Sanctioned Singles League Play for Ratings

[Steven Jacobs]

PDGA Sanctioned Leagues Available This March 2012

The PDGA will be providing the resources for players to earn PDGA rated rounds playing in their hometown weekly leagues. If you already have leagues, you'll be able to continue running them pretty much how you've been running them. The PDGA will simply provide the ratings service for your league players.

"Okay, so how much this is going to cost?"  All players will pay $1 per week. There's no extra fee for nonmembers. League Directors keep half (50 cents) for admin costs, final standings payouts, course improvements, charities, etc and the PDGA gets the other half (50 cents). We feel splitting the fees with the League Director is essential to help strengthen local disc golf clubs and help with course maintenance to keep our courses looking nice.

League Directors will determine your weekly league entry fee. If you want to play for $2, $5, $20, or FREE that's up to your league. The PDGA league sanctioning fee will be just $25 for a 12-week league. The PDGA is not going to track payouts for leagues. It's up to the League Directors how they wish to go about handling their leagues (meaning Ams can accept cash without losing Am status).

The March 2012 roll out will be the first phase of the program. We are requesting that all events be standard singles play until we get the system established. Once we get everything working smoothly we hope to provide the option for other formats including handicapped, global ratings based, team and even doubles leagues. This may take some time to develop all of these formats. But once we get more players getting rated rounds then it will be much easier to establish the parameters for how these other formats will work. Plus the IT side of things will need a little time to incorporate handling the different formats.

If you want to ask questions about the PDGA league please feel free to visit the PDGA DISCussion Boards where I will be answering questions or email me directly at Kmccoy@PDGA.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is Discontinuum interested in running a weekly league like this?  What would be the best day of the week to have it?  What course would it take place on?

[pdga#7648]

I think this is pretty neat. The PFC is going to have this during leagues.

[tacimala]

I would enjoy this

[airspuds]

bruce > how many side games can you think of ?

[Chainmeister]

DISContinuum has always run 2 tier doubles as long as I have been around.  The PDGA concept would work well with a singles tags league.  If we want to do it with a payout a straight singles league may not work as I would not play a singles league with Brett.  I like Brett but don't feel a need to donate money to him each week.  If there was no payout or a minimal payout I would be happy to lose to Brett and would grade myself based on how close I came to his score. Or, we could do a handicap league like Fox Valley does.  We could do payouts based on the handicaps but could report raw scores for ratings.
Frankly, I think a singles/ratings league may be a good thing for the club.  

The only question I have would be whether a regular rated league would detract from the local tournament scene.  Would this take players from IOS, or Skyline, or Joliet or Red Roc or any of our neighbors?  Is that a good or bad thing?

[Dan Michler]

I'm not a huge fan of this.  To me the ratings are an indication of how well you perform in tournament golf.  Assuming they are weighing league rounds equally to tournament rounds, many players who participate in this are going to have their rating based largely on their performance at leagues.  Leagues are almost always on your home course, where most players are going to perform at a level that is above their actual skill level.  I think this has the potential to make the ratings something different than they currently are.  I'd rather it be maintained as a pure measure of your performance in PDGA sanctioned tournament golf.

[pdga#7648]

I agree Dan. ratings will be fabricated by playing at home courses. I could raise my rating to the 980 range playing nothing but leagues at Bradley Park in no time at all. will I? no. I may play leagues here and there, but I pay my dues to the PDGA each year to play tournaments. My rating is reflected by how I play different courses in a tourny format. I would want to reach the 970 level by playing all over the place, not just the easier courses out my back door.  I think there will be even more 1000 rated players with this new format? true 1000 rated players? not at all.

It will be good for new players though I think. Getting them a rating may influence them to join the PDGA and start playing tournaments? we have several league members that only play leagues, and never travel. but if they can establish a rating in a league, that might incourage them to try tournament golf. and we all know we need more tournament players. I would like to see new aces at tournys, other than playing the same people week after week like we do now.

[tjdub26936]

Leagues are almost always on your home course, where most players are going to perform at a level that is above their actual skill level.  I think this has the potential to make the ratings something different than they currently are.

