Great Northwest Open - April 16th-17th - Whistler's Bend - Page 11 - Oregon Events

emmarose · #**201** April 19th, 2011, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullseye

genius.

and i second that emotion.

Bullseye · #**202** April 19th, 2011, 01:18 PM

Given my earlier.. uhh... post.

I wanted to be sure to be the first to say "Thank you Teresa for posting the results!!!!" Woohoo!

bryan_luoma · #**203** April 19th, 2011, 01:52 PM

Sunday morning (pro): 51 = 1019
Sunday noontime (am): 51 = 992
Sunday afternoon (pro): 51 = 1002

?

Sam · #**204** April 19th, 2011, 02:12 PM

Bryan, it all has to do with who is on the course at the same time. Higher rated players on the course with you will generally result in your round ratings being higher.

bryan_luoma · #**205** April 19th, 2011, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam

Bryan, it all has to do with who is on the course at the same time. Higher rated players on the course with you will generally result in your round ratings being higher.

Yeah, thanks Sam!

Here is a snippet from the PDGA FAQ:

"The scores thrown by propagators each round are used to calculate the SSA rating for a specific course layout. A propagator is a current member whose rating is over 799 and is based on at least 8 rounds. As long as there are 5 propagators playing a course layout, ratings can be calculated. The average rating of all propagators will equal the average rating they get for the round – always. If the same course layout is used more than one round, the scores from multiple rounds will be used to determine an overall SSA, as long as the individual round SSAs come out close to each other, so everyone gets the same rating for the same score on the same course. If the SSAs are significantly different, likely due to varying wind conditions, the round ratings will be calculated separately. If a propagator shoots more than 60 points below their rating, their score will not be used in the SSA calculations."

Scott · #**206** April 19th, 2011, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bryan_luoma

Yeah, thanks Sam!

Here is a snippet from the PDGA FAQ:

"The scores thrown by propagators each round are used to calculate the SSA rating for a specific course layout. A propagator is a current member whose rating is over 799 and is based on at least 8 rounds. As long as there are 5 propagators playing a course layout, ratings can be calculated. The average rating of all propagators will equal the average rating they get for the round – always. If the same course layout is used more than one round, the scores from multiple rounds will be used to determine an overall SSA, as long as the individual round SSAs come out close to each other, so everyone gets the same rating for the same score on the same course. If the SSAs are significantly different, likely due to varying wind conditions, the round ratings will be calculated separately. If a propagator shoots more than 60 points below their rating, their score will not be used in the SSA calculations."

How does the TD decide who the propagators will be?

Bullseye · #**207** April 19th, 2011, 03:10 PM

TD don't decide. That is automatically calculated when you upload the results.

Scott · #**208** April 19th, 2011, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullseye

TD don't decide. That is automatically calculated when you upload the results.

So they're randomly chosen?

Bullseye · #**209** April 19th, 2011, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott

So they're randomly chosen?

It is my understanding that all (current) players whose ratings are over 799 and have played at least 8 rounds are propagators. I don't think that quoted text is limiting the number of propagators to five, it simply says at least five.

I'm sure Chuck K. will correct me if I am wrong.

Scott · #**210** April 19th, 2011, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullseye

It is my understanding that all (current) players whose ratings are over 799 and have played at least 8 rounds are propagators. I don't think that quoted text is limiting the number of propagators to five, it simply says at least five.

I'm sure Chuck K. will correct me if I am wrong.

Ahhh... I see.

And this all happens automatically through some sort of computer majik?

Sean Phillips · #**211** April 19th, 2011, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bryan_luoma

Sunday morning (pro): 51 = 1019
Sunday noontime (am): 51 = 992
Sunday afternoon (pro): 51 = 1002

?

Sunday morning round had different basket placements than the later two.

Sam · #**212** April 19th, 2011, 08:02 PM

Computer majik, yes. So if the propagators are lower rated, higher ratings are harder to achieve, I believe.

Sam · #**213** April 19th, 2011, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean Phillips

Sunday morning round had different basket placements than the later two.

Yah... and that, too. Thanks for the reminder, Sean.

bvdisc · #**214** April 20th, 2011, 07:25 AM

Having higher rated players in your division only helps your players ratings if they don't shoot well. If you're a 980 rated player then a 1000 rated player brings more points to the table. But they'll also shoot (on average) 2 strokes better then you per round and keep the extra points they brought. A 960 player brings less points to the communal pool but will also most likely take less from it at the end of the day.

Just saying that having higher rated players in your pool will raise your scores is a misnomer.

DexterHawk · #**215** April 20th, 2011, 07:54 AM

I'd say the disadvantage isn't having lower rated players in your pool, but rather having newer players in your pool. These newer players are getting better faster and many of them expect to throw better than their rating 75 - 90% of the time. That would push ratings down because the average player in the pool would be better than their average. This phenomenon may have been further exaggerated by this being the first tournament of the year, with a bunch of folks having practiced and improved over the winter.

Flash · #**216** April 21st, 2011, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the flogging putter

I wish it was that easy but it is not. I have been talking about this for a couple of years. The actually work is the easy part. Almost as easy as asking this question. Ball rolling! Thanks flash.

Sorry about that I did not mean to call you guys out. Just wanted to express what everyone was saying over the weekend including many locals. It just seems to make sense to build some sort of french drain in that location. The high use in that area has increased the compression of the ground in the surrounding areas which has increased the spread of the seepage of water from its natural flow. I think a valid argument for a natural drain could be made especially with support from a riparian specialist. I do not know of any but we have two schools in Oregon that pump these kinds of specialists out so there has to be at least one or two who are disc golfers.

I just want to see the experience and Whistlers enhanced year around.

emmarose · #**217** April 21st, 2011, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bvdisc

...misnomer.

misconception.

thank you.

peace threw disc golf & much love,

sgt. mjr. spells-a-lot

bvdisc · #**218** April 22nd, 2011, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DexterHawk

I'd say the disadvantage isn't having lower rated players in your pool, but rather having newer players in your pool. These newer players are getting better faster and many of them expect to throw better than their rating 75 - 90% of the time. That would push ratings down because the average player in the pool would be better than their average. This phenomenon may have been further exaggerated by this being the first tournament of the year, with a bunch of folks having practiced and improved over the winter.

True.

I'll have to get you to come out to play something in the Boulder area sometime.