Harder Courses for worlds?