Would you like to see the PDGA limit number of disc carried in tournaments?

[josephreese]

So would a limit on the number mean no mid-round additions/replacements?

Just an anecdote to chum the sharks: In the MVP Circuit I played, one of our card mates lost his driver. He had to play most of the course with just his mid and putter. He ended up posting the best score in the group.

 

[BrotherDave]

Just an anecdote to chum the sharks: In the MVP Circuit I played, one of our card mates lost his driver. He had to play most of the course with just his mid and putter. He ended up posting the best score in the group.

That's because the driver was super flippy for most people. But that isn't that uncommon, I've seen lots of tournament success from people playing it really safe and just throwing a putter up and down the fairway all round, especially if it's a really tough course.

I think a disc limit would just hurt scoring separation even more cos players won't bag that one trick shot disc that would enable them to go for it cos they need backups for their go-to discs.

I think the pro-disc limit people should just organize the battle golf disc association.

 

[Countchunkula]

I don't see carrying a sh!t load of discs as being an advantage.

In a competitive round, I only want to throw discs that I've practiced with and know their flight characteristics. Since stability is so inconsistent, this means testing each individual leopard or valkyrie or insert disc of your choice. I can't imagine taking the time to practice with 50+ discs; so that I knew and could trust the flight characteristics of each one.

I've usually got less than 15 in the bag and a few of those are new discs being tested plus a few backups. In a competitive situation, I wouldn't be throwing more than 5-8 discs (barring extreme weather).

 

[Martin Dewgarita]

One thing that hasn't been discussed.. I think the PDGA should require 30 or more discs to be carried by every player, and every disc must be used at least once. Notice I said by the player and carry, not caddy or pull a cart. This would introduce a new level of conditioning and an entirely different skill set.

 

[josephreese]

That's because the driver was super flippy for most people.

Yeah, I couldn't get that driver to work for me. The mid that year was also pretty understable, but that's what he started using off the tee after his driver was gone. Once he got it in his head to power down he started scoring well. It took seeing that firsthand to get me to trust mids and putters off the tee on some holes.

 

[iacas]

So would a limit on the number mean no mid-round additions/replacements?

If I had my way, sure. Adds to the strategy.

Then, with such a rule, would you need to monitor players to prevent them from visiting their strategically-parked car during the round? Or keep track of not just the number of discs, but which discs, they are carrying?

Is this really an issue? Are disc golfers this dishonest? This is far from the first comment about how "TDs will have to count everyone's discs" or "we'll have to monitor players" or whatever.

Can't disc golfers be honest? Aren't they expected to call penalties on themselves and all that? And, you know, to try to adhere to the rules and spirit of the game?

I understand what iacas is saying. The benefits of a disc limit would be in the strategy of choosing discs for a given course, or conditions, which would be interesting. And adding the challenge of doing more with less---demonstrating the skill that, with any given disc, you can throw it on more than one flight path, and more flight paths than you otherwise would.

Kinda, yeah.

Though, in my opinion, the value of the latter is negligible. Even if you stipulate that it's true, it doesn't significantly enhance the game.

And as I've said, I disagree. I think it enhances the game. Which is why I'm in favor of it. I wouldn't be in favor of something that degrades the game, just out of some weird desire or something.

Would you please offer a limited disc option for tournaments so this discussion will go away? Oh wait, you mean TDs can already do that if they want. Nobody does. Why is that?

Because they haven't. Because they're worried about what Innova et al would say? Because they disagree with me? Because they have bigger things to tackle first? Should I go on…?

"What is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right." - Albert Einstein.

I don't see carrying a sh!t load of discs as being an advantage.

I do.

In a competitive round, I only want to throw discs that I've practiced with and know their flight characteristics. Since stability is so inconsistent, this means testing each individual leopard or valkyrie or insert disc of your choice. I can't imagine taking the time to practice with 50+ discs; so that I knew and could trust the flight characteristics of each one.

a) 50+ is a helluva lot. I think even 25 is too many.
b) Pros and higher level players DO have the time to practice with and get to know 25+ discs.

