I always hear this 880, 900, 1000 etc. rated rounds, but how is the rating of the round calculated? I tried to search but nothing really came up in the first couple of pages and I wasn't gonna look through 35 of them, so I apologize if this has already been answered somewhere else. I'm curious to know what my best rated round has been.
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
Exactly how are rounds rated?
- Thread starter kcplease
- Start date
grodney
* Ace Member *
The known individual ratings of the players playing the course are combined with the scores they shot and it's ground up and spit out as an "SSA" which is essentially a rating for how many strokes the course was taking that round. The process is then essentially reversed and the calculated SSA is combined with the scores the players shot and those are ground up and spit out in order to assign each player a Round Rating for that round. The round ratings are pretty much averaged into their existing individual ratings to further refine their player ratings.
Or something.
Highest rated round ever was 1121 (or was it 1117?) by Brian Skinner. Yeah 1117 sounds more right.
Or something.
Highest rated round ever was 1121 (or was it 1117?) by Brian Skinner. Yeah 1117 sounds more right.
Last edited:
runnaman
Eagle Member
In short, the only people that know how to calculate rating are those that work for the PDGA. It's a formula that allows them to produce ratings and no one else, so they don't share it.
There is; however, a modified formula that deals with course length.
There is; however, a modified formula that deals with course length.
Barbiaux
Bogey Member
WHAT!!!!! You lost me at The
I had the same question. I just started playing this year and was thinking about doing a c-tier even in 2 weeks but I was curious what rating I currently throw at.
Not to hi-jack the thread but If I play in 1 c-tier event will I then be given a rating or do you have to play x number before you get one.
looks like mash's link had the answers, so nm
biscoe
* Ace Member *
marcwatts
Newbie
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2009
- Messages
- 20
There is an explanation to the PDGA formula here: http://www.pdga.com/documents/ratings-guide
Click on the PDF. In my understanding it uses a method similar to getting graded on a curve. They are good for the day and round the round was played. If it's windy and nasty the "scratch" golfer might be even par, so if you shoot +2, your round would be 980 and his is 1000. Since each throw is worth 10 points. So if the next day the weather is beutiful and the scratch player shoots -5, you have to shoot -3 to get another 980 round.
Click on the PDF. In my understanding it uses a method similar to getting graded on a curve. They are good for the day and round the round was played. If it's windy and nasty the "scratch" golfer might be even par, so if you shoot +2, your round would be 980 and his is 1000. Since each throw is worth 10 points. So if the next day the weather is beutiful and the scratch player shoots -5, you have to shoot -3 to get another 980 round.
Paging Dr. Kennedy...
Oversimplified, your round ratings are based on your score, compared to everyone else's score, and what everyone's rating was coming in.
Depending on the course, it's usually about 8-10 points per stroke.
For example, if a tournament field has an average rating of 930 coming in, everyone will get a round rating for each round, and those ratings will average 930 (or close to it). Some higher, some lower. Weather doesn't enter into it. It's how you shot, compared to how everyone else shot. Not in your division, but everyone playing the same layout at the same time.
You'll have a player rating once you've have a round in a sanctioned tournament. Well, once it becomes official.
*
That's very general to give you a rough idea. At least until Chuck joins us to clear up the details.
Depending on the course, it's usually about 8-10 points per stroke.
For example, if a tournament field has an average rating of 930 coming in, everyone will get a round rating for each round, and those ratings will average 930 (or close to it). Some higher, some lower. Weather doesn't enter into it. It's how you shot, compared to how everyone else shot. Not in your division, but everyone playing the same layout at the same time.
You'll have a player rating once you've have a round in a sanctioned tournament. Well, once it becomes official.
*
That's very general to give you a rough idea. At least until Chuck joins us to clear up the details.
GLong
* Ace Member *
on a typical par ~54 course, each throw will be worth about 10 ratings points. as the course gets longer/tougher and par rises, each stroke will be worth a little bit less. check out tourney results for iron hill in delaware. par 72 course and typically 1000 rated round is 70ish.
search tourney results on courses you play on pdga.com and check out what scores on different layouts were rated. it's pretty easy.
