Sunday Afternoon mini results: weeks 11-20

[ERicJ]

Originally Posted by griff

that puts hemmy's 42 at about 1056ish ?

Prolly 1060+.

[JimKelly]

Originally Posted by ERicJ

Based on Bryan's spreadsheet data...
22 rated players with an average player rating of 939.3
Average score for all those players is 52.1
That puts the rough SSA at 46, but with the SSA down that low it's more like 12 ratings points per stroke which moves the SSA closer to 47... based on the rounds logged out there.

Sunday week 19 based on Brian’s spread sheet for Sunday 28 2011 (post #4)

Take a round of tournament golf, and average all the player ratings of 800+ rated competitors with at least 8 rated rounds in their history.
Say you get an average of 950 out of them.
Next average all of their scores for that round (assume 18 holes).
Say you get an average of 53.
Then for that round a 53 would be rated 950.
For SSA's in the general range of 48-53 you add or subtract ~10 ratings points per stroke, so 54 is 940-rated, 50 is 980-rated, and 48 is 1000-rated (and thus also the SSA).

SUNDAY 28 2011 (post #4)

I only see 14 players who have a rating posted next to there name. Please look at the list for week 19 Sunday 28 2011. (post #4)
1003, 1004, 966, 982, 971, 968, 967, 975, 977, 951, 891, 898, 857, 869 = 13,279 13279/14 = 948.5

The scores next to the names of the rated players based on Brian’s data 8/28/11
44, 42, 44, 43, 48, 49, 45, 48, 49, 59, 54, 56, 55, 62 = 698
698/14 = 49.857

49.857 = 948.5 golf
50 = 949
50 - 42 = 8
8 x 10= 80 or 8 x 11 = 88
80 + 949 = 1028 or 88 + 949 = 1037

It looks like my head got blown up online… So I’m sure I goofed, some how… I showed you my math, how about you show me your math.

Originally Posted by ERicJ

Prolly 1060+.

Please show your math for the 1060 + round for Sunday 28 2011 week 19 based on Brian's data (post #4)

[ERicJ]

Originally Posted by JimKelly

I showed you my math, how about you show me your math.

If you look just at Week 19 then the course looks easier because you have (a) a smaller sample size and (b) a significant number of very good scores bringing the average down.

If you look at the averages across the entire spreadsheet you get probably a more realistic picture.

This is a good example of how SSA can fluctuate from round to round on the same course if the conditions vary or the players shoot atypical scores. Look at the number of players in Wk19 that are below their average.

[JimKelly]

Originally Posted by EricJ

If you look just at Week 19 then the course looks easier because you have (a) a smaller sample size and (b) a significant number of very good scores bringing the average down.

If you look at the averages across the entire spreadsheet you get probably a more realistic picture.

This is a good example of how SSA can fluctuate from round to round on the same course if the conditions vary or the players shoot atypical scores. Look at the number of players in Wk19 that are below their average.

I wasn't asking for examples of fluctuating rounds I asked for the formula for calculating ratings. I know what the realistic ratings are for North Side... But everyone had a really awesome day and I wanted to know how that actually affects ratings.

Originally Posted by JimKelly

PRO side of town will do that... Can somebody do the ratings on the scores?

Originally Posted by JimKelly

No, the SSA comes from certain players ratings and scores.

I just don't have the exact formula for the calculations.

Originally Posted by ERicJ

The only other significant detail I left out was: players that score over 2.5 standard deviations below their average are tossed out of the calculations. Otherwise that's basically the way the numbers are calculated. If you think differently you'll need to show your (math) work.

You questioned my math, really...

Thanks for the formula information

[frisbeeguy]

Originally Posted by FlyinBryan

Here's the entire scores since we started the Sunday mini to give more scores to make better averages.

Yo, Mr. FlyinBryan... as much as it pains me to bring this up, can you correct my score from last Sunday's mini to a 43.

Thanks, ah

[ERicJ]

Originally Posted by JimKelly

But everyone had a really awesome day and I wanted to know how that actually affects ratings.

That's a different question. The round ratings are based on the assumption that most of the time, most players will score their average game. Chuck Kennedy's famous quote: "The average of the propagator player ratings going in will equal the average of the round ratings coming out. Always."

So if you have a day where everyone has an awesome round you won't see awesome ratings out of that.

Imagine a small NCC tournament played by ten JimKelly clones all rated 975:

• If all ten clones score 50 in round 1, then a 50 is rated 975 for that round.
• If the clones eat their Wheaties at lunch and all score 42 in round 2, they'll be disappointed to find that those 42's are also rated 975 for round 2.

You can see that if everyone steps up their game the ratings won't reflect the improvement. You need a base of players that are generally shooting around their average.

• Overnight before round 3, one of the clones goes out and has a Hemi installed.
• Then in round 3, nine of the ten Jim clones shoot their average 50, but the souped up tenth clone uncorks a 42. The 50's will be rated ~966 and the 42 would get ~1054.

Originally Posted by JimKelly

You questioned my math, really...

Trust... but verify.

[JimKelly]

Originally Posted by ERicJ

So if you have a day where everyone has an awesome round you won't see awesome ratings out of that.

I have never stated that, are you making things up now? I wanted to see how the ratings were (affected) because of the awesome play.

Originally Posted by ERicJ

Trust... but verify.

I can now see how a non typical performance/awesome round can affect the round with my sweet math and your formula. Keep redirecting this is fun!

[FlyinBryan]

Originally Posted by frisbeeguy

Yo, Mr. FlyinBryan... as much as it pains me to bring this up, can you correct my score from last Sunday's mini to a 43.

Thanks, ah

Done....