FPO

 

[brutalbrutus]

The problem is rating compression as the real or mathematical "par"(field average number of throws - despite what Steve West wants to believe) increases which devalues each stroke. It's as easy to shoot a really high rated round as a really low rated round at Fountain, where it's as hard to shoot a really high rated round as a really low rated round at Idlewild.

-12 Idlewild - 1071
-12 Fountain - 1062

Even 68 Idlewild - 997 (61 of 120 players over course par)
Even 56 Fountain - 941 (27 of 165 players over course par)

+9 Idlewild - 948
+9 Fountain - 849

+20 Idlewild - 873
+20 Fountain - 700ish

Like I said, a glitch. It doesn't make sense to be rewarded less for shooting really well on harder courses, than on easier ones... and I don't really care what happens at the lower end. If you play bad, you should get bad ratings

I know ratings aren't the be all end all but some guys do shy away from certain courses because they know they have to shoot lights out to get the good ratings. I think this may be even more prevalent in the local tourneys. I know several guys who won't play events at Mt Airy because of this.

 

[brutalbrutus]

I phrased that wrong. Its that you should be rewarded more for playing great on harder courses. Playing -11 or -12 down at Idlewild should be an 1100 or close to it.

 

[Jolt]

I think Paige likes her new putter. . 100% C1x and 60% C2 !! . . did any of the men even beat that stat?

 

[ToddL]

One odd thing. . -8 was 1021 rated for both MPO and FPO...but they did not play the same layout, two holes are shorter for FPO

Last night I was looking at the ratings and saw that the layouts weren't properly assigned to the divisions. Tournament Manager had the FPO division playing the MPO layout. "OMG, quick, fix that before anyone writes any stories about Paige shooting a 1021 in round one!" Got the TD to fix it ...... and the ratings stayed precisely the same. I've never seen it work out that nicely before.

The difference between the MPO and FPO layouts is about 100' each on 2 holes. The courses are very, very similar, so it makes sense that the ratings on the two layouts should be similar. But being precisely the same is a nice coincidence.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Last night I was looking at the ratings and saw that the layouts weren't properly assigned to the divisions. Tournament Manager had the FPO division playing the MPO layout. "OMG, quick, fix that before anyone writes any stories about Paige shooting a 1021 in round one!" Got the TD to fix it ...... and the ratings stayed precisely the same. I've never seen it work out that nicely before.

The difference between the MPO and FPO layouts is about 100' each on 2 holes. The courses are very, very similar, so it makes sense that the ratings on the two layouts should be similar. But being precisely the same is a nice coincidence.

Lower rated female propagators taking slightly more OB penalties relative to their ratings can account for the difference in course length.

 

[Steve West]

The problem is rating compression as the SSA increases which devalues each stroke. It's as easy to shoot a really high rated round as a really low rated round at Fountain, where it's as hard to shoot a really high rated round as a really low rated round at Idlewild.

56 Idlewild - 1071
38 Fountain - 1123

68 Idlewild - 997
50 Fountain - 1001

77 Idlewild - 948
59 Fountain - 910

88 Idlewild - 873
70 Fountain - 799

Fixed that for you. While your point is valid, ratings are not affected by par at all. And SSA is not the field average, it is supposed to be the average score of 1000-rated players.

 

[biscoe]

I like the fact that theoretically acing every hole at Idlewild (6 points per stroke) would rate about 1300 and theoretically acing every hole at Fountain (10 points per stroke) would rate about 1320.

 

[CaptainAnhyzer]

I think Paige likes her new putter. . 100% C1x and 60% C2 !! . . did any of the men even beat that stat?

1000 Rated Putting Confidence !! She was on FIRE !!!
:clap::clap::clap:

 

[Cgkdisc]

I like the fact that theoretically acing every hole at Idlewild (6 points per stroke) would rate about 1300 and theoretically acing every hole at Fountain (10 points per stroke) would rate about 1320.

Seems like when Roger and I calculated the ratings for an Ace on a one hole course it came out to something like 2000 or perhaps an imaginary number as the other root.

 

[sidewinder22]

Fixed that for you. While your point is valid, ratings are not affected by par at all. And SSA is not the field average, it is supposed to be the average score of 1000-rated players.

You didn't fix it. Par and SSA are arbitrary. SA of the field is real math.

 

[Cgkdisc]

You didn't fix it. Par and SSA are arbitrary. SA of the field is real math.

Par (the way Steve calculates it) and SSA use the same data set or reference. SA can be precisely calculated but it stands alone and can't be related to other values, especially across tournaments and different courses.

 

[sidewinder22]

Par (the way Steve calculates it) and SSA use the same data set or reference. SA can be precisely calculated but it stands alone and can't be related to other values, especially across tournaments and different courses.

You have to do some mathematical gymnastics to compare SW par or SSA at Fountain to Idlewild.

Two completely different courses and skill sets required to shoot SSA, where the cheese should stand alone IMO.