Ripper
Double Eagle Member
This is the only truly active disc golf forum! Dysfunctional in allot of ways but uber creative, and very knowledgeable!
-
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)
Ask PDGA Board Member Peter Shive
- Thread starter shive
- Start date
This is the only truly active disc golf forum! Dysfunctional in allot of ways but uber creative, and very knowledgeable!
dmbrun2
Eagle Member
Have you ever thought of trying to do like a joint event with the PGA I think it would be a good idea to show ppl that are active disc golf, maybe put on a clinic and show the gofers how to disc?
Avus
Birdie Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2011
- Messages
- 302
In reference to AM Worlds this year I was curious if my 500+ ma2 points would qualify me for an invite. I doubt I will accumulate enough in MA1 this year in time.
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1757220&postcount=79
For the discussion in the original thread I brough it up in.
I thought you might be able to explain.
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1757220&postcount=79
For the discussion in the original thread I brough it up in.
I thought you might be able to explain.
All Am points are the same, it doesn't matter which Am division you earned them in.
Ripper
Double Eagle Member
Think that having MJ, McBeth, and Shive on here answering questions adds allot of energy to the discussions about the sport. Shows that if you are sincere, informative and open that you can get a very good discussion.
Think most of us believe that the PDGA is way to compartmentalized and hinders growth. In my eyes it's antiquated and now does stuff just to say that they are doing things. Think that the points system etc are outstanding but just seems like there has gotta be a more concentrated, viral, and more effective way to grow the sport of disc golf. PDGA should hire a professional company (not clash, disc golf monthly, or disc golf planet) but someone to video tape professionally outside of the sport and it would be a success. Maybe just one event, or even make an event like a skins game, etc. If not a success vi-rally it would help raise revenues i'm sure because everyone would clamor to buy it. They aren't clamoring to buy PDGA DVD's now. 2010 was unwatchable, 2011 hasn't came out yet, and 2012 I never even thought about buying because they last two years pissed me off so bad that I wouldn't give another dime! Let's face it i'm/we're sick of Worlds Vids not coming out, when they do they are not very good, 4 hr telecasts that show more of the ground then the actual game, etc. Stuff like that just isn't going to impress anyone this day in age. Those things are destroyed quickly in this world and destroyed on free boards like this one. I'd grow away from the people like the Chains, Vibram and Worlds guy, and actually get some competent, and trustworthy people to give your money to tape and market the sport. Hell try and get with Gopro they seem to want to help anyone with anything to use their equipment to video tape events (lol even weddings)! There are companies out there that would love to take my dues to make something that is quality, and probably even cheaper but the hard truth is that the PDGA seems like a buddy system to siphon funds to incompetent buddies who don't seem to have a clue.
Did the Worlds 2011 DVD even come out? That's such a black eye that you should sue whoever said that they would make that video, because it drove away allot of consumers, and hurt allot of other outlets also!
Think most of us believe that the PDGA is way to compartmentalized and hinders growth. In my eyes it's antiquated and now does stuff just to say that they are doing things. Think that the points system etc are outstanding but just seems like there has gotta be a more concentrated, viral, and more effective way to grow the sport of disc golf. PDGA should hire a professional company (not clash, disc golf monthly, or disc golf planet) but someone to video tape professionally outside of the sport and it would be a success. Maybe just one event, or even make an event like a skins game, etc. If not a success vi-rally it would help raise revenues i'm sure because everyone would clamor to buy it. They aren't clamoring to buy PDGA DVD's now. 2010 was unwatchable, 2011 hasn't came out yet, and 2012 I never even thought about buying because they last two years pissed me off so bad that I wouldn't give another dime! Let's face it i'm/we're sick of Worlds Vids not coming out, when they do they are not very good, 4 hr telecasts that show more of the ground then the actual game, etc. Stuff like that just isn't going to impress anyone this day in age. Those things are destroyed quickly in this world and destroyed on free boards like this one. I'd grow away from the people like the Chains, Vibram and Worlds guy, and actually get some competent, and trustworthy people to give your money to tape and market the sport. Hell try and get with Gopro they seem to want to help anyone with anything to use their equipment to video tape events (lol even weddings)! There are companies out there that would love to take my dues to make something that is quality, and probably even cheaper but the hard truth is that the PDGA seems like a buddy system to siphon funds to incompetent buddies who don't seem to have a clue.
