It’s an XY scatter chart with some trig formulas that draws a 3D model of the golf swing. It can be rotated
to any angle, and used to isolate the actions of different body parts.

It’s something I’m trying to market, but I’m happy to discuss the techniques used.

In an analogy with the way stock prices & volumes are sometimes charted, I would consider plotting the weeks 1 to 13 on the x-axis, and two panel charts for the y axis, the upper chart being a line graph (as you have done above for weeks 12-13, but for all weeks) to plot the ranks of each player each week. They could all be the same colour for the purposes of the chart. Then below that in the second panel I would plot a column graph, the value for the y-axis being the sum of absolute change in rank for all players. So, for the above displayed data, week 13 would be 24 by my reckoning. This would hopefully stand out from previous weeks and provide the contrast you need to demonstrate the ‘upset’ week it was.

I’d like to see that plot, and see if it really does stand out. If it doesn’t another metric you could use for ‘upset-ness’ is to calculate the sum of %change in rank. So a player dropping from rank 1 to 4 (300% change) would be much more significant than a player slipping from 11 to 14 (27% change). This tactic might better reflect how changes at the top end of the leaderboard may be percieved as more significant to observers and commentators – the real ‘upsets’.

Rick

“Miller vs Kusleika”: use lines with markers, and use straight lines, not smoothed lines. Smooth lines lie, and without markers you can’t tell how badly.

I don’t get “Two Nice Rounds”. It looks like it should be shots per hole on the Y axis, and I don’t even need 36 shots per hole.

For “Upset Saturday”, hide the gridlines or make them as light as possible. Use only dark colors for the lines (they could even all be black), and label both points with the name, on the left of the first point and on the right of the second. Alternatively you could try a scatter with first rank as X and second as Y.

“No ‘I’ in Team”: If you look real close, you can see ‘me’. I’m not sure what the bars charts are showing.

The way it reads (to me) is that Miller bogeyed the first, birdied the second, birdied the fifth and bogeyed the last. Two bogeys, two birdies, everything else par. Tesar birdied three, four, and eight (and parred everything else) for a three under 33.

I can’t grasp Week 11. Vertical axis looks to be course par, but horizontal axis is by hole.

Shouldn’t the vertical be 1 to 10 (12?) and then the Par series move according to the hole?

Or if par centered, what’s with 36?

…mrt