ratings cheat

[REDFIVE]

So I have been given some crap for my rating. I haven't been able to play many tourneys so I don't have many rated rounds. I lost 7 rounds this update and added only 3 for a total of 10 rounds. My rating is 1003 which I think is about right, anything from 995 to 1000 plus or minus. I am curious what others think is a base number of rounds to consider a rating legit, or does it matter?

[REDFIVE]

With 40 views and no comments I will assume it doesn't matter or nobody really cares. Either way.

[Bullseye]

Originally Posted by REDFIVE

So I have been given some crap for my rating. I haven't been able to play many tourneys so I don't have many rated rounds. I lost 7 rounds this update and added only 3 for a total of 10 rounds. My rating is 1003 which I think is about right, anything from 995 to 1000 plus or minus. I am curious what others think is a base number of rounds to consider a rating legit, or does it matter?

I'm of the opinion that a rating isn't entirely accurate until a player has at least 10-15 rounds in the bank. This will weed out the folks who ripped it up in their first tourney, but might not be able to maintain that level of performance.

You're a slightly different case though. Much like Brody Miller & Tim Skellenger, you're obviously a good player who just doesn't play too many sanctioned tourneys. Your rating is probably pretty accurate (+5/-5 points either way) .

You could solve this problem fairly easily. Play more sanctioned events and take your place among Washington's best.

[Toby Puttzinski]

Overrated.... overrated.... overrated!!

[Ol' Bob]

While I usually pass over the PDGA threads completely, your title made me take a peek. Not a huge scandal for someone not rated. Made me look, anyway.

[olydiscgolf]

The number of rated rounds needed to get an accurate rating is directly affected by the consistency of the golfer. If there's a huge gap between your low rounds and your high rounds, then 10-15 rounds (4-5 tourneys worth) is probably enough.

I was just reading an old article (1990) by Chuck Kennedy, he stated 3 rounds are sufficient to determin handicap for new players who are improving quickly. I think that it would hold true of rating as well.

[REDFIVE]

Originally Posted by Toby Puttzinski

Overrated.... overrated.... overrated!!

$20 a stroke?

[Bullseye]

Originally Posted by olydiscgolf

The number of rated rounds needed to get an accurate rating is directly affected by the consistency of the golfer. If there's a huge gap between your low rounds and your high rounds, then 10-15 rounds (4-5 tourneys worth) is probably enough.

I was just reading an old article (1990) by Chuck Kennedy, he stated 3 rounds are sufficient to determin handicap for new players who are improving quickly. I think that it would hold true of rating as well.

I disagree (on the ratings part anyway) based on what I have actually seen over the years. What I have seen is many people joining the PDGA to play at their "home course" tourney and as a general rule they tend to play well at their home course. This gives them well rated rounds which get double weighted by the PDGA, but as time progresses their rating naturally drops down to the level of their consistent play.

[Chuck Kennedy]

FYI - recent rounds do not get double weighted until the player has at least 8. If a player only plays their home course, which many do, and they shoot better on their home course as expected, their rating is still valid since it reflects how well they do on the only course(s) they play in competition each year. They are only potentially over-rated when they travel. Of course this helps everyone else in the tournament since that player indirectly provides rating points to the field if they shoot worse than their "homey" rating.

[Bullseye]

Originally Posted by Chuck Kennedy

FYI - recent rounds do not get double weighted until the player has at least 8. If a player only plays their home course, which many do, and they shoot better on their home course as expected, their rating is still valid since it reflects how well they do on the only course(s) they play in competition each year. They are only potentially over-rated when they travel. Of course this helps everyone else in the tournament since that player indirectly provides rating points to the field if they shoot worse than their "homey" rating.

It is nice to know early rounds are not double-weighted.

[sillybizz]

Originally Posted by REDFIVE

$20 a stroke?

Don't do it Toby, the only I can pay him back is if I win the world series of poker, lol.

[gwillim]

Originally Posted by Chuck Kennedy

FYI - recent rounds do not get double weighted until the player has at least 8. If a player only plays their home course, which many do, and they shoot better on their home course as expected, their rating is still valid since it reflects how well they do on the only course(s) they play in competition each year. They are only potentially over-rated when they travel. Of course this helps everyone else in the tournament since that player indirectly provides rating points to the field if they shoot worse than their "homey" rating.

Heh hehe...Homey Rating...hehe.

I just found out a new way to make fun of ppl

[Snooskie Longhorn]

Looks like REDFIVE didn't have any PDGA tournaments in 2007 on record. Was that about the time you moved from Advanced to Open? What was your rating in 2004 vs. today, i.e. how much did it go up?

[DexterHawk]

Only true ratings cheat is when someone DNF's a round that they are doing bad in. I think the PDGA needs a new rule... If you're injured the TD can DNF you... If you just quit you get par plus four on the rest of the holes and a rating for your round... Sure it will probably get dropped, but if you have enough it won't and it will show up on your record.

Just an idea... Someo e tell me why I'm wrong

[Scott]

Originally Posted by DexterHawk

Only true ratings cheat is when someone DNF's a round that they are doing bad in. I think the PDGA needs a new rule... If you're injured the TD can DNF you... If you just quit you get par plus four on the rest of the holes and a rating for your round... Sure it will probably get dropped, but if you have enough it won't and it will show up on your record.

Just an idea... Someo e tell me why I'm wrong

I don't think we should put TDs in the position of having to determine whether or not an injury is legit.

IMO it is a victim-less crime. The only people these baggers are screwing over are themselves.

[Chuck Kennedy]

Remember that the functional reason for ratings is to separate ams into the proper skill division for competition. Retaining bad round ratings versus a DNF would just drag better players into a lower division and actually reward them for bad behavior. Likewise, it would encourage even more players to bag their last round if they were out of it in an event knowing that they could pull down their rating.

[Chuck Kennedy]

BTW, the PDGA has contacted players showing a pattern of DNFs. Future behavior like that will subject them to review by the PDGA Disciplinary Committee. The manufacturers who do sponsorships also are aware of the DNF issue and look closely at a player's DNF history to see if their rating might be artificially inflated. They also want to know if a potential sponsored player is a simply a good sports(wo)man.

[REDFIVE]

Originally Posted by Snooskie Longhorn

Looks like REDFIVE didn't have any PDGA tournaments in 2007 on record. Was that about the time you moved from Advanced to Open? What was your rating in 2004 vs. today, i.e. how much did it go up?

2004- 874 to 886 am2
2005- 941 to 945 am2/adv
2006- 965 adv
2007- 965 adv/open
2008- 987 to 986 open
2009- 995 to 1003 open

[Tim]

Damn Chris, can you give me the secret ingredients to the Elixir of 2005?

[NWDiscer]

Originally Posted by Tim

Damn Chris, can you give me the secret ingredients to the Elixir of 2005?

making putts from 20'-40'??