2019 United States Disc Golf Championship Oct 2-5

[Steve West]

Do you know from experience? I mean, if it's really 80 - 100 feet downhill, distance control should be a non issue, especially with an opportunity to practice. What makes it difficult?

I have played it, but I did not try to lay up. Even though I had no chance of throwing far enough to reach the island. I mean, c'mon, people were watching!

But my experience is irrelevant to what these competitors can or should do. If they decide to lay up, there is an IB point they should aim at to minimize their expected score. That point is toward the far end of safety. More precisely, it is the point where the risk of going OB offsets the higher scores expected from being farther from the basket. So, no matter the skill, there will be risk of going OB if playing perfect strategy.

Or, go out and mark an arc about 80 feet away down a slope with firm ground. Bet money on who can land closest to the line without going over, and you will see some throws go over the line.

What this means is that the expected score from aiming at the optimal lay-up point is not less than the expected score from aiming at the optimal point on the island. (It is nowhere near the targets.)

 

[aredoubles]

So does the 80 foot layup zone off of 17s tee still exist? Do players even practice that as a Plan B, say for windy conditions, or going into the hole on the final round with a 4 stroke lead? It still baffles me that after all these years, we never see this, at least on lead cards.

Did Feldberg do it this year? I guess not as he got a 2 in round 2. He shot 1 down on the hole overall so good for him.

It's almost a guaranteed island hit on that 2nd shot because it opens up and allows for a wide hyzer (left or right) coming in. It's much easier to control speed coming into the green. 4 seems to be worst case scenario there. Is it an ego thing?????

Feldberg laid up in rounds 3 and 4. Both times, he parked the second shot, and tapped in for par.

At least from watching the final round's last six cards, Isaac and Ezra Robinson were the only other guys that chose to lay up. Looking at their scores over the tournament from lay-up plays, via uDisc:

Feldberg
No lay-up Rds 1 and 2
Rd 3 - 3
Rd 4 - 3

Isaac Robinson
No lay-up Rd 1
Rd 2 - 3
Rd 3 - 5
Rd 4 - 4

Ezra Robinson
No lay-up Rds 1 and 2
Rd 3 - 3
Rd 4 - 5

So at least judging by the Robinson's, the lay-up play is no guarantee at all, both of them still took 5s from there.

In one post-tournament interview, Conrad mentioned that he considered it for the final round, but had never practiced before, so decided against it.

 

[Golden Tuna]

USDGC is always interesting to me...

I like the test of skill, but dislike the artificial OB. Conversely, I love Maple hill because of the natural OB challenges. The benefit to artificial OB is that you get the stroke, but (generally) get to keep your disc. A god way to illustrate this on camera would be longer grass in the rough, but I get the challenges of such a request.

BTW, if you ever plan to go to Rock Hill, try to plan your trip in conjunction with the USDGC because the course is not worth playing in "regular" layout. My wife still says that is one of the worst courses we've ever played...

In my opinion, mandos should only be used for safety concerns. Otherwise, it's just a bad hole design. The new 3 & 4 are boring in my opinion.

IMO:
Hole 3 could be improved by moving the tee up a bit AND moving the DZ back about 100' from the mando. In my opinion, this scenario urges players to "go for it" off the tee or throw a smarter shot to get in scoring position. If they encounter the DZ, they have to throw a more skilled shot to save Par. May not be as 'emotional' to watch, but is probably more challenging to play...

Hole 4 could be improved by removing 1 set up mandos. Perhaps take the second set out and move the first set back a bit. I really don't see a need for both sets...

Frankly, all the talk from the Duvalls about emotional engagement from the audience is annoying. As a spectator, my opinion is meaningless unless I decide to stop watching. I think disc golf has proven the audience is there, regardless of the tournament, course, players, etc.

So, I would rather see a course designed to challenge the players than for the "emotional engagement of the fans". As a side note, I will watch every second of every (MPO) round at Maple Hill, Idlewild, Smuggs, Northwoods, etc. even if i know the outcome. But, I'll only check out the USDGC, LVC, GBO rounds if I'm bored because the courses just aren't engaging to me.

My opinion would be slightly different if the Gold/Arena course were set up the same way year round and I could go there to test my skills.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Although small sample size, those lay-ups still produced an average score 4 or less. If you miss the green from the tee half the time, your best scores will likely average 4 with the chance for much higher. I think the issue is the weather varies enough over the span of the event that you can't practice all of the conditions you might face under pressure nor have muscle memory two or three days later if you did practice under the conditions presented in the later rounds.

