Simon Lizotte: OK Ratings Aren't That Great

Are ratings good? Are ratings bad? Brodie and Uli try to convince Simon that ratings for pros aren't great.
Full Episode: kzbin.inforzFy_NYt4l8
Watch and listen to new episodes of Tour Life with Brodie Smith and Paul Ulibarri & check us out on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, and TikTok for the best moments from the show.
Download the full podcast here:
Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/tour-life-with-brodie-smith-and-paul-ulibarri/id1666597105
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/24Njsr7puAiQxjSSXFMYwM?si=ed66b1705c8d4b70
Join the channel to get access to perks:
/ @foundationpodcasts
Follow Tour Life on Social Media:
hoo.be/tourlife
Merch - Coming soon to foundationdiscs.com

[@jamesbenton4123]

Ok Brodie won me over right there at the end. The top % of your rds count towards your rating.

[@brannnnnnn]

Same. My first time ever watching and I agreed with him. Guess I’ll buy a Get Freaky Zone now next year.

[@kimmomatikainen1843]

Average shows how good you are and top of the rounds shows how good you can be. I have a friend who has little lower rating than I have, but I usually win him. On a good day he is way better than I am mainly because he can throw 500 ft. He has good days rarely. My bad days are a lot better than his. So in your opinion player who I win in 75% of the tournaments that we both play should have a higher rating than I do because his good days are better than mine, but who quite rarely wins me? Personally I don't care about ratings. I check that maybe once a year when someone asks what my rating is. It shows in my game because I do stupid things and try all kinds of fun shots because I don't care if a shot costs me 10 rating points. Fun goes before rating or position.

[@brannnnnnn]

@@kimmomatikainen1843 I only care about ratings because sandbaggers keep shitting on me in ma3 division tournaments I pay good money to play in. I'm always middle of the pack in ma3. And if the ratings were the average of top rated rounds those guys would get pushed up to ma2. and the people who always win ma2 would get pushed to ma1, and the people who always win ma1 would get pushed to MPO. So tournaments would get easier for newer players to podium in, and harder for experience players to podium in. if your buddy only rarely beats you his rating would reflect that, even his top rounds wouldn't all be great. So no, his rating would still be lower than yours if you consistently play better than him. Brodies suggestion only impacts the best players in each division, not the inconsistent.

[@douggiefreshdg]

@@kimmomatikainen1843the ratings would populate from tournament play not casual rounds so you would be higher rated if your friend is consistently not doing well at tournaments

[@TAS-gb5ph]

I was mostly with Brodie on the “ratings don’t tell the full story” side before watching this, but this was the best I think him and Uli have ever articulated this. I’m now fully convinced. Well done, y’all.

[@danielmillerprod.]

Brodie spent 12 minutes trying to troll Simon on his Instagram and failed 🤣

[@paintballjunkie65]

I do remember someone interviewing Kristin Tattar and asking about what she thought about her rating that she earned in Europe as compared to the US. And she said she said that most Europeans dont care about ratings, only strokes.

[@keisi1574]

The local club in my area has a player who's sandbagged hundreds of times at the local minis and in tournaments. He's done it for 15 years. He's on the board of the local club and helps run the minis n tournaments. It's pretty much stealing from new players/beginners. It's led to hundreds of players, many who've played for just a few months, having to compete with a player who's played for 15-20 years- because his rating stays pretty much the same. Brodie's idea addresses this problem. We should all want to address n fix problems which are discouraging, and even unfair, to new players.

[@brannnnnnn]

There is a dude who lives like an 1.5 hours from me in a major city, and he drives over to play all of our C tiers, he wins 90% of them. His rating stays the same.

[@brannnnnnn]

Left out the part about him doing it for about the last ten years. Anytime he signs up we know one of us is out of the money.

[@its_me_JZ]

20:34 had me cracking up. "If you take the top 30 and we all play. Well, I wouldn't be in that so I shouldn't say we" 😂

[@discstroy_disc_golf_apparel]

So the biggest flaw with ratings I believe is the current weather on the course. Say there is a flex start tournament from 7am- 5pm and a handful players Start at 7am and there is no wind at all. Then a handful of players start at 3pm and now there is 25mph winds. Obviously the round with the 25mph winds is gonna make the course harder and it's gonna be harder to shoot a score that compares to the round with no wind. But the ratings are the same for the entire day. Pdga ratings only take in affect if the winds change by 30mph. How is that fair ?