Did the Worlds 2011 DVD even come out? That's such a black eye that you should sue whoever said that they would make that video, because it drove away allot of consumers, and hurt allot of other outlets also!
Ripper
Double Eagle Member
***************Truly do appreciate you coming on this board and hearing solutions, or problems. Please do not think above post was malicious, just really want quality disc golf footage. At least https://www.youtube.com/user/lcgm8 quality !!!
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
@dmbrun2 - Several disc golf - ball golf challenges have been run on ball golf courses going as far back as the mid-90s with about an even split between the disc golf team or the ball golf team winning.
@Ripper - several videos have been done by professionals outside the sport with some better and some worse performance or results than the insider teams you mentioned. For example, the 2010 Worlds DVD was a team outside the so-called "buddy" circle. I think some feel the the 2001 Worlds video was pretty good done by insider Blair Paulsen. I think he did the 2003 DVD which showed the 800 ft "almost ace" by Elaine King that skipped off the basket scattering the few women putting out. The 2005-2007 Worlds videos were outsiders found by Duesler who later founded discplanet.tv. He only helped them with some commentary not filming.
@Ripper - several videos have been done by professionals outside the sport with some better and some worse performance or results than the insider teams you mentioned. For example, the 2010 Worlds DVD was a team outside the so-called "buddy" circle. I think some feel the the 2001 Worlds video was pretty good done by insider Blair Paulsen. I think he did the 2003 DVD which showed the 800 ft "almost ace" by Elaine King that skipped off the basket scattering the few women putting out. The 2005-2007 Worlds videos were outsiders found by Duesler who later founded discplanet.tv. He only helped them with some commentary not filming.
Last edited:
Ripper
Double Eagle Member
First off Chuck why do you not have your tag!?
Think allot of negativism toward the PDGA is that we go off on tangents (rational and irrational) and almost conspiracies. Think openness and transparency are great for organizations and hope that you guys listen and interact on this thread. I mispoke the last I saw was the 2009 Worlds DVD, so i'm actually interested to see 2010!
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
Not sure about the tag. Might be that the addition of the DGCR Verified tags for MJ and McBeth knocked out the Consultant tags.
I believe Tim posted a few days ago that he was removing the Consultants tag because it never really amounted to anything.
Found it:
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1755546#post1755546
Last edited:
LeBryson James
Double Eagle Member
Where is my players pack?! lol
But my question is, how is a rule changed or added to by the PDGA? Who comes up with the new rulings? How are they voted on and tested or what ever? Thanks.
But my question is, how is a rule changed or added to by the PDGA? Who comes up with the new rulings? How are they voted on and tested or what ever? Thanks.
Awesome...i know everyone here is super happy to have you!
So i ask this of everyone....
Whats in your bag?
models/weights/what you use them for if utility/strange?
shive
Par Member
Rules changes and additions
KatanaFrenzy:
Rules changes and additions are proposed by the Rules Committee. They must then be passed by the Board.
KatanaFrenzy:
Rules changes and additions are proposed by the Rules Committee. They must then be passed by the Board.
shive
Par Member
What's in my bag?
Elnino:
I'm sponsored by Innova, so . . . . .
three Rocs (180) at various stages of beatness, for approaches
Leopard (167), for approaches that are just beyond Roc range
Monarch, Katana, Boss, Destroyer (all 167), and Blizzard Katana (155) for driving
Birdie putter (175)
That covers all my bases. I've used Rocs and Birdies my whole Pro career (since 1996). The others are more recent additions, replacing older types. The Blizzards in particular amaze me with their stability. I've never before been able to throw light plastic without turning it over. I'm in my 70's now and throwing as far as I ever did because of the Blizzards.
