Register

  • 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)

ALL Mach baskets should be outlawed in pro tournaments!

So, we can now see that about $100 buys you a simple throwing device, and you can even set up an odometer on it pretty simply. You can use a variable speed drill to get different speeds. And you can use different chairs to get different heights.

Of course for another $100 you can by a small motor, a rheostat, and mount the damn thing on a tripod. You can mount a chuck to the spindle of the motor for easy breakdown.

Again, this seems easy enough to do and then you know. You'd know whether Mach Xs do spit out left side or if it's just angry pros who didn't get what they want. You'd know if Mach X has a bounce out area, off the X link, as some have proposed. You'd know what speeds the different baskets can handle, and what angles. You're only missing one thing, an ability to launch discs at angles (see Nikko's nose down putts.) I'm not sure that's necessary.

Of course all of this is dependent on our ability to translate from French... :D
 
I don't know what the Mach numbers are, but the early Mach spit out machines are pretty bad. The whole "practice on it" and "use finesse" arguments don't hold water for me. A player can only control so much. Obviously, putting has multiple dimensions (spin rate, nose angle, speed, height, etc), but from what I've seen on the crappy Mach baskets it is usually just one dimension that caused the spit out and the "change" that would of caused the putt to stay is one that is too small for the player to actually control. I'm not defending ramming in a hyzer at 100 MPH and expecting it to stay. I'm talking about, for example, practice putting with the same putt over and over and every once in a while you hit one of "those spots" and your putt does not stick. The difference from making to missing is sometimes just centimeters and typically one dimension (bit lower, bit higher, bit left, bit right) - a value that we cant expect a human throwing a disc to "adjust" - because it is so close to the putts that are sticking - too close to expect a player to change. In other words, the crappy baskets cause purely "random" misses and that is not good for competition. In my experience I can stand around a Innova Pro 28 and every miss I get is on me. I don't see a "random" result.

I don't agree with the OP but I can't defend the older crappy Mach baskets. Like all players, my evidence is purely anecdotal and a putting machine in a controlled testing environment could actually answer this question for us. My emotions are also playing into my opinion because I rage pretty hard when I get spit outs on Machs and have wished them a fiery demise on several occasions.

As a previous poster points out Brinster's putt is made for spit outs. Given his tenure I would expect he is fully aware that his style lends itself to spits and has consciously decided not to change it. Likely because he would miss more putts outright than the few that don't stay in.

Of course, given my signature, my opinion on baskets wont hold up to board scrutiny.
 
What I find so interesting in these discussion is the vast differences we get in responses.

One person says "everyone has to use them" or "it's part of the game" or "putt softer" while the next person says "why should a putt ever cut through?" or "if certain baskets are known for them, why are the out there being used?" or "they look silly to the outside viewer."

In reality, all of these points are accurate and the need for control is somewhere in the middle.

I really liked what Steve did with saying we are only going to use certain baskets - whether you think that list is too long or too short, it was a really solid idea. However, the execution of it was below par and pretty much brings us back to the point I've made for years.

Our sport at the highest level is currently about Money. That is the largest factor. If you have money, you can host an event that attracts the worlds best.

Look at Ledgestone - two years ago 90% of pros publicly bashed the event and then they are right back there again. They do the same with the USDGC course and the re-throw and other odd rules. And next year, they are right back there again.

I truly believe growth of the sport as a whole has very little to do with the pro tour side but growth of the actual pro side won't happen until pros stop playing events with rules and standards they don't like. It's either going to take a huge hit to their wallet or a dozen more events willing to raise 75k.
 
Lazerface said:
I don't know what the Mach numbers are, but the early Mach spit out machines are pretty bad. The whole "practice on it" and "use finesse" arguments don't hold water for me. A player can only control so much. Obviously, putting has multiple dimensions (spin rate, nose angle, speed, height, etc), but from what I've seen on the crappy Mach baskets it is usually just one dimension that caused the spit out and the "change" that would of caused the putt to stay is one that is too small for the player to actually control. I'm not defending ramming in a hyzer at 100 MPH and expecting it to stay. I'm talking about, for example, practice putting with the same putt over and over and every once in a while you hit one of "those spots" and your putt does not stick. The difference from making to missing is sometimes just centimeters and typically one dimension (bit lower, bit higher, bit left, bit right) - a value that we cant expect a human throwing a disc to "adjust" - because it is so close to the putts that are sticking - too close to expect a player to change. In other words, the crappy baskets cause purely "random" misses and that is not good for competition. In my experience I can stand around a Innova Pro 28 and every miss I get is on me. I don't see a "random" result.
Click to expand...

