At the last tournament there a 56 is rated 946(even "54" is 966) and the previous year a 56 was 962. I know that I am not including weather etc in this. I'm not griping, I just think something is off with the metric for this type of course given the disparity.
-
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)
Round Ratings
- Thread starter timg
- Start date
At the last tournament there a 56 is rated 946(even "54" is 966) and the previous year a 56 was 962. I know that I am not including weather etc in this. I'm not griping, I just think something is off with the metric for this type of course given the disparity.
Changing it to "Moderately Wooded" brings the SSE in line although the course obviously is lightly wooded. I might have to make a private terrain adjustment field to take care of some courses so that the one can remain accurate in terms of course description.
Drakeab
Par Member
Any thoughts of adding the variable of wind/rain into the calculation?
Any thoughts that this cool feature may turn out to be more trouble than it's worth?
It's absolutely no trouble at all and no, adding dynamic weather conditions to the formula won't happen.
jeverett
Double Eagle Member
*hehe* I agree with Timg on this one.. we already *barely* have enough 'real' SSA data to calibrate the three SSE formulas against as it is. Having to further categorize each 'real' SSA by whether or not it was generated during fair weather or not just stretches what little data we have too far to be accurate.
Unless of course someone out there can provide me with a wealth of 'real' SSA's + course layout length data (for 18-hole as well as non-18-hole layouts), along with the associated 'foliage value' *and* weather conditions for each and every round of it.
I'd *love* to collect this kind of data, but so far no one has been able to help at all.
The SSE formula has been adjusted slightly and all round/player ratings have been updated accordingly.
jeverett
Double Eagle Member
The adjustment implemented the fix to non-18-hole courses that we discussed (related to the extra-length-scalar), as well as the change from a 255ft. to a 235ft. constant for 'heavily wooded' courses. Also, it looks like there may be some glitches with historical rounds currently.. player and round ratings for a lot of rounds are off currently.
notroman
* Ace Member *
I just looked and my recent rounds the ratings seemed a bit more accurate, but when I clicked to view all to see some of the older rounds they all changed to n/a. Now even the most recent rounds are showing n/a.
jeverett
Double Eagle Member
I think timg might be re-running the script that sets the rating for every round in the DGCR database.. it could take a while.
notroman
* Ace Member *
Got it. Thanks.
jeverett
Double Eagle Member
Historical rounds (and thus player ratings) should now be fixed and updated to the current formulas. Hopefully we have a better handle on non-18-hole course round ratings now, although there may well still be some outliers.
UCF_Knight
Birdie Member
Round ratings are looking really good! A few of my recent rounds were looking a little low and high and both ends have come back towards where they should be. Great work gents.
jeverett
Double Eagle Member
Alright, the newest SSE formulas should be working properly now, and all SSE's and round/player ratings are updated too. This does *not* mean, however, that some courses won't still have SSE's that don't match up with 'real' SSA data.. so if anyone comes across anything that looks amiss, please let us know!
Seems like a good time to make this post again. The SSE works pretty well for most courses but won't work for all courses. If your local course has any of the following: lots of artificial OB, is really short, has ~9 holes, has massive hills, has mountain lions that eat discs, etc. The SSE may not be that accurate in those cases.
Thanks for the DGCR ratings. Cool tool. Any plans to have an OB factor in the ratings calc? I changed the course to Heavily wooded and got more accurate ratings, but that doesn't represent the course correctly. Woods factor for that course has since been changed back to moderate.
Which course are you referring to?
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2007
- Messages
- 4,525
timg needs to give the official answer on this, but I will chime in on 2 things.
The foliage description (Lightly, Moderately, and Heavily wooded) is much more valuable to most for describing how the course feels and how shady it is than for its effect on SSE and Player Ratings. timg has stated several times that he will change things back to the appropriate value if users change it to make adjustments to SSE & Player Ratings.
We have discussed adding a "Technicality" field to act as an adjustment like you are suggesting. "Technicality" would cover high amounts of OB, very punishing greens (high roll-away potential), and lots of short fairway segments (as in 300' L-shaped holes). These are the elements that bring the average throw length down that cannot be captured by the SSE formulas that are currently based solely on course length and foliage. I have no idea on where timg's head is at in regards to implementing something like this.
The technicality field is already part of the system, it's just a private admin field that I can adjust as needed.
Similar threads
