United States disc golf championships

[Ryan P.]

Live ball golf coverage is the model. It's been around for decades. It works. Millions of non-golfers (or very occasional golfers) are drawn to it. Why? Well there's a big and coordinated and experienced production crew that has commentators and cameras from various angles covering multiple cards/groups. They can pick angles, replay shots, moments, reactions, slow-mo, all on the spot... It can be better than being at the event. ...so and so is making moves from the 4th card... Are the leaders aware? Is it changing strategy? Risk Reward decisions? Post production just can't be the same with all these layers in real time...

Even just a decade ago the cost to produce this kind of coverage was totally prohibitive for disc golf. But today technology is making it much more accessible to a much lower budget. Yeah they're making blunders and have some poor pr and customer relations, but it's only going to keep getting better as they learn from mistakes.

From my perspective the real issue that doesn't get attention on this subject is the courses themselves! A huge part of attracting viewership for ball golf events is the beauty, setting, history and design of the courses. Too many disc golf courses that host premier events are located on multi-million dollar landscapes designed for other purposes; university campuses, public parks and ball golf courses. It's blatantly obvious to viewers, especially curious fans we'd like to capture who are not avid disc golfers. It screams "this sport ain't legit".

Now let me qualify... DG got where it is from a lot of DIY, low budget courses, as well as courses that utilize existing developed landscapes, like USDGC in Rock Hill.... Tons of history and evolution there that tells a story! And so much work and thoughtful design to make tournament play for the best of the best engaging... They have even taken big strides to address the impact on the landscape, compaction and erosion (See latest DiscGolfer Mag article which highlights hole 18).

But the future is dedicated courses in beautiful landscapes, artfully designed and impeccably manicured (not with turf and fertilizers like ball golf). Maple Hill is a pretty good example of a premier venue that has continually improved over the years with course legibility, beauty and legitimacy, through mulching, terracing, tee areas, trails, etc....

Live coverage is an important piece for 'going mainstream' and appealing to a broader audience. More attractive courses are critical for this. The question is, should dg go mainstream or is it better suited to remain and be perceived as an alternative lifestyle sport? I'm sure the pro players would love the financial rewards. But would it change the culture for the worse?

This is a way it has been done. This is not the only way to do it. I agree that many people watch golf for the aesthetics, but not all do. Many people watch DG for the aesthetics too, but not the same aesthetics as golf.

Another way to say my thoughts is that we could follow in the footsteps of golf, but we don't have to. We could keep the wooded courses that have a more intimate feel with nature than the big views of the ocean and mountains that golf has, which is more grandiose. I'd prefer that we stay unique.

 

[davetherocketguy]

That response sounds like you wouldn't be watching it anyway -- Whether free or PPV. If you don't have 3 hours to carve out to watch DG, and if when you do get that time you'll choose playing over watching, then I don't think the question is for people like you? The question is for people in different circumstances... Am I right about that?

Nope.

I would like the option to watch the last bit of the later rounds. Not the entire event. I can do an hour or two to see the end but not for $25. That's kinda absurd imho. If I spend $25 then I feel like I have to watch all of it to make it worthwhile. Sorry but I am just not interested in the early round dramas. I would be especially PO'ed if I made time to watch the ending rounds just to have the stream dropped.

Someday when I am retired maybe I'll have a different view on this sort of thing but not at the moment...

 

[tahoe]

Unique AND Attractive DGCs

This is a way it has been done. This is not the only way to do it. I agree that many people watch golf for the aesthetics, but not all do. Many people watch DG for the aesthetics too, but not the same aesthetics as golf.

Another way to say my thoughts is that we could follow in the footsteps of golf, but we don't have to. We could keep the wooded courses that have a more intimate feel with nature than the big views of the ocean and mountains that golf has, which is more grandiose. I'd prefer that we stay unique.

I think I agree with you. Let me clarify... I don't mean to say that disc golf courses should look just like ball golf courses, only that they should be much more 'attractive and legible'. Each should be designed to look beautiful to serve the respective nature of each type of golf... I think the disc golf world is coming to a consensus that playing on ball golf courses doesn't fit the flights, shapes and strategy we would like to see on a disc golf course... The intent wasn't that disc golf courses need to look like ball golf courses, it was that ball golf courses are often beautiful to look at and that's an important part of gaining viewership. Disc golf should absolutely stay unique like you say...

The flight of a disc is very different from the flight of a golf ball off a club. It requires different landscapes. Players are able to hug the contours of the land, shape shots through bending corridors defined by branching and underneath ceilings, etc... Wooded courses with elevation offer these qualities we want but I feel we need to make them more attractive and legible... This means defining fairways and making attractive, defined LZs, fairway edges and greens with mostly non-turf landscape techniques (stone, boulders, gravel, timber, chip mulch, plantings, trails...) that accentuates the beauty of the land with clearly shaped fairways. This will make a disc golf course attractive AND unique and 'intimate'.

