Couple more 1100 rated rounds

[JR]

Järva is versatile and has lots of trees and some tight spots. There are a lot of height variations there and some places where the tee is shielded from the wind that can jet fast sideways across the fairways in the middle of the flight. Järva is a risk and reward course where you can gain with risky maneuvers but it has to be a very good shot to not be raped by the trees and bushes.

[JHern]

How would you know?

Exactly.

The performance value of a 1000-rated round will always fluctuate, both as new players with worse scores enter the pro field, and as the top players with the very highest scores percolate up to the very best scores. Also, the top touring pros typically play tournaments mostly with one another, which becomes a bit self-referential. The diffusion of ratings across the field (necessary to damp these kinds of statistical fluctuations) is not always very good, and likely very region-dependent.

[juju]

Whatever. I will always be skeptical of the ratings system.

[rusch_bag]

Whatever. I will always be skeptical of the ratings system.

Me too.

[abcd]

will and dave with two more 1100 rounds

http://www.pdga.com/tournament_results/76135

[juju]

Yup. Inflation have been proven.

#pDGAratinginflation

[AbelRod]

dumb, this should not happen

[jsun3thousand]

there was a 10 stroke difference between 2nd and 4th. mcbeth, schusterick, and feldberg shot way better than the rest of the field all week. just look at the difference between the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd cards for today's round http://www.dynamicdiscs.com/disc-golf-live-scoring/. the lowest rated of the 12 is 1024. if you watched the live coverage, the courses favored players that could throw monster hyzers accurately and hit long putts. mcbeth even said in the interview after today's round that the courses fit his strengths.

[JHern]

Ratings for the top players in a tournament are based upon how well they shoot relative to the "rest of the pack." If the "rest of the pack" shoots worse than usual relative to the top players, perhaps due to big party the night before, weather conditions that require more skill to play (hence increasing the spread in scores, with the top rounds as extreme outliers), a worse than usual pool of players (partly corrected for by leveraging against player performances in other tournaments, but relying on diffusion), etc., then it is easier to shoot a 1100-rated round.

Four 1100-rated rounds in a single tournament is definitely an extreme case, and it would be interesting to try and understand how this arises. I'm glad Chuck is here to discuss it. I think the weather conditions, and the much larger than usual pool for this tournament (more lower skilled pros), are both possible factors.

[rusch_bag]

They were saying how calm it was out the last round so I don't know about the weather for this last round. I still think it is nuts though that Dave shot two of the best rounds ever and lost.

[Chuck Kennedy]

The primary thing that's been "proven" is it's possible to design course layouts where only the elite have the capability of shooting extremely well in great conditions compared to everyone else - open course, lots of narrow fairways with treacherous OB, fast and dangerous greens and longer than "normal" par 3s only birdieable by elite arms. Both of these courses produced the same average ratings as before and from round to round. So no overall ratings inflation happening there. In other words, the majority of players did not get any ratings bonus playing here and lower level players took more of a hit than normal. Ratings overall can't inflate because whatever some players earn in higher ratings, others lose the exact same amount. That simply means the elite are continuing to get better than the rest.

Take a look and you'll see the 1000 rated round (SSA) and ratings for the same score on Fountain was within 3 points for the pro pool ~55 on both Thursday and Saturday. However, the scoring dispersion (standard deviation) was higher this year, i.e. how many players played well above or below their rating in a round. I think we're also seeing more high level touring pros taking the time to get to locations and practice. The Memorial gets more out-of-state "casual" pros than many events, especially from the northern states as a late winter getaway who don't have open, OB riddled courses like this to practice even in the summer.

[JHern]

I can see how these courses can be tough for mid-level players, but become fairly easy when you have a big arm, good aim, and know your plastic. Mid-level arms can't simply hyzer bomb every shot over the trees, which is all Will Schusterick ever has to do at Fountain Hills or Scottsdale. Players with lesser arms have to get the discs to turn over, and shape lines, in order to get anywhere close to the same distance, which puts their game at much greater risk than usual, and the trees come into play, limiting their lines.

I had been talking with some of these guys recently, and a lot of them are not happy with the level of challenge that a lot of the courses provide. After seeing the latest developments, and especially recognizing how far the youngest players can bomb in a round, there is going to have to be some changes. To compensate, courses have been lengthened and lots of OB and narrow landing areas have been introduced. But what we need is also tighter fairways owing to natural obstacles, such as huge trees and landforms. I think Milo McIver is a step in that direction, but that course is still more wide open than I'm thinking is the ideal. I want to see a course that forces Will Schusterick to take different lines, throw turnovers, and which has enough natural hazard off the fairway that OB lines aren't even needed/required. Probably has to be a course in the big redwoods, in the mountains, or similar.

...I still think it is nuts though that Dave shot two of the best rounds ever and lost.

Shooting an 1100-rated round has never been a good way to win tournaments. Shooting steady, consistent, and above your rating is how you win days-long tournaments. Hardly anyone can keep up the level of risk required for 1100-rated results over multiple rounds without getting into some kind of trouble. I watched most of the rounds at this Memorial, and I have to say that Feldberg encountered a ton of good luck along the way. He played great golf, too, but how many times did he perch on the edge of OB, or got some tree love that saved an otherwise errant throw?

[vtbuzzz]

Lets see how these guys fair up in new England territory...specifically our courses up here in vermont we have limited wide open fairways and almost no roller shots. And lots and lots of trees. I know they would complain about one of our best courses in the area cherry hill up in Montgomery very fair fairways but way yo wooded for those big arm guys.

[Chuck Kennedy]

The highest rated round ever, 1117, was thrown on a tightly wooded course, Darkside at the Blockhouse. So wooded courses in general won't prevent highly rated rounds. How you design the wooded course can make a difference.

[biscgolf]

what the darkside has in common with the arizona courses is there are a lot of holes on which big arms have a big advantage. the shots on the darkside are MUCH easier to shape if you are throwing a roc on almost all of them- my impression of the holes at the memorial is that there are a lot of them most people simply cannot reach accurately but very few that are long enough to be legit par 4 holes- same with the darkside.

it's my guess that the high rated rounds in zona are more "replicable" than skinner's 41 on the darkside.