TUGR Junior

[leezer99]

Big news coming out of the world of junior golf rankings. I expect this to be huge. Finally a system better than JGS.
 

https://tugr.org/junior

[Tugu]

Will this mean kids can play local events again? I can stop being told I'm hurting my kid by letting him play in Norcal? That I don't "have" to spend thousands and goto Arizona for the Heather blah blah blah? 

 

[leezer99]

1 hour ago, Tugu said:

Will this mean kids can play local events again? I can stop being told I'm hurting my kid by letting him play in Norcal? That I don't "have" to spend thousands and goto Arizona for the Heather blah blah blah? 

 

 

I would love to see ALL events ranked but I can't assume that will be the case. Coaches still want to see multi day results. 

 

BTW - this has been vetted by a few college coaches already and they are excited to see the results. But let's be honest, you're not going to see a player like BB drop from number one to 23rd or anything crazy like that. 

[wegobomber31]

This looks very promising as I thing an adjusted strokes gained/Data Golf-like methodology is the way to go. In the end, the rankings should be aligned with the right incentives of the game. Improve by shooting scores against better competition. 
 

one limitation I see is they seem to base their relative strokes on how far you are behind the best guy (say, Miles Russell is zero and everyone else is measured on how far back they are from that). I think a better measure of “zero” should be something more stable. You can’t control what Miles Russell does in his next tournament, but what he does would impact whether my Relative Strokes goes up or down. I think you want to show tangible data that your junior is getting better over time, based on what they are doing relative to their competition, not so directly dependent on what some other kid is doing. 

[golferdad8]

On 2/21/2024 at 1:45 PM, leezer99 said:

 I expect this to be huge. Finally a system better than JGS.
 

https://tugr.org/junior

I hate to sounds like an old fart, the Betamax was better than VHS but still lost the war.

 

As much as I've talked with college coaches about JGS (even those who say it's not very good), they still can't help but use it as a gauge. Junior Golf Hub has been saying they're building a better JGS for 5 years, but they're still 2 years away from it being done. I bet I can build a better JGS in 1 months just using Chatgbt, haha. 

 

[leezer99]

3 hours ago, golferdad8 said:

I hate to sounds like an old fart, the Betamax was better than VHS but still lost the war.

 

As much as I've talked with college coaches about JGS (even those who say it's not very good), they still can't help but use it as a gauge. Junior Golf Hub has been saying they're building a better JGS for 5 years, but they're still 2 years away from it being done. I bet I can build a better JGS in 1 months just using Chatgbt, haha. 

 

TUGR junior rankings will address this. 

[Tugu]

4 hours ago, golferdad8 said:

I hate to sounds like an old fart, the Betamax was better than VHS but still lost the war.

 

As much as I've talked with college coaches about JGS (even those who say it's not very good), they still can't help but use it as a gauge. Junior Golf Hub has been saying they're building a better JGS for 5 years, but they're still 2 years away from it being done. I bet I can build a better JGS in 1 months just using Chatgbt, haha. 

 

With my older kid, I've met some coaches where I literally cringed when listening to them speak.

 

Case in point, my older boy is technically inclined by nature (CS major). He took to golfing machine as his way to understand the swing.

 

Whilst watching him hit balls (as good a range session as I've ever seen my boy put on btw), a coach at a decent program said words to the effect of:-

 

We need to get him some pictures of TITTIES to get his head out of that technical stuff.

 

Overall, we've been underwhelmed by many of the coaches we have crossed paths with. I hold zero hope that they will see through the JGS rankings racket.

[leezer99]

I think y’all are going to like it. Got early access and it looks amazing.

 

 Here are the stats from everyone’s favorite junior golfer. 

Edited March 9 by leezer99

[golferdad8]

I got early access also & just took initial look at the jr ranking. Imho, the current rankings is as inaccurate as JGS. 

 

Not to get too personal, but my son has gone head-to-head against lots of the guys on this list who are ranked higher than him - this output doesn't make any sense.

Further, when he beats many of these kids (and other top D1 players in amateur events), I bet these events aren't factored in. 

 

So far, what I see is similar to any computer program: garbage in - garbage out. 

