Controlling Understability

[nosajeel99]

I am kind of with sidewinding on this one to a point. I have to favor learning with something a little more difficult early on, in order to benefit you the most in the long haul.

If you learning to shoot pool with smaller (as in the width of the opening" pockets, the regular tables will be much easy. If you are learning to throw a baseball through a tire, I would start with something that has a smaller opening first. This way the tire seems huge! If you learn to throw a disc that is tough to throw (requiring you to throw level and with good spin)...once you conquer that, many of the other discs will take minor adjustments to become proficient with.

I think that creates a lot of frustration with newer players. Frustration does not equal fun; no fun, no play.

 

[colombo117]

The archangel is a sawed off shotgun while a teebird is a rifle. Teebirds are far more accurate than an archangel.
The archangel is, in my opinion "crappy."
It's not because of my "form" either, I have thrown the archangel many times and tried to keep it in my bag but it is better served in my dogs mouth.
A putter is a better tool to find your form than the archangel.

 

[Donovan]

I think that creates a lot of frustration with newer players. Frustration does not equal fun; no fun, no play.

Hmm, first few times out to play and try the game out or only playing with buddies 1 day a week for beers that is one thing. However, if you are at the point where you want to try and learn the game, then this is where I think you should start. If you want to get good, fast, then conquer what forces you to focus for improvement right off. Once you master that, you will see much faster improvement throughout.

I learned to play pool on a snooker table with regular sized balls. Those pockets seemed tiny because of it. But that is all I had to work with. When I finally went and played out somewhere, I was amazed how much easier the game was. It pays to focus and challenge yourself up front if you are serious about learning something.

 

[RustyP]

One good way to practice controlling understable discs is to grab a few understable discs and try throwing knife-hyzers with them (with 60-degrees of hyzer or more), focusing on keeping them on the same angle all the way through the flight. You'll notice after a while that if you roll your wrist outward (bending at the wrist so that your knuckles are moving slightly closer to your forearm) at the moment of release it creates less spin and the disc won't flip as easily. After you get the wrist roll down try experimenting with the same discs on shots with less and less hyzer angle, until you're able to throw them flat without turning them over.

 

[garublador]

I am kind of with sidewinding on this one to a point. I have to favor learning with something a little more difficult early on, in order to benefit you the most in the long haul.

If you learning to shoot pool with smaller (as in the width of the opening" pockets, the regular tables will be much easy. If you are learning to throw a baseball through a tire, I would start with something that has a smaller opening first. This way the tire seems huge! If you learn to throw a disc that is tough to throw (requiring you to throw level and with good spin)...once you conquer that, many of the other discs will take minor adjustments to become proficient with.

I have no idea if the Archangel is that disc, as I have one but have never really taken the time yet to throw it regularly.

I'm not sure those are very good comparisons. Think of it this way. There are two people can lift 100 pounds and they want to learn to lift 200 pounds. One of them starts by getting good at lifting 100 pounds, ups it to 105, gets good at that, ups it again and continues on that The other guy just tries and tries to lift 200 pounds. Which one do you think will be able to actually lift 200 pounds first? Sure the second guy may do it eventually, but will that really be faster than how the first guy does it?

There are probably thousands of analogies and cliches anyone could come up with to support my side. When you learn to ride a bike do you just get on one and keep falling over until you get it or learn with training wheels until you're good and then take the wheels off? If you do it the first way, how do you learn the balence in the first place? You are unable to experiment and get the feel of balencing because you just fall over right away. Race car drivers normally move from slower, smaller cars up to the fastest ones. Do divers start on the really high platforms doing lots of flips or do they start off on a lower one doing few flips and twists? Starting easy and moving up in difficulty is a very common approach to learning for a reason. Otherwise they'd teach calculus to 1st graders.

Here's my version of the pool analogy using the Archangel. It's like you wanted to get good at 9-ball, so you decided to learn on a table that's constantly moving randomly and the pockets randomly open and close. How could you ever develop the skills needed to play the game in that environment? Would that really be faster than learning on a solid, flat table with good bumpers and a good cue, especally if that's the environment in which you'll be normally playing.

 

[Rbuzz9]

i like the Gun analogy

i think understable discs are great for beginners to understand how discs behave since they are the easiest to turn over, easiest to hyzer flip / s curve etc. Understable discs are great for players with less power since they will maintain their straight flight longer and will usually get more distance than a stable disc.

