The scoring system debate (again)

Does what it says on the tin!
bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by bruce » Fri Oct 28, 2011 1:53 pm

Jester wrote:
bruce wrote:I'm good to you people, and don't you forget it. Spreadsheet now includes the top 30 Ams
Any reason why the tabs no longer appear at the foot of the sheet?
They do when I look at it... :?:
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

Hopper
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 11:50 am
Location: Harwich

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by Hopper » Sat Oct 29, 2011 9:03 am

superb spreadsheet, bruce, does show positions this year would not have changed much whatever scoring system was applied. I personally like the present scoring system, it didn't bring a close finish in the ams this year as phil was a worthy run away winner, however last year good finale at Croydon with three in contention for am crown on last event last year and year before that at Burnlaw (chris & James, I think)? Perhaps make it best 5 or 6 events to encourage long trips but I beleive most regular players attend what they can and can afford to now. Would the Croydon lads have gone to Burnlaw for 40 ish points as a win, I suspect so, just for the weekend and garys company. Think Rich said if you can only make 4 or 5 a year you have to pick your events, some are tied by availability others by favorite courses, costs, company or new courses which you haven't played. I would imagine only a minimum would be on points on offer and then only applying to the top five in each group.

User avatar
West
Posts: 2624
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:51 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by West » Sat Oct 29, 2011 1:07 pm

The thing with F1 scoring is in F1 yes the top 10 race finishers might be the only ones to score however any team could have a reliability failure or an accident etc and not be able to finish and hence the lower teams can score points, but anyone could score points which is fine; and could work for us.

However as its a team game and has a defined limited entry as well it can't apply to the UK disc golf tour. Also coming 10th out of 12 teams, which Team Lotus are doing this year, is very important as they get a shed load of cash for the following season; how would this apply to us?

I'm not really sure what I'm trying to say but I think its a valid thought when looking at scoring points ...
"West"
PDGA: #8823
BDGA: #250
Twitter: @WestDiscGolf
BDGA DoC 2007 - 2011

User avatar
West
Posts: 2624
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:51 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by West » Sat Oct 29, 2011 1:11 pm

Random thought, how does the PGA score tour events?! I've had a quick search but can't find details.
"West"
PDGA: #8823
BDGA: #250
Twitter: @WestDiscGolf
BDGA DoC 2007 - 2011

dunc
Posts: 325
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 3:32 pm
Location: Rugby

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by dunc » Sat Oct 29, 2011 1:39 pm

I wouldn't recomend losing the top four results rule in all scoring systems, I just think the F1 scoring system particularly lends itself to more of a full race

I do agree with Jester, we need to encourage more people to join the sport and play in events not force the few players we have to play in more. However, I do think we should try and reward the players more that do make more events, the current system does not do this. - Hopefully that doesn't sound like too much of a contradiction!

We do need to be careful, my thoughts were that if the F1 system was set right that it wouldn't force the top people in contention to play more as four wins and a second place would be pretty unbeatable. But it might reward people who make more events..... although if Del makes all 8 events it would be pretty impossible for somene to beat him unless they also made all 8 events... which is why I thought maybe the best 6 as most of the people in contention do make 5-6 events

and Westy... I'm not sure I understand your point at all!?? It's just a simple points system that allocates points to players who finish from 1st to 15th..... similar to the F! drivers championship. I'm not talking about having a second Constructors championship running alongside it....
The Treasurerrer..... hic!

PDGA #8822
BDGA #154

Paul Holden
Posts: 578
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 10:34 pm
Location: York

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by Paul Holden » Sat Oct 29, 2011 2:40 pm

dunc wrote:However, I do think we should try and reward the players more that do make more events, the current system does not do this.
Not entirely true. By allowing best 4 results it encourages players who are less consistent to attend more than 4 events. I hold my hand up here and I am pretty sure it's not a positive of the current system :)
Paul Holden
BDGA No. 307
PDGA No. 34662

User avatar
West
Posts: 2624
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:51 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by West » Sun Oct 30, 2011 10:26 am

Random idea number x (where x is greater than 6)

To keep with the idea of everyone scores some points and keep with benefiting attendance (hence beat more people get more points) why not keep with the current system, but instead of always top person gets 100 points the top value is calculated by the number of players (per division) and then keeps with the number of players/gap calculation.

Then you could also add in some additional points for top 5?

Thoughts?
"West"
PDGA: #8823
BDGA: #250
Twitter: @WestDiscGolf
BDGA DoC 2007 - 2011

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by bruce » Mon Oct 31, 2011 9:42 am

West wrote:Random idea number x (where x is greater than 6)

To keep with the idea of everyone scores some points and keep with benefiting attendance (hence beat more people get more points) why not keep with the current system, but instead of always top person gets 100 points the top value is calculated by the number of players (per division) and then keeps with the number of players/gap calculation.