 

Edited March 9 by golferdad8

[leezer99]

6 hours ago, golferdad8 said:

I got early access also & just took initial look at the jr ranking. Imho, the current rankings as as inaccurate as JGS. 

 

Not to get too personal, but my son has gone head-to-head against lots of the guys on this list who are ranked higher than him - this output doesn't make any sense.

Further, when he beats many of these kids (and other top D1 players in amateur events), I bet these events aren't factored in. 

 

So far, what I see is similar to any computer program: garbage in - garbage out. 

 

 

You provide that feedback to Jeff?

[golferdad8]

Hey, TUGR & JGS & AJGA Rolex - you want to see how players really rank?
 

How about incorporating the prestigious 107 year old SF City results (and other amateur tournaments) in your database so everyone can see how top amateurs & D1s compare with recruited college players and beyond? This is critical data which will make rankings more accurate. 
 

This will give you better data than just comparing junior tournaments with adjusted ratings on JGS.

 

As you can see, this is legit set up & condition - only 6 players carded even or lower out of the field of 156 who entered (250 if counting the pre-qualifier on the first day.
 

https://www.golfgenius.com/pages/10318711707983183120

 
 

[jayslaysongolf]

Hate to say this but new rankings will take years to make a difference.  Something to look forward to maybe if your kid is under 12.

 

For everyone else we are stuck with jgs which basically makes the race over by the time a kid is 14.

 

Don’t waste your time with rankings and focus on life after junior golf.

 

 

 

Edited March 11 by jayslaysongolf

[leezer99]

23 minutes ago, jayslaysongolf said:

Hate to say this but new rankings will take years to make a difference.  Something to look forward to maybe if your kid is under 12.

 

For everyone else we are stuck with jgs which basically makes the race over by the time a kid is 14.

 

Don’t waste your time with rankings and focus on life after junior golf.

 

 

 

 

Well, thank you for your positivity and eagerness to support change Mr. Unverified New Member. Keep spreading the good cheer and maybe try and show us that your heart isn't as black as that lump of coal you got in your stocking this year. 

[Golfquant]

47 minutes ago, jayslaysongolf said:

Hate to say this but new rankings will take years to make a difference.  Something to look forward to maybe if your kid is under 12.

 

For everyone else we are stuck with jgs which basically makes the race over by the time a kid is 14.

 

Don’t waste your time with rankings and focus on life after junior golf.

 

 

 

I think this is spot on accurate

[golferdad8]

3 hours ago, jayslaysongolf said:

Hate to say this but new rankings will take years to make a difference.  Something to look forward to maybe if your kid is under 12.

 

For everyone else we are stuck with jgs which basically makes the race over by the time a kid is 14.

 

 

 

I agree with the first part, but the second part is not accurate. LOTS of great players at age 14 peak & decline, while many who focus on "getting better" will have many options even through 10th-11th grade year. From my recollection, from end of 8th grade to 11th grade, the # of boys triple. Therefore, even if a boy is top ranked early, there will be LOTS of players chasing. Further, even if just making it to top 200 in the class, there will be plenty of options for college golf.

 

Bottom line, TUGR's set up isn't much better (at this point) and more importantly, the way it's set up behind paywall, it will have a difficult time getting player and college coach adoption. 

[leezer99]

27 minutes ago, golferdad8 said:

I agree with the first part, but the second part is not accurate. LOTS of great players at age 14 peak & decline, while many who focus on "getting better" will have many options even through 10th-11th grade year. From my recollection, from end of 8th grade to 11th grade, the # of boys triple. Therefore, even if a boy is top ranked early, there will be LOTS of players chasing. Further, even if just making it to top 200 in the class, there will be plenty of options for college golf.

 

Bottom line, TUGR's set up isn't much better (at this point) and more importantly, the way it's set up behind paywall, it will have a difficult time getting player and college coach adoption. 

The rankings are free. The analytics are not. 

[golferdad8]

1 hour ago, leezer99 said:

The rankings are free. The analytics are not. 

The rankings without the analytics and transparency to back them up is DOA imo. 

Currently JGS is a must have for junior golfers & coaches who recruit. 

 

TUGR is not a "must have" - and it's not even clear that the rankings are any "better." 

