375ft to win a World Championship?

[thedrew300]

Wiggins has the all around skills to dominate, I just don't think his mental game is there yet.

 

[Halcón]

Alcuin,

Just for fun, what do you think you would score if you made 90% of putts within 30', and cleaned up your driving and approaching to near flawless accuracy. Even at your current distance. It's not out of the realm of possibility. How would your scores improve?

 

[Alcuin]

Even many of the 18 hole courses only have a few so really how many holes does it benefit a player to have that D over accuracy?

I don't mean to pick on you AFTC, but this is something I've seen mentioned throughout this thread that doesn't make sense to me. I don't think you can develop huge d (450'+) without developing accuracy alongside it. With 400' of max d, you can still strongarm the disc to get there. But 450' consistently is a different story.

Here's a real world anecdote:

Hole 18 at Bird's Ruins in Marshall. It's about 415' from the short pad to long pin. The fairway gently slopes downwards from right to left, and the pin is a few feet in elevation below the pad. You can throw the disc pin high on top of the hill, with basically no elevation change from the pad, or at the bottom of the hill, still pin high, and be a few feet in elevation below. I throw two max d drives with Destroyers, and they weren't that great, ending up at around the 375' mark, center fairway. I can get to the pin, maybe 1/5 of the time.

Someone I was playing with steps up, and throws three shots. The first is a Leopard, which ended up pin high on top of the hill. Then someone else (actually tomdizzlefizzle I believe) challenges him to throw a few Roc shots. He throws the first, which ends up a few feet past my Destroyers, center fairway. Then next ends up right next to his Leopard. So that's over 400' with a Roc.

I can beat this player, and have, but it's pretty rare. It's tough to compete when you're throwing 375' with a Destroyer and somebody can get past that with a Roc. You just don't have as much control, and that person's going to have birdie chances on holes that you need to throw one in on to 2.

And this is just a really good local player. When you're thinking about the elite players, they are taking on all comers. Not only do they have to beat one another, they also have to roll over every phenomenal local player to win, and they usually do. They are consistent at 450', and are also consistent at every other skill that Mr.375 is consistent at as well.

So is it possible for Mr.375 to win? Sure, it's possible, in the abstract sense that "anything's possible!" But it's so extremely unlikely, that it's hardly probable at all. You could make a million off of a penny with those odds. And that's why it doesn't happen.

 

[Toro71]

majority of courses are still this way. most 9 hole courses I can think of here, and that's a TON-- have no shots over 500' let alone even 450'. Even many of the 18 hole courses only have a few so really how many holes does it benefit a player to have that D over accuracy? Why doesn't avery Jenkins dominate or David Wiggins? They are not very accurate and struggle putting.

I may be spoiled by living where I do, but at least half the dozen 18 hole courses in my town are designed for, or adapted to, longer distance...as are worlds courses.

And, it doesn't require, like, 500 ft par 3s for 500 ft of power to create separation. On a 375 par 3, Mr. 375 is throwing his max D driver. McBeast is throwing a nice easy Roc 3, (or a putter, or anything in his bag if he wants for that matter.) What'r the scoring averages going to be over 10 times playing the hole?

Besides, who's saying that big D is all you need to dominate? I think the point is, it takes everything, total game to win a worlds, so, no, 500 ft of D doesn't win a WC, but you don't win one without it, 99 times out of 100, if the other top contenders have it.

 

[Toro71]

Alcuin,

Just for fun, what do you think you would score if you made 90% of putts within 30', and cleaned up your driving and approaching to near flawless accuracy. Even at your current distance. It's not out of the realm of possibility. How would your scores improve?

I think the point that everyone is getting besides you is, 99.99% of the time, his game would still be a number of throws more than the other incredible players in the worlds MPO div that have the same perfect game inside 375, plus an additional 200 ft of power.

 

[BirdieMachine]

I think the point we are making is that no one exists that is going to be more accurate and a better putter then say McBeth, Wysocki, Nikko, Doss, Will, Brinster, Feldy etc. Just to compete with less power you'd have to have a better accuracy game and putting. They are the best because they are the best at putting, accuracy and have power. Just saying that you could see someone be more accurate and a better putter is just ridiculous to make up for his non birdie holes.

 

[Halcón]

Toro, I was just asking him on a more personal level. Not that he'd be competing in Worlds.

 

[Toro71]

Toro, I was just asking him on a more personal level. Not that he'd be competing in Worlds.

I just reread my post, didn't mean to come across that a**y. My bad.

Only meant to point out, that most of the top dogs are dominant inside 375, so where does Mr. 375 make up the throws he's behind to the guys that ALSO bomb it.

 

[Alcuin]

Alcuin,

Just for fun, what do you think you would score if you made 90% of putts within 30', and cleaned up your driving and approaching to near flawless accuracy. Even at your current distance. It's not out of the realm of possibility. How would your scores improve?

Good question.

It would improve greatly to be sure. Probably enough to compete at a pretty high level. But not enough to win in the real world.

I usually hover around par for the long tees to long pins at Hiestand park, my home course. Hypothetically, if I made 90% of my putts inside 30' and everything else was flawless, I could theoretically and realistically shoot -8. There are eight holes on that course that I have gotten into the circle regularly enough to say that I could guarantee them if I was playing flawlessly (this would be me getting a 2 on holes 3, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 18). This doesn't count some of the holes that I've deuced, but don't get into the circle enough to warrant my guaranteeing them with my flawless performance.