Then you could also add in some additional points for top 5?

Thoughts?
Not sure I see how this differs from the PDGA or Top 3 modifications in the spreadsheet?
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

ultiali
Posts: 179
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 9:35 am

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by ultiali » Mon Oct 31, 2011 12:59 pm

So what do you think Bruce?

User avatar
West
Posts: 2624
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:51 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by West » Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:31 pm

The only difference I can think of is that the PDGA scoring system doesn't allocate scores for people who DNF where as we do ...
"West"
PDGA: #8823
BDGA: #250
Twitter: @WestDiscGolf
BDGA DoC 2007 - 2011

User avatar
Jester
Posts: 1782
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:10 am

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by Jester » Mon Oct 31, 2011 3:26 pm

In reviewing all the options in the spread sheet (thanks for assembling, Bruce), I lean towards the ‘5 points for turning up, plus an additional 5 points for every player beat’ with a bonus (50, 25 & 10) for the top 3. Thoughts as to why:

1. Down to last place everyone gets points.
Benefit: everyone gets something for coming, everyone gets their name in Power/Amstats, there’s always something to play for.

2. The bonus for finishing top 3 rewards those players at a higher rate than 4th place down.
Benefit: A high place is really worth striving for, adds an extra element of tension at the top, means overall ties in Power/Amstats will be less statistically likely than a system without bonus’.

3. Beating more players nets more points than beating fewer players.
Benefit: Players are rewarded more for placing ahead of a larger group of players than a smaller group. In all but exceptional circumstances the former is always harder than the latter so the system is fairer.


A good side effect of this system: as many players will be attracted to events with a good turnout, I can see TD crews creating a positive circle by getting players to register early and then publicising this info to attract others

Should DNFs be used when calculating points for an event? I don’t think they should. A DNF should get zero and not place in the results. Players should not be rewarded for ‘beating’ a DNF as they haven’t beaten them, the DNF just dropped out. Not using DNFs in points calculation gives the points won integrity and stops a low-attended event generating high points by having a bunch of players complete just one round or even just part of one round.
Jester
BDGA #128
PDGA #8817
------------------------------------------------------
Croydon DGC: Hyzer Cup Champions 08/09, 13/14

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by bruce » Mon Oct 31, 2011 3:40 pm

Well the first thing to note is that there is a breadth of opinion, and as such no real 'right' answer. Chris makes a great point that different people attend particular events for a wide variety of reasons, only some of which we have any control over. Fundamentally we go to tournaments for recreation, and the competition is a structure that in my view should lie over the top of that without impacting on the recreational element any more than it has to.

Some general thoughts:
All other things being equal, if one system encourages/rewards attendance at small events and one discourages, I'd pick the encouraging one.
All systems break at the extreme ends of the scales.
We have limited resources to implement/process stuff, the more complex it is, the longer it will take.
I don't feel DNFs should count towards or receive points. Neither should the JJ division playing from arbitrary tees.

Open
11 of the top 16 Open played 5 events or more, but 3 of the other 5 didn't even get their 4 in (average 5.2). So you could conceivably make a case for playing best 5 events as the majority already do, but having the option to drop one or more events also works as a reward for those that travel. Don't think we need to do a lot to encourage Open players to attend more events, they are already committed to the Tour.

However other than Mull the quality of attendees was generally good, better than half the T16 attended every event. On that basis it does seem rather arbitrary to have second place vary between 90 and 95 points. The 5ppp system looks like a good fit to me, only the last 3 at Croydon would have missed out on points, and they DNF'd anyway.

Am
Only half the Am T16 played 5+, and only 10 from the T30 (ave 4.75 & 4.1, respectively). Can't see any real case for changing the number of counting events here.

There is definitely a higher degree of volatility in the Am results, some events have the same number Am and Open, some have 2 or 3 times the Ams, there are players finishing variously 1st & 15th, 2nd & 20th at different events. Also a large contingent of Int Ams turning up can suddenly boost the ratings of all the Adv Ams, even though there is no direct competition. That's a natural feature of having no lower rating limit on the division, unlike the 920 break in Open.

