Ratings and penalty strokes

[rhatton1]

I'm curious, how can the ratings take into account penalty strokes fairly when they can't handle throw and distance?

Do the lack of penalty strokes make them statistically insignificant? Does anyone have any evidence of how many penalty strokes are applied in a given tournament to back that up?

This is coming from an idiot that has often received 2 strokes for adding up his card incorrectly, and has also had par plus 4 on a few holes over the last few years - Dad of small children, am often late to first rounds. In one round a couple of years ago I had 10 extra strokes ( 2 missed holes and then forgot one was a par 4 so had carded a 7 instead of 8 for the par plus 4...the difference of a 980 and an 880 rated round) am I a rare outlier of stupidity or are a lot of players ratings artificially lower than they should be and are other players individual round scores inflated as a result?

As another example a friend at a two day tournament last year got 12 shots extra for missing the last three holes (possibly more as a couple of these are birdiable) of the first round as he had to leave early for a house viewing but still wanted to play the next two rounds of the tournament. Again his round was rated, does it not matter because this is one guy in a field of 80 and so has little to no bearing?

What if one card misplays a hole in a small field surely that would have just as much affect on the ratings as 4 players taking numerous rethrows on one hole - and at least that would be a reflection of the course difficulty rather than player error?

When you can potentially have shots added for misscoring, misplaying, courtesy, footfaults, 888 ratings artificially depressing players rating etc. etc. doesn't this skew the ratings given to other players?

Could penalty strokes be marked separately so they add up to the overall tournament score but then aren't applied to the score for ratings - and players that missed holes/misplayed holes don't get a rating for that round.

Does it even matter?

(Sorry Chuck )

 

[filobedo]

I'm curious, how can the ratings take into account penalty strokes fairly when they can't handle throw and distance?

Do the lack of penalty strokes make them statistically insignificant? Does anyone have any evidence of how many penalty strokes are applied in a given tournament to back that up?

This is coming from an idiot that has often received 2 strokes for adding up his card incorrectly, and has also had par plus 4 on a few holes over the last few years - Dad of small children, am often late to first rounds. In one round a couple of years ago I had 10 extra strokes ( 2 missed holes and then forgot one was a par 4 so had carded a 7 instead of 8 for the par plus 4...the difference of a 980 and an 880 rated round) am I a rare outlier of stupidity or are a lot of players ratings artificially lower than they should be and are other players individual round scores inflated as a result?

As another example a friend at a two day tournament last year got 12 shots extra for missing the last three holes (possibly more as a couple of these are birdiable) of the first round as he had to leave early for a house viewing but still wanted to play the next two rounds of the tournament. Again his round was rated, does it not matter because this is one guy in a field of 80 and so has little to no bearing?

What if one card misplays a hole in a small field surely that would have just as much affect on the ratings as 4 players taking numerous rethrows on one hole - and at least that would be a reflection of the course difficulty rather than player error?

When you can potentially have shots added for misscoring, misplaying, courtesy, footfaults, 888 ratings artificially depressing players rating etc. etc. doesn't this skew the ratings given to other players?

Could penalty strokes be marked separately so they add up to the overall tournament score but then aren't applied to the score for ratings - and players that missed holes/misplayed holes don't get a rating for that round.

Does it even matter?

(Sorry Chuck )

The ratings are a dumpster fire. Stick to something much easier to understand and solve like Hilbert's and Landau's Problems.

 

[DavidSauls]

One difference between these non-play penalty strokes, and a T&D---particularly, a poorly designed T&D hole---is that the T&D hole potentially affects every player in the tournament, every round. It might get played 360 times (4 rounds, 90 players). If there are multiple poorly-designed T&D holes on a course, it might be over a thousand plays. This could create a lot of extra penalty strokes.

On the other hand, the non-play penalties like wrong scorecard, misplay, missed holes, are fairly infrequent and rarely affect a large part of the field. For a given player who is habitually late, his rating won't reflect his skill level, but for the overall ratings it won't make a huge difference.

That said---the PDGA has softened a bit, no longer saying that T&D automatically invalidates ratings---just that it might create unrateable rounds.

 

[krupicka]

Just thinking out loud here. Not to change the scoring/results of the event, but what if ratings were computed on actual throws + 1/2 * penalty throws. It would be a little more work for the TDs.

 

[DavidSauls]

Just thinking out loud here. Not to change the scoring/results of the event, but what if ratings were computed on actual throws + 1/2 * penalty throws. It would be a little more work for the TDs.

Are you talking about TD-issued penalty throws (missed hole, wrong score, etc.), or all penalty throws (including O.B., etc.)

One consequence would be that identical scores on the results page would show different ratings.

 

[krupicka]

I was thinking all. And yes the consequence of identical scores showing different ratings would be weird and may have other unintended side effects. Just trying to explore the concept.

The missed hole one would be a strange case under this scheme. Would all par+4 throws considered penalties? or just the +4? Better would be to not include the hole at all (which makes things even more complicated).

