[Question] Potential tech standards changes?

[BlueBells]

I believe the intent here was to focus on disc golf as a combination of technique, power and finesse.

I play in an area with HEAVY disc golf traffic amongst people 18-24. There is a good reason that big arm drivers are the most stocked discs here: general, run of the mill athletic guy (and girl) are realizing that what they lack in finesse, they can make up for by buying nukes and grooves and just throwing full power overhead drives. It's a quick and dirty way to get distance without putting the necessary time into learning good mechanics...and while it's not exactly a sustainable way to become a good player, it does look good to other people just getting into the sport.

I don't think safety was the main issue here. I think it was a statement regarding the degeneration of the recreation level of a sport from "disc throwing" to "object hurling".

 

[SirRaph]

To make an analogy, they're thinking of banning long-shaft, trampoline-faced drivers because they think that newer golfers hit their irons better?

 

[oldredhat]

If what the OP summarized was the extent of the presentation, the the last 30 or so pages are pure speculation. I agree with Andy that they need to put together a more specific presentation. (although there's no guarantee that they'd so at wraiths, Andy)

It does bother me that he didn't have any data to support his comments, but I can't make a judgement on his reasoning or proposed changes when he didn't present either.

 

[scarwig]

the last 30 or so pages are pure speculation.

you HAVE been to DGCR before, haven't you?

 

[onemilemore]

It does bother me that he didn't have any data to support his comments, but I can't make a judgement on his reasoning or proposed changes when he didn't present either.

I think it was Three Putt who mentioned this earlier: If this is safety related, of course they don't want data, because it would likely tell the public what players already know - throwing sharp-edged plastic in a park is dangerous. Good luck trying to get more courses in the ground if that study comes out.

 

[Pwingles]

I think it was Three Putt who mentioned this earlier: If this is safety related, of course they don't want data, because it would likely tell the public what players already know - throwing sharp-edged plastic in a park is dangerous. Good luck trying to get more courses in the ground if that study comes out.

I understand there are differences in the usage between baseball fields and dg parks in a city park, but accidents occur in both instances with bystanders and i see plenty of rinky dink little ball fields in and around parks (and dg courses).

To me this makes design more the issue and not the sport(s) themselves.

Accidents wont go away. Ignorance and negligence wont either.

Im not sure that the argument about dg being dangerous to spectators is valid in this instance. The answers are already there imo.

Dont build where you cant safely build.
Be mindful of other park users.

And for new courses, dont build in parks that dont have the area to safely install one.

 

[onemilemore]

I understand there are differences in the usage between baseball fields and dg parks in a city park, but accidents occur in both instances with bystanders and i see plenty of rinky dink little ball fields in and around parks (and dg courses).

To me this makes design more the issue and not the sport(s) themselves.

Accidents wont go away. Ignorance and negligence wont either.

Im not sure that the argument about dg being dangerous to spectators is valid in this instance. The answers are already there imo.

Dont build where you cant safely build.
Be mindful of other park users.

And for new courses, dont build in parks that dont have the area to safely install one.

You hit the nail on the head here. This is kind of the double-edged sword of disc golf's growth, as I see it. People want more courses, so they end up shoehorning them in places where they shouldn't be and as a result eschew proper course design.

Slow growth, in this case, wouldn't be a terrible proposition. Sure, we all want more places to play, but not at the expense of safety and having someone take one to the dome and suing everyone.

As for what Duvall deemed "sustainable" in his presentation, we can only guess. But there is plenty about disc golf that can be worked with to make wide-rimmed drivers still acceptable. Proper course design is numero uno on this list.

 

[Mr. America]

What exactly was the guy's problem with wide-rimmed drivers?

 

[AndyJB]

If what the OP summarized was the extent of the presentation, the the last 30 or so pages are pure speculation. I agree with Andy that they need to put together a more specific presentation. (although there's no guarantee that they'd so at wraiths, Andy)

It does bother me that he didn't have any data to support his comments, but I can't make a judgement on his reasoning or proposed changes when he didn't present either.

The Wraith thing just comes from a Dave Dunipace quote someone put up in this thread earlier about him saying years ago that was as fast as discs ever needed to be and why they dragged their feet on releasing the Destroyer (which I clearly love but for all intents and purposes is just a faster Wraith)

I dont know how many eyeballs Innova has on the internet DG community but his vague presentation could be an attempt to spark the conversation, as it clearly has done here. Thats a bit of a stretch but not totally outside the realm of possibility, either. Im just confused. There have been a lot of good points brought up in this thread and all of them make sense in their own ways. It will be interesting to see if this pans out or is just quietly forgotten.

 

[oldredhat]

I think it was Three Putt who mentioned this earlier: If this is safety related, of course they don't want data, because it would likely tell the public what players already know - throwing sharp-edged plastic in a park is dangerous. Good luck trying to get more courses in the ground if that study comes out.

While the OP brought up safety, the presentation itself covered sustainability. Regardless, it's poorly defined, and lack of data doesn't help when you're trying for a policy change (that is also poorly defined.)