 

[notroman]

I had the chance to play USDGC in 2012 and 2013. Whether I ran the green on 17 depended on how confident I felt that day. Usually my attempts at running the green resulted in the red flag. The lay up play for me was just a jump putt off the tee - didn't need to cover more than 80-100 feet in order to get a wide open righty hyzer line to the green.

 

[Casey 1988]

Log out and lose your password.

I am okay, he never liked me from the get go so no big problem what he just said. Even when I was new to the site and making mistakes and he was punishing me for tying to figure out where to post on the site.

 

[Streets]

I am okay, he never liked me from the get go so no big problem what he just said. Even when I was new to the site and making mistakes and he was punishing me for tying to figure out where to post on the site.

There's making mistakes and then there is just pulling conspiracy theories and misinformation out of your backside and presenting them as fact. :wall:

 

[Lurp Nuts]

Watching the coverage from 2001 there were a ton of bird's eye view shots. It's hard to tell, but it looks like they had some kind of movable tower. Why not bring that back? Especially for the weirder OB holes like 9-12.

 

[Casey 1988]

USDGC is always interesting to me...

In my opinion, mandos should only be used for safety concerns. Otherwise, it's just a bad hole design. The new 3 & 4 are boring in my opinion.

IMO:
Hole 3 could be improved by moving the tee up a bit AND moving the DZ back about 100' from the mando. In my opinion, this scenario urges players to "go for it" off the tee or throw a smarter shot to get in scoring position. If they encounter the DZ, they have to throw a more skilled shot to save Par. May not be as 'emotional' to watch, but is probably more challenging to play...

Hole 4 could be improved by removing 1 set up mandos. Perhaps take the second set out and move the first set back a bit. I really don't see a need for both sets...

My opinion would be slightly different if the Gold/Arena course were set up the same way year round and I could go there to test my skills.

Hole 3 needs the drop zone changed or you will have at least one top player find it easier to navigate the course by going ob on purpose to go to the drop zone. Pin is fine but move it to the left a tad 10-15 feet to make it a little easier to hit the Mando shot.

Hole 4 I agree that the double set of double mando shots is not necessary. I think remove the right mando on the front set then remove the left one on the second set as the hole sort of opens up that way to the left anyhow right after that second set of double Mandatory. This keeps the player needing to do a long skinny shot but not a skinny tunnel shot and the idea I propose still eliminates doing a sky hyzer shot, or makes it doable but very very risky.

 

[davetherocketguy]

I am okay, he never liked me from the get go so no big problem what he just said. Even when I was new to the site and making mistakes and he was punishing me for tying to figure out where to post on the site.

You're just going to brush that off as a, "he never liked me" thing? lol...whatever. Regardless of how much Streets likes you or doesn't like you your little conspiracy theory on them rearranging Winthrop OB to make it harder for McBeth just because he left Innova is the single stupidest thing I have ever read on DGCR.

 

[Casey 1988]

You're just going to brush that off as a, "he never liked me" thing? lol...whatever. Regardless of how much Streets likes you or doesn't like you your little conspiracy theory on them rearranging Winthrop OB to make it harder for McBeth just because he left Innova is the single stupidest thing I have ever read on DGCR.

Not sure but it looks that way with how Paul tried to go where he normally would in other years yet was in OB this year.

Of Course the More Logical Explanation is that Paul mentally is done after winning worlds. One can see it in how he is playing and not really being all that focused when executing shots in tournaments.

 

[davetherocketguy]

Of Course the More Logical Explanation is that Paul mentally is done after winning worlds. One can see it in how he is playing and not really being all that focused when executing shots in tournaments.

Stick with that theory and forget the other one. Please.

 

[rhatton1]

Of Course the More Logical Explanation is that Paul mentally is done after winning worlds. One can see it in how he is playing and not really being all that focused when executing shots in tournaments.

And the most logical thing is to accept him at his word that he reinjured his ankle on the very first putt of the first round. There is video evidence to back it up. Let's just go with that shall we.

 

[DavidSauls]

The bar for "More Logical" was set pretty low.

 

[DavidSauls]

In the meantime, I sort of wish some moderator could combine a couple of threads: the one complaining about what a poor experience watching the USDGC is, and the one complaining about being unable to watch it (the way they want).

 

[biscoe]

When 17 was first set up, the only rule which would allow for re-tee was OB. That's no longer the case. Don't you think Relief Area (re-tee throwing 2, instead of re-tee throwing 3) would be enough risk to generate interest? Doesn't the engagement come from seeing the player standing on the tee throwing again and again? And from being able to clearly see whether the throw will or won't land on the island. Without the penalty, viewers might be even more engaged because they could count the throws directly.

How much more interest do you think is created by that made-up invisible extra penalty for each miss?