I know Dan didn't use the term "rating inflation", but here's Chuck Kennedy's response to that concern:

"Ratings cannot inflate. Ever. There are never more ratings points available than the the average rating of the propagators playing. All that happens if everyone plays better is the SSA of the course that round will be lower than it might be in tournament play on a weekend. But that does not inflate ratings."

[CEValkyrie]

I think the positive side of this is that non PDGA members can get exposed a player rating in a non formal setting of league. I'm not sure how much a league rating will increase the # of PDGA members over the course of the year. I think it's worth a shot though.

[stpitner]

I would love to try this out with a handicap league.  The only part I don't like is the $25 sanctioning for a 12-week league.  If you only get to keep 50 cents a player, you need 50 players to show up before you break even on that.  Ideally you would have a league that averages at least 25 guys, but 10 is more likely the number.  That's 5 weeks before you break even on expenses.  I would rather see it be based on your average attendance.  If you average 10 people, then charge me $10 at the end of the league.  If I average 25, charge me $25, max at say... $40 or something.

I REALLY like the no fee for non-members.  That's a great way to introduce them to the PDGA, and it's a great way to get the local player to see how they would fit in for an upcoming sanctioned tournament.

As far as elevated ratings, I just see the SSA getting watered down, and then the tournament ratings might be a little weaker than expected - so that would then get the SSA to go back up, and it's a back and forth affect.  I could see local rounds getting rated maybe 5-10 higher than tournament ratings, which isn't that great.  But.... I'd have to see it before I believe it either way.

[pdga#7648]

hang on a second. don't you have to be a current PDGA member to get ratings for leagues? if so, some of the PFC members will have to renew or sign up to even get the ratings.

[Chainmeister]

I think you don't need to be a PDGA member to play in the league.  Your round ratings will still show in the reports but your cumulative rating will not be calculated.   Ratings will not inflate.  However, if everybody is playing their "home" course the course will have an artifically low SSA.  For example, Bevier is usually about 900 for an even  par round. I suspect that if leagues were held there and everybody started getting the home course mojo the scores would lower and even par would sink lower and lower into the 800's over time.  Over a 12 week league it is conceivable that the same score in week one may be 20-30 points lower rated by week twelve if everybody simply starts shooting better at that same course. Playing some alternative tees could mix things up and minimize the home field advantage. 

Scott, just wondering- would you have any concern that regularly rated local leagues would lower the participation of some players in the local tournaments?

One positive aspect of the rated rounds would be to make league play more like tournament play. No more flipping over your driver or casual application of the rules.  I'm sure Mike K wold like that. 

[Dan Michler]

I know Dan didn't use the term "rating inflation", but here's Chuck Kennedy's response to that concern:

"Ratings cannot inflate. Ever. There are never more ratings points available than the the average rating of the propagators playing. All that happens if everyone plays better is the SSA of the course that round will be lower than it might be in tournament play on a weekend. But that does not inflate ratings."

Here is how I would counter Chuck's point.  Many recreational-type players do not travel to other courses or play many tournaments.  They often are quite capable to make the shots on their home course, but struggle mightily on others.  I remember experiencing this myself as a new player.  I was probably a 950 player at Sinnissippi, but about a 890 player when I'd travel to Joliet.  This summar I went on a trip to MN with Stan.  I was beating him by alot more on those courses than I would at the local courses, which I believe to be because Stan isn't used to playing courses outside of Lake County.  I agree with Doug, that he is probably also a better player in Peoria than he is when he travels, but not to the same extent because he's a much more experienced player who is used to making shots on all types of courses.

With this system you could have non-tournament players signing up for the PDGA to track their ratings at the league events.  Their rating will absolutley be inflated because their RELATIVE skill level compared to the field is better at their home course than elsewhere, and also because a higher percentage of their rated rounds will come from their home course.  And when they do travel to a tournament, it will cause more ratings inflation because the average rating of the propagators will then be higher.  In this case, it will cause the inflation of the experienced player's rating, which will counter the long-held complaint of amateurs that the ratings on the Am day are always lower than the Pro day, caused by the large number of lower rated players who are rapidly improving.