Once players have attained a more powerful throw - the Understable disc becomes more of a finesse disc. - More attention needs to be paid to the throw rather than just power. They need to be thrown at a slower speed or they turnover - If thrown full speed they need either have a hyzer release or lots of room to S curve.
I have also noticed Understable discs seem to have lots of glide - so if it gets up in height- theres a possibility it lands a little off the mark. The more variables introduced the more precise one must be

i have a Monarch and my throws are all over the place -looooooong turnovers / some halfway decent hyzer flips. But the only throw i feel comfortable throwing is a downhill anhyzer around a left hand turn (lhbh)

in contrast if i am throwing my Xcaliber all i am concerned about is throwing sidearm as hard as i can just trying to keep the nose down so it doesnt just go sky high and fade left -- wayyy less things to be concerned about.

 

[sidewinding]

This reminds me of an old story about professional gambler Doyle Brunson. He made a huge bet with the #1 pro ping pong player in the world that he could beat him as long as Doyle got to choose what they used for paddles. The bet was accepted. Doyle pulled out two glass coke bottles. He had practiced for months with a coke bottle. He dominated the #1 ping pong player in the world with a glass coke bottle.

It's not always about using what everyone else uses.

 

[Rbuzz9]

The archangel is a sawed off shotgun while a teebird is a rifle. Teebirds are far more accurate than an archangel.
The archangel is, in my opinion "crappy."
It's not because of my "form" either, I have thrown the archangel many times and tried to keep it in my bag but it is better served in my dogs mouth.
A putter is a better tool to find your form than the archangel.

the analogy isnt how the discs fly compared to projectiles shot out of guns

its about the fact that the smallest adjustment to a rifle will significantly change the rifle's shot and the same adjustment applied to a shotgun's barrell will do virtually nothing to the shotgun's blast.
If an archangel and a tbird are thrown with the same speed and both are tweaked slightly , chances are the change will impact the archangel's flight a lot more so than the tbird's.

 

[colombo117]

If an archangel and a tbird are thrown with the same speed and both are tweaked slightly , chances are the change will impact the archangel's flight a lot more so than the tbird's.

Exactly why I think the archangel is junk and not a disc you would want to use. Its not only slight tweaks (which happen on every throw) that affect the flight of it, its the wind that will make it fly horribly. A seasoned teebird is such a great disc as is Cyclone or Eagle. These disc can fight the wind and slight variations in speed and release and they are proving champion used discs.
I am not saying you need to be a champ to throw them They are just more predictable
I just think if you wanna have a consistent round don't use a disc where the slightest variations in wind, speed, hyzer release angle, and what ever else could effect the flight of the disc. These are variations that are hard to control most of the time so why use a disc that will sputter right roll over a die?

 

[Rbuzz9]

i have enough troubles as it is - unless i'm going short distance , throwing a roller or throwing around a left turning downhill hole, i wont use a very understable disc. they are too all over the place for me

 

[Donovan]

This reminds me of an old story about professional gambler Doyle Brunson. He made a huge bet with the #1 pro ping pong player in the world that he could beat him as long as Doyle got to choose what they used for paddles. The bet was accepted. Doyle pulled out two glass coke bottles. He had practiced for months with a coke bottle. He dominated the #1 ping pong player in the world with a glass coke bottle.

It's not always about using what everyone else uses.

Actually that was Amarillo Slim, if memory serves me correct. His book is amazing.

 

[Donovan]

I'm not sure those are very good comparisons. Think of it this way. There are two people can lift 100 pounds and they want to learn to lift 200 pounds. One of them starts by getting good at lifting 100 pounds, ups it to 105, gets good at that, ups it again and continues on that The other guy just tries and tries to lift 200 pounds. Which one do you think will be able to actually lift 200 pounds first? Sure the second guy may do it eventually, but will that really be faster than how the first guy does it?

There are probably thousands of analogies and cliches anyone could come up with to support my side. When you learn to ride a bike do you just get on one and keep falling over until you get it or learn with training wheels until you're good and then take the wheels off? If you do it the first way, how do you learn the balence in the first place? You are unable to experiment and get the feel of balencing because you just fall over right away. Race car drivers normally move from slower, smaller cars up to the fastest ones. Do divers start on the really high platforms doing lots of flips or do they start off on a lower one doing few flips and twists? Starting easy and moving up in difficulty is a very common approach to learning for a reason. Otherwise they'd teach calculus to 1st graders.

Here's my version of the pool analogy using the Archangel. It's like you wanted to get good at 9-ball, so you decided to learn on a table that's constantly moving randomly and the pockets randomly open and close. How could you ever develop the skills needed to play the game in that environment? Would that really be faster than learning on a solid, flat table with good bumpers and a good cue, especally if that's the environment in which you'll be normally playing.

Forgive me up front bro, I mean no disrespect at all. I just think there is really something to be looked at here.

