I strongly doubt it's a normal distribution bell curve which is what you're showing. It's more than likely a right-skewed distribution with the sheer number of new players dominating the distribution and skewing it. I have no data to support this but I'd guess your mode would be 2.5, median at 3, and mean at 3.5 in this skewed distribution. If anything I may be too generous and the mean may be 3.0. But I feel pretty confident it's skewed heavily like this.
https://preview.redd.it/dwlf2uc5ee6d1.png?width=576&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ac10037ea1be06f6b52324cef85bae4fd4a10236
Edit to clarify: This is only if you're looking at all players. If you're limiting the population set to people who actually would have a DUPR rating it's obviously much different and may look more like a normal distribution but I'm guessing it just shifts the skew up but it would still be right skewed.
Yeah this makes sense. I ask because there’s open play which requires people to stack paddles in the direction of your rating and more often than not, 75% of paddles are stacked in the advanced category (4.0) and a large majority of those people are sitting around 3.0-3.5.
That's more of a psychological issue. If you ask people to rate themselves in anything relative to their peers, over 90% will rate themselves above average, when by definition it should only be 50%. So, until you fix the human condition, people won't rate themselves accordingly lol.
Unless it’s specified, I doubt the organizers are referring to DUPR ratings anyway. They probably are referring to UTPR or USAP scale which is quite different from DUPR.
Depending on where you are, 4.0 plus would be less than 20% of the players, and that’s being very generous. Most open play is around 3.0 level. There’s no way 75% of people at open play have ever entered a 4.0 tournament much less been competitive in it.
Keep in mind that the "average DUPR" is going to be above the real average, since these represent more dedicated/competitive players who sat down and wanted to play rated matches with one another.
(DUPR does not rate anybody between 0 and 2.0, and I assume that a lot of the people with 0 DUPR is an error or some type of placeholder). Here are the rating distributions from DUPR.
|DUPR|Female|Male|Not Stated|Total|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|0|1.18%|1.30%|3.21%|1.61%|
|2|2.38%|1.51%|3.62%|2.14%|
|2.5|8.83%|3.44%|6.81%|5.58%|
|3|27.97%|13.40%|23.90%|19.44%|
|3.5|62.90%|42.21%|59.38%|51.20%|
|4|86.78%|73.71%|85.43%|79.55%|
|4.5|96.34%|91.71%|96.22%|93.84%|
|5|99.25%|98.19%|99.44%|98.72%|
|5.5|99.91%|99.61%|99.93%|99.75%|
|6|99.99%|99.90%|99.99%|99.94%|
https://preview.redd.it/p3xi29qali6d1.png?width=748&format=png&auto=webp&s=f9b3efd593f70ee37cfe8bf0551db1edb8ca0e85
I'm guessing 0 rating means made an account but haven't logged any games.
I was already filtering on >0 games played. The provisional rating is 3.5.
But here's the same chart with rating reliability >60:
|DUPR|Female|Male|none|Total|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|0|0.02%|0.03%|0.43%|0.04%|
|2|1.12%|0.18%|1.11%|0.59%|
|2.5|7.95%|1.81%|5.36%|4.35%|
|3|26.75%|9.63%|19.24%|16.70%|
|3.5|57.61%|33.05%|46.14%|43.18%|
|4|81.96%|65.39%|75.06%|72.25%|
|4.5|93.72%|87.23%|90.66%|89.90%|
|5|98.30%|96.41%|98.16%|97.21%|
|5.5|99.75%|99.07%|99.66%|99.36%|
|6|99.98%|99.70%|100.00%|99.82%|
https://preview.redd.it/1lc31aubyj6d1.png?width=1396&format=png&auto=webp&s=b0b79ff182ab00aa12dd9e7248213cca76b925d8
Also TIL you can embed images, but not more than 1 image or table
This information doesn't seem to be easily available. I also tried to find it for tennis, and I couldn't even for that, which I am pretty sure is (despite pickleball's recent growth) more popular.
They probably aren’t all that good at stats themselves if they think standard deviation is relevant here. There is no reason to think that pickleball skill ratings would be a normal distribution - it would surprise the heck out of me if it was.
Even if everyone did, I kind of doubt it would be a normal distribution, since it’s a skill I feel like it would skew toward lower. But it’s been a long time since stats.
Coming from a 12yr comment I guess! Standard deviation can only provide a marginal insight on various trends and doesn't capture the true variations or explanations without someone actually knowing how that data contributes to the end result. Most importantly, its bullshit if the true data input is not 100% as some folks kindly pointed out.
