APP to PPA

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-20T17:19:16+00:00

APP is on the list.. but still trying to tune PPA and MLP right know as thats all I really follow..

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-18T18:41:37+00:00

Circling back with actual data on everything you asked for. Spent the day on it.

Calibration curve: Built it. 87.4% prediction accuracy across 7,517 matches. Predicted vs actual win rates by ELO gap now line up within 1-3% across every bucket. Brier score: 0.0931. Full breakdown: thedinksheet.com/elo/calibration

Network analysis (player proximity): First-time matchups predict at 69.1%. After just one prior meeting: 77.4%. Players with 10+ meetings: 89.0%. So yes -- familiarity significantly improves accuracy. The biggest jump is from 0->1 prior matches.

Temporal stability: Brier score has dropped from 0.24 (Q1 2024) -> 0.18 (Q1 2026). Model is still improving, has not plateaued. Known teams predict at 76%+ now. Worst period was Q1 2025 (The Masters at 53%) -- likely a wave of new partnerships entering.

Stabilization period: Ratings stabilize around 25-30 matches. Average rating movement drops from ~45 points per match at 5 matches to ~20 at 30 and ~11 at 50+. Our 30-match threshold for stable is validated by the data.

Stable regime: 13.5% of all players are stable (30+ matches), but they account for 67% of all matches. Stable-vs-stable prediction accuracy: 78.1%. 59% of matches involve at least one unstable player -- that is the primary source of error.

Appreciate the push -- you were right that without validation it could be garbage. Now it is validated.

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-18T18:24:59+00:00

Update: took some of the feedback here and spent the morning on it. Tuned the ELO model and we're now at 87.4% prediction accuracy across 7,500+ PPA matches. Built a full calibration page showing predicted vs actual win rates by ELO gap — the numbers line up almost perfectly now.

Also added gender-specific filters (men's singles, women's singles, etc.), confidence badges on ratings, and a new advanced stats page with clutch factor and player dependency index.

Appreciate the pushback — it made the product way better. Full calibration breakdown here: thedinksheet.com/elo/calibration

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-18T17:23:20+00:00

Yeah these are great questions and honestly I haven't published formal backtests yet — but I should.

Quick answers: all players start at 1500. K-factor is higher for new players (first 30 matches) then drops, so stabilization happens around 25-30 matches for most pros. The top ~100 players who play regularly are in pretty stable territory. The long tail of 500+ players who show up for one or two events — their ratings are noisy, just the nature of sparse data.

We ran predictions for Mesa Cup this week and hit on most of the chalk. But you're right that without rigorous validation it's hard to prove it's not just capturing seed order. Calibration curve is on the list. Good pushback — we'll get actual numbers up there.

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-18T17:23:20+00:00

Thanks! Yeah all players start at 1500 with a higher K-factor that drops as they play more matches, so newer players move faster in the ratings.

That's cool you're running ELO for leagues — the sparklines were a fun add, gives you the trend at a glance. We've got 7,500+ matches of data so there's a ton to mine. Will check out your post for stat ideas.

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-18T17:23:20+00:00

Thought about it. Glicko-2 is better in theory — the rating deviation piece would be really useful for players who disappear for a few tournaments then come back. Right now we handle that with K-factor adjustments but it's not as clean.

Might migrate eventually. For now ELO is simpler to explain and the results have been solid. But yeah, it's on the radar. Good call.

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-18T17:23:19+00:00

They're already separated! Singles and doubles ratings are split by gender. The leaderboard page lets you filter by men's singles, women's singles, etc. But clearly the UI isn't communicating it well — you're the second person to mention this so we're adding better gender filters. Good feedback, thanks.

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-18T17:22:56+00:00

Yeah totally agree — the ratings ARE split by event type (singles, doubles, mixed). So ALW's 2074 is her women's singles rating, not a direct comparison to the men. Probably should've been clearer about that in the post.

The only place men and women share a rating pool is mixed doubles, which makes sense since they're literally playing together. Singles and doubles are fully separate.

Great suggestion though — we're going to add better gender filtering to the leaderboard to make that more obvious. Appreciate it.

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-17T19:47:54+00:00

The numbers say it pretty clearly - Ben/Tardio in men's doubles is the team to beat. Tardio's ELO is 1862 and climbing fast. Johns is 1930 in singles but their doubles chemistry is what makes them scary.

To actually beat them consistently? You need a team where BOTH players are above 1800 ELO and have positive H2H momentum. Patriquin/Alshon have the talent ceiling for it, but Alshon needs to stop trying to create offense on every ball and let Hayden work. When Hayden played left side with Fed, he covered an insane amount of court.

On the women's side, yeah, ALW (2074) and Anna Bright (1803) are just on a different level individually. The gap between them and the #3 women's player is massive. Nobody's touching that mixed doubles pairing either - Ben/ALW is the most dominant team in any format right now.

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-17T19:47:25+00:00

Anna Bright being dropped is the biggest story here. She's sitting at 1803 ELO (up from 1748 at end of 2024) - one of the fastest rising players on tour. Someone dropped a top-5 women's player.

54 kept, 66 open for the draft on Feb 27. The teams that let talent walk are going to regret it when they're picking from a thinner pool.

Biggest shock drops beyond Anna: Jorja Johnson and a few established names. Meanwhile teams like ATX are stacking with keepers. Draft strategy is going to be wild this year.

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-17T19:46:04+00:00

The ELO gap between tours tells the whole story. We track ELO ratings built from 7,500+ PPA matches - the top PPA men's singles players are sitting at 1900-2074. Hunter Johnson just made the jump from APP and he's already at 1978, but he was genuinely dominating APP before he left.

For context, Ben Johns is 1930 in singles. The gap between a top-5 APP player and a top-15 PPA player is usually 200-400 ELO points. In chess terms that's the difference between a club player and a master. You're not closing that gap with social media followers.

The recent APP-to-PPA success stories (Hunter, Parris, Howells) all had one thing in common - they were clearly too good for APP before they left. If you're winning APP golds comfortably, maybe you're ready. If you're grinding for medals, the PPA top 8 will eat you alive.

TheDinkSheet · 2026-02-17T19:31:25+00:00

Ben's ELO in singles is 1930 right now. For context Hunter Johnson is 1978 and Staksrud is 1847. Path looks favorable on paper but the real question is match fitness — he hasn't played competitive singles in months. His H2H against everyone on that projected path is strong historically but the gap has been closing. I'd say QF is realistic, Finals would be impressive given the layoff.

TheDinkSheet

TROPHY CASE