Elnino:
I'm sponsored by Innova, so . . . . .
three Rocs (180) at various stages of beatness, for approaches
Leopard (167), for approaches that are just beyond Roc range
Monarch, Katana, Boss, Destroyer (all 167), and Blizzard Katana (155) for driving
Birdie putter (175)
That covers all my bases. I've used Rocs and Birdies my whole Pro career (since 1996). The others are more recent additions, replacing older types. The Blizzards in particular amaze me with their stability. I've never before been able to throw light plastic without turning it over. I'm in my 70's now and throwing as far as I ever did because of the Blizzards.
That brings us to one of my pet peeves. It only took 1 min to find problems with the latest changes. (The new mando play description is fubar)
In this age of social media - would it be a huge issue to get _proposed_ changes out to the community so feedback could be gotten from forums like this(and others)?
Not necessarily to change stuff - but to make sure that any ambiguities/loop holes are caught.
Garrett76zt
Par Member
Peter, when looking at tournament results you used to be able to see details that included the layout and maybe even conditions. Also you could view course SSA's for every tournament that has taken place at that course. I accessed that information ALL THE TIME. What was the reasoning for removing that info from the site? I'm sure that all that information is still available to the PDGA. Is it possible we can get that back? Is it because the PDGA is charging money for that info now with the PDGA apps?
tbird888
Salient Disc Test Team
Peter, thank you for being so willing to answer our questions.
I have a question about disc certification. I apologize if this has already been addressed. In the case of Innova, I noticed that Innova's Plus molds aren't on the approval list, and I'm wondering why. They are marketed as a separate models (TL vs TL+, Roc vs Roc+). There is an obvious difference in the mold between the plus and non-plus molds.
I'm also curious about the Roc. I understand there are different toolings made when one mold wears out, but none of the molds really fly alike. They are even marketed separately as well (San Marino, Ontario, and Rancho all have a star run and stamp). Now Innova's released the RC3 which is yet another variation on the mold. Why do they get a pass just because they stamp the Roc name on the disc?
I have a question about disc certification. I apologize if this has already been addressed. In the case of Innova, I noticed that Innova's Plus molds aren't on the approval list, and I'm wondering why. They are marketed as a separate models (TL vs TL+, Roc vs Roc+). There is an obvious difference in the mold between the plus and non-plus molds.
I'm also curious about the Roc. I understand there are different toolings made when one mold wears out, but none of the molds really fly alike. They are even marketed separately as well (San Marino, Ontario, and Rancho all have a star run and stamp). Now Innova's released the RC3 which is yet another variation on the mold. Why do they get a pass just because they stamp the Roc name on the disc?
Last edited:
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
@Garrett76zt - Peter asked me to respond. The SSA data displayed as a big list for each course is unlikely to return to the PDGA website for competitive reasons per PDGA Board request. It's too easy to sweep the information for others to try and duplicate the PDGA ratings system which is an important member benefit. The SSA info is still available indirectly for those who wish to use it by looking for the score nearest 1000 rating on the courses played in events. A modified version as noted is used in the PDGA app for calculating ratings.
@tbird888 - Peter would likely ask me to answer this one also. The PDGA Tech group approves discs that meet the tech standards which includes some but not all physical measurements that could be measured on a disc. It has no bearing on the name(s) or flight characteristics of discs made in that mold that have different dimensions other than the ones measured. For example, the type of plastic, colors, stamping, dome height, mold/molding site, cooling, flashing and even some rim curvature elements that are not measured can vary and the disc does not get a separate listing on the approved list. That doesn't mean it's not useful to have such a list of disc variants that covers those elements but it's outside the realm of the PDGA to do that.
