ALL Mach baskets should be outlawed in pro tournaments!

[Tim_the_Enchanter]

He talked about bounce outs and left hand weakness. Especially on elevated baskets. It's actually worth listening to because they talk some about course design.

Beyond that I'd have to go back and watch it again.

From my recollection, Paul wasn't really criticizing the Mach X, just pointing out that trying to stick an anhyzer putt on the weak side is nearly impossible on them. He and Nate were more critical of the basket being within a foot of the trees.

 

[SonicGuy]

4. Different baskets react differently to different putts. For example, I putt nose down and typically pretty flat. Mach 3s and 5s, that most people have issues with, I don't. I have more putts bounce back on something like a Mach X or a Prodigy basket than I do cut throughs on Mach 3s. I truly believe that someone who commits their livelihood to playing the sport should do offseason practice on multiple types of baskets and see how certain baskets react to certain putts. Is it worth going to a pitch putt instead of a spin on a Mach 3 based event even if you aren't as comfortable? This is somewhat similiar a lot conversations of anchoring putters in golf. .

This. :thmbup:

If we all played basketball we would be complaining that we hit the red square on the backboard but the ball didn't go through the hoop. No kidding. You have to hit it right, not just hit it. Get over it.

 

[Tim_the_Enchanter]

This. :thmbup:

If we all played basketball we would be complaining that we hit the red square on the backboard but the ball didn't go through the hoop. No kidding. You have to hit it right, not just hit it. Get over it.

While that's true, not all baskets are equal and some catch better than others. I have yet to putt on the DD and Prodigy baskets, but the Mach X and modern Discatcher are the best catching baskets I've experienced.

 

[VictorB]

MachV/X catch fine.

If this were ball golf, would we be complaining that hitting the ball as hard as you can to the hole shouldn't make it bounce/roll over the target??? There's certain finesse in putting, every single putt that looks too hard shouldn't stay in, IMO.

Also, find the video of Sexton throwing a full power forehand at one of the baskets from like 20' - it didn't bounce out. They catch just fine.

i personally think the best catching baskets (for all types of putters / spin/ push/ fast /slow/ hyzer/anyhyzer/high/low/strong or weak side) are Innova Discatcher Pro baskets.....

but even those (which are the ones they use for all the DGWT events) can have HORRRIFIC SPIT OUTS.

2014 World Championships... Steve Brinster...

Compiled spit outs from Steve Brinster's 2014 worlds IN ONE ROUND!!! (man if you computed the strokes from his spit outs you realize how close he was to that top card in the end).


https://youtu.be/XuDbL6ciARA?t=169
https://youtu.be/XuDbL6ciARA?t=394 (not a spit out but spit back!)
https://youtu.be/XuDbL6ciARA?t=634 (aaaaaallllmoooossst)
https://youtu.be/XuDbL6ciARA?t=945
https://youtu.be/XuDbL6ciARA?t=1580


mach x and prodigy baskets catch pretty much all fast center putts... but have horrific push outs for soft putters. all baskets have strengths and weaknesses.

Brinster also has a hard thrown, rising hyzer putt, which is pretty much the worst style in terms of what's going to blow-through or whatever.

 

[notroman]

Mach 5's and 10's are pretty solid catchers, and the players voted for the 10's. The wind was probably partly to blame, and of course user error.

My first introduction to the 5's was at 2012 Worlds at Wingett where I parked my starting 4 holes to within 20 feet and every single putt came out the back end or kicked off the pole back at me. It killed my round. I hate Mach 5's.

 

[VictorB]

can't believe it took 6 pages for someone to point out that the mach 5 that rejected Philo's ace already isn't dgpt approved. The baskets also weren't the only aspect of that course that wasn't pro tour worthy.

He got lucky the basket got in the way - he was going to be OB by 50'.

 

[alecfalzone]

"Am Side" spit-outs are notorious on Mach X's and T1's.. However cut throughs are physically impossible. Mach 3's and 5's are probably the most inconsistent baskets I have ever played on and should all be thrown into a volcano never to be seen again.. Innova DisCatcher Pro 28's are great in addition to the DD Veteran baskets..