Weight lifting has nothing to do with accuracy. Accuracy and coordination is the skills we are discussing, not brute strength. So that analogy has nothing to do with this. You at least have to pick something that requires an aiming or precision type skill to make a comparison, otherwise I am not sure it will make sense. And you can say I am picking on you, but moving pockets have nothing to do with shooting 9-ball.

I am not saying there is only one way to do things. That would be shallow and close minded, but I am saying there is alot to be learned when the task is much more focused. If your race car driver started learning the fastest kind of racing first, just think how much better his reaction time would be at every level slower than that one. I know nothing of racing, but I am sure their handling & skills learned at the most difficult levels of the sport first, can benefit the most from that kind of intense training.

This has nothing to do with disc golf, but have you ever played a video game on the hardest level first for a while, and then went back and played the beginner level? The game is so easy at the beginner level, you feel like a king. It is because you trained your reactions and timing and so forth at a more focused level first.

There is something to be said for starting at the easiest level of something first. You do get many more smaller successes as time goes on. BUT my money is on the other guy to be good at a task faster, if he starts at the tougher levels. This is for the serious minded person who wants to improve anyway.

On last note to be added. Just because people have taken baby steps first in the past and have always taken baby steps first, this doesn't means that is the only way to do it. We all have lots to learn and discover new ways of accomplishing things. That is what makes us so special in the world.

 

[Donovan]

Actually that was Amarillo Slim, if memory serves me correct. His book is amazing.

The best part of this bet was he beat the guy the first time around by choosing frying pans as the paddles. Then when the guy begged for a rematch he went home and practiced with the frying pan. That is when Slim had Pans with him, but when the game was about to start, he walked over and drank 2 cokes right out of the machine and said, he lets use these coke bottles for our paddles (which he was practicing with for the same amount of time). They were so light weight compared to the frying pan and nearly impossible to hit the ball straight with anyway. I don't think the guy scored a point the entire match. OH and he was playing a world champion player and took his money, plus everyone else's in the place.

Here is a link the book on Amazon.com:
Amarillo Slim in a World Full of Fat People: The Memoirs of the Greatest Gambler Who Ever Lived

It is one of my all-time favorite reads ever!

 

[SunIsBlue15]

I disagree. If you learn marksmanship using a shotgun and then switch to a rifle, your aim will not be very good. But if you learn with a rifle first and then switch to a shotgun your aim will be excellent. The archangel is like a percision sniper rifle while a teebird is like a sawed off shotgun.

I agree with you guys on this one. That's kind of the reason I started the thread in the first place. It's the only disc in my bag that I really struggle with. If I can get to a point where I am throwing it well consistently, I feel that my game will be greatly improved on the whole.

 

[sidewinding]

The best part of this bet was he beat the guy the first time around by choosing frying pans as the paddles. Then when the guy begged for a rematch he went home and practiced with the frying pan. That is when Slim had Pans with him, but when the game was about to start, he walked over and drank 2 cokes right out of the machine and said, he lets use these coke bottles for our paddles (which he was practicing with for the same amount of time). They were so light weight compared to the frying pan and nearly impossible to hit the ball straight with anyway. I don't think the guy scored a point the entire match. OH and he was playing a world champion player and took his money, plus everyone else's in the place.

Here is a link the book on Amazon.com:
Amarillo Slim in a World Full of Fat People: The Memoirs of the Greatest Gambler Who Ever Lived

It is one of my all-time favorite reads ever!

Thanks for clarifying. It's all coming back to me now. It's been a few years since I read that book. Amarillo Slim was good friends with Doyle Brunson.

 

[Donovan]

Thanks for clarifying. It's all coming back to me now. It's been a few years since I read that book. Amarillo Slim was good friends with Doyle Brunson.

You bet. This is really off topic, but I have actually been in the room where Doyle came up with Texas Hold'em. It is in the basement of a now Ice Cream Shoppe right next to the White Elephant in the Stockyards in Fort Worth, TX. They still have some of the old furniture and bar type stuff down there, but they never actually made it into little tourist like gig. It is used for meetings and can be rented out. If we had not been talking to the right guy, we would have never known about it. It even has a street side entrance, that is a cement stairway for loading stuff.

 

[nosajeel99]

I am not saying there is only one way to do things. That would be shallow and close minded, but I am saying there is alot to be learned when the task is much more focused. If your race car driver started learning the fastest kind of racing first, just think how much better his reaction time would be at every level slower than that one. I know nothing of racing, but I am sure their handling & skills learned at the most difficult levels of the sport first, can benefit the most from that kind of intense training.