Is it enough to be worth the cost of giving this one little hole so much influence over final standings? Doesn't it reduce interest in other holes?

From a game construction standpoint the weight Hole 17 carries is absurd. I still think that the higher the score attainable the greater the engagement though. People remember McCray's blowup there precisely because the number was so high. It appeals to the same lowest common denominator lizard brain within people as reality tv. How important that is depends on the goals of the event.

 

[DiscJunkie]

So does the 80 foot layup zone off of 17s tee still exist? Do players even practice that as a Plan B, say for windy conditions, or going into the hole on the final round with a 4 stroke lead? It still baffles me that after all these years, we never see this, at least on lead cards.

Did Feldberg do it this year? I guess not as he got a 2 in round 2. He shot 1 down on the hole overall so good for him.

It's almost a guaranteed island hit on that 2nd shot because it opens up and allows for a wide hyzer (left or right) coming in. It's much easier to control speed coming into the green. 4 seems to be worst case scenario there. Is it an ego thing?????

Hitting the layup is almost as risky as trying for the fat part of the island. The laid up disc could go too far and into OB. If you want to play safe, going for the middle of the island is the smarter choice. If you can reach it.

Steve, seems like we had this disagreement last year about H17.

I still disagree with your conclusions that laying up is a low-benefit strategy.
Nothing is without risk, admittedly, but laying up at H17 this year was relatively safe and the second throw is ~200' downhill and open.
There was a wide, flat space to lay up, about 80' in front of the tee. Plus, a lay up gives you a clear view of the green and allows a hyzer onto the green.
If H17 doesn't have this lay-up area, the discussion changes.
If the players feel like they have to go for the green from the tee, they bear the consequences.
It may be a question of practice in Conrad's case, but the lay-up is a safer play and especially for players who are tired or stressed and under pressure, it's good strategy.

 

[krupicka]

I had the chance to play USDGC in 2012 and 2013. Whether I ran the green on 17 depended on how confident I felt that day. Usually my attempts at running the green resulted in the red flag. The lay up play for me was just a jump putt off the tee - didn't need to cover more than 80-100 feet in order to get a wide open righty hyzer line to the green.

I laid up every time when I played in 2012. Laying up was an easy high percentage toss. Hitting the green from the layup area is a much easier shot than from the tee. I went 4434 and I'm a sub 900 player... I also wasn't worrying about my finish position so the mental stress of the hole didn't affect me as much.

The stat showing the stress of that hole on the leaders: Top 9 finishers averaged 4.7 for Hole 17 in R4. Next 9 finishers averaged 3.7 for Hole 17. That hole gets in a player's head so much more when the title is on the line. Every player knows the history of that hole. If you want the title, you have to pass that test.

 

[DiscJunkie]

Hi Steve, Like many models of the psyche, there are three people running around inside my design head. My question gives voice to the sportsman in me. Despite falling further than any open division champion, my inner athlete still wants to know that the throws are pretty doable and to be presented with some interesting strategy choices. *

Then there is the game design, accountability, math guy in me who wants to have the best matching of score to demonstrated skill. This guy does not like throw-and-distance at all. He would opt for more progressive drop zones and distance only penalties. This guy loves talking to Steve West and Chuck Kennedy.

Finally there is my inner Pete May. He wants to make disc golf spectacular. He wants players to experience "the thrill of victory, and the agony of defeat." If we do this right, the spectators will be hooked to the "human drama of athletic competition." This drama is experienced mostly by the player in traditional disc golf.

The challenge is for young Harold, Pete, Steve and Chuck to play nicely together. That's the motivation for the original question. I agree that there is no need to add two to a score for traditional disc golf which is mostly for the players. Championship disc golf, which is also about the spectator, may need *some bad shots to count two to increase the emotional engagement for both player and spectator. But in either traditional or Championship disc golf, good throws with good strategy should be in. *

~ Harold

Harold,
I appreciate that you give us a window into the thought process.
Winthrop Gold is your playground, and you have the right to establish goals and priorities for the course and tournament.
Personally, I'm much more in touch with the Steve and Chuck guy,
so the Pete May guy really puzzles me.
Still, I'll most likely be there next year because I love watching the high-level Pros execute their game,
but the Pete May guy is really pushing me to wonder if it's worth enduring the circus show to watch the professional disc golf.

This is not meant to change your focus or strategy.
It is just the opinion of one disc golfer,
and he absolutely recognizes your right to do things your way.

 

[Streets]

And the most logical thing is to accept him at his word that he reinjured his ankle on the very first putt of the first round. There is video evidence to back it up. Let's just go with that shall we.

Logic and reality aren't in Casey's wheelhouse.