A fixed point system would solve this, but at the cost of a large contingent at certain events getting no points. 5ppp would for example have given Paul Holden/Neil Martin sharing the last place 5 points at Croydon (instead of nearly 60), and nothing for the remaining 8 Advs or 15 Ints. A possible solution would be a staggered system whereby if <30 players enter Am, it's 5ppp, 30+ could use 2.5ppp. That system would have seen only the last 8 at Spring Fling, last 7 at Cyclone and last 5 at Equinox miss out on points. But then you just run into the same issue of some second places being worth more than others...
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by bruce » Mon Oct 31, 2011 4:02 pm

Jester also makes a good case and I agree that system is the most effective method of assigning a value to the individual event performance of those described. It's probably a very good option for the Open division but I think my point about the possibility of an influx of Int Ams/rookies artificially boosting the overall points might sway me against it in the Am case.
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

User avatar
Jester
Posts: 1782
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:10 am

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by Jester » Mon Oct 31, 2011 4:14 pm

bruce wrote:Jester also makes a good case and I agree that system is the most effective method of assigning a value to the individual event performance of those described. It's probably a very good option for the Open division but I think my point about the possibility of an influx of Int Ams/rookies artificially boosting the overall points might sway me against it in the Am case.
Ignoring for a moment any extra work it would create, would having adv amstats and int amstats solve the problem?
Jester
BDGA #128
PDGA #8817
------------------------------------------------------
Croydon DGC: Hyzer Cup Champions 08/09, 13/14

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by bruce » Mon Oct 31, 2011 4:44 pm

Jester wrote:Ignoring for a moment any extra work it would create, would having adv amstats and int amstats solve the problem?
You'd have to close the Adv Am division at season start like we do in Open and leave Int Am to their own season long competition, but I think the existing system where folks get a short stint in Int then progress upwards is more suited to a bunch of players who are on the steeper end of the learning curve.

In terms of sorting out the top of Adv Am, yes it would probably solve the problem (roughly 10-30 Adv Ams across the events). Int Am would be just about impossible to score though as all the attendance volatility is there, I can't see how you'd have any effective scoring system.

If you can't effectively rank them over a season why bother? Just go with a top 20 or so Am scoring model and give them something to aim for getting into instead maybe? I'd like to hear from a few of the ex and current Int Ams on this, did you/do you pay any attention to the AmStats you pick up?
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

User avatar
rhatton1
Posts: 1692
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by rhatton1 » Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:15 pm

When I was playing int am, amstats didn't really bother me at all. I wasn't looking at an overall tour position as it seemed a bit pointless - I didn't really feel like I was competing with the advanced ams.

I have had one full season at adv. am now and am definitely interested in amstats as I am now competitive with the group and this is a worthwhile marker - before it didn't really make any difference if I was 21st or 22nd, what mattered was getting into finals at the int am level.

I like Jesters suggestion - it seems to be fairer all round and appears to answer most problems.
www.discgolfuk.com
richard@discgolfuk.com
Home of the Midlands One Day Series
Talk to us about courses!

User avatar
Neil M
Posts: 157
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:48 pm
Location: Eastbourne

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by Neil M » Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:28 pm

Having played most of the season at Int. Am and moving up towards the end I don't think AMstats have been much of a consideration. I have been more interested in getting my rating up. I have looked at Amstats but the rating has been my priority in judging my progress (or in the case of QP my regression!). If I get to a point where I am competing at the top end of Adv Am then Amstats will become of greater interest but until then rating will remain my priority.
BDGA: 362
PDGA: 46974

User avatar
West
Posts: 2624
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:51 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by West » Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:43 pm

How about current system as is with the following changes ...

Powerstats - Open players; cut off at the beginning of the season at PDGA rating 920 (and runs as current)
Amstats - Advanced Amateur players only; only players playing in the Advanced Amateur division get counted.

Nothing - Intermediate Amateur division; purely event by event bragging rights only. If you want to rank nationally then play Advance Am

Thoughts?
"West"
PDGA: #8823
BDGA: #250
Twitter: @WestDiscGolf
BDGA DoC 2007 - 2011

User avatar
West
Posts: 2624
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:51 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by West » Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:46 pm

And then if people are recovering from long term injury or some other "issues" and want to play Int am to get back into the swing of things as not fit enough to play up to their PDGA rating which is over a year old can play one off events and compete ... obviously with TD/Board approval *hint hint* :roll:
"West"
PDGA: #8823
BDGA: #250
Twitter: @WestDiscGolf
BDGA DoC 2007 - 2011

User avatar
Village
Posts: 1024
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 1:54 pm
Location: I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you

Re: The scoring system debate (again)

Post by Village » Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:11 pm

Stick as it is.

Nuff said.
The worst thing about having a failing memory is.....no, its gone...

Running with scissors since 1977

BDGA 173 PDGA 8831

Post Reply