The point I've made a few times is that if you can make the same throw and just choose a different disc, that requires less skill than forcing a smaller number of discs to hit more lines and flights by changing the throw.

Changing the throw, IMO, requires more skill than changing the plastic.

Since I made the golf analogy above, hitting a 7-iron on nine different flights (high, medium, low and draw, straight, fade) requires more skill than hitting a different club. The player who can do that is more skilled than an imaginary golfer who had nine different 7-irons and who just made the same swing.

 

[DavidSauls]

Can't disc golfers be honest? Aren't they expected to call penalties on themselves and all that? And, you know, to try to adhere to the rules and spirit of the game?

Most are....though rules have to contemplate those who aren't.

I can think of a few who, if they detoured to their car to shed a jacket or grab a water bottle or whatever, I'd be suspicious of.

Particularly if they were part of the presumed majority who think the limit is a dumb rule. Their would be great temptation to bend it. And, if the disc limit has any real effect, skirting it would have a significant effect.

 

[Old Dog]

I wouldn't mind a "1 caddy" rule. I don't want to feel the earth shake from armies of caddies as Rico or Feldy walk to their disc.

As far as limiting discs ... idk. PGA definitely isn't a fair example, since they limit clubs, but not balls. You could play a different type of ball on each hole if you wanted. So you might say their possible unique equipment action is limited to 14x18. Far more than I'd ever want to carry.

I'm pretty sure you have to play the same make/model of ball for the entire round once you've started a round.

 

[DavidSauls]

Dear PDGA,

Would you please offer a limited disc option for tournaments so this discussion will go away? Oh wait, you mean TDs can already do that if they want. Nobody does. Why is that?

It simple enough, the guys who think this is a good idea are quite allowed to run tournaments doing this. They should.

I agree with the sentiment, but is this true? Other than requesting a special rule waiver, which may or may not be granted?

It does bring to mind the next question: If the number of discs should be limited, what would that limit be? And why?

If it's a TD option, but not a PDGA rule, disc-limit enthusiasts, TDing events to prove their theory, could experiment with differing limits. Perhaps adjusting them a little on loss-prone courses.

 

[lyleoross]

Iacas,

Albert Einstein, really? "What's right?" You do realize you just said that your opinion that there should be a limit on the number of discs is "right" as in, has a moral imperative? Cowsers man, this is disc golf, not nuclear annihilation. Any time, any day, any round you want, you can limit the discs you're carrying to your heart's content. I do agree though Innova/Discraft/Tridiscs are all plotting to keep as many discs as they can in our bags. Have you heard about the new 50 disc backpacks they're making?

It turns out that players who have the resources tend to buy discs. Those who don't, don't. I have a couple of hundred myself, and I limit my purchases. Go watch Smashboxx next week, Terry probably has 1,000. The correlation between discs owned and discs carried in tournaments is weak in my observation. Weak enough that I'd be willing to bet loose change on it, and I hate gambling.

As I indirectly pointed out, if there was a huge drive for this, the TDs would be doing it. There are a few limited disc tournaments. They are considered fun play. The one in Houston allows players to decide what disc the player is going to use with limited availability cards.

There are real issues the PDGA has at hand including growth, and backing. There are real issues at hand concerning rules and play, par, basket structure, step and jump putting, course difficulty for majors. Not to mention the development and structure of a Pro Tour, World Tour, NT Tour etc. I'd much rather those be addressed than the PDGA foster a disc limitation on the sport that isn't going to impact fairness of play, but is going to annoy a significant number of players who will now have to manage their disc selection prior to play. I can hear it now, "crap, I can't believe that some twit on social media got the PDGA to make me sort through discs prior to tournament play when I have other things to do."

BTW - David is correct about monitoring players for discs. I've seen too many guys sneak off to have a joint, smoke, beer etc, to think that guys won't sneak off to get discs, not to mention having to go through everyone's bag pre-tournament to make sure it's in line before tee off. I can hear the TDs moaning already. Or perhaps we can hire the TSA to do it? What was their fail rate on searching for explosives, oh yeah, 90%.

It's a fun enough discussion, but the day the PDGA gives it any real attention will be the day they receive several thousand emails entitled, "really?"