The 3,000+ coaches recruiting in the US do not have unlimited budgets - I doubt they will subscribe to both...and probably will stick with JGS. 
 

If TUGR were smart, they would provide free data for everyone until all the users are hooked & it comes the new standard.

Otherwise, they'll follow the many subscription model software companies that die as they don't get to critical mass on their revenue model.

 

 

[leezer99]

6 hours ago, golferdad8 said:

The rankings without the analytics and transparency to back them up is DOA imo. 

Currently JGS is a must have for junior golfers & coaches who recruit. 

 

TUGR is not a "must have" - and it's not even clear that the rankings are any "better." 

The 3,000+ coaches recruiting in the US do not have unlimited budgets - I doubt they will subscribe to both...and probably will stick with JGS. 
 

If TUGR were smart, they would provide free data for everyone until all the users are hooked & it comes the new standard.

Otherwise, they'll follow the many subscription model software companies that die as they don't get to critical mass on their revenue model.

 

 

So you’re ok with jgs assigning arbitrary cca numbers to events?

[golferdad8]

1 hour ago, leezer99 said:

So you’re ok with jgs assigning arbitrary cca numbers to events?

I’m not ok w their cca - but the smarter coaches understand it’s BS to have both strength of field AND adjust rating boost to an already inflated course rating. These coaches KNOW the top 10 players are NOT 7 strokes better on average than the 100th ranked player.
 

Further, as @tegu has pointed out, top players who average 78+ in invitationals without wins & rarely having top 5 finishes - it’s intellectually dishonest/naive to recruit using these JGS rankings. BUT - coaches can see all the raw scores & courses to make their own judgement. 
 

Bottom line, while I think JGS is flawed, imo TUGR needs to be 5 to 10x better to get people to change. No need to change if its equally flawed or if it’s only a little better. 

[leezer99]

4 minutes ago, golferdad8 said:

I’m not ok w their cca - but the smarter coaches understand it’s BS to have both strength of field AND adjust rating boost to an already inflated course rating. These coaches KNOW the top 10 players are NOT 7 strokes better on average than the 100th ranked player.
 

Further, as @tegu has pointed out, top players who average 78+ in invitationals without wins & rarely having top 5 finishes - it’s intellectually dishonest/naive to recruit using these JGS rankings. BUT - coaches can see all the raw scores & courses to make their own judgement. 
 

Bottom line, while I think JGS is flawed, imo TUGR needs to be 5 to 10x better to get people to change. No need to change if its equally flawed or if it’s only a little better. 

 

This is a no brainer... I wish I had time to further educate you on why TUGR Jr will be better but here's a jumping off point. 

[golferdad8]

Come on - this is TUGR propaganda. Heck, their #1 highlight/pitch is that they self-proclaim that they “accurately rank players who never played against each other” is bogus - my son has beaten plenty of players who are ranked higher than him “according to TUGR.”  
 

Further, TUGR claims to be “all inclusive” yet excludes the amateur events where again where many lower ranked players have beaten the top ranked players. 

Look, I’m not bitter as my son’s off to D1 golf & moving on from JGS. All I’m saying is that this “new” system is filled w inflated promises as bad as Elon Musk & Full Self Driving cars - and as a beta tester I had higher hopes. 

Edited March 12 by golferdad8

[golferdad8]

1 hour ago, leezer99 said:

 

This is a no brainer... I wish I had time to further educate you on why TUGR Jr will be better but here's a jumping off point. 

“Will be better”…famous last words from people selling subscriptions software 😂

Edited March 12 by golferdad8

[wegobomber31]

15 hours ago, leezer99 said:

 

This is a no brainer... I wish I had time to further educate you on why TUGR Jr will be better but here's a jumping off point. 

This list is interesting and I don’t even know it’s 100% true or if the “check’s” are all positives and the “X’s” are all negatives. For instance, there’s nothing inherently wrong with a points-based system like AJGA or OWGR. They are just geared to reward top performance by design. I happen to think a strokes-gained measure is a more accurate reflection of skill level, so they are on the right track.

 

Also I know at least initially they have mostly U.S. data so the rankings are very U.S. top heavy (the opposite problem of WAGR. Again, there’s nothing wrong with that but I don’t think you can grade yourself as “All-Inclusive” then. 
 