That being said, I don't think there are many singles leagues, and I wouldn't expect that to change.  So, I doubt the impact will be high, and perhaps it will draw in new players as Brett said, which is a good thing.

[Chainmeister]

I know Dan didn't use the term "rating inflation", but here's Chuck Kennedy's response to that concern:

"Ratings cannot inflate. Ever. There are never more ratings points available than the the average rating of the propagators playing. All that happens if everyone plays better is the SSA of the course that round will be lower than it might be in tournament play on a weekend. But that does not inflate ratings."

Here is how I would counter Chuck's point.  Many recreational-type players do not travel to other courses or play many tournaments.  They often are quite capable to make the shots on their home course, but struggle mightily on others.  I remember experiencing this myself as a new player.  I was probably a 950 player at Sinnissippi, but about a 890 player when I'd travel to Joliet.  This summar I went on a trip to MN with Stan.  I was beating him by alot more on those courses than I would at the local courses, which I believe to be because Stan isn't used to playing courses outside of Lake County.  I agree with Doug, that he is probably also a better player in Peoria than he is when he travels, but not to the same extent because he's a much more experienced player who is used to making shots on all types of courses.

With this system you could have non-tournament players signing up for the PDGA to track their ratings at the league events.  Their rating will absolutley be inflated because their RELATIVE skill level compared to the field is better at their home course than elsewhere, and also because a higher percentage of their rated rounds will come from their home course.  And when they do travel to a tournament, it will cause more ratings inflation because the average rating of the propagators will then be higher.  In this case, it will cause the inflation of the experienced player's rating, which will counter the long-held complaint of amateurs that the ratings on the Am day are always lower than the Pro day, caused by the large number of lower rated players who are rapidly improving.

That being said, I don't think there are many singles leagues, and I wouldn't expect that to change.  So, I doubt the impact will be high, and perhaps it will draw in new players as Brett said, which is a good thing.

Good points. However, I figure the non PDGA rec casuals will not be ratings propogators at league play as they are not PDGA members with ratings over 800.  The local who can shoot 950 at Fairfield but would hit every tree at Lemon Lake will not have his score considered when ratings are determined.  Once they join PDGA their fluctuant play will effect raitings as they will tend to shoot with 100 pt spreads from round to round.  You correctly point out that rapidly improving players effect ratings.  This would be the case with Stan or Steven or the Jacksons a couple years ago.  It would not be the case with a non PDGA player.   I think your point about Doug would apply equally to lower rated players as well.  Younger players will likely get better if they keep playing.  There are a lot of players who are still lower rated but have lots of experience. We shoot pretty much the same crappy score most rounds with not much more standard deviation than someone like you or Doug.  I don't mind playing tournaments blind because I will pretty much play my game whether its at Bevier or a new course.

[Sr.]

It's the horse chasing the sugar cube trick. Casual players at leagues will get a taste of ratings and like it. I think the PDGA is gambling on more new members coming from this.

[Bruce Brakel]

break even on expenses.

Break even on expenses?  Are you serious?  Sell three friebees! 

I think the effect on ratings will be minimal because almost everyone will have the same home course effect going for them.  But if there is a measurable ratings effect, Chuck will tweak the ratings process.  It would take about two years for any ratings effect to appear, and then it would require a thorough analysis of player-by-player results at large travel tournaments like Worlds, Bowling Green and the Memorial.  If there is a ratings effect, it will probably be like the lower am pool effect, where Chuck will deny it for five years, and then put the juice in [or take it out] for a year where it is needed, and then declare the problem solved!   

Ever since Brett and Jim ran the Safari Series way back when Brett was amateur, I've thought this would be a cool idea, PDGA ratings and points for league play.  I am curious if this is a Pro 2 - R tier - 150 Class - Super Class kind of idea that lasts a year [or two] and is never seen again, or a trophy only - AM4 - cashless pre reg kind of idea that catches on in some places and has some legs.  I would play a PDGA league if the league entry was kept cheap like most leagues and I could fit it in my schedule and it was some kind of fair format, like the main five r-PDGA divisions, or pro-am shoot against rating, or whatever. 

Here: let's google-alert this for Chuck to respond.

Chuck Kennedy disc golf Chuck Kennedy.