 

[DavidSauls]

The point I've made a few times is that if you can make the same throw and just choose a different disc, that requires less skill than forcing a smaller number of discs to hit more lines and flights by changing the throw.

Changing the throw, IMO, requires more skill than changing the plastic.

I understand that point.

But I don't see how it makes the game better, or enough better to justify the rule.

I can dream up a lot of changes that would make the game more challenging, and in some way require more skill. Few that warrant the compulsion of a rules change; fewer still that I think most people would like.

Just requiring more skill, in itself, isn't enough. Does it make the game better? For whom? Players? They're not asking for it. Spectators? There aren't any. The future? Highly speculative.

*

Out of curiosity, do top players make the same throw every time, and just change discs?

I'm not a top player, but any given disc from my bag is likely to be thrown any number of ways---forehand, backhand, big hyzer, big anhyzer, flat, hyzer flip, etc. My indecision on a tough hole is not just which disc matches the layout and wind if I throw it normally, but which disc at which different release will work best.

Even as I agree that it takes more skill to play with fewer discs, I think it's oversimplified to say players just throw the same way every time, and change discs to suit the hole.

 

[lyleoross]

I agree with the sentiment, but is this true? Other than requesting a special rule waiver, which may or may not be granted?

It does bring to mind the next question: If the number of discs should be limited, what would that limit be? And why?

If it's a TD option, but not a PDGA rule, disc-limit enthusiasts, TDing events to prove their theory, could experiment with differing limits. Perhaps adjusting them a little on loss-prone courses.

I know of three or four tournaments that limit disc options, not to mention the ones sponsored by the manufacturers. Not sure on sanctioning of them, though.

My feeling is simple enough, if this were a real issue, players would be demanding it. However, lets grant the point. Let's say it requires the aforementioned release from the PDGA. While the PDGA limits certain things, if they were getting dozens or hundreds of requests for tournaments with disc limitations we'd be hearing about it. I don't believe it's happening to any real extent.

It isn't like issues that impact fair play, as mentioned in my last post. As long as the rule of play treats all players equally, with the same options, I'm okay with it. As a reminder, for a long time, range finders were illegal. The PDGA felt not every player had access. Now that they are ubiquitous, the PDGA says go ahead, just do it in the standard time limitation. The only rational reason I could see to limit disc options would be if different players were impacted differently.

The supposition that limiting disc selection will significantly impact play to the better or to a higher skill set is just that, a supposition. Would it make the game significantly more exciting? That is a more important measure.

 

[lyleoross]

I understand that point.

But I don't see how it makes the game better, or enough better to justify the rule.

I can dream up a lot of changes that would make the game more challenging, and in some way require more skill. Few that warrant the compulsion of a rules change; fewer still that I think most people would like.

Just requiring more skill, in itself, isn't enough. Does it make the game better? For whom? Players? They're not asking for it. Spectators? There aren't any. The future? Highly speculative.

*

Out of curiosity, do top players make the same throw every time, and just change discs?

I'm not a top player, but any given disc from my bag is likely to be thrown any number of ways---forehand, backhand, big hyzer, big anhyzer, flat, hyzer flip, etc. My indecision on a tough hole is not just which disc matches the layout and wind if I throw it normally, but which disc at which different release will work best.

Even as I agree that it takes more skill to play with fewer discs, I think it's oversimplified to say players just throw the same way every time, and change discs to suit the hole.

As always, half of what I say is already in your posts. Good to know I'm thinking like the rational guy here, at least some of the time.

 

[Old Dog]

I just think that limiting the number of disc would not only place more emphasis on player's skills but also multiply the strategy factor X fold.

Say competitors were limited to 12 disc of their choice per round. Players are given the opportunity to play at least one pre-tournament practice round with no limitations on the number of discs and/or do a walk threw. Then they get to choose the 12 disc that they think will work best for the 18 holes taken into account weather conditions, wind etc. Players would have to use the chosen 12 disc for the entire round. Between rounds players could be allowed to make unlimited substitutions.