My personal preference would be to always play on DisCatcher 28's that have been installed within the past 5 Years. Once the galvanized finish starts to wear off the chains start to get slippery. When they are new, they are the most consistent catcher regardless of your putting style. For example, look at all the putts from the DGWT last year and this year, they're pretty darn consistent.

I would love to see a single basket approved for all events sanctioned as an A-Tier or higher

 

[DavidSauls]

One benefit of not having a single model anointed as the basket of championships, is continued innovation.

If the PDGA had anointed the best basket to be the "one and only" 20 years ago, we might still be putting on single-chain, shallow-basket targets. That, or every few years there'd be a furor as the PDGA contemplates changing the standard for the new latest-&-greatest.

If you think this is contentious now, imagine if top-tier events were Discatcher-28-only, and then in 3 years consideration was given to changing this to the "Mach XXV" or "Prodigy 007" or something.

 

[davetherocketguy]

One benefit of not having a single model anointed as the basket of championships, is continued innovation.

If the PDGA had anointed the best basket to be the "one and only" 20 years ago, we might still be putting on single-chain, shallow-basket targets. That, or every few years there'd be a furor as the PDGA contemplates changing the standard for the new latest-&-greatest.

If you think this is contentious now, imagine if top-tier events were Discatcher-28-only, and then in 3 years consideration was given to changing this to the "Mach XXV" or "Prodigy 007" or something.

^^^^^^

That feller right there get's it.

Here's another benefit: competition.

We benefit when manufacturers compete for our business. If you make it so that Innova is the only one with the "official" basket they'll jack thier basket price from $330 (or whatever it is) to $500+ leaving those trying to put in new courses to decide, "Can I afford the 'official' baskets so I can have a shot at getting a tournament here?"

 

[DG_Before_Breakfast]

Took me a while when Dela went from Mach 5 to Mach 10, but now I like the Mach 10 better. They do tend to spit out touchy putts, which is bad for my touchy style of putting, but they catch most putts better, and have less chain throughs, where the disc finds a way through the chains to the other side, on good solid putts than the 5's. I tend to do a lot worse on any other type of basket, since I'm not used to them. Hate that Chastity belt on the Discatchers especially, but I'm sure if I played those every day I'd like them better.

 

[lyleoross]

One benefit of not having a single model anointed as the basket of championships, is continued innovation.

If the PDGA had anointed the best basket to be the "one and only" 20 years ago, we might still be putting on single-chain, shallow-basket targets. That, or every few years there'd be a furor as the PDGA contemplates changing the standard for the new latest-&-greatest.

If you think this is contentious now, imagine if top-tier events were Discatcher-28-only, and then in 3 years consideration was given to changing this to the "Mach XXV" or "Prodigy 007" or something.

I would argue that a standard that can be evaluated and modified. Seems like a good place to invest innovation grants for example.

 

[Shamis]

Mach 5's seem to catch an awful lot of terrible putts.

 

[lyleoross]

One benefit of not having a single model anointed as the basket of championships, is continued innovation.

If the PDGA had anointed the best basket to be the "one and only" 20 years ago, we might still be putting on single-chain, shallow-basket targets. That, or every few years there'd be a furor as the PDGA contemplates changing the standard for the new latest-&-greatest.

If you think this is contentious now, imagine if top-tier events were Discatcher-28-only, and then in 3 years consideration was given to changing this to the "Mach XXV" or "Prodigy 007" or something.

I wanted to add to this just a bit. Standards doesn't mean the same. The most logical standard would be determined by creating a throwing machine and throwing discs at the basket. Different speeds, angles, side to side. Define a range that you want caught. You could, for example, measure player putting speed and test in that range. Same for angles. Then you write specifics. An acceptable basket must catch a disc thrown with the following parameters.

How the manufacturers meet that is up to them. And of course, the best ones will do it the cheapest.

BTW, unless it has a license to kill, I'm not buying the Prodigy 007.

 

[CaptainAnhyzer]

So a Discraft sponsored event shouldn't have Discraft baskets?

