Dumb@$$ New Guy Question #3 - Round Ratings

[PBokor]

So I think I understand the Ratings systems, but the concept of 'Round Ratings' has me confused. My local course hosted a B-Tier sanctioned event this past week-end (2 Rounds Saturday and 1 on Sunday). While I didn't attend, I am pretty sure the tees and basket locations remained consistent throughout the week-end. The only difference was the weather. Saturday was blazing hot (90-100 F), while Sunday was 20 degrees cooler.

My question is this: Why would the same player, throwing the same score get different ratings? See example below.

 

[JTacoma03]

So I think I understand the Ratings systems, but the concept of 'Round Ratings' has me confused. My local course hosted a B-Tier sanctioned event this past week-end (2 Rounds Saturday and 1 on Sunday). While I didn't attend, I am pretty sure the tees and basket locations remained consistent throughout the week-end. The only difference was the weather. Saturday was blazing hot (90-100 F), while Sunday was 20 degrees cooler.

My question is this: Why would the same player, throwing the same score get different ratings? See example below.

Chuck will probably be along to explain this better - but here's the nuts and bolts.

Ratings is a zero sum system (sum total of player ratings in the field is the "purse" for the points, then divided out according to an algorithm - taking into account weather, scores, etc.)

20 degree difference in 24 hours is pretty big, that will definitely make the ratings change.

 

[rd.bittle]

The collective score being better or worse will cause the round rating to go up or down for the same score.

 

[Cgkdisc]

So I think I understand the Ratings systems, but the concept of 'Round Ratings' has me confused. My local course hosted a B-Tier sanctioned event this past week-end (2 Rounds Saturday and 1 on Sunday). While I didn't attend, I am pretty sure the tees and basket locations remained consistent throughout the week-end. The only difference was the weather. Saturday was blazing hot (90-100 F), while Sunday was 20 degrees cooler.

My question is this: Why would the same player, throwing the same score get different ratings? See example below.

Looks like a longer layout was played in R1 and the same layout in R2 & R3. Look at Tim Baugher's 58 in R2 & R3 both at 932 and Nick Shuler's 58 rated 979 in R1.

 

[rd.bittle]

If I understand correctly.

 

[discallday]

This was written before posts pointing out any layout changes, but I hope it is still valid.

Not yet mentioned: The course may not change, but the conditions often do. Thus, shooting a 66 was easier to do in more mild conditions. The same would be true if Saturday saw 50 mph winds, and Sunday saw only 10 mph gusts. The ratings are meant to accurately represent the skill required to shoot a given score, on a given course, in the given conditions. The mathematical explanations thus far are meant to accomplish this.

Similarly, I've seen that a given score will correspond to a lower rating in the afternoon round, compared to the morning round. I expect this has to do with players being more warmed up and accustomed to the course during the 2nd round. The opposite can also be true if the afternoon round is ridiculously hot (like at the NAAC http://www.pdga.com/tour/event/22307). I expect that practice and relaxed nerves improved some players scores in the 2nd round, but the 100 degree temps in the 2nd round on Saturday worsened the average player's score even more so. As for the 3rd round, everything was in the long, so par changed from 61 to 69.

One last phenomenon that I've observed is that exhaustion/Saturday night partying can cause players to play worse on Sunday rounds than they do on Saturday. This tends to affect ams more than pros, I think.

 

[PBokor]

One last phenomenon that I've observed is that exhaustion/Saturday night partying can cause players to play worse on Sunday rounds than they do on Saturday. This tends to affect ams more than pros, I think.

Spot on. I posted the Intermediate scores as they are closest to my level, but the Open players were far more consistent. Par was 54, Open winner threw 55-53-54, Runner-Up 53-56-54.

No decent hotels/motels for miles, so most either camped on-site or just drove in each day. I expect the campground got a little 'messy' Saturday night.

Gives me hope though, as I throw mid to high 60s from the slightly shorter Reds. I intend to sign up next year, just to see how I compare.

 

[rd.bittle]

Good lock with that.

 

[jeffmonty]

Blues round 1. Reds rounds 2 and 3.?

 

[jksdg]

Ratings is a zero sum system (sum total of player ratings in the field is the "purse" for the points, then divided out according to an algorithm - taking into account weather, scores, etc.)