[@crusher26638]

Simon is so spot on. Rating can get off when the pool of players do not mix. There may be a way to manipulate ratings like Paul indicates, but I think he’s off. I always know when I play better than my rating or average or worse than my rating. I’m of course I played often or never. I know if I played well or not. 75% of the time I can guess my round rating within 10 points. I guess in Paul’s defense, if their contract takes rating as well as their popularity, they may feel conflict over playing in a event that might bring them exposure but I also doesn’t have a good upside for rating. Courses matter. Spread matters bunching matters.

[@austinmoser5056]

I think that inside the context of the pro tour the ratings are very accurate. When you're playing against relatively the same field week after week. It's local tournaments where the ratings are absolutely screwed. One week you might play a tournament with 70 players, ranging from 1000 rated to 650 rated, the next week play a tournament with 25 players ranging from 820 to 930 and then the next week play a tournament that has the divisions split among different courses, so in your division there might only be 800-850 rated players or 950+ players. That's when the system fails.

[@jamesbenton4123]

"no but Uli"

[@kimmomatikainen1843]

I can see one big flaw with having top rounds in rating system. Average shows how good you are and top scores shows how good you can be. Especially in amateurs and also lower level of pros there are players who are steady players and players who fluctuates a lot. If we have a player who almost always plays well but rarely great or rarely badly and his rating is 960. He usually plays rounds between 980 and 940, Then we have a player who throws far and can play great rounds, but also really sucks so his rating is similar. Plays 1000 rated rounds but frequently plays 920 rated rounds. These two play in the same tournaments few times a year. This steady good average player is better in 75% of the tournaments they both play. Player B has better individual rounds, but other rounds are so bad that he loses. In this example Player B would have a rating of 990 and player A who does better in tournaments would have a rating 970. Why should a better player have 20 points lower rating? Why should player B who rarely wins player A should have a better rating? Just because he can play better, but plays worse? There are a lot of real life examples like this.

[@ChadSolberg]

Simon is my favorite. Uli and Brody pretty dope too. Great convo

[@tektyman]

What makes the PDGA rating system so interesting is also what makes it so problematic to try and use for anything beyond just finding it interesting. Among other things, it tries to solve two different problems with one tool in a way that ends up being bad at one to accomplish the other. The two problems being: #1: how good is 'member A' at disc golf generally. A skill rating. It extrapolates to "assign each member a rating that can sort them in order of, and show proportional differences in, skill." The PDGA player rating. Independently, this is a fairly trivial and often solved problem. 2/10. #2: how well did 'member A' play in this round, independent of all non-skill factors. This extrapolates to "assign a rating of skill quality to each round in a way that makes comparable to any other round scored the same way, regardless of any non-skill factors". The PDGA round rating. This is night and day more interesting and more difficult. 8/10. Even if comparable solutions exist, the uniqueness of all the myriad complexities Disc Golf specifically presents, means any solution is going to also be meaningfully unique. The PDGA rating system takes an already monumental set of requirements in even trying to solve for problem #2, and further requires the output of problem #1 to be non-arbitrarily correlated to the output of #2. So a "1050 player" is as good as a "1050 round" is good, across the entire range of ratings and members. As interesting problems to solve go, 10/10. The fact that such a niche sport like disc golf tackled it is honestly kinda hilarious and absurd. What we actually have, though, is a system that vastly underperforms many other well known systems at solving problem #1 independently. So If the metric used to judge the PDGA rating system is "how well can it rank players by skill", it really is quite bad. This is what people usually care about, and what most other systems are usually solving for, so this is understandably how people might judge the whole system. But if your metric is "How well does your system correlate the skill quality of any round or player to any and all other rounds and players, regardless of all other factors?" It would be hard not to call the PDGA rating system world class, if for no other reason than I'm just not aware of anything really even trying to do the same thing. I can imagine it being better, but in the same way I can imagine the Concorde being a better supersonic airliner... I wouldn't know the first or last thing about actually doing it, and there is probably a reason or two so few even try. Huh, I guess TL;DR the PDGA ratings system is the Concorde: made in a way that fatally overvalues the coolest aspects, to the detriment of the useful ones.

[@berryginger1065]

Brodie, Brodie, Brodie… everything you have been saying recently has made me respect you more and more. I hate playing in tournament for the reason you expressed. If there is a gap of 4+ between the top players and the people below them and people are throwing a great game what’s the point. 4-30 are battling and 1-3 are just coasting out front. A great game is a battle not a washout.