Now -8 is an incredible score for that course. It rarely happens; I only know of it happening once (though I'm sure it happens more than that), during a league round where somebody got a -9, but I don't think that was entirely long pins. It's not a long course either, but it does require a complete bag of skills. Cale got a -5 there when he won the Mad City Open this past year. It was also his worst round of the tournament.

So in perfect conditions, with absolutely flawless driving, approaching, and putting, I could potentially put up that score if I hit every single putt for 2, and nailed all my approaches for pars on holes that are unreachable to me.

But we are seriously stretching the limits of probability. I might never get that score of -9, and I'm comfortable saying that even maxing out my current skills, I'm not likely to do it. And I can tell certainly say that expecting our Mr.375 to actually perform that well during tournament play is stretching reality to the point of absurdity. I guess I'm just not sure what the point is in a thought experiment that's based on so many things that are in reality entirely improbable. He has to be flawless all the time on every thing, because he's playing catchup the entire round with people who have more birdie opportunities than he does. And even on top of that, Mcbeth is going to be putting down nearly flawless performances and throwing farther.

Oh and when Cale put up a -10 at Elver during that tournament, a 1060 rated round, we were all talking about it. That's an amazing score. I play there all the time, at least once a week during the open season, and struggle to get under par, while he waltzes into town and puts up a score that I seriously couldn't even dream of. That's amazing, and that's why I don't think that even an absolutely ideal version of my game will not stack up.

 

[Ocelotl]

Really looking forward to alot of this being put to the test at Blue Lake during worlds in 2014, I would love to see if guys like gurthie and wiggins can use some of their extreme D skills to challenge lines that most people cant attempt, or if all of the OB will cause them to play shorter safer shots.

 

[tomdizzlefizzle]

1 and 2 at hiestand should be in your range.

 

[JAKE master]

mr 375 could prob put up some b+c tier wins, but an A teir would be where he becomes just another number in the crowd i would bet.

 

[Alcuin]

1 and 2 at hiestand should be in your range.

I get 1 every once in a while. But I play for 3 on hole 2 usually; I should try to go for it more. It's one of those holes that are just out of reach for me, like 8, 16, sometimes 17. I've even gotten pretty consistently down the fairway on 15 for a jump putt, but I've never deuced it. I've deuced 8 and 16 before, but it's pretty rare. I've never deuced 17 but should have several times.

These holes are the perfect illustration of why I don't have enough d to break into the next level. I'm just outside the circle on a lot of holes, and would need to hit a bunch of jumpers if I'm going to outscore the longer throwers at their best.

 

[Ziggy]

Hiestand is one of the few courses that I have hung a 1000 on.
Every hole but the long one in the way back of the park (hole 10?) has been deuced by me. But yea, alcuin pretty much nailed it on the head. Consistency. For my most recent 1000, I was able to get 5 out of the 8 consistent holes for birdies, while missing 2 more putts and squeak by with 2 amazing upshots to save par from the rough on both the downhill (#15?) and bad tee shot on #2. Consistency.

 

[wake911]

I don't mean to pick on you AFTC, but this is something I've seen mentioned throughout this thread that doesn't make sense to me. I don't think you can develop huge d (450'+) without developing accuracy alongside it. With 400' of max d, you can still strongarm the disc to get there. But 450' consistently is a different story.

I'll be the guy. I have 400' of consistent distance and accuracy with my Teebirds (on an open hole). I throw destroyers and bosses for longer shots than that. I regularly throw them 425'-475'. My accuracy left-to-right and distance control is suspect though. I'm maybe 35% accurate to within 30' of my intended target at 425-475' It's getting better, but I flip them over sometimes, sometimes they hyzer the whole way, and sometimes they are great. The percentage is maybe 50% at 425' and 20% at 475'.

I can throw my blizzard bosses over 500' on a distance line (threw 531' at BG Ams last year, 1' out of 4th place.) With little to no accuracy or control at all. 1 out of 10 will be perfect and finish right where I'm aiming. I would never use this throw or power in a round that means anything.

If I came and said I throw 500'+, that'd be inaccurate of my skills. If I were giving my accurate comfortable distance it is about 400'-425', on an open course I expect to have a putt at birdie at least 75% of the time at this distance.

The saying I've heard, and repeated a lot is "The easiest way to get more distance, is to temporarily stop caring where it goes" Getting out in a field and just letting loose and not caring about hitting your line, or mark, or whatever helps to get your arm speed up, your lower body into it more, and then you can hone the accuracy at that higher speed over time. I learned to play on a very long, wide open course, so accuracy was WAY less important than sheer distance. Hence why I throw further than many folks who learned on woods courses where accuracy trumps distance. (to this day it's why i beat better people than me on open courses, and get beat by worse players than me in the woods)

Distance <=> Accuracy is a tricky thing, and depending on where and how you learned disc golf can change the relationship. This is why a tip many people say, and I use on the course as often as possible, is "staying within yourself". I try not to use a shot that i don't have 50% or more accuracy with, on the course. It's playing it safe, but at my current skill level with all my discs, the smart move is to not risk that 1/10 that is REALLY REALLY BAD. at 425' i'm within 30' about 50% of the time, but within 60' probably 95% of the time. So i don't have the REALLY bad shot. But as soon as it goes to 450', 475'. Yes I can get it there....sometimes....20-35% of the time accurately....but the real problem lies in the other 65-80%....sadly I have NO IDEA where they will go.

This is why accurate distance and "Max D" distance are 2 different things.

 

[Halcón]

Thanks for the breakdown Alcuin. I often think of my own game and wonder what I'd score within my means, but had a flawless day. I think I'd easily shave 7-8 throws off my average.