Last edited:
Do people like the current ratings system? Seems too complicated...
GLong
* Ace Member *
what's complicated about it? you don't have to do the calculations. just show up and play.
Yes.
No.
People, being people, have a range of likes and dislikes.
Personally, I find the ratings pretty cool. They seem to accurately reflect my game (and document it's decline). I find I can finish a round and often guess pretty accurately what kind of rating it'll have, based on how I feel I played.
For those of us who remember the pre-rating days, when division choice was completely voluntary, is a great improvement. Though with the side affect of too many divisions.
I guess more from a out-side in standpoint it just makes the sport a little harder to follow than others where it is pretty clear who is the best via points totals or wins/losses. From the general public standpoint I don't think any of them would understand the ratings system or how 2 players who hardly ever face eachother can have top ratings together... and like DavidS stated: "Though with the side affect of too many divisions."
Luckily, or unluckily, the general public never encounters it.
The comparison would be with ball golf handicaps....if I'm a +5 handicap and someone in California's a +15, it's pretty easy to know who's better despite the fact that we've never played each other. With disc golf ratings, all you have to know is that the higher rating is the better player, and you've accomplished the same thing.
Disc golf ratings claim to be more accurate, though the math is beyond me. Fortunately, some else is dong the math for me.
The comparison would be with ball golf handicaps....if I'm a +5 handicap and someone in California's a +15, it's pretty easy to know who's better despite the fact that we've never played each other. With disc golf ratings, all you have to know is that the higher rating is the better player, and you've accomplished the same thing.
Disc golf ratings claim to be more accurate, though the math is beyond me. Fortunately, some else is dong the math for me.
True and yes luckily we don't have to worry about the math! It is just odd to me that when you go and look at the PDGA ratings of Pro Men the top rated players are generally the best out there but not all of them and it seems like someone who has played 100+ rounds vs 1-50 should be factored in more because a person who has 7 rounds in should not be equally rated as someone with multiple times that. Even a good player like JonhE McCray for example who has many 1st place finishes and top rating but also the events he played in and won are smaller full of a list of people 90% of us have never heard of yet he is top 10 North American and around top 10 highest rated players when he is not even out playing against the best. Maybe the ratings are not the issue but the tournament/pro schedules.
Umm, that's how we do it in our sport. The quirky recent USDGC being an exception to the rule.
The PDGA ratings system is not meant for the general public's dissemination.
There are a great number of players who could compete with our top pros if the money was there to compensate for the time and commitment it takes to tour. Considering what our top pros make, many folks at this juncture would prefer the steady and more lucrative income provided by their day jobs, and go hit a tournament when and where they can.
How is the ratings system NOT meant for the general public's dissemination? Last time I checked there was no other way to see how good a player is.... I don't believe that there are a "great" number of players who could compete with the top pro's and understand they do not make a lot of money but $200-$300 / round average from THE top guys not to mention endorsements and other personal ventures their top Pro status allows them to succeed in.. I wouldn't say they make BAD money for doing something they love and if you are not doing it like they are maybe you shouldn't be considered "pro" thats all-- specially in the top 10.
If the public cared....they could look at who the World Champion is. Are how many World Championships a player has won. Or National Tour titles, or their place in the current National Tour. Or Money Won (at which point they'd guffaw).
There's even a Ranking, separate from Rating (though very similar). You could see who's the 9th-ranked player in the world. Even not knowing the math, I think that concepts understandable. When I hear of a player's ranking in the tennis world, I understand what it means without understanding the formula behind it.
There's even a Ranking, separate from Rating (though very similar). You could see who's the 9th-ranked player in the world. Even not knowing the math, I think that concepts understandable. When I hear of a player's ranking in the tennis world, I understand what it means without understanding the formula behind it.
It usually takes me less than 30 seconds to give someone enough basics on the rating system that they get the concept. 1000 rated is the scratch score, and approximately 10 points either way is equivalent to a stroke. The side of the system that people who aren't disc golf nerds like us see isn't really that difficult to understand.