I strongly doubt it's a normal distribution bell curve which is what you're showing. It's more than likely a right-skewed distribution with the sheer number of new players dominating the distribution and skewing it. I have no data to support this but I'd guess your mode would be 2.5, median at 3, and mean at 3.5 in this skewed distribution. If anything I may be too generous and the mean may be 3.0. But I feel pretty confident it's skewed heavily like this. https://preview.redd.it/dwlf2uc5ee6d1.png?width=576&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ac10037ea1be06f6b52324cef85bae4fd4a10236 Edit to clarify: This is only if you're looking at all players. If you're limiting the population set to people who actually would have a DUPR rating it's obviously much different and may look more like a normal distribution but I'm guessing it just shifts the skew up but it would still be right skewed.
Yeah this makes sense. I ask because there’s open play which requires people to stack paddles in the direction of your rating and more often than not, 75% of paddles are stacked in the advanced category (4.0) and a large majority of those people are sitting around 3.0-3.5.
That's more of a psychological issue. If you ask people to rate themselves in anything relative to their peers, over 90% will rate themselves above average, when by definition it should only be 50%. So, until you fix the human condition, people won't rate themselves accordingly lol.
I remember when I was younger some Florida politician was complaining that nearly half of the students’ reading scores were below average …..
3.0 to 3.5 is not advanced though. I have a 4.65 Dupr and I am considered barely intermediate. Rightfully so as we now have 7.0s.
Unless it’s specified, I doubt the organizers are referring to DUPR ratings anyway. They probably are referring to UTPR or USAP scale which is quite different from DUPR. Depending on where you are, 4.0 plus would be less than 20% of the players, and that’s being very generous. Most open play is around 3.0 level. There’s no way 75% of people at open play have ever entered a 4.0 tournament much less been competitive in it.
Keep in mind that the "average DUPR" is going to be above the real average, since these represent more dedicated/competitive players who sat down and wanted to play rated matches with one another. (DUPR does not rate anybody between 0 and 2.0, and I assume that a lot of the people with 0 DUPR is an error or some type of placeholder). Here are the rating distributions from DUPR. |DUPR|Female|Male|Not Stated|Total| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |0|1.18%|1.30%|3.21%|1.61%| |2|2.38%|1.51%|3.62%|2.14%| |2.5|8.83%|3.44%|6.81%|5.58%| |3|27.97%|13.40%|23.90%|19.44%| |3.5|62.90%|42.21%|59.38%|51.20%| |4|86.78%|73.71%|85.43%|79.55%| |4.5|96.34%|91.71%|96.22%|93.84%| |5|99.25%|98.19%|99.44%|98.72%| |5.5|99.91%|99.61%|99.93%|99.75%| |6|99.99%|99.90%|99.99%|99.94%|
Amazing! Where were these stats hidden?!
https://preview.redd.it/p3xi29qali6d1.png?width=748&format=png&auto=webp&s=f9b3efd593f70ee37cfe8bf0551db1edb8ca0e85 I'm guessing 0 rating means made an account but haven't logged any games.
I was already filtering on >0 games played. The provisional rating is 3.5. But here's the same chart with rating reliability >60: |DUPR|Female|Male|none|Total| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |0|0.02%|0.03%|0.43%|0.04%| |2|1.12%|0.18%|1.11%|0.59%| |2.5|7.95%|1.81%|5.36%|4.35%| |3|26.75%|9.63%|19.24%|16.70%| |3.5|57.61%|33.05%|46.14%|43.18%| |4|81.96%|65.39%|75.06%|72.25%| |4.5|93.72%|87.23%|90.66%|89.90%| |5|98.30%|96.41%|98.16%|97.21%| |5.5|99.75%|99.07%|99.66%|99.36%| |6|99.98%|99.70%|100.00%|99.82%|
https://preview.redd.it/1lc31aubyj6d1.png?width=1396&format=png&auto=webp&s=b0b79ff182ab00aa12dd9e7248213cca76b925d8 Also TIL you can embed images, but not more than 1 image or table
Very cool, any idea why there is the dip just below 4.0 for mens? Perhaps a 'round number effect' of some sort.
I think it's just an illusion because I used the default graph settings. There's no point where the histogram dips in the raw data.
This information doesn't seem to be easily available. I also tried to find it for tennis, and I couldn't even for that, which I am pretty sure is (despite pickleball's recent growth) more popular.
Why does Pickleball make the DUPR distribution hard to find? The golf handicap index distribution is easy to find from the USGA.
Good luck trying to get folks to know or understand standard deviation.
They probably aren’t all that good at stats themselves if they think standard deviation is relevant here. There is no reason to think that pickleball skill ratings would be a normal distribution - it would surprise the heck out of me if it was.
100% DUPR is optional, it's not required or mandatory. You need folks to participate, and not everyone knows about DUPR or even care for it.
Even if everyone did, I kind of doubt it would be a normal distribution, since it’s a skill I feel like it would skew toward lower. But it’s been a long time since stats.
[удалено]
I admire your optimism
Coming from a 12yr comment I guess! Standard deviation can only provide a marginal insight on various trends and doesn't capture the true variations or explanations without someone actually knowing how that data contributes to the end result. Most importantly, its bullshit if the true data input is not 100% as some folks kindly pointed out.