[@markryan1]

Ratings are very accurate if you play with people of similar skill levels. If pros play on a pro tour course, the rating is a great reflection on how well you played. If amateurs play an amateur course, the ratings are accurate too. However, the actual value could be inflated or too low. But this doesn't matter because ratings are best used to give an estimate of how good you are compared to others. So I think ratings should not be used to tell how "good" you are at disc golf, rather it should just be used to tell how well you played in round compared to others who played the same round. Too many factors are in play to base a rating off of a specific score like weather and time of day, so instead the PDGA uses the other people there to measure your play. Its a good system, it just isn't a tell of how "good" you are.

[@ReluctantAardvark]

It sounds counterintuitive for sponsors to link bonuses to player ratings as it stops them competing in local events which may harm their rating.

[@LoyalDW]

so my input on this is that the system is accurate but only compared to the place that you live and play in. The reason I say this is because here in Canada in B.C. it's common for people from Washington to come to events in the lower mainland of B.C. and wipe the floor with people who are ranked similarly. When you look at their rank from tournaments in the U.S. they will be 950-980, then come here and shoot 1020 and win the tournaments by 8-12 strokes. I also have someone in my club who is 1000 rated, and when they went to the states for a tournament he got beaten badly by people

[@beansontopofbeans]

😆 Simon at the end.. Okayyy, ratings aren't that great

[@user-pu2hp9oc5g]

Simon won that c-tier in Australia that Mcbeth played in 2015. You missed your chance to ask him about it.

[@jonathonmyers1587]

It's pretty simple ... each tier should track its own rating independent of the other tiers. A c-tier event shouldn't impact an elite tier rating.

[@Saculmit]

Top pros should be incentivized by their sponsors to play a handful of C tiers each year just to help push brand recognition.

[@kimmomatikainen1843]

Or agree that required rating average is calculated only from elite level tournaments.

[@toddgordon3522]

I am a MA3/MA4/MA50 player, I also find myself skipping local tournaments because I know they drop my rating, while I’m still learning and trying to reach my goal of a 900 rating. I think the rating algorithms and end numbers are broken and need to changed for what’s best for the game.

[@stattersall]

I'm in the same boat. I'm not crazy about guys that are MA1 playing in the 50+ division either. I feel like once you hit a certain rating you should not be eligible for an age-protected division.

[@Blacklisted87927]

I like uli blaming c tiers as the reason his rating gets trashed.

[@nicholasmoreno7904]

The only issues with ratings is if you play a limited number of courses and you are really good at those courses you are going to have an inflated rating compared to someone who plays in pdga sanctioned tournaments at many different courses. There needs to be a modifier that is implemented for the different number of courses you play and their difficulty setting.

[@12to6]

Fantastic discussion

[@kens1776]

Great content!

[@Swisha623]

Isn’t the course difficulty and round rating determined by what a 1000 rated disc golfer would score threw 18 holes on said lay out of each division? For example if MA3 is playing the same layout, OB and Par as a MPO player. The round rating would be determined by what a 1000 rated MPO player would shoot. Which would negatively impact the MP3 golfers rating not the MPO.

[@sarinhighwind]

C tiers will always give you a lower rating because of how the propagation system works. Unless there are a ton of top tier golfers there to set the propagation higher. Ratings rate you to the standard field you play in.

[@tonyprime7]

you can certainly game the system, certain courses and events will give you a higher rating. just played a c tier and the mpo winner shot -10 and -13. -13 round rated 1068 and the -10 rated 1025. total props to him but -13 on that course couldnt compare to chandler shooting -19 on any course.

[@Southpawlefty]

Some people dont like being reminded of the bad days they had maybe its that simple and i hate ratings they're not universal

[@jamesbenton4123]

1080 Japan is not 1080 DGPT

[@BoTillman46480]

The water hole discussion is exactly how Scott Withers and the guys in the PNW get to be 1020 rated only playing B and C tiers. Go look at the scores. Nick Wood is another example from a few years ago. He was like 1030 locally and then went down on tour. In Oklahoma, it’s the exact opposite cuz all our courses are short and easy for everyone. I was 1010 for four years and every “tour” event I played would be way above my rating that I established on local courses. Too much variance in the rating system

[@rcwoodshop170]

Sounds like a challenge!! Can brodie get me from 900 rated to 950? Let's go!!!