This is what happens when you start thinking out loud. Some duds and some good ideas. You never know... I'm already starting to think dud here.

 

[JC17393]

Unless a player is completely inconsistent in their tournament to tournament play, occasional late-showing penalties aren't going to affect one's rating one iota. Reason being that a player with a couple par+4s on their card are likely to end up with a final score that will rate too low to either count as a propagating round for that particular event or count in one's average after the event. That is how the ratings handle those kinds of penalties.

Taking the PDGA's side for a second with regard to leaving T&D or other rule variant rounds unrated, that is a factor to one's score that is outside the player's control. They have to play the hole as proscribed, and if it is set up in a way that doesn't allow a "play it safe" option to escape it relatively unscathed, what can they do?

On the other hand, so-called TD-issued penalties such as par+4 or an incorrect scorecard are entirely within the player's control. They count their card (or should). They determine when they arrive for their round or if they can stay to complete it. No different than they throw discs out of bounds or to the wrong side of a mando or into a spot where the disc becomes lost and get penalized accordingly. They are all part of what is required, by the rules of play, of the player in order to complete a round. A rules variant takes things outside that a bit.

 

[MichaelWebster]

I would consider basic math and following the rules part of the skills needed for the game. So I don't think of penalty strokes artificially depressing the OP's rating, just that he needs to work on those parts of his game. Do some practice math every day. I know I try to add up 5-10 scorecards a day just to keep my mind sharp for tournament play.

 

[ToddL]

The ratings don't specifically rate your ability to throw a frisbee. The ratings rate your ability to play a tournament round of disc golf using PDGA rules. If you suck at adding up your scorecard, then you suck at PDGA tournaments, throwing ability notwithstanding.

It's kind of an odd way to think about it, but there's a certain legitimacy to it.

 

[BionicRib]

If you gain 12 strokes from penalties and the round you shoot is 880 and you are a 985 rated player who has played enough rounds to be a propagator I would assume that round would be outside 2.5 standard deviations which wouldn't effect your overall rating. Right?

So what difference does it make? Unless those penalty strokes put you at a 950 round and it was counted towards your rating.

Or am I missing something?

 

[BgWvDave]

I would consider basic math and following the rules part of the skills needed for the game. So I don't think of penalty strokes artificially depressing the OP's rating, just that he needs to work on those parts of his game.

Now that is an interesting take. Great point Mr. Webster.

 

[Stone]

The ratings don't specifically rate your ability to throw a frisbee. The ratings rate your ability to play a tournament round of disc golf using PDGA rules. If you suck at adding up your scorecard, then you suck at PDGA tournaments, throwing ability notwithstanding.

It's kind of an odd way to think about it, but there's a certain legitimacy to it.

This is the best way to consider what a PDGA rating represents.

 

[araytx]

Before I add more, kudos to those players who pointed out that forced T&D is thrust upon EVERY player, whereas, the other penalties you mentioned are not. They are, at least to some degree, within the player's control or choice. Know that on any shot a player still can choose T&D via Optional re-throw rule; but it is not forced upon him. So the current system accommodates chosen T&D.

One key factor is that it goes to design of the ratings system. When ratings were first "invented" they were designed for a certain game. Specifically, when the sport used last spot inbounds w-one-throw penalty as the standard. That's where the argument about T&D being a different game came about, and over time, there ended up being enough statistical data to prove that it is true. Chuck collected data several times, including the year that the USDGC was all T&D. Having a forward drop zone is nearly the same as the original rule, plus it keeps the card moving forward.

I think it was an unintended consequence of us getting coverage online and TDs seeing some of the designs out there in bigger events, that they began little by little "creatively" designing more "difficulty" into certain holes using T&D. New course designers did as well. However, that's not how the sport was created. Ratings came into play when, 1998 or so? and drop zones were added in 2002 -- nearly the same era. SO the era in which our current ratings system was designed intended that T&D not be a forced penalty upon all players and it was incorporated statistically into the ratings system. Could a new system be devised which takes T&D into account? Sure it can, but I am not sure anyone would want to a) have it, and b) do it. There are enough complaints with the current ratings system -- which, btw, I think is just fine.

 

[DiscJunkie]

In Chuck's defense, I don't think he was saying that T&D should never be used, but that it should not be used in such a way that it would not excessively penalize or excessively reward.
For example, let's say that you have an tiny island hole 250' from the tee.
If you use strict T&D, many people will have excessive scores trying to make the tiny island so far away. However, a random good throw might net a Rec player a 2. Have you seen some of the T&D scores from USDGC #17?
If you make it normal OB (no island) or if you utilize a forward Drop Zone after the first OB throw, the scores are going to be a good bit more indicative of a person's overall ability.

 

[lyleoross]

From the original discussion on T & D by Harold Duvall, 2003:


The rules committee wanted to eliminate the 2-meter penalty.

Stroke and distance is currently a player choice for OB. No change was/is proposed.

