PDGA data comparing player skill by sex

[roblee]

Not only this, but we also have a, shall we say, very loosely formed null hypothesis.

Actually that is a very specific null. If you don't have a research background the concept can be confusing. As mentioned before, using a null hypothesis was a light-hearted attempt to sound learned (failed again. :|:|)

Note the immediate conflation between male professionals, and males without that designation. Furthermore, in order for this to apply to the topic engendering the question (pun intended), the question of intrinsic male ability vs. female ability is being brought to the table.
I had no desire or need to conflate other male divisions. That would be lots more work.

roblee, you noted a 10x disparity in the number of MPO and FPO data points in your set. Given the fact that females are roughly equally represented in the overall population versus males, does this not represent a very large possibility that there exists some confounder that is influencing the conclusion?
Not at all. That's common in many endeavors. It simply says that fewer females choose to join the PDGA as professionals than males. Ask someone else why.

Note, I'm not saying I think the conclusion is wrong. I'm questioning whether the statistical analysis you have done says anything more than "existing male FPO players outscore existing FPO players". And again, we do not need a formal analysis to reach that conclusion.
The only number crunching I did was calculate percentages. That's my pay grade.

You have been asked multiple times, and in several ways, "What is the value of this analysis?" and you have yet to even try to answer that question. You've been asked why this analysis is somehow germane to the topic of trans-women disc golfers, and have also not tried to answer this question.

I had no intention of providing value to you. I was curious how to quantify the difference between the skill levels of male & female DGers. I found an easy way to do this from the largest DG ratings data base in the World and shared it to this site. I have nothing germane to say about trans-women playing in female DG divisions but you seem hell bent on insisting that I do.:\

 

[roblee]

You mentioned trans- in both the first and last paragraphs of your original post. Pardon us for thinking that was what you were hinting at.

Yep, trans-gender posts about male advantages in DG were the catalyst for my query. I'm pretty transparent plus I have nothing to hide.

 

[txmxer]

Yep, trans-gender posts about male advantages in DG were the catalyst for my query. I'm pretty transparent plus I have nothing to hide.

I tried to say earlier, but I'll rephrase, I gave you the benefit of doubt that you had an ulterior motive. At the same time I was skeptical for the same reasons EVERYONE ELSE responding has been skeptical.

Your arrogance in regards to the scientific method doesn't help your cause. When you invoked that methodology, naturally, it was assumed you would continue your inquiry beyond the introductory premise.

Finally, you blast the idea that the issue of trans athletes starts with male/female comparisons but delve no deeper than that superficial statement. To make that argument as you did is out of context. It is only the entry point in to the issue, not the conclusion.

As far as civility goes, pot meet kettle. You want to ramble aimlessly? Probably shouldn't revisit the thread you started. Maybe start a blog and lock out comments so your aren't emotionally harmed by people engaging in the conversation YOU initiated.

 

[thecandydan]

I know some female disc golfers who are considerably better than some male disc golfers that I know.

Null hypothesis: "So you're telling me there's a chance?"

 

[Rastnav]

I had no intention of providing value to you.

This wasn't the question I asked. Rather, I asked "What is the value of this analysis?" Or, to put it another way, "What do you find valuable about being able to reject the null hypothesis?"

I was curious how to quantify the difference between the skill levels of male & female DGers. I found an easy way to do this from the largest DG ratings data base in the World and shared it to this site.

Note that you again have substituted "male and female disc golfers" for "the current MPO and FPO fields". You've also stated you have done no statistical tests on the data, nor do you have any interest in considering confounders. Wouldn't being precise about the specific test that you did, and doing the relevant statistical work, be required to reach a scientific conclusion?

I have nothing germane to say about trans-women playing in female DG divisions but you seem hell bent on insisting that I do.

I note that you posted this in the "Rules Question and Discussion" section of the forums. What was your motivation for posting it here?

 

[Rastnav]

Null hypothesis: "So you're telling me there's a chance?"

This is actually a question that I would consider mildly interesting. What percentage of all registered female disc golfers have a rating greater than some male disc golfer? Although, that's not any more than mildly interesting, as you would really just be considering what percentage of registered female players have a higher rating than the lowest registered male.

I think there is probably a somewhat more interesting question to be asked in there somewhere, but I'm not sure.

 

[roblee]

T
I note that you posted this in the "Rules Question and Discussion" section of the forums. What was your motivation for posting it here?

Division qualifications are in the Competition Manuel which is linked under Disc Golf Rules & Standards. Ratings are linked in Section 2.01 A of the CM. If you think there is a better place I'm all ears.

 

[roblee]

This is actually a question that I would consider mildly interesting. What percentage of all registered female disc golfers have a rating greater than some male disc golfer? Although, that's not any more than mildly interesting, as you would really just be considering what percentage of registered female players have a higher rating than the lowest registered male.