I don't find this to be the case when looking at tournaments I have done. I have looked at both ratings that have become official and those still "unofficial". I have found round ratings to be slightly higher than the sum of player ratings. I omitted players whose pdga rating was not in bold.

 

[biscoe]

I don't find this to be the case when looking at tournaments I have done. I have looked at both ratings that have become official and those still "unofficial". I have found round ratings to be slightly higher than the sum of player ratings. I omitted players whose pdga rating was not in bold.

some particularly bad rounds are dropped from the calculations.

 

[TimSyl]

Don't understand the ratings system. Played in a tournament in February. Shot the same score both rounds. Same course, same day. First round was rated 864, second round was 925.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Don't understand the ratings system. Played in a tournament in February. Shot the same score both rounds. Same course, same day. First round was rated 864, second round was 925.

If these are Official Results then something was funky in reporting the course layouts correctly. This much of a difference should not happen. Even 20 points is suspect unless wind was significantly different between rounds.

 

[TimSyl]

It was February in MI, and the wind was "blizzard like" the 2nd round. Many people's scores went up 10-15 throws.

 

[takman]

It was February in MI, and the wind was "blizzard like" the 2nd round. Many people's scores went up 10-15 throws.

That's the reason the ratings were higher. Achieving the same score while most struggled in blizzard conditions = higher rating.

 

[jksdg]

some particularly bad rounds are dropped from the calculations.

that would skew it even more the other way.

my sample size is a small 6. 4 rounds official, 2 unofficial (Saturday)

Unofficial tourney (47 propigators)
round 1 net +70
round 2 net +184

Official tourney (58 props)
round 1 net +131
round 2 net +311

Official tourney (45 props)
round 1 net +228
round 2 net +148

I thought it was zero sum, but it isn't. Do scores over a certain deviation get thrown out on one or both sides?

 

[JC17393]

It was February in MI, and the wind was "blizzard like" the 2nd round. Many people's scores went up 10-15 throws.

If everyone's rounds (but yours, apparently) went up the same 10-15 throws, then the ratings would shift to match. So if everyone but you shoots 10 throws worse, your round is going to have a significantly higher rating relative to the first round, even if it's the exact same score.

Ratings aren't based on a fixed par for the course, they're based on how you do relative to the field. Sounds like you did much better against the field in round two than you did in round one.

 

[DavidSauls]

A link to the results might help the analysts.

 

[TimSyl]

If everyone's rounds (but yours, apparently) went up the same 10-15 throws, then the ratings would shift to match. So if everyone but you shoots 10 throws worse, your round is going to have a significantly higher rating relative to the first round, even if it's the exact same score.

Ratings aren't based on a fixed par for the course, they're based on how you do relative to the field. Sounds like you did much better against the field in round two than you did in round one.

Actually a few people scored lower. Below is my division.
Advanced Masters (15)
Hide round ratings
Place Points Name PDGA# Rating Rd1 Rd2 Total
1 90.0 Charlie Mullins 43698 937 74 935 72 1001 146
2 84.0 Tim Stecker 62807 880 69 974 80 946 149
3 78.0 Pov Underhill 42947 922 76 919 83 925 159
4 72.0 Rob Brower 58283 906 76 919 85 911 161
4 72.0 Frank Youmans 63992 905 75 927 86 904 161
6 60.0 Jason Heidrich 92562 78 903 84 918 162
6 60.0 Trevor Lord 72398 841 79 895 83 925 162
8 48.0 Tim Sylvain 32582 857 83 864 83 925 166
8 48.0 Dan Oakley 16177 908 80 887 86 904 166
10 36.0 Scott sr Spear 46449 902 74 935 95 843 169
11 30.0 David Tomlinson 78710 852 83 864 88 891 171
12 24.0 Billy jr Scott 69217 906 77 911 95 843 172
13 18.0 Gary Bodell 16542 892 82 872 93 856 175
14 12.0 Erich Partee 75123 855 81 879 96 836 177
15 6.0 David Ramos 89422 746 93 785 100 808 193

 

[DavidSauls]

That's hard on the eyes, but I only see one person who shot lower---by 2 strokes.

It's based on all players who played the same layout, not one division (unless only that division played that layout).

Link to the tournament results?