During the course of a round a player could replace a lost disc or substitute a disc in his bag at the cost of one penalty stoke per disc. This would place an emphasis on strategy and risk reward decisions during a round. For example "I really wished I had bagged my XYZ disc for this hole/shot now that I think about it again. I can substitute a disc for it at the cost of one stroke... is it worth it?" Or another example may be: Do I risk trying to carry over a long water hole and possibly loosing my PDQ driver for the rest of the round or lay up for a safer shot. I could risk the long shot knowing I could replace my PDQ driver with another at the expense of adding an additional penalty stroke... is it worth the risk?"

I think placing these types of chooses/decisions on the player would make for a more interesting game and reward players with a larger skill set.

 

[ru4por]

The real question then is, given the ,current ability of any player to chose to limit their own discs, do you think it would be a competitive advantage to you, to limit the discs others carry. I don't believe I need my competition forcing me to play in conditions they feel benefit them. I like to the idea of having the choice to subscribe to the disc number philosophy I chose.

 

[JC17393]

At this point in the discussion, it feels like everyone's going round and round making the same points over and over again. How about a new direction?

Someone, anyone, who is a proponent of limiting discs, come up with a sample plan on how this would look. Come up with a number and explain your rational as to why that number is ideal in your vision of the future of competitive disc golf. No more abstract concepts...let's discuss exactly what this kind of thing should look like, in your view. Nothing I dislike more in a debate than the "they/we should do this" without ever specifying what "this" really is.

Just like any other good rules debate, write the rule you want to see and justify why it is better than what already exists. And go.....

 

[DavidSauls]

At this point in the discussion, it feels like everyone's going round and round making the same points over and over again. How about a new direction?

Someone, anyone, who is a proponent of limiting discs, come up with a sample plan on how this would look. Come up with a number and explain your rational as to why that number is ideal in your vision of the future of competitive disc golf. No more abstract concepts...let's discuss exactly what this kind of thing should look like, in your view. Nothing I dislike more in a debate than the "they/we should do this" without ever specifying what "this" really is.

Just like any other good rules debate, write the rule you want to see and justify why it is better than what already exists. And go.....

......and please include your mid-round replacement rule.

 

[gdub58]

At this point in the discussion, it feels like everyone's going round and round making the same points over and over again. How about a new direction?

Someone, anyone, who is a proponent of limiting discs, come up with a sample plan on how this would look. Come up with a number and explain your rational as to why that number is ideal in your vision of the future of competitive disc golf. No more abstract concepts...let's discuss exactly what this kind of thing should look like, in your view. Nothing I dislike more in a debate than the "they/we should do this" without ever specifying what "this" really is.

Just like any other good rules debate, write the rule you want to see and justify why it is better than what already exists. And go.....

I'm not the most ardent supporter of this, but I'll give it a shot:

- Limit of 12 discs to start a round. Why 12? Sounds limiting enough to me that players will have to give some real thought to what they will carry.
- Unlimited substitutions between rounds - you can use a completely different set each round
- If a disc is lost or damaged during a round, it can immediately be replaced with the same mold/plastic, as long as it doesn't cause a delay in the round. If it takes three holes for someone to get a replacement, that's fine. If a player wants to have someone following him around with a bag of replacements, that's fine.
- If a disc is not lost or damaged it cannot be replaced during a round.
- Players cannot use each other's discs.

I wouldn't see this as a viable rule for your local c-tier - as many have said, TDs do not need to deal with this kind of thing.

I could see this being done on a trial basis in an NT or two to see how it is received. The reasons for doing it have already been mentioned, but for me seeing the disc lineup for each of the players on the covered card(s) would be cool and could add some interest to the viewing experience.

The Japan Open already has what I would consider a more onerous restriction with the requirement that all players have to use 150 class discs, so it's not like this kind of thing is without precedent.

 

[Old Dog]

At this point in the discussion, it feels like everyone's going round and round making the same points over and over again. How about a new direction?

Someone, anyone, who is a proponent of limiting discs, come up with a sample plan on how this would look. Come up with a number and explain your rational as to why that number is ideal in your vision of the future of competitive disc golf. No more abstract concepts...let's discuss exactly what this kind of thing should look like, in your view. Nothing I dislike more in a debate than the "they/we should do this" without ever specifying what "this" really is.