You cannot make a 1 cm adjustment to your throw, but you can certainly analyze your throws and determine to 1 cm how much you missed by on the basket that rejects puts at random?

:doh::doh::doh:

Learn how to putt and your putts will stick. Pros developed styles that favor metal contact over made putts. If they wanted to stick every putt that hits a chain they could, but it would come at the expense of airmailing a couple more putts than they want to.
 
SonicGuy said:
You cannot make a 1 cm adjustment to your throw, but you can certainly analyze your throws and determine to 1 cm how much you missed by on the basket that rejects puts at random?

:doh::doh::doh:

Learn how to putt and your putts will stick. Pros developed styles that favor metal contact over made putts. If they wanted to stick every putt that hits a chain they could, but it would come at the expense of airmailing a couple more putts than they want to.
Click to expand...

Hints my suggestion for a putting machine. It's random because it feels that way - I realize that's not evidence. I'm just saying, the same putt, thrown almost exactly the same way, sometimes sticks, and sometimes does not. Random Outcome. I FEEL really strongly it is true. I have faith it is true :D
 
If you want to get it right, you simply have to start from scratch with a new target design. Chain patterns can never be radially uniform for 360 degrees. Even the size of the links, their positions vertically and rotationally within the chains will not remain in the same positions over use, even from putt to putt nor wind puff to wind puff. Slight height differences as installed or over time plus slight tilt cannot be seen. Even player height and release height matter. It's a fool's errand to try and measure anything that's meaningful with a mechanical thrower.

Either we try to design a target that's radially and vertically uniform, likely without chains at least on the outside, or figure out a uniform basket design with outer chains and accept all its flaws that sometimes produce random results. Or, just leave the basket specs alone and accept the expected occasional unexpected results as part of our game.
 
I paid very... VERY close attention to the putting in the final round, after reading this thread. McBeth, in commentary, said he missed on 5 because the baskets tend to spit out if you hit left. Here's the thing, Wysocki was missing a LOT of putts... right.

I haven't been around here long, but caught the 'putting is too easy' thread, which makes this thread a bit of a head-scratcher.

I've hit dead center and chained out. It happens. It wasn't on a Mach anything basket. Asking for less randomness at the basket makes me start wondering if we should eliminate natural grass, and wind, and branches, and ... I think you get the point.

And at the end of the day, it's frickin' throwing plastic discs. How about we NOT make it the big a-hole game that ball golf is, and all just be a little chill, shrug off a chain-out and move on.

(says the noob who screams obscenities on the course when she misses) :D
 
10285162.jpg
 
Cgkdisc said:
If you want to get it right, you simply have to start from scratch with a new target design. Chain patterns can never be radially uniform for 360 degrees. Even the size of the links, their positions vertically and rotationally within the chains will not remain in the same positions over use, even from putt to putt nor wind puff to wind puff. Slight height differences as installed or over time plus slight tilt cannot be seen. Even player height and release height matter. It's a fool's errand to try and measure anything that's meaningful with a mechanical thrower.

Either we try to design a target that's radially and vertically uniform, likely without chains at least on the outside, or figure out a uniform basket design with outer chains and accept all its flaws that sometimes produce random results. Or, just leave the basket specs alone and accept the expected occasional unexpected results as part of our game.
Click to expand...

You constantly bring up having a uniform consistency, but the variable chain pattern is not what is causing spit outs and whatnot so I really have no idea why.
 
SonicGuy said:
You constantly bring up having a uniform consistency, but the variable chain pattern is not what is causing spit outs and whatnot so I really have no idea why.
Click to expand...
The chain pattern absolutely matters. Not sure where you're coming from.
 
mattdabbs said:
I kept reading "putting machine" and all I could think of was Paul McBeth.
Click to expand...
Speaking of which...


1) Worth a 2nd look.
2) Wonder what Addidas thinks about how prominent that swoosh is? Maybe they shoulda sponsored him sooner.
 
Cgkdisc said:
The chain pattern absolutely matters. Not sure where you're coming from.
Click to expand...

The spit outs and blow through putts being discussed are not the victims of hitting the wrong link because they impacted a specific part of the chain pattern.
 
the Black Hole® Portal Course Basket boasts 3 tiers and 30 strands of high visibility stainless steel chains, symmetrically spaced.

Do any other baskets feature this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

geebob
Champion's Cup and other meanderings
Replies
0
Views
87
geebob
geebob
billnchristy
Full Metal Basket
2 3 4
Replies
69
Views
9K
ohtobediscing
ohtobediscing

Latest posts

Top