-
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)
DGPT: 2019 Idlewild Open
- Thread starter brutalbrutus
- Start date
Because one stroke was slightly more valuable on the FPO layout. That again shows the layout wasn't that much easier because the difference in stroke value wasn't greater than that.
Last edited:
ok, you are probably right.
But i look at a hole like hole 2 at "the Beast" . . only ONE FPO birdy in 4 rounds total. . but in MPO most of the top players birdy that hole multiple times.
Still the round where Rated the same for MPO and FPO.
Most of the holes at the Beast played over par for FPO
bwgort
Birdie Member
This happens quite a lot. An easier course can produce a higher rating if the players shoot worse on the shorter layout relative to their rating. Remember for the purposes of ratings calculations, it's two separate courses with no relation to one another.
We actually do have something like that, but the timing is all off on it. I will work with Udisc to see if we can update that so that it is a little quicker.
bwgort
Birdie Member
We're not talking about relative to par here. Par isn't relevant for ratings calculation purposes. For purely raw score, the FPO hole 4 and 5 were easier than the MPO 4 and 5.
- Joined
- May 4, 2010
- Messages
- 1,648
Good stuff here.
#3 made me immediately think about the picturesque intersection of 2, 4, and 5 at Idlewild Open. A stationary camera (on a lift if I'm gonna dream) positioned here would have a good view of people crossing the pond on hole 2, the wide view from the basket of people driving on hole 4, and the drives on hole 5.
Is this sarcasm? Because CCDG's production has been stagnant for at least two, if not three, years. Getting as good as CCDG means getting just good enough to do the job, and then sitting on it for a long time. At least in terms of presentation. Maybe they've upgraded equipment, got more cameras, etc. but I can't tell.
Is this sarcasm? Because CCDG's production has been stagnant for at least two, if not three, years. Getting as good as CCDG means getting just good enough to do the job, and then sitting on it for a long time. At least in terms of presentation. Maybe they've upgraded equipment, got more cameras, etc. but I can't tell.
I actually disagree with this. CCDG has added a lot of little things over the past few years. They dabbled in "flight line", speed gun, & additional drone graphics when they have the manpower. Where I think they could use a refresh is in their between hole scoring page, I think that is getting a bit stale and I never loved it in the first place.
I could be wrong, but it seems the bulk of people buying discs, couldn't name more than 5 top pros.
Plus I know plenty of older AM's that don't care at all about watching/following pro disc golf.
Would you want to sink 6 to 7 figures a year into sponsoring pro disc golf, only to have the same people asking for more every year because they can't find outside sponsorship?
Yep. Their hole previews are the best in the business with those overlays for the Mandos / OB.
The radar read-outs also add value, although I think they sometimes fixate their discussion on the disc speeds a bit too much. It's definitely a net positive, because it's very interesting to see the difference between a "soft" throw with a distance driver and a harder throw with something slower. Speed isn't something a camera catches well (especially from the direct-behind angle), so the numbers really help to show how the disc was thrown.
The only thing I can think of where CCDG might lag behind Jomez on is correcting for bright and shadowed environments. And possibly for capturing the magnitude of slopes, which is really hard on camera.
I think that this is part of it. But on the other hand, your hardest core DG fans are the ones consuming the most media. Probably your biggest "whales".
And as we have discussed multiple times, the manufacturers are sponsoring players, events, and now media as well. There is a really fine line between what sponsoring an event does/should get you. And it is really up to the TD and the level of sponsorship. Should sponsoring the event get you free commercials on any media coverage? Because a manufacturer is going to really think about sponsoring if it only covers the event and NOT the media and another sponsor can come in and take the media spots.
We are in strange and wonderful times.
I don't know CCDGs workflow. But I am fairly sure that Jomez films in S-log (RAW) and does color correction on a lot of shots, especially ones that are in darker environments. Maybe CCDG does as well and I don't know. That could be the reason for the color difference.
And for any crew, showing elevation is difficult. Cameras do elevation and distance no justice. Which is why for live, if I have an option, I will show a behind the shoulder view of a putt as well as a sideview to give the viewers a perspective.
Orchestra
Newbie
Is Anhyzer TV taking the full video feed from the FPO live broadcast and recutting it for shot by shot? Is that what Steve Dodge originally planned to do with his new media plan at the beginning of the season? I'm not criticizing, just curious. I appreciate having condensed footage.
No, AnhyzerTV is working with the footage directly from the cameras. Which is why it is taking longer than normal to get out. The footage had to be converted to an MP4 file and then uploaded to a server so they could download it. The problem is when you convert it away from MOV, you lose all of the metadata making it VERY hard to easily reassemble it in a timely manner. It becomes a very manual process.
I'm sure you've got a better perspective than me, I'm just a weekly watcher - I don't really "work" with it much so I may not notice the little changes. From my casual perspective - I just remember in 2017 watching Jomez all of a sudden move forward between Winter-Spring to a new onscreen overlay system (sticks with me because that was the winter I started watching coverage), while CCDG stayed still.... and then it happened again... and then it happened again. It seems like their entire on screen presentation has been stale, not just the in between hole scoring.
I don't like the way the speeds are presented, though - it seems like I forget its even there unless a) its some kind of record throw, they have a flashy lil icon for when someone like Eagle breaks a record I think or b) they mention it. Its too quiet. We don't need flames above a certain threshold like FOX baseball radar, but just something that makes it POP whenever a new one comes up on screen, to draw the eye for a moment.
You know... crop that hair short, throw on a ball cap... and he's got a real CHAMP look to him. Maybe its just the ears. Shoulders aren't quite broad enough... but yeah.
brutalbrutus
* Ace Member *
This is total thread drift, but here goes:
I think it was the 2018 BSF, when a commentator pointed out that Bradley Williams was consistently throwing ~10mph slower than the rest of the card, but also throwing just as far in most instances. He was working angles and spin better on lofty lines to achieve the same distance as the guys who were throwing faster.
That was by far the most insightful comment that I've ever noticed with regards to the radar guns, and you really have to pay attention throughout the round to make that sort of observation. For some of the more spacious courses where they lean heavily on the radar gun and throw distances to give context, it would be interesting to see those number tabulated hole-by-hole at some point. And you could mine useful analysis out of those tables, like how headwind vs. tailwind impacts distance at similar throw speeds, or if some players have certain speed/distance ranges where they appear to sacrifice accuracy for pure power.
I feel like THAT would be lot more interesting use of the data they already have, rather than the occasional, "Holy smokes, these guys throw hard!"
Last edited:
Similar threads
