Higher Ratings in PDGA Sanctioned Leagues

[gregwil2]

Has anyone been playing in local PDGA Sanctioned Leagues and noticed their league rating is significantly higher than their actual rating?

This course I'm playing on isn't my home course, and I've only played it two more times outside the league. But my rating is much higher (50+ points) in the rounds than my current rating. Could just be my rating is new and now I'm playing above, but I wasn't sure if anyone has similar results.

Also, will each round count towards my rating or will all the league rounds be averaged into a single rating? I can't seem to find it on http://www.pdga.com/leagues or http://www.pdga.com/your-league-now-pdga-ratings

 

[gcanter2376]

Rating

Mine seemed the opposite. Actually made my rating drop.

 

[Scoot_er]

Local league here has the exact opposite happening......

SSA is around -7 in the tournament but is coming out at -10/11........I am rated 1014 and to shoot that each week would require course record golf every round (current record is -12).

I am personally not a fan of the program as it stands due to the possibility it will screw up the entire ratings pool


Looks like each week gets a rating as well

 

[Cgkdisc]

Overall, the average of league ratings MUST equal the average of the ratings of the propagators playing the courses. We compared the average ratings of the propagators with their average league ratings and they ended up the same as expected. It shouldn't surprise anyone that there will be players who shoot better in league than events and vice versa. But there's no inherent advantage or disadvantage overall to leagues versus events, only to individuals and they'll need to figure that out for themselves.

 

[Scoot_er]

Overall, the average of league ratings MUST equal the average of the ratings of the propagators playing the courses. We compared the average ratings of the propagators with their average league ratings and they ended up the same as expected. It shouldn't surprise anyone that there will be players who shoot better in league than events and vice versa. But there's no inherent advantage or disadvantage overall to leagues versus events, only to individuals and they'll need to figure that out for themselves.

It's a problem when the average prop is rated under 900.........and this rating is constructed from out of town events...then you use that 880 rating to predict their home course score...which would be a low prediction.

Takes 1035+ golf to shoot 1000........and I have made up my mind.....and looking at the league results it seems like others voted with their feet as well.

All this does is reduce the integrity of the original ratings IMO.

 

[Cgkdisc]

It's simply ignorance Scoot_er. Who's to say that the real SSA isn't what is recorded during leagues and you get a bonus at events? The only way the SSA can come out lower at a league is if everyone is averaging better scores. If you can't shoot 2 better, it's your failure not the system. The course simply plays easier apparently due to less pressure at some leagues.

 

[Scoot_er]

It's simply ignorance Scoot_er. Who's to say that the real SSA isn't what is recorded during leagues and you get a bonus at events? The only way the SSA can come out lower at a league is if everyone is averaging better scores. If you can't shoot 2 better, it's your failure not the system.

If that is true your ratings are garbage........course record is barely 1000?........really?

I have played long enough and can estimate the rating within +/-5pts......at any PDGA event......but they aren't even close at this local league.

6 holes at 400ft or more.....yet the league SSA is -10/11....or in an extreme case -14

 

[Scoot_er]

f you can't shoot 2 better, it's your failure not the system. The course simply plays easier apparently due to less pressure at some leagues.

Yes......for the low rated players.........and it is more than 2.......but you never looked at the results I sent you......try 5 shot fluctuations in SSA

This isn't about ratings.....it is about money....if anything it takes credibility away from the ratings.......

Had Climo shown up the SSA would have probably been right.........but since the highest rated player is below 950.........this doesn't happen

-18........6 strokes better than the course record = 1050 LOL

 

[Cgkdisc]

Like I said, who's to say the numbers from league aren't closer to the true course rating? There's no independent way to confirm it either way. For all we know, some course SSAs are inflated due to tournament stats only. I think we'll be reconsidering course ratings all over the country based on league play.

I don't know how many times I have to say this but there's no truth to the myth that higher rated players increases the SSA. Ulibarri played a league in South Dakota and their SSA was still 1-2 shots lower that night than in an event.

 

[gregwil2]

The league I'm playing in is a new course (only open about 3 months). So I wonder if the SSA is still in flux or not on par to a more established course. That could explain the higher ratings. For an example I'm shooting 3 par (on a par 68) and getting about a 960 rating.

