- Joined
- Nov 2, 2008
- Messages
- 21,995
Same course layout:
-
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 sidewinder22
- Start date
brutalbrutus
* Ace Member *
Hmm that looks familiar. At our local league night we had a good drop from one week to the next. 3weeks ago it was raining and a 54 got you a 972(10 point spread). 2weeks ago was rained out. Last week it was very windy and a 54 was a 939(11 point spread). It was much more difficult during last weeks wind round than it was during the rain round which wasn't fun but zero wind.
Last edited:
What exactly are we supposed to be looking at? Three different events (I assume) with three different pools of players aren't likely to yield exactly the same results (ratings). Doesn't matter what course is being played, that's always going to be the case. Ratings evaluate players against the field, not the course.
grodney
* Ace Member *
SSAs of 60, 59, and 56. Guess it was playing easy that 3rd event.
Considering the difference (1ish points) between the first and second round ratings on the third event, I'm guessing those are unofficial numbers. Good chance those will change with the official calculations, perhaps bringing the SSA up a little to be more in line with the other two. But even if it doesn't, so what? 3 events, 3 pools of players, it might as well be 3 different courses. The math works the same either way.
grodney
* Ace Member *
Yep. And good point about the 3rd perhaps being preliminary. And if not, still nothing of consequence.
Even less of consequence when you consider how much that 30-point aberration will affect a particular player's rating. What, 3 ratings points if he plays 10 events a year? 1.5 points if he plays 20?
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2008
- Messages
- 21,995
You are correct about the prelim ratings on the 3rd event. I disagree that it might as well be 3 different courses because it's the same course/layout. I'm just surprised the difference. I think a lot of local low rated players shooting hot rounds brought the SSA down artificially.
wjgray2
Newbie
I played an event this weekend that JohnE McCray was at and he smashed the course records during both rounds. This resulted in my rounds being rated about 25 points worse last weekend than the previous tourny at this course.
For example, I shot a 61 at this course in may for a 916 round, last weekend I shot a 60 and it was an 899 round! Ratings can be strange for sure.
For example, I shot a 61 at this course in may for a 916 round, last weekend I shot a 60 and it was an 899 round! Ratings can be strange for sure.
Ratings do not factor the hot round or give any special preference to the top rated player. Average score of the propagators will equal the average player rating of the propagators.
If you have league at the same course, same weather, for 10 weeks, with the same players, I expect the score needed for a 950 round will be lower after 10 weeks.
If you have league at the same course, same weather, for 10 weeks, with the same players, I expect the score needed for a 950 round will be lower after 10 weeks.
MichaelWebster
Par Member
If you have a good number of propagators, then one hot (or terrible round) will not have a great effect. In addition, what the top pros shoot have no more effect on round ratings than your AM3 propagator. At a C-tier two weeks ago a top rated player shot 40 pts below his rating at my home course, yet with only 20 propagators we still had the lowest SSA ever recorded on the course.
You misunderstand my point. Whether it's the same course or not, the math doesn't change. The course is irrelevant to the calculations. As far as the equation and calculation is concerned, it is three separate courses being played. The SSA wasn't brought down artificially by anything. The SSA is what it is for that round.
Ratings aren't for comparing courses (even if they're the same course), they're for comparing the players against the field.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2011
- Messages
- 187
You expect a decent amount of variation. I'd guess the same layout, same conditions, same time of year, etc., two round will still have different SSAs by 5-10 points on average. The variation should go down as the number of propagators goes up. (Roughly at the square root of the number of propagators, e.g. 9 times as many propagators = 1/3 as much variation.)
But also it's not clear these rounds were comparably. What was the weather like? What time of day were they played? Were they league or tournament? What time of year was it? (I'd guess for identical conditions, players shoot better in September than March just because they've had more recent practice.) Et cetera
But also it's not clear these rounds were comparably. What was the weather like? What time of day were they played? Were they league or tournament? What time of year was it? (I'd guess for identical conditions, players shoot better in September than March just because they've had more recent practice.) Et cetera
A-mothereffing-MEN. I don't know how some players, that have been playing for 10+ yrs don't understand this yet. We just ran an event at a course where a 55 last year was 1047 rated and a 56 this year on the same layout was 1001. Of course the guy that shot the 56 was annoyed, but he just couldn't understand (or at least didn't seem to understand or wouldn't admit that he understood it to me) that when the field is shooting on average, better this year, and the bulk of the propagators are lower rated, then the ratings are going to be lower.
Course doesn't matter except for how it affects the scores, the only thing that matters is the propagator ratings and the scores.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2008
- Messages
- 21,995
Lol...that's ^^^^ your tourney scores I posted.
I understand it's based against the field, I'm just amazed at the difference. And this just shows how ratings can be regionally affected.
which IMO is BS... ive heard people comment on videos how they were going to play local and get their ratings up or different crap. None of it seems to be standardized or fair by any means.
