Quote Originally Posted by julien12 View Post
Hi khris,

First let me say, “Thanks for all that you do for the community”. You are constantly working for us and it is greatly appreciated.

Your ‘training calc’ spreadsheet is great and well thought out. I have used a similar one (same underlying calculations) for the last few seasons and find that it definitely helps me use my greens more efficiently.
One difference between our spreadsheets (screenshot below) is that I put more emphasis on - the amount of points still to be gained per drill - versus what percentage of points are still to be gained. What you will see in the screenshot is that I have added a drill ranking algorithm for our two methods (right two most columns). I rank drills by how many points are still to be gained (high to low) whereas your method ranks them by how little of there maximum potential has been achieved (low to high). In the example in the screenshot my top ranked drill, Wing Play, is your sixth ranked drill and your top ranked, 1-on-1, is my fourth ranked.
What is your view on this difference? Is it better to focus on the points still to be gained or on the drill potential still left?
Thanks again for all your help and I look forward to your response,

Click image for larger version.  Name: C7045953-DFE8-4163-887F-A1700165A31E.jpg  Views: 244  Size: 94.9 KB  ID: 133449
I think it's practically the same... "potential left" is the evolution of drill that still missing, then, as a "given skill" can go to a white, or to a grey attribute, what should matter here at this point isn't the drill info displayed, but the player you pick to be trained. IMO isn't relevant one or another system as it is the same info, % completed or points missing...

Good job, btw and thanks.