Determining a lie after a lost disc is currently one of the most judgmental and inconsistent situations in our rulebook. Stroke and distance would remove the ambiguity and inconsistency. In some cases, stroke and distance would be more severe than "last seen." In other situations, e.g. downhill tosses, stroke and distance would be les severe. Returning to play from an approximate lie will take time, but it's a stretch to say that rounds would take significantly longer to play. If folks start timing when they are supposed to, the rounds may speed up.

Undersirable lie would still allow you 5 meters for 1 stroke. The change really involves the second part of 803.05A. Instead of returning to the fairway no closer to the hole (which sometimes is impossible to do), the player would replay from the previous lie. Like lost disc, the change for undesirable lie is designed to reduce ambiguity and inconsistency.

Most of us have experience nasty situations where we did not want to get the disc. Generally, these are known right away. Why waste time with the current rule when you can just throw again? Most competitors will still do everything they can to throw from where the disc came to rest.

This change could be significant if there are lots of undesirable situations where players are currently invoking the 2 throw option to get back to the fairway no closer. My experience over the years with this rule is that it is not very common, but neither I nor the rules committee play everywhere the PDGA rules are used. If this situation is common, it would be good to know.

Take care,
Harold
__________________
harold Duvall

The expansion of T & D into a hole based system to add "toughness" to a course, IMO, doesn't invalidate anything, nor should it. When you play, you are playing by a set of universal rules that apply to everyone playing. You make choices, "should I get up at 8:00 for a 9:00 tee, or 7:00. Should I throw a midrange and keep it safe, or really reach out with a longer disc towards that T & D zone? The rating you receive is a reflection of the decisions you make, all of them. Not liking that is inevitable.

Some point out that a lucky throw is going to get a player a better throw than they deserve. That's a little bit like saying that a guy who pulled the slot machine handle in the airport in Las Vegas, and won, has proven you can beat the house. Over time and play, the ratings system levels such things out, it's statistics.

The truth is that the ratings system should count every action and choice the player makes as they approach the round. Then it is an accurate reflection of the mentality and preparedness the player brings to the game.

Please watch Dave Feldberg's YouTube on preparing for a tournament. What he is saying is the difference between a 54 and a 49 (that is, a good score and an average score on a par three course). That is, preparing markedly affects your score. Then find the recent thread on what McBeth was quoted about, that is, being mentally tougher than his competitors. Denying that these things significantly impact your rating is ludicrous. Denying that any rule or course structure can be accounted for, and planned for, takes away from the game.

Just MO.

 

[lyleoross]

BTW - Keep in mind that I'm not disagreeing with the PDGA. What they are talking about is a hole to hole analysis. You can design a hole that is literally impossible to play if you want. They are saying if you design a hole that is too tough, we won't rate it, or that round. Simple enough.

 

[Martin Dewgarita]

As another example a friend at a two day tournament last year got 12 shots extra for missing the last three holes (possibly more as a couple of these are birdiable) of the first round as he had to leave early for a house viewing but still wanted to play the next two rounds of the tournament. Again his round was rated, does it not matter because this is one guy in a field of 80 and so has little to no bearing?

Pretty sure it doesn't work like that... par +4 is only applied if you miss holes at the beginning of the round, not for a DNF.

 

[Cgkdisc]

There's a lot of potential content that could be discussed in depth. For starters, rather than regurgitate it here, please read or re-read my story on Granularity. That's the current go-to in-depth discussion on some parts of this ratings and penalties topic.

Extensive T&D can be handled by the ratings system. It's just proven to alter the game stats enough that it's not the same game. Ball golf discovered this long ago and many in disc golf have not realized that. If T&D boundaries lined both sides of every fairway and every OB area that players had to carry in the main fairway, it would be fully rateable T&D disc golf. Players would have separate T&D ratings and T&D propagators would produce new scores. I don't think players would find it fun but it would be a legit game with legit stats.

 

[JC17393]

Pretty sure it doesn't work like that... par +4 is only applied if you miss holes at the beginning of the round, not for a DNF.

That's the way it used to be (auto DNF). Now the TD has the discretion to assign par+4 for missed holes in the middle or at the end of a round per 803.03G(6): "Omitted Hole. The round has been completed, and the player has neglected to play a hole. The hole is scored the same as a hole missed due to late arrival."

It's up to the TD whether to let the player continue to play due to extenuating circumstances (i.e. a good excuse for skipping/missing the holes) or to DQ for deliberately misplaying for advantage (e.g. skipping a hole to take a par+4 rather than a potentially higher score).

 

[Cgkdisc]

T&D for our current game is not an appropriate fairway challenge element for a few reasons. However, it can be an appropriate element to discourage routes outside the course property in the same way it's used in ball golf. Although rather than T&D for defined course boundaries, I think playing from where the disc lands (bringing it back to closest point inbounds) and tacking on a 2-throw penalty would be more effective and keep play moving. Hopefully, RC will consider for next rules update.