 

[mashnut]

I understand there are differences in the usage between baseball fields and dg parks in a city park, but accidents occur in both instances with bystanders and i see plenty of rinky dink little ball fields in and around parks (and dg courses).

To me this makes design more the issue and not the sport(s) themselves.

Accidents wont go away. Ignorance and negligence wont either.

Im not sure that the argument about dg being dangerous to spectators is valid in this instance. The answers are already there imo.

Dont build where you cant safely build.
Be mindful of other park users.

And for new courses, dont build in parks that dont have the area to safely install one.

If you really want to go down that road, something like 3/4 of current courses would have to go away.

Also, the issue isn't spectators, it's innocent bystanders who have no idea what we're doing or where we're going to be doing it. Baseball fields are well defined and well understood by the vast majority of people who would be walking around a park. You can't say the same thing for those nice paths in the woods with the funky deer feeders.

 

[disc qualified]

I can't tell you how many non-playing park users have stood near a basket or on /next to a fairway as I was about to throw. I say "watch out" and they wave me on as though they don't think I can throw that far. When I get near them and explain how fast some of the discs can fly and how far they can go as well as how dangerous it could be if they got hit by one it's like a revalation to them. Some people think that we use frisbees to play frisbee golf and have no concept of the differences between frisbees and discs. I guess you could call it ignorance but it's really just a lack of exposure.

Having said that, I have no problem with gradually decreasing the number of warp speed drivers being produced and adopting uniform standards that would keep discs in the 9-10 speed range. Yes, those discs can still cause property damage and injury but they are a bit easier to control, especially for the clueless chucker who is seduced by speed 13 drivers that they have no business throwing.

 

[EL-KABONG]

Selling millions of these discs and then crying foul?

Something stinks.

Wonder how Prodigy and other new brands would fare with one third of their new molds declared non legal?

 

[AndyJB]

Selling millions of these discs and then crying foul?

Something stinks.

Wonder how Prodigy and other new brands would fare with one third of their new molds declared non legal?

We keep getting the same comments posted again and again. So here ia my now stock response:

1) Innova is not an evil corporation bent on disc gold domination...they already have that. They are actually going against their own well-being

2) Prodigys best and most consistent discs are not their drivers. Lots of people have tried them but I dont see them in many bags and I see a lot od them being resold. Their mids and putters are top notch.

3) Innova has far more to lose than gain with this proposal....their market share wont be greatly effected if any other company besides Discraft went out of business

4) Since no one has any idea what the heck Mr. Duvall is even talking about, its unfair to paint him or Innova as evil

 

[mashnut]

Selling millions of these discs and then crying foul?

Something stinks.

Wonder how Prodigy and other new brands would fare with one third of their new molds declared non legal?

They cried foul, then when they weren't able to get the tech standards updated they made these discs so they wouldn't be left behind by other manufacturers, then they have continued making the same point. It just doesn't seem as sinister to me as some are trying to make it out to be.

 

[scarwig]

I stand by my liability/safety angle.

 

[g2avity]

Wow. Read all 32 pages. Great read! Well said Three Putt.

Also - Destroyer = greatest driver ever made (even if reluctantly).

 

[Rizbee]

Geez, I wish I had enough time to write all that's in my head, but I don't. but to hit the high points:

1. Sustainability is about being able to survive and thrive without depleting or destroying the resources you have available. Disc golf sustainability, therefore, is about making sure there are places to play now and in the future, allowing for the expected /desired growth of the sport.
a. Safety is part of this - if people who are bystanders in public parks are being injured, that's bad for sustainability, because courses will be pulled from public parks.
b. Space needed for courses is part of this - when discs fly farther, you need more space for courses. Needing more space means more cost, less availability of land for courses. High costs will slow development of new courses.

2. Disc golf in it's current form is dangerous to unknowing/unaware bystanders. People walking through the park, not knowing there is a disc golf course present have no idea they could be hit by a sharp, heavy projectile thrown hundreds of feet away. This problem has only be exacerbated by advances in disc speed/distance. When I designed my first course in 1985, you only needed to worry about park users, say, 50 feet off the fairway being hit (by blunter discs, too). Now that discs (often thrown by unskilled players) can go even farther off course, you really need 100ft or more of safe space surrounding fairways.

3. Other sports have limited the "wow" factor of their product in the name of safety: baseball bats have been deadened to protect pitchers, racing cars have been made slower to protect drivers and spectators, golf balls have restrictions (mostly to keep courses from getting too long) that make them safer, football requires helmets, makes safer helmets, restricts types of hits. All of these sports remain popular spectator sports.

4. Wide-rimmed, fast, sharp-edged drivers do more damage to trees than midranges or putters. Look at trees close to the tee of a long hole, compared to trees next to the tee of a short hole. Which trees have received more damage? Yes, the trees near the driver-disc hole, not the midgrange/putter hole.

5. Public park courses are part of the sport and part of the history of the sport. Requiring private land and pay-to-play for *all* courses will eliminate most of our available placers to play and make it difficult to get new ones.