Just like any other good rules debate, write the rule you want to see and justify why it is better than what already exists. And go.....

......and please include your mid-round replacement rule.

Did you not read post #274?

 

[iacas]

Most are....though rules have to contemplate those who aren't.

I can think of a few who, if they detoured to their car to shed a jacket or grab a water bottle or whatever, I'd be suspicious of.

Particularly if they were part of the presumed majority who think the limit is a dumb rule. Their would be great temptation to bend it. And, if the disc limit has any real effect, skirting it would have a significant effect.

Well, that's kinda sad, I guess.

Anyway, if part of the reason for opposing a rule is because you're worried about people cheating, the problem isn't really with the rule…

I'm pretty sure you have to play the same make/model of ball for the entire round once you've started a round.

Only in some cases. For casual play, even for handicaps, no. For many amateur tournaments, no. On the PGA Tour and some higher level events, the condition of competition is in place, yes.

Albert Einstein, really? "What's right?" You do realize you just said that your opinion that there should be a limit on the number of discs is "right" as in, has a moral imperative?

You know, I debated including that, because I feared someone would take it far, far more seriously than intended, as you've done.

I'm simply quoting it to say that what may be "best" for disc golf may not be the "popular" option. Many people will point to a poll as if it's "proof" that I'm "wrong" or should change my opinion.

What is "best" may not always be popular. Raising taxes to pay for something may be what's "right" but it's unlikely to be a popular thing.

When discussing opinions, there is almost never a "right" or "wrong." I get that. And I posted the quote in a lighthearted, not serious way of saying that "popularity" alone doesn't mean as much as some seem to think.

The correlation between discs owned and discs carried in tournaments is weak in my observation.

I haven't talked about discs owned or anything like that.

As I indirectly pointed out, if there was a huge drive for this, the TDs would be doing it.

I never said there was a huge drive for it. My Einstein quote speaks to that - it's not a popular opinion. I get that. But… so what?

There are real issues the PDGA has at hand including growth, and backing. There are real issues at hand concerning rules and play, par, basket structure, step and jump putting, course difficulty for majors. Not to mention the development and structure of a Pro Tour, World Tour, NT Tour etc.

No doubt there are "bigger" issues, but that doesn't mean they have to ignore everything else.

And again, I don't expect this to pass any time soon (I only say that because I'm not a fan of saying "never"). That doesn't invalidate my opinion.

BTW - David is correct about monitoring players for discs. I've seen too many guys sneak off to have a joint, smoke, beer etc, to think that guys won't sneak off to get discs, not to mention having to go through everyone's bag pre-tournament to make sure it's in line before tee off.

So disc golfers are dishonest cheats. Cool. Not.

But I don't see how it makes the game better, or enough better to justify the rule.

I do.

I can dream up a lot of changes that would make the game more challenging, and in some way require more skill.

I could too, but this thread is about this one.

Just requiring more skill, in itself, isn't enough. Does it make the game better?

It's not really about requiring "more skill." It's about further separating players with more skill.

Imagine right now someone's scoring average is 57.3 and a competitor of his is 58.0. The two have a range of scores that look a bit like a bell curve, and the B guy beats the A guy maybe 40% of the time.

Their scores might go up slightly, to 58.1 and 59.6, but the gap will increase: B will beat A only 25% of the time now. The better player will be able to separate himself more. IMO.

Out of curiosity, do top players make the same throw every time, and just change discs?

I highly doubt that, but you're mistaking my simplification of the concept to make my point with what I'm actually saying. The player who has MORE throws available to him is the more skilled player. The player who makes fewer throws and relies on the plastic to do what he needs to do is the less skilled player (assuming all else is equal - you could limit Ricky Wysocki to a forehand and an 800-rated player to any throw he wants to make and Ricky is clearly the more skilled).

Even as I agree that it takes more skill to play with fewer discs, I think it's oversimplified to say players just throw the same way every time, and change discs to suit the hole.

I haven't said that.

......and please include your mid-round replacement rule.

I already did. No mid-round replacement. Adds to the strategy.