@tbird888 - Peter would likely ask me to answer this one also. The PDGA Tech group approves discs that meet the tech standards which includes some but not all physical measurements that could be measured on a disc. It has no bearing on the name(s) or flight characteristics of discs made in that mold that have different dimensions other than the ones measured. For example, the type of plastic, colors, stamping, dome height, mold/molding site, cooling, flashing and even some rim curvature elements that are not measured can vary and the disc does not get a separate listing on the approved list. That doesn't mean it's not useful to have such a list of disc variants that covers those elements but it's outside the realm of the PDGA to do that.
Last edited:
shive
Par Member
Ripper:
You argue passionately for more quality disc golf TV/video, as do many other PDGA members. This is a very complex issue, and I have been wrestling with it ever since I joined the Board a year and a half ago. How the PDGA should proceed in this area depends on the answers to many fundamental questions. This is not the place or time to debate the entire issue, but I'll give you an example of just two of the questions that have occurred to me.
1) Who should pay? If you want to play disc golf in a tournament, you pay your own entry fee. The entire PDGA membership does not pay for you to play. If you want to watch disc golf on TV or video, should you pay to watch, or should the entire PDGA membership pay for you to watch?
2) Who should be paid? The current PDGA video/TV program uses (for the most part)) a single provider, but there are many independent sources producing high-quality material (see for example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZBbSH4n2dU). Should the PDGA put all its eggs in one basket, or should it do more to encourage and support independent producers?
PS: Don't worry about offending me. I appreciate passionate argument, and I expected a far more rough-and-tumble experience on this forum. I won't melt, and I'm not going to run away and hide even if this thread heats up.
You argue passionately for more quality disc golf TV/video, as do many other PDGA members. This is a very complex issue, and I have been wrestling with it ever since I joined the Board a year and a half ago. How the PDGA should proceed in this area depends on the answers to many fundamental questions. This is not the place or time to debate the entire issue, but I'll give you an example of just two of the questions that have occurred to me.
1) Who should pay? If you want to play disc golf in a tournament, you pay your own entry fee. The entire PDGA membership does not pay for you to play. If you want to watch disc golf on TV or video, should you pay to watch, or should the entire PDGA membership pay for you to watch?
2) Who should be paid? The current PDGA video/TV program uses (for the most part)) a single provider, but there are many independent sources producing high-quality material (see for example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZBbSH4n2dU). Should the PDGA put all its eggs in one basket, or should it do more to encourage and support independent producers?
PS: Don't worry about offending me. I appreciate passionate argument, and I expected a far more rough-and-tumble experience on this forum. I won't melt, and I'm not going to run away and hide even if this thread heats up.
tbird888
Salient Disc Test Team
Thanks Chuck. I know we've discussed this in the past with you mentioning you'd ask about it. I appreciate you doing so. I still have some issues though. Innova has/had two different TeeBird molds, CAL and CA. They both fly like TeeBirds. What makes them different to us anal retentive throwers is the variations you say the PDGA doesn't account for. The Roc instances are not like that at all.
It seems that, by your logic, Innova could legally take, say, a Destroyer wing and a Vulcan top, mold it, stamp it a Destroyer, and sell it as a Destroyer, even though it's clearly not a Destroyer. Prior to the TeeDevil's approval, Innova was selling a non-approved mold under an approved mold's name, with no punishment from the governing body. Is this a common practice amongst all the manufacturers?
In the case of the Rocs, you can buy a "Star San Marino Roc", a "Star Ontario Roc", and a "Star Rancho Cucamonga Roc". Those aren't just Rocs. There's an obvious difference between the molds, beyond unaccounted for molding inconsistencies, if Innova's marketing them separately. Now the RC3 is out, marketed as such, and it flies closer to a Buzzz than a current production Roc. How can you truly say that it's from molding inconsistency and not from a true replacement mold?