I’m optimistic that this ranking will be fine and reasonably accurate. Yes, your kid might be ranked behind kids that he beat head-to-head, but that is always going to happen when you trying to boil down something as volatile as tournament scores into one comprehensive number. 
 

and be prepared…some high end tournaments could actually effectively get more than the 4-stroke upward adjustment that they would’ve received in JGS. 
 

Edited March 12 by wegobomber31

[leezer99]

On 3/11/2024 at 8:51 PM, golferdad8 said:

Come on - this is TUGR propaganda. Heck, their #1 highlight/pitch is that they self-proclaim that they “accurately rank players who never played against each other” is bogus - my son has beaten plenty of players who are ranked higher than him “according to TUGR.”  
 

Further, TUGR claims to be “all inclusive” yet excludes the amateur events where again where many lower ranked players have beaten the top ranked players. 

Look, I’m not bitter as my son’s off to D1 golf & moving on from JGS. All I’m saying is that this “new” system is filled w inflated promises as bad as Elon Musk & Full Self Driving cars - and as a beta tester I had higher hopes. 

USGA and amateur events will be included along with one day qualifiers. Only qualifications are that it has to be on a publicly accessible site and verifiable. 

[golferdad8]

4 hours ago, leezer99 said:

USGA and amateur events will be included along with one day qualifiers. Only qualifications are that it has to be on a publicly accessible site and verifiable. 

Will be included - or are included? Given lack of transparency, not sure the public can confirm the validity of the data. This is why I go back to basic software key: garbage in, garbage out. 
 

Even with all of JGS’ faults, one can click on any kid & see what tournaments & data goes into arriving at that # & ranking.  At this point, TUGR is not even close to ready for prime time. 

[leezer99]

50 minutes ago, golferdad8 said:

Will be included - or are included? Given lack of transparency, not sure the public can confirm the validity of the data. This is why I go back to basic software key: garbage in, garbage out. 
 

Even with all of JGS’ faults, one can click on any kid & see what tournaments & data goes into arriving at that # & ranking.  At this point, TUGR is not even close to ready for prime time. 

Is included. Blades Brown example. 
 

Edited March 14 by leezer99

[golferdad8]

Those are all JUNIOR tournaments - none of these have the higher competition of D1 or former tour pros.
 

Many of the best junior golfers are competing against top amateurs in tournaments where my son beat higher ranked juniors. Yet, none of these tournament results or scores are captured & explains why he’s not ranked higher. Therefore, when I see players he beat get ranked HIGHER than him because those tournaments are not included, I hope you can understand why I don’t think this ranking is “accurate” or to be relied upon. 

Again, this ISN’T about my son or his ranking as he’s done w recruiting - it’s just a data point to share with everyone & explain why TUGR is overpromising their accuracy & superiority over other rankings. Let’s include good data so the output can be accurate & this be trusted. 

Edited March 14 by golferdad8

[jayslaysongolf]

JGS is truly horrific and wrong in there rankings almost anything would be better.

 

I wish it would change but a lot parents believe in and benefit from JGS.   Any junior ranking like TUGR needs to have kids who improve show up in the rankings in a meaningful way to be sucessful.

 

Right now a poorly ranked Freshman only chance to improve their ranking is to play in a major USGA or AJGA junior event and win.  

 

 

Edited March 14 by jayslaysongolf

[golferdad8]

2 hours ago, jayslaysongolf said:

 

Right now a poorly ranked Freshman only chance to improve their ranking is to play in a major USGA or AJGA junior event and win.  

 

 

Actually there are many more options than that, plus there’s no hurry as a freshman. Just focus on getting better, use decade to improve course mgmt, and learn to shoot below par.
 

Once that’s on track, during sophomore year join amateurgolf.com & enter tournaments & get top 3 finish by beating D1 college players (where your top choice schools are playing).
 

I promise you the coaches will show high interest & ignore JGS or TUGR rankings (as his amateur scores won’t be in either company’s data).

[wegobomber31]

The rankings look largely fine to me. It’s pricier than I expected. 
 

interestingly enough, there’s about 8 “strokes” difference between the top player and the 1200th ranked player in both TUGR and the much maligned JGS. 

Edited March 14 by wegobomber31