[@theairportstuff]

C-tier's are notoriously difficult for players that cannot count past 4 and think mandos are optional. The players don't take it seriously and won't play by the rules. Let's not bring up the dope smoking during the round.

[@MrpHeno]

Any opinion on UDiscs new round rating scores?

[@quproduction1107]

Simon's facial expression is great. I agree with him.

[@MaximilianWollner97]

Like Brodies idea for only the best rounds to count. In my experience at least in northern europe its harder to get a high rating. I have friends that go to the US sometimes and they say that ratings are super inflated at a lot of US events.

[@shawnrw3727]

Need to get rid of the ratings system and just go with points .

[@tomcroft5119]

Good conversation about ratings. But, WTF with Brodie checking on Simon's instagram account during their conversation to see if he's telling the truth.

[@MullinatorDiscGolf]

Uli is absolutely right! I typically agree with Simon but he’s bonkers if he thinks the current system is good. It has NOTHING to do with the course. I’ve played an even at a course where I had a very mediocre round but because pros from surrounding states came to play my rating was inflated by a ton, same layout & same conditions. How can you say that a system that has nothing to do with the actual course you’re playing and only has to do with who you’re playing and how they play in that round only?

[@ricmurry3710]

The Global Masters Series provides world rankings based on the year’s top 8 rated rounds a player has played. This kind of sounds like Brodie’s idea for only counting the top 30 out of 100.

[@easy3discgolf144]

Ratings only work in small, consistent pools. The same 50 players, playing against each other, consistently., ratings work well. Once you start introducing other players, playing in different pools, ratings fall apart. A Montana 1000 rated player is not the same as a 1000 rated North Carolina player. But that 1000 rated Montana player, playing consistently against other Montana players, is in fact a 1000 rated Montana player when compared to his peers. So pro tour players, playing pro tournaments, against other pros, in that pool, ratings are accurate.

[@alexbisnett8751]

Not to talk smack or get personal, but I think it's worth pointing out that Ulibarri has played 67 rounds in Elite series and Majors this year, averaging a 1013 rating. His overall rating is 1020. In all other events this year, his average is 1017, and in C-tiers specifically, he averages 1012. I don't think it is accurate to say that C-tiers destroy his rating. They seem to be closely aligned with his other events.

[@jesserichardson1395]

Agree with Brodie about ratings. When comparing disc golf ratings to stick golf handicaps,. Nobody mentioned distance scaling. Like Simon throws twice as far as those MA3 guys. Bryson DeChambeau doesn't hit the ball twice as far as your local 18 handicapper

[@odedgegaming182]

Don't cave Simon! The ranking system is fine for what it is and with any system, it can be minipulated. But if you are that simple of a thinker, then there isn't much that can be done. If I were to get into the NBA, get fouled when I made the basekt, shot one freethrow, make it, then retire... I would be a 100% at freethrows. Anybody looking at that stat would ignore it just as quickly. Looking at the UDISC world rankings, that seems to be flawed as well. Eagle is top of the list? While he is a great players, he didn't have that kind of a season and Calvin should be on top as he has the best average finish. I usually play the same courses with a couple of exceptions against roughly the same players. When I play well, I have a higher ranking and the same is true when I play poorly. At the end of the year, I tend to average out to my ranking. I don't think that happens by accident? Since any game/sport is has inconsistencies, the average of your play should matter more than your best/worst/perceived potential. The rating system makes sense that it throws away your extremely high/low rounds to get rid of these anmolies, it applies it to the rounds played in the last year, and weights your last set of rounds a bit higher... that all makes sense to me. I think for tour players, there should be a seperate rating that only covers tour events/majors, but if they didn't make the rating public, I would be fine for that. But I bet you that the higher rated players (that play a lot of rounds) will tend to finish higher than the lower rated players, again, I don't think that happens by accident.

[@odedgegaming182]

To Brodie's example about the 400' hole with and with out water, your argument makes sense if that's how we play disc golf. But keep on with that train of thought and as you increase the distance, the farther throwers would have higher ratings. But that's not disc golf, that's a distance competition.

[@Backhand_Drew]

No one complains when they get those generous ratings for those terrible rounds. I rarely feel punished for bad rounds, could be different with tour level players so this may not apply to everyone.

[@carnyshill684]

Withers was #1 rated as TD of rural pop up courses he placed the teepads and baskets.. then like not top 25 at a dgpt event.

[@douggiefreshdg]

I completely agree with brodies idea for a rating system

[@outdoorenthusiastenl4907]

Looks like Uli took a sativa gummy and Simon took a indica gummy.

