• 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)

The 2012 Amateur Championships at Bowling Green

Emailed someone at PDGA about ratings.

I sent an email to the PDGA regarding when the ratings might be corrected and this is the response I got:

The current platform that does the unofficial ratings can't calculate them
properly once the pools are merged as it can no longer tell which players
played which course on which day. This is a known issue that affects the
few events that are so large that they require multiple pools across
divisions. Hopefully a planned future re-write of the platform will correct
this.

When the next ratings update is done on May 15th, they will be corrected and
official.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

So I guess we have to wait until May 15th. :mad:
 
i dont remember the ratings being so screwed up last year for the same tournament, with about the same number of players playing in the same number of pools but maybe they were....
 
i dont remember the ratings being so screwed up last year for the same tournament, with about the same number of players playing in the same number of pools but maybe they were....

I thought the same thing but am not sure one way or the other if this happened last year. Or maybe there was not such a long period of time between the end of the tournament and the next ratings update.
 
The unofficial ratings have usually been incorrect every year because the effort isn't made to do what's necessary to set up all of the pool and division assignments properly. Worlds is the only other event with pools and course assignments as complicated as BG. But the PDGA Worlds team has been trained over the years to set up the system to produce appropriate unofficial ratings.
 
The 'official' part I have no doubt . . . anyone else retaining skepticism about the 'corrected' part? :D

The PDGA does a great job with this, they use a number of mathmatical and statistical models to determine if the scoring is appropriate...including comparing similar divisions on different days on the same course. It just stinks until May 15th.
 
The unofficial ratings have usually been incorrect every year because the effort isn't made to do what's necessary to set up all of the pool and division assignments properly. Worlds is the only other event with pools and course assignments as complicated as BG. But the PDGA Worlds team has been trained over the years to set up the system to produce appropriate unofficial ratings.

i certainly understand where there could be issues but since I believe all divisions other than rec played the same 4 courses in the same pools as last year, it shouldnt of been so difficult to get this straight. I dont remember ever seeing ratings for the final 9 before (didnt even know a 9 hole round could be rated) so I suppose that may have thrown a wrench in the gears...
 
The trouble comes with having people in the same division playing two different courses during the same round. It's true every year for MA1, MA2, & MA3.

On PDGA.com, the TD must first set up the course layouts - for BG, that would be the nine different courses. Then, the TD must go into each round and specify which layout each division is playing that round. When members of the same division play two different layouts during the same round it's going to cause problems. But evidently there is a solution:

The unofficial ratings have usually been incorrect every year because the effort isn't made to do what's necessary to set up all of the pool and division assignments properly. Worlds is the only other event with pools and course assignments as complicated as BG. But the PDGA Worlds team has been trained over the years to set up the system to produce appropriate unofficial ratings.

Perhaps the folks at Worlds could give HB a call or vice-versa . . .
 
I dont remember ever seeing ratings for the final 9 before (didnt even know a 9 hole round could be rated) so I suppose that may have thrown a wrench in the gears...

Occasionally final 9's will get an unofficial rating but they never become official. The PDGA's minimum requirement for a rated round is 13 holes. In short, final 9 performances never count towards a players rating.
 
Occasionally final 9's will get an unofficial rating but they never become official. The PDGA's minimum requirement for a rated round is 13 holes. In short, final 9 performances never count towards a players rating.

They deserve a rating though. I followed the lead card of the advanced group through the course and it looked like a beast! The players made it look easy though. Kyle Chapman (I think that was his name, the guy who ended up winning) birdied the first three holes to my amazement. Actually, he f-ing parked all three drives!!
 
They deserve a rating though. I followed the lead card of the advanced group through the course and it looked like a beast! The players made it look easy though. Kyle Chapman (I think that was his name, the guy who ended up winning) birdied the first three holes to my amazement. Actually, he f-ing parked all three drives!!

Believe me I wish they did too. My final 9 track record is pretty stellar. One was unofficially 1043 rated. But it makes alot of sense why they arent. Its not like a regular round of golf. Take my case for instance. I came into that final 9 at BG last year tied for the bottom spot, 7th or 8th I believe. I had absolutely nothing to lose. The worst I could do was stay in the same place I already was. So I was aggressive and played balls out and it payed off. I jumped to 4th. Playing a round with no consequences in regards to finish or ratings is not your average round of golf, which imo should exclude them from ratings calculations. However, it does make for some exciting golf!
 
I'm pretty sure that Big Dog came up from Augusta to do the scoring.

Agreed, but it seems his presence didn't make much of a difference on the unofficial ratings.

Apologies if I'm sounding snarky towards HB. I don't mean to. I have great respect and admiration for all of his hard work. I've been a TD and know how difficult it can be to get everything right. I don't have any suggestions for a solution either. I have given it a lot of thought, but can't figure out how it can be done with the PDGA's current software. So all I'm saying is that if this is true:

the PDGA Worlds team has been trained over the years to set up the system to produce appropriate unofficial ratings.

. . . then that means it is possible and someone with access to the BG Ams TD site should find out how it's done.
 
Andrew was the official scorer, inputting each round, and working on pool set up and etc. prior and post event. This allowes me to handle the other needs of the event from food to flymart to easter egg hunts that arise.
Hopefully Chuck will "train" him if needed. I have used the PDGA (Dave) for this task for the last few years making scoring updates on line quicker after each round. Andrew was a great addition to the staff and thanks to the PDGA for sending him up (we covered his hotel). I am sure in time he and the "system" will be able to handle large events with out devine or Chuck's intervention.
 
is the pdga still having problems fixing the ratings? i noticed BG isnt listed under my profile for the upcoming update :(
 
The official scores for all of the events to be included in the upcoming ratings update will be posted by this Friday night.
 
Top