 

[Scoot_er]

Like I said, who's to say the numbers from league aren't closer to the true course rating? There's no independent way to confirm it either way. For all we know, some course SSAs are inflated due to tournament stats only. I think we'll be reconsidering course ratings all over the country based on league play.

I don't know how many times I have to say this but there's no truth to the myth that higher rated players increases the SSA. Ulibarri played a league in South Dakota and their SSA was still 1-2 shots lower that night than in an event.

I am to say!...........you are the one who is trying to defend a poor model.

If I would have played....the SSA would move closer to the Avg event........it may not be equal but it will move closer.......

BTW.......wasn't Paul pissed about that?.....pretty sure I remember him posting of FB.....and that was for 1-2 strokes difference not 3-4...or more

 

[Cgkdisc]

The model defends itself with actual data. I just point to what it shows.

BTW, it's too early to tell since we haven't had time yet to evaluate a few issues brought up now that we actually have league ratings to look at and review. There may be changes to the league program once we have a chance to look at it. Several suggestions have already been made to review by our PDGA league team.

 

[Scoot_er]

The model defends itself with actual data. I just point to what it shows.

That the SSA can realistically fluctuate from 47 to 42??????

I understand the model provides data.......and I also understand how that data comes about.....I just don't think the "inputs" are good enough to provide accurate results/data/predictions.

-8......= 947........are you kidding me??????? that was 1012 six months ago (and for the past 10 years)

 

[jdw80550]

My rating went up. We held our sanctioned leage at one of the most difficult courses in the area, then we had member with ratings anywhere from 787-992 show up and play. Put it all together and it certainly helped my overall. Now it didn't shoot me up 50 points, but it made my +6 to +9 come out to about my normal rating, instead of the drop I thought I was going to take. When the best score at this course was -4 from the Pros, it definately evened out the playing field.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Yes, you can get a 12% SSA variation within a small propagator data set. Grab any small data set at random in a regular sanctioned event and you'll see that level of variation. That's why bigger fields produce better numbers. However, no one got league ratings based on that 12% fluctuation because all rounds on the same layout were averaged together.

 

[Scoot_er]

Yes, you can get a 12% SSA variation within a small propagator data set. grab any small data set at random in an event and you'll see that level of variation. That's why bigger fields produce better numbers. However, no one got ratings based on that 12% fluctuation because all rounds on the same layout were averaged together.

So it is a bad model........based on the sample size!!!!!!!

C'mon Chuck....the results aren't anywhere near significant.....when using 4 Pros...who have ratings not based on that course but on out of town courses.

 

[Scoot_er]

With that said taking all each week's sample and averaging them together will make the results fairly accurate.....with higher confidence

 

[gregwil2]

The league I'm playing in is a new course (only open about 3 months). So I wonder if the SSA is still in flux or not on par to a more established course. That could explain the higher ratings. For an example I'm shooting 3 par (on a par 68) and getting about a 960 rating.

Sorry...I was mistaken. 3 over par 68 (71) is a 945 rating. Then best round in the league was a 58 which got rated a 1026. I guess that seems pretty reasonable.

 

[jenb]

I don't know why it would surprise anyone that a pool of locals all playing their home course will produce a lower SSA than a pool of tournament players, many from out of town, some never having played the course before. SSA isn't intended to track "course par" or anything else except what that pool of players averages on that day, relative to their respective ratings. Its the same as in chess or table tennis. Propagators win points from one another. The total points going in will equal the total points coming out, regardless of how well or poorly the propagators played that day, or the course conditions.

 

[VictorB]

I don't know why it would surprise anyone that a pool of locals all playing their home course will produce a lower SSA than a pool of tournament players, many from out of town, some never having played the course before. SSA isn't intended to track "course par" or anything else except what that pool of players averages on that day, relative to their respective ratings. Its the same as in chess or table tennis. Propagators win points from one another. The total points going in will equal the total points coming out, regardless of how well or poorly the propagators played that day, or the course conditions.

Nah, SSA is the Scratch Scoring Average - ie what a 1000 rated player should be shooting.

It's not completely relative to the ratings of the players that are on the course that day, though that does weigh in the calculation.