And the Pros VOTED for them.

 

[lyleoross]

So a Discraft sponsored event shouldn't have Discraft baskets?

And the Pros VOTED for them.

DGA and Discraft have a relationship. One makes discs, the other baskets.

 

[Lazerface]

When putts hit dead center, then spit out?

Heck yea, especially in a head wind.

 

[Lazerface]

Spend enough time practicing, you can putt on anything.

Blaming the basket is the hallmark of a lousy putter. Or, someone looking for excuses instead of taking responsibility for poor putting.

This is true, but I hope at some point standardization at the tour level is reached. I don't want "changing your putting style" to be one of the skillsets to succeed. At least when it comes to varying targets, but that's just me.

 

[DavidSauls]

I wanted to add to this just a bit. Standards doesn't mean the same. The most logical standard would be determined by creating a throwing machine and throwing discs at the basket. Different speeds, angles, side to side. Define a range that you want caught. You could, for example, measure player putting speed and test in that range. Same for angles. Then you write specifics. An acceptable basket must catch a disc thrown with the following parameters.

How the manufacturers meet that is up to them. And of course, the best ones will do it the cheapest.

BTW, unless it has a license to kill, I'm not buying the Prodigy 007.

We'll probably have to wait a while on that testing machine.

In the meantime, I assume the O.P. was thinking of top-tier pro events, not all pro events. The next best alternative to a putt-testing machine might be polling or at least asking the top pros to evaluate the top baskets, as I understand Steve Dodge did. . Individual pros would have biases but a consensus of them might be as close as we can get to determining which baskets work best, at that skill level.

And what then? We still have the quandary of too few people willing and able to put on big events. Just as we have to accept less-than-top-tier courses, for now we'll be accepting less-than-top-tier baskets, if that's what comes with the offer to host.

 

[Hampstead]

Completely different, yet similar.




Timbers: JELD-WEN size complaints are just excuses

The Portland Timbers return home this week looking to find the best way out of a two-game losing streak. Playing in front of the Timbers Army at JELD-WEN Field is a good place for the team to start.

Portland are 5-1 in league play at their home. And yet, over the past month, a couple of opposing coaches have publicly taken issue with JELD-WEN Field's size and suggested that it plays into the Timbers' favor.

"The pitch, because it's a little bit too small, when you watch the games they played at home, it's a little pinball," Philadelphia Union coach Peter Nowak told local reporters prior to the May 6 game in Portland. "[The Timbers] press the other team, and we've got to figure out a good plan for that."

Too small?

At 70 yards wide, 110 yards long, the pitch at JELD-WEN Field is FIFA certified and meets the governing body's guidelines as well as those of MLS. Field dimensions are not fixed from one pitch to the next and are a bit like Major League Baseball ballparks in that sense.

Wilkinson said complaints about field dimensions seem like excuses. He also pointed out that every team tries to cull advantages from its home field. Is heat an advantage for players acclimatized to it in Houston? Does living at altitude give Colorado players an advantage?

"There is a reason Colorado has one of the biggest field sizes and they are at altitude," Wilkinson said. "It's not an excuse, not a reason to go there and lose, it's just a topic for discussion. Whether the grass is a little longer or the field is a little bigger, you always want to win your home games and want your field to play to your advantage. Should I go out and tell Timbers Army not to come to the game because they give us an advantage?"

http://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2011/06/06/timbers-jeld-wen-size-complaints-are-just-excuses

 

[lyleoross]

We'll probably have to wait a while on that testing machine.

In the meantime, I assume the O.P. was thinking of top-tier pro events, not all pro events. The next best alternative to a putt-testing machine might be polling or at least asking the top pros to evaluate the top baskets, as I understand Steve Dodge did. . Individual pros would have biases but a consensus of them might be as close as we can get to determining which baskets work best, at that skill level.

And what then? We still have the quandary of too few people willing and able to put on big events. Just as we have to accept less-than-top-tier courses, for now we'll be accepting less-than-top-tier baskets, if that's what comes with the offer to host.

Done.