But why not mix in ocean, lake and mountain views into a disc golf course if they are available to the site? Especially 'peek-a-boos' framed by forest openings... I feel courses that are entirely within dense woods feel too claustrophobic. The ideal is a mix that weaves in and out, with few if any entirely open holes unless elevation is a prominent feautre, imo... Long views offer a sense of where you are in the world and moments for reflection, rejuvenation... Important reasons why many are attracted to playing and watching both ball and disc golf.

Currently most forested courses are blanketed in compacted hardpan soils, exposed roots/rocks (trip hazards), rilling and gullying. We just need to start addressing these conditions with landscape construction BEFORE opening courses for play. Soils are very hard to fix once they are already compacted. We want to keep the soils acting like sponges as much as possible to serve the landscape ecology of the site to be sustainable over time. Luckily doing this makes courses more attractive at the same time. One thing we can learn from ball golf is that construction and maintenance are important to keep courses beautiful over decades and even centuries... Most ball golf courses may use tons of water and fertilizers, but much of that water percolates beneficially back into the water-table through designed permeable landscapes, including natural precipitation. When soils are compacted there is sediment transport, soil profile reversal and excessive evaporation. This is another form of wasting water as a natural resource...

Land for recreation is becoming more scarce. Let's be better stewards for future generations of disc golfers and fans.

 

[vadisc]

Post-pro is available, you can pay for the DGN PPV and get it. It's produced by DGN, but has a dedicated commentary team (i.e. it isn't just snippets from the final round broadcast, it's the entire lead card plus the shots that matter down the stretch, with a commentary team talking over the post-produced video just like all the YouTube companies do it.

The question is, now that you know about it, will you do what you said and pay for it?

No, I would not pay now since I know who won and I'd also be paying for the live coverage which is no longer live. If there were an option for post pro only a reduced rate (~$5), I'd probably pay for it today, would have definitely paid for it Sunday or Monday when I was trying to stay away from anything DG related to avoid spoilers.

 

[Streets]

I'm very late to the party but you have to buy post-pro @ $25!? **** that.

 

[araytx]

Nope.

I would like the option to watch the last bit of the later rounds. Not the entire event. I can do an hour or two to see the end but not for $25. That's kinda absurd imho. If I spend $25 then I feel like I have to watch all of it to make it worthwhile. Sorry but I am just not interested in the early round dramas. I would be especially PO'ed if I made time to watch the ending rounds just to have the stream dropped.

Someday when I am retired maybe I'll have a different view on this sort of thing but not at the moment...

That I understand, too. I'd contend that those customera who believe as you do -- however worthy that opinion is -- are not part of the PPV targeted audience.

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

Now that I've learned that the post-production is also PPV, my mind can't help but view this whole thing as a disgrace. Jomez is successful, has a great image, and is probably doing just fine without this sort of a money grab.

Why isn't the revenue from ads (like Bushnell, etc., on Jomez), patreon support, and increased merchandise sales from more eyeballs not good enough for the USDGC too? ​

Disc Golf might be exploding, but it's still in a growth phase with a good chunk of its fanbase being relatively new. This is no way to treat so many newcomers to the sport.

It's supposed to be the national championship. Shouldn't everybody get to witness the national championship of a sport we tout to be so inclusionary?

In my mind it's more like that troll's "American Disc Golf Tour" than the national championship now. I can't believe it's gotten a worse reputation AFTER the labyrinth of awful ropes you can't see on coverage that confuse even the commentators who already know the results, but here we are.

Disc Golf is supposed to be better than the ugly "eminence front" sports where money dominates everything.

I'm looking forward to the other events that let the incredible post-production teams like Jomez cover it and make money off of ads, sales and patreon support. Until the USDGC changes its ways, it's rubbish to me. Sorry to say it, and I love a lot of Innova plastic, but this is shameful.

 

[dehaas]

Now that I've learned that the post-production is also PPV, my mind can't help but view this whole thing as a disgrace. Jomez is successful, has a great image, and is probably doing just fine without this sort of a money grab.

Why isn't the revenue from ads (like Bushnell, etc., on Jomez), patreon support, and increased merchandise sales from more eyeballs not good enough for the USDGC too? ​

Disc Golf might be exploding, but it's still in a growth phase with a good chunk of its fanbase being relatively new. This is no way to treat so many newcomers to the sport.

It's supposed to be the national championship. Shouldn't everybody get to witness the national championship of a sport we tout to be so inclusionary?

In my mind it's more like that troll's "American Disc Golf Tour" than the national championship now. I can't believe it's gotten a worse reputation AFTER the labyrinth of awful ropes you can't see on coverage that confuse even the commentators who already know the results, but here we are.

Disc Golf is supposed to be better than the ugly "eminence front" sports where money dominates everything.