I think there is probably a somewhat more interesting question to be asked in there somewhere, but I'm not sure.

Lowest male rating is 0.
Lowest female rating is 0.

Look like parity./B]

 

[Rastnav]

Division qualifications are in the Competition Manuel which is linked under Disc Golf Rules & Standards. Ratings are linked in Section 2.01 A of the CM. If you think there is a better place I'm all ears.

So, you have question about the rules of qualification for divisions? You would like to have a discussion about them?

 

[coupe]

If you think there is a better place I'm all ears.

Here.

 

[jupiterboy]

Most of "these" threads are locked, not surprisingly. So this would be better added to some of the locked threads, but I've always landed on the idea that there is no "fair" solution, and that science doesn't offer a clean conclusion. This woman, Sabine Hossenfelder, gives a clear rundown, IMO, worth watching.

 

[jenb]

Yep, trans-gender posts about male advantages in DG were the catalyst for my query. I'm pretty transparent plus I have nothing to hide.

I have difficulty believing anyone argued that MPO players have no advantage over FPO players in transgender threads. Cite?

I have seen it argued that transwomen who medically transition to the extent required by PDGA rules for competition in FPO have no significant residual advantage over ciswomen playing FPO. If you had "researched" that null hypothesis, I think you would find that the few out transwomen playing FPO have ratings that are well within the norm for FPO. Please go crunch those numbers and get back to us. Enquiring minds want to know.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

(1) Nor are people checked for reproductive anatomy when they register with the PDGA.

They dont?!

I knew something seemed wrong when they asked me to drop my drawers.

 

[DavidSauls]

They dont?!

I knew something seemed wrong when they asked me to drop my drawers.

I learned that they don't, when I was kicked out of the tournament check-in line.

 

[roblee]

I have difficulty believing anyone argued that MPO players have no advantage over FPO players in transgender threads. Cite?.........

I never heard that argument either counselor. I stated the opposite. I recon that using a null hypothesis was confusing to those not familiar with the term. It's conventional wisdom that MPO players have a competitive advantage (PDGA Player Statistics 2022).

 

[jenb]

I never heard that argument either counselor. I stated the opposite. I recon that using a null hypothesis was confusing to those not familiar with the term. It's conventional wisdom that MPO players have a competitive advantage (PDGA Player Statistics 2022).

Don't see what it has to do with the transwomen playing FPO debate. You compared MPO player ratings to FOO player ratings, which include the trans women's ratings. That seems to support the conclusion that MPO players have a competitive advantage over transwomen playing FPO. Yes?

 

[roblee]

Don't see what it has to do with the transwomen playing FPO debate.....

Nothing. Current PDGA members registered as MPO, on average, have a competitive advantage (on average) over all other member divisions (PDGA Player Statistics 2022).

 

[jenb]

Most of "these" threads are locked, not surprisingly. So this would be better added to some of the locked threads, but I've always landed on the idea that there is no "fair" solution, and that science doesn't offer a clean conclusion. This woman, Sabine Hossenfelder, gives a clear rundown, IMO, worth watching.

I can't look at her without thinking of Will Ferrell as Janet Reno.

 

[txmxer]

Currently the PDGA has competition divisions divided into 2 major categories; male & female. Generally, our sex (male or female) is determined at conception by the combination of sex chromosomes we receive from our parents and we have no choice. Fast forward to today and the desire and ability to identify and live with a gender identity different than the sex determined at birth is very much a part of our evolving society. Enough intro.

Lots of DG discussion about allowing transitioned genetic males (hormone therapy &/or surgery) to play in female divisions. Science is my education, training, and career so I looked for something simple to answer the null hypothesis: There is no difference between the skill level of professional male disc golfers and professional female disc golfers. Sure everybody knows males are better, right? I just wanted to see this quantified. This is not a Steve West analysis, it's just some basic math based on PDGA ratings. A major assumption is that the rating system is a valid way to measure a players skill set no matter who you are nor where you play.

Looking only at current MPO & FPO PDGA members:
There are 6,741 MPOs (all classified as male) & 639 FPOs (all classified as female). Highest rated MPO is 1051. Highest rated FPO is 981. 14% (973) of MPOs are rated 981 or higher. Using a 934 rating as a benchmark (Highest rating allowed in Mixed Amateur Intermediate) 64% (4,332) of MPOs are rated >934 and 5% (34) of FPOs are rated >934. My amateur analysis indicates the null hypothesis is not supported by these data.

This may have no bearing on transgender division classification. Just something I was curious about. The PDGA Medical Committee has formed a subcommittee for Gender-based Divisions so recon the dialog is just beginning.

You nullified your own null hypothesis in post #1. What now?

 

[jupiterboy]

I can't look at her without thinking of Will Ferrell as Janet Reno.

I see that for sure. She reminds me of my college friends in a way.