[@kylechristenberry9061]

The more I hear Uli talk the more I long for him to come back next video with better logic and maturity. I want to like the guy, but he makes it so hard to

[@quproduction1107]

Ratings are an objective measure of relative performance. You can poke holes with any measurement system. If you recommend a fix to the issues you describe, great, let's hear it.

[@matthewwilson7802]

This sport also tripled in size in the last 3 years. There's going to be some things to iron out

[@chadsanders8393]

If it keeps the pros from sandbagging more power to the rating system

[@chadsanders8393]

Simon's brain is burning up trying to understand with these hamster wheels

[@Precisionmagert]

Uli made good points

[@BoTillman46480]

Ratings are too dependent on the field ratings and not dependent enough on raw score. If I play the same course with a field of 1000 rated players one day and then another day it’s all players that are 925 rated, my rounds should not be rated differently

[@jonsidell3338]

Pros should be able to play C tiers “for the love of the game” and face no ratings penalty. Come scoop up an easy paycheck and put on a show for the fans!

[@Southpawlefty]

The courses we play should be rated for even par cause not all courses are the same and par should matter to pros who are always throw under par just a thought from the guy who actually has the worst ratings 😂😂😂

[@kimmomatikainen1843]

That is how some ratings (not PDGA) are calculated. I mean disc golf score application based rating. Courses changes and the level of game changes etc. and those course ratings are updated I think once a year. With that course rating update it also updates players ratings afterwards so my rating can change after two months playing that course because course rating changed. New course doesn't have a rating at all because there is nothing to build the rating on, but once course gets a rating, then it will update your personal rating accordingly. And practice rounds with few friends don't impact rating.

[@supay_inca]

Brodie is right. Has always been right.

[@jonseliski9687]

if its harder to get a good rating against a weak field, then how did Manabu Kajiyama get an off the charts good rating against a weaker field? its not logical. thanks.

[@jamesbenton4123]

Simon made the best points.

[@Southpawlefty]

You guys should all come play Faylor lake with the worlds worst diacgolfer 😂😂😂

[@nicholasmoreno7904]

There isn’t any MA3 player in the world that is 🐦 a 400 foot hole without a throw in.

[@tattooedjohnson]

Ratings are skewed....home course player ratings are gonna be higher than guys who are on different tracks...or great player chunders during rated rounds and crappy player shoots 3 great rated rounds then doesn't play anymore rated rounds. Get a new system!

[@markhansen8039]

Hmmm…the two guys with poor ratings don’t like the ratings. The legend says they are quite accurate. I wonder who’s opinion I value?

[@nautilusshell940]

Ratings are good until you get to 1020 and not on the pro tour. I think the main problem is the course difficulty isnt factored in, even individual hole difficulty. Birdie'ing certain very difficult holes should be a more valueable rating stroke than an easy hole.

[@davidwilbur753]

CT

[@davidwilbur753]

CT

[@kimmomatikainen1843]

Getting a birdie on a difficult hole does have more value in rating and scorewise. You basically get a stroke against the field and it moves you up in position and the higher your final score is, the better rating you get. So getting unlucky spitouts and getting a bogey on easy hole should instantly bring your rating down. Just based on individual hole? Or two players who get the same score, but other one has a great birdie so the other player should get a higher rating?

[@WillEnj0y]

Disagree. The benefit of scoring the hard hole is the fact that nobody else will do it. If you can’t keep it clean on the easy holes that’s one you. Someone who bogeys the easiest hole and birdies the hardest hole is the same as someone who pars both and that’s how it should be.

[@andruboine]

Tell me you don't know what statistics is with out telling me Turns on this clip

[@hopeforeveryone9808]

Uli cares about his estimate g and hates dogs. I wonder what else's is wrong with him.

[@terrancep4089]

Getting people talking?..?...

[@hopeforeveryone9808]

Yeah exactly Simon who gives a F about a number.

[@nochruto]

why oh why is Simon streaming with a 2015 potato camera.

[@matthewwilson7802]

One of the highest rated players in the world saying ratings aren't that great kind of seems like when really wealthy people say money doesn't buy you happiness😂 b*******

[@ralphevans143]

Why does anyone listen to Brodie anyway he is an ultimate player who happen to pick up disc golf. Let the real disc golfers speak on ratings. Oh ya got bunch of subscribers so now ya a dg genius now?

[@FoundationPodcasts]

I study the game a lot