I'm looking forward to the other events that let the incredible post-production teams like Jomez cover it and make money off of ads, sales and patreon support. Until the USDGC changes its ways, it's rubbish to me. Sorry to say it, and I love a lot of Innova plastic, but this is shameful.

Just to play devil's advocate, the total purse at the USDGC was $80,000. Throw Pink was just shy of $25,000.

Where do you think that money comes from?

 

[Steve West]

...
Why isn't the revenue from ads (like Bushnell, etc., on Jomez), patreon support, and increased merchandise sales from more eyeballs not good enough for the USDGC too?
...

Disc Golf is supposed to be better than the ugly "eminence front" sports where money dominates everything.
...

Money will always dominate everything. Money is by far the easiest way to get stuff, and it is the only sustainable way to get people to do stuff for you.

The question is: Whose money do you want to dominate? Yours, or Bushnell's? My bet is on "all of the above".

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

This wasn't good for Disc Golf.

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

Just to play devil's advocate, the total purse at the USDGC was $80,000. Throw Pink was just shy of $25,000.

Where do you think that money comes from?

Worlds was like $130,000. I was able to watch it.

 

[dehaas]

Worlds was like $130,000. I was able to watch it.

I'd be amazed if that's the case next year unfortunately.

Worlds is bid a couple years out and typically has all types of fundraising opportunities leading up to the event.

USDGC is hosted by a privately owned company. What if they raised disc prices by a buck or two and started making USDGC free to view? The money has to come from somewhere to cover event costs.

 

[glassila]

Just to play devil's advocate, the total purse at the USDGC was $80,000. Throw Pink was just shy of $25,000.

Where do you think that money comes from?

Purses for August: Preserve Championship $75,000, Ledgestone $119,000, Idlewild Open $83,000, MVP Open $76,000...none of these had a $25 PPV.

 

[Ryan P.]

It's been pointed out to me that Innova rakes in money. If this is true, PPV isn't needed for then to fund the tourney.

That being said, I'm fine with PPV. We already have it with DGN. I don't love that they restrict Jomez/others from filming, but I really don't care.

 

[Ryan P.]

Also, I get that people need to let out their frustrations. But let's move on soon. Not that anyone will listen to me ... this is the internet after all.

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

I agree. I'm totally moving on and no longer holding the USDGC with high esteem.

If all the rest of the Disc Golf pro tournaments went to PPV only (and especially if they went to wide open holes with ropes I can't see on the telecast that confuse even the commentators), I'd stop paying attention to pro Disc Golf. I assume quite a few potential fans of the pro sport would never see them in the first place and growth and interest in the pro game would stall. It seems to be a short-sighted strategy in my opinion. Then there were the technical issues that made it terrible to boot! There will be diehards who continue to support it, like with the Detroit Lions' fanbase. Power to them and everybody who wants to spend their money for a service they like, but I'm out and I assume a lot more will be too.

I have always enjoyed playing casually, but Jomez, CCDG, and locally to me Crew 42 are responsible for my resurgence in both watching and playing sanctioned Disc Golf for the first time in nearly 15 years. It was a Crew 42 video that alerted me to a local putting league that got me to show up the next week. They featured Andrew Marwede and that was the first time I'd ever heard of him...and he lived locally at that time! It was a free broadcast but I became a Patreon supporter and still am a couple of years later. I bought a t-shirt too.

Down with PPV!

 

[DavidSauls]

Why isn't the revenue from ads (like Bushnell, etc., on Jomez), patreon support, and increased merchandise sales from more eyeballs not good enough for the USDGC too? ​

I could be totally wrong, but I'd guess that the advertising revenue on a per-viewer basis is a tiny fraction of that PPV. Multiply it times the increased number of viewers, it's still not close.

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

I could be totally wrong, but I'd guess that the advertising revenue on a per-viewer basis is a tiny fraction of that PPV. Multiply it times the increased number of viewers, it's still not close.

That's true for the short term. The diehards who exist now will ante up for this service, but where do future diehards, who buy lots of plastic and wear gear, come from?

Rather than woo future customers, it's more like, "Here is our sport's national championship. Give us $25 or we'll hide it from you, even though business has never been better for us, and if you're new to the sport and haven't had the chance to see why this is worth the hype in the first place, screw you too!"

I can't believe this is the way to growth and prosperity 10 years from now.

By the way, I just learned Winthrop is a PUBLIC university. Wow, it just keeps getting better. How dare they hold an event with such prestige and enthusiasm on taxpayer-funded land and facilities and at the same time exclude some of those taxpayers from witnessing it? They should have to do this on private property if they're going to act all Galt's Gulch-y about it.

 

[DavidSauls]

Every try to watch a major college football game in a PUBLICLY owned stadium, without tickets?

Or, for that matter, a Winthrop basketball game in the arena they play the USDGC around?

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

I'm talking about the broadcasts. Are Winthrop football and basketball games PPV?