This has nothing to do with disc golf, but have you ever played a video game on the hardest level first for a while, and then went back and played the beginner level? The game is so easy at the beginner level, you feel like a king. It is because you trained your reactions and timing and so forth at a more focused level first.

There is something to be said for starting at the easiest level of something first. You do get many more smaller successes as time goes on. BUT my money is on the other guy to be good at a task faster, if he starts at the tougher levels. This is for the serious minded person who wants to improve anyway.

On last note to be added. Just because people have taken baby steps first in the past and have always taken baby steps first, this doesn't means that is the only way to do it. We all have lots to learn and discover new ways of accomplishing things. That is what makes us so special in the world.

I think that starting out with easier discs is very beneficial. There is nothing wrong with getting more difficult discs but they will be much harder to throw. You have to learn basics before you can pop a 400' drive with a Destroyer. Why don't we just start people on the 4th level of Spanish instead of starting them off in level 1? Because we need basics. Get those down and then you can go to harder stuff.

Playing on the hardest level of a game will make the easier levels easy, but it will take a lot longer, you'll die a lot more along the way, and may not enjoy the game as much. And that is only if you are an experienced video game player. Someone who is brand new to games isn't going through Halo 3 on Legendary. (Though in some cases you'll unlock more 360 achievements in one swoop!)

As you said, there are different opinions on this. I just hold the opinion that getting basics down with easier discs is more beneficial in moving to upper levels.

 

[garublador]

As you said, there are different opinions on this. I just hold the opinion that getting basics down with easier discs is more beneficial in moving to upper levels.

Exactly. While there are many different ways to go about things, very few of them will give the best, fastest results. I don't care if someone chooses to use an inferior method to learn. I want it to be clear that the method is inferior, though. The fastest, easiest way to go about this isn't an opinion, it's a fact. Spending time learning to control a disc that's unpredictable is a waste of time. There is never a situation where you'll need that skill since filling your bag with predictable discs will always lead to better scores than choosing to throw unpredictable discs.

SunIsBlue15, I guanatee you'll eventually find that the Archangel is not a good learning tool, that it is too unpredictable and it will either lead you to reaching a plateau earlier than you want or you'll switch to something more predictable and begin learning many times faster. Whether or not you choose to come to that realization now is up to you.

I get my information from Blake at Disc Golf Review. He got his information from various pepople who have either been playing for decades or who own disc companies as well as his experience teaching dozens of people to play. I have ignored his advice in the past but have come to find that every single thing he presents as being the fastest or best has been true. I'm not speculating or just going off some sort of gut feeeling. What I'm presenting has worked for lots and lots of people, including myself. Before listening to him I had maxed at 350' using high speed drivers. I achieved that after a couple months of playing and stayed there for nearly 3 years while playing 3-5 times per week. As a direct result of following his advice for two years and only playing 0-2 times per week when it's nice out I threw my first 350' (measured on a football field) golf shot with a putter last weekend.

There are roughly five groups of posters at the DGR forums: those in my situation, people who are new and are following the adivce, those that have followed his advice and get fairway drivers out past 400', those that throw far naturally and have a hard time coaching others to do the same, and those that choose to ignore his advice because they follow the "whatever works for you" philosophy and complain about hitting a plateau at 300'.

I'm giving advice to keep people out of that last group, but most of what I see here are people arguing that they want to stay there. Believe what you want, but that really is the result I'm trying to get by posting this stuff. Again, the purpose of these arguments I've been in has been to help pepole improve by pointing out common falacies that prevent people from reaching their potential. You can argue all you want and throw out all sorts of comparisons, analogies and chiches, but I am backed with results and none of that other stuff will change my mind.

If people don't want it, I can stop. Just say the word.

 

[colombo117]

Yeah, I hope I didn't hurt anybodies feelings on this topic. Its just whenever I hear the archangel mentioned I cringe. I used it for a while and it only led to frustration. I do think that learning with understable discs is good, as is using putters or middies. I just think that the archangel is a very unpredictable disc and you would be better off using a different understable disc.

 

[SunIsBlue15]

garublador, well put. Just to clarify the whole ArchAngel thing:

It's not the only disc I throw. In fact, I rarely throw it. Really, the only times I ever throw it is when I'm out on a field and just practicing drives. Then I usually throw all of my discs in my bag.

So I'm not using the ArchAngel as the only tool to improve my game. It's just the only disc in my bag that I really struggle with. That's why I posted this thread. Because of this thread, I will probably throw it even less than I do now, since it's so unpredictable.

And definitely don't stop giving advice. That's one of the main points for having message boards -- even if people disagree with what you post. There are probably a lot of people that read these message boards that don't post. So you never know how many people you are actually helping.