6. You don't need heavy, wide-rimmed drivers to have interesting, entertaining, compelling disc golf competition. There were lots of oohs and aahhs when Sammy Ferrans threw his Aero 400+ feet to park hole #4 at Ellison park in Rochester during the finals of the 1984 PDGA Worlds. If all competitors have to "disc down", the competition will still be great.

7. While restricting driver speed/width/sharpness would hurt sales of already-produced discs, those sales would be replaced by increased sales of slower discs, both from existing players and the new players who would come along in the future. Titleist has to make all of their golf balls the same size - they do just fine.

8. A standards change would never happen immediately, but would undoubtedly be phased in over time. X number of years before *any* discs are illegal, with more "old" discs made illegal each year, starting from the fastest/sharpest and adding more each year. It may take several years to do this, but it would get the desired result and give players time to wean themselves off of these discs.

9. Harold Duvall, who made the presentation to the PDGA board, is a multi-time World Champion and has been playing disc golf and other disc sports for well over 30 years. He knows a few things about flying discs. He LOVES the sport of disc golf, which has provided himself, his friends and family with income for 30 years. He is a man of high integrity, and has done a tremendous amount to further the sport of disc golf (creating EDGE, USDGC, donating many courses and countless discs and baskets). I find it hard to believe he would make this proposal without careful consideration of its impact on the sport.

10. Just because Harold is a part-owner of Innova doesn't mean this is an evil Innova scheme to kill the competition. There are people in this world who do things for reasons other than personal financial gain. Harold is one of them.

I'll stop at ten, but I could easily give you many more points, but work beckons.

 

[depster]

As long as they atleast keep the wraith or even beast around ill be happy..

 

[Old Bassman]

Geez, I wish I had enough time to write all that's in my head, but I don't. but to hit the high points:

1. Sustainability is about being able to survive and thrive without depleting or destroying the resources you have available. Disc golf sustainability, therefore, is about making sure there are places to play now and in the future, allowing for the expected /desired growth of the sport.
a. Safety is part of this - if people who are bystanders in public parks are being injured, that's bad for sustainability, because courses will be pulled from public parks.
b. Space needed for courses is part of this - when discs fly farther, you need more space for courses. Needing more space means more cost, less availability of land for courses. High costs will slow development of new courses.

2. Disc golf in it's current form is dangerous to unknowing/unaware bystanders. People walking through the park, not knowing there is a disc golf course present have no idea they could be hit by a sharp, heavy projectile thrown hundreds of feet away. This problem has only be exacerbated by advances in disc speed/distance. When I designed my first course in 1985, you only needed to worry about park users, say, 50 feet off the fairway being hit (by blunter discs, too). Now that discs (often thrown by unskilled players) can go even farther off course, you really need 100ft or more of safe space surrounding fairways.

3. Other sports have limited the "wow" factor of their product in the name of safety: baseball bats have been deadened to protect pitchers, racing cars have been made slower to protect drivers and spectators, golf balls have restrictions (mostly to keep courses from getting too long) that make them safer, football requires helmets, makes safer helmets, restricts types of hits. All of these sports remain popular spectator sports.

4. Wide-rimmed, fast, sharp-edged drivers do more damage to trees than midranges or putters. Look at trees close to the tee of a long hole, compared to trees next to the tee of a short hole. Which trees have received more damage? Yes, the trees near the driver-disc hole, not the midgrange/putter hole.

5. Public park courses are part of the sport and part of the history of the sport. Requiring private land and pay-to-play for *all* courses will eliminate most of our available placers to play and make it difficult to get new ones.

6. You don't need heavy, wide-rimmed drivers to have interesting, entertaining, compelling disc golf competition. There were lots of oohs and aahhs when Sammy Ferrans threw his Aero 400+ feet to park hole #4 at Ellison park in Rochester during the finals of the 1984 PDGA Worlds. If all competitors have to "disc down", the competition will still be great.

7. While restricting driver speed/width/sharpness would hurt sales of already-produced discs, those sales would be replaced by increased sales of slower discs, both from existing players and the new players who would come along in the future. Titleist has to make all of their golf balls the same size - they do just fine.

8. A standards change would never happen immediately, but would undoubtedly be phased in over time. X number of years before *any* discs are illegal, with more "old" discs made illegal each year, starting from the fastest/sharpest and adding more each year. It may take several years to do this, but it would get the desired result and give players time to wean themselves off of these discs.

9. Harold Duvall, who made the presentation to the PDGA board, is a multi-time World Champion and has been playing disc golf and other disc sports for well over 30 years. He knows a few things about flying discs. He LOVES the sport of disc golf, which has provided himself, his friends and family with income for 30 years. He is a man of high integrity, and has done a tremendous amount to further the sport of disc golf (creating EDGE, USDGC, donating many courses and countless discs and baskets). I find it hard to believe he would make this proposal without careful consideration of its impact on the sport.

10. Just because Harold is a part-owner of Innova doesn't mean this is an evil Innova scheme to kill the competition. There are people in this world who do things for reasons other than personal financial gain. Harold is one of them.

I'll stop at ten, but I could easily give you many more points, but work beckons.

Thanx Rizbee for a well written reply than is not just speculation based on the previous reply.