Can you win without distance? ... YES!

[JFink2011]

My latest post "Hope for the Weak" talks about how players can still succeed even though they may not be able to throw 500' like the pros.

SkyHyzer Blog

If you can drive 300', maybe you could be world's best disc golfer...

Preview:

 

[DiscNutt123]

That's pretty cool.

 

[JBryant]

Many disc golfers can throw 300 but I know some who cannot be consistent throwing past that and they peak out at a certain level.

 

[ecpenguin]

Some of those courses have holes that you need 300+ just to clear water or the OB.

Still, very cool article. Accuracy and putting really is the key.

 

[bradharris]

There's a a lot missing from these stats. You're basing your estimations on distance only, but a very important part of the game is placement. Three holes at Maple Hill in particular stand out to me:

Hole 1
It requires about 400' downhill to clear the pond. Or you could lay up around 250 short, or play to the left or right. Once past the pond, the green is sheltered with a small opening. So to have any reasonable chance of hitting the green, you need to be able to place a shot near the opening for a short approach and then a putt. If you max out at 300, you won't clear the pond. So you have to play to safe, leaving you about 500' from the pin. The perfect 300 footer still leaves you 200 short. From here you need a placement shot, an upshot, and a putt. By distance alone, the 300 foot driver can hole out in 4, however, because of the placement requirements, it will likely be a five at best.

Hole 12
Here you're playing a long shot out of the woods, around a corner, and up a hill. To get an open shot to the pin, you have to throw about 400. From there, another 300 parks it. However, a 300 foot drive will require a short out shot to clear the woods. The third shot can reach the green with a putt for four.

Hole 16
This hole has two routes. The big arms are rewarded with a 400' water carry to the pin for a chance at at two. If you can only get 300, you have to play up the side of the water. You'll be short of the corner, which means you'll need a second shot around the corner, a third up shot, and a putt for four. By distance, you likely had this as a three.

 

[JFink2011]

Some of those courses have holes that you need 300+ just to clear water or the OB.

Still, very cool article. Accuracy and putting really is the key.

This is very true. In the article there is a note... "These results do not take in to account elevation, terrain, woods, weather, etc."

I'm not even saying anyone can do this, in fact, it's quite impossible... but it's a good example of accuracy > distance and how lack of natural ability won't keep you out of it.

 

[garublador]

The thing is that it's much easier to be super accurate at 300' when you can throw 400'. If you assume that you're most accurate at 80% of your top distance then you'll be throwing 375' to get the numbers from that chart. That's not to say that putting isn't super important, just that throwing 300' and being both accurate at and shaping all sorts of different lines at 300' are way different things.

 

[JFink2011]

The thing is that it's much easier to be super accurate at 300' when you can throw 400'. If you assume that you're most accurate at 80% of your top distance then you'll be throwing 375' to get the numbers from that chart. That's not to say that putting isn't super important, just that throwing 300' and being both accurate at and shaping all sorts of different lines at 300' are way different things.

Great point!

I definitely still wish I could throw 500 feet.

 

[bradharris]

Another thought that really puts this into perspective. This theoretical player is getting a two on every hole under 330'. There are a great number of courses that have no holes longer than that, so he's regularly shooting a 36 on lower level courses....

 

[Pwingles]

Does this mean "perfect 300 ft AND UNDER drives" or just 300 foot drives? Would make a 500 foot hole very hard to play

 

[chrishysell]

There's a a lot missing from these stats. You're basing your estimations on distance only, but a very important part of the game is placement. Three holes at Maple Hill in particular stand out to me:

Hole 1
It requires about 400' downhill to clear the pond. Or you could lay up around 250 short, or play to the left or right. Once past the pond, the green is sheltered with a small opening. So to have any reasonable chance of hitting the green, you need to be able to place a shot near the opening for a short approach and then a putt. If you max out at 300, you won't clear the pond. So you have to play to safe, leaving you about 500' from the pin. The perfect 300 footer still leaves you 200 short. From here you need a placement shot, an upshot, and a putt. By distance alone, the 300 foot driver can hole out in 4, however, because of the placement requirements, it will likely be a five at best.

Hole 12
Here you're playing a long shot out of the woods, around a corner, and up a hill. To get an open shot to the pin, you have to throw about 400. From there, another 300 parks it. However, a 300 foot drive will require a short out shot to clear the woods. The third shot can reach the green with a putt for four.

Hole 16
This hole has two routes. The big arms are rewarded with a 400' water carry to the pin for a chance at at two. If you can only get 300, you have to play up the side of the water. You'll be short of the corner, which means you'll need a second shot around the corner, a third up shot, and a putt for four. By distance, you likely had this as a three.

Being one of the weenie arm players I do understand this. Granted I haven't been back to Marshall street since the 04 MSDGC. I was able to compete with the eventual winner somewhat on the short layouts, losing 2 and 3 strokes per round on the Maple Hill and Elements shorts and then 6 each on the longer layouts. There is a consistent distance that is necessary to be a top player. I want it but after nearly 20 years it's still eluding me. 300ft is still enough to cash and make some of your money back.

 

[garublador]

Does this mean "perfect 300 ft AND UNDER drives" or just 300 foot drives? Would make a 500 foot hole very hard to play

It depends on the hole. You could throw one 300' drive off to the side to leave you another 300' drive if there's room.

 

[JFink2011]

Another thought that really puts this into perspective. This theoretical player is getting a two on every hole under 330'. There are a great number of courses that have no holes longer than that, so he's regularly shooting a 36 on lower level courses....

Haha, yep! He's quite the golfer isn't he?

 

[JFink2011]

Being one of the weenie arm players I do understand this. Granted I haven't been back to Marshall street since the 04 MSDGC. I was able to compete with the eventual winner somewhat on the short layouts, losing 2 and 3 strokes per round on the Maple Hill and Elements shorts and then 6 each on the longer layouts. There is a consistent distance that is necessary to be a top player. I want it but after nearly 20 years it's still eluding me. 300ft is still enough to cash and make some of your money back.

I feel your pain, lol.

And I would agree with you, it has always been my opinion that if you can't consistently throw 400+ in sheer distance, you will never be in the top 10 players in the world.

Thanks for you comment.

 

[chrishysell]

But you can win. It may not be one of the majors or anything fancy but with my weak throw I have lead A Tiers and have finished 2nd in both an NT and A tier. I have in excess of 70 PDGA wins. Certain courses fit me better than others. Through consistancy and by limiting my mistakes I have been able to surprise many longer throwers on long courses.

 

[JFink2011]

But you can win. It may not be one of the majors or anything fancy but with my weak throw I have lead A Tiers and have finished 2nd in both an NT and A tier. I have in excess of 70 PDGA wins. Certain courses fit me better than others. Through consistancy and by limiting my mistakes I have been able to surprise many longer throwers on long courses.

What an epic example. Thanks man, that's awesome!

If you wouldn't mind, what is your average max drive?

 

[BENFTS]

If you can drive 400' at de la and you hit all your puts you can win everytime. My max distance is not all that great but I almost always get under par for de la, of course -13 in a single day says that McBeth like distance and putting is the way to be. He could have been -17 but missed 4 putts.

 

[mashnut]

It's a lot easier to be accurate on 300' shots of various shapes if you can get there with a putter, mid or driver rather than having to pull out your fastest disc to make that distance. Having those options opens up a lot of lines that a 300' max thrower just wouldn't have.

 

[zepphead33]

Wow, you put a lot of effort into proving something that is pretty obvious. Good work, just kind of pointless.

 

[Connor Jones]

Wow, you put a lot of effort into proving something that is pretty obvious. Good work, just kind of pointless.

It's cool, it was still more useful than this post.