• Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
    It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)

United States disc golf championships

Is pay per view at US dgc a good idea or not?


  • Total voters
    152
I tend to agree. I also think we are rapidly approaching the time when it will occur.

You could even make another "cut" for those who need to come back. Say Top 20? If it's so hard to make arrangements to play another day, shorten the field even more. Guys rarely comeback from outside the Top 10 anyways, if not Top 4. So top 20 should be enough, if or when it happens again. If guys need, want to leave simply give them 20th place then. I would think most guys who are in the Top 20 would want to try and move up though even if it makes them having to stay another night, delay travel plans, etc..
 
Bad shots are punished by being FURTHER away from the hole. Making up pretend lakes and tall weed hazards is the epitome of gimmicks.

Just take any of the holes out there pretty much. Ropes are 35 feet from the basket. One player lands 25 feet, one player lands 65 feet long. But then he picks up his disc then plays from 35 feet. Like wth is he doing? Your 65 feet away, why are you picking up your disc and moving it to 35 with a stroke penalty?

Or I forgot we are pretending. I guess I'm not a good pretender.

Huh? I thought pretending was basically your whole shtick. :confused:
 
I think all the little trees they planted on 5 are a great addition. They'll push people to play closer to the water, especially on the second shot. Wish there were 1-2 more, continuing down that line.
 
Last edited:
An overlooked part of the new hole 9: No one made a putt from the drop zone, and everyone on video is laying up. From UDisc stats is looks like 40-50 people went OB off the tee, missed from the drop zone, and made a C1 putt. Seems like they could have found a better DZ location.
 
An overlooked part of the new hole 9: No one made a putt from the drop zone, and everyone on video is laying up. From UDisc stats is looks like 40-50 people went OB off the tee, missed from the drop zone, and made a C1 putt. Seems like they could have found a better DZ location.

Correction, one player made the drop zone putt. Paige Pierce did earlier in the women's tournament.
 
Must be a Fountain of Youth in the lake at Winthrop...


As of right now, Sexton is -10 t-1st, Barsby is -9 in 3rd, Barry is -8 t-4th and JohnE is -7 t-7th...:eek:
 
I agree with what you said, but not necessarily with what you're (potentially) implying.

It seems that you're implying we shouldn't change. I don't think we need to change. But I do think it'd be great if designers could figure out a way to design a course in which there was a very smooth curve of bad/worse/worst shots are punished somewhat/normally/harshly. I wouldn't want all courses to be this way; it's great to get a lucky break, and some of the best rounds of my life have involved many lucky breaks. Additionally, I don't think there's anyway to get rid of all luck in DG, and nor do I want to. I simply think it'd be great to have a smoother punishment curve on some courses.

Lastly, bigger picture: I was illustrating to OMD that ropes are no different with luck than the obstacles he's arguing we should replace them with. He's arguing that we shouldn't use X because it is deficient, but we should replace it with Y (even though Y has the same deficiency).

I'm not trying to imply that we shouldn't change. Ropes (and other design features) can be used well, or poorly. We should continue to work on refining design.

My argument is similar to your last paragraph, except that I extend it to other sports.
 
According to Udisc, Paige made a Circle 2 putt for birdie.

Well I guess I'm wrong. I wasn't watching super closely, but she was very close to the drop because that tree was all in her way.

I do agree that scoring separation can be achieved using more fair tactics. An impossible drop zone is essentially a two stroke penalty.

Edit: Went back and watched again, I am wrong. She was 10 feet or so left of the drop and about 10 feet closer.
 
Last edited:
I agree with what you said, but not necessarily with what you're (potentially) implying.

It seems that you're implying we shouldn't change. I don't think we need to change. But I do think it'd be great if designers could figure out a way to design a course in which there was a very smooth curve of bad/worse/worst shots are punished somewhat/normally/harshly. I wouldn't want all courses to be this way; it's great to get a lucky break, and some of the best rounds of my life have involved many lucky breaks. Additionally, I don't think there's anyway to get rid of all luck in DG, and nor do I want to. I simply think it'd be great to have a smoother punishment curve on some courses.

Lastly, bigger picture: I was illustrating to OMD that ropes are no different with luck than the obstacles he's arguing we should replace them with. He's arguing that we shouldn't use X because it is deficient, but we should replace it with Y (even though Y has the same deficiency).

Trees with no OB play as a smaller penalty to ropes everywhere and OB shots taken. It's easy, find a better course with trees, that's long enough, challenging enough, yet fair that can host a major.

It's so much more enjoyable watching players like Ricky make crazy recovery shots then to see them pick up a disc and place it in the fairway.
 
So I have not been paying attention, but there is no post-production coverage for this event?
Stupid, stupid, stupid.
 
So I have not been paying attention, but there is no post-production coverage for this event?
Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Not sure about that, but the free presentation is two weeks later I think.

Ie, I think it will be on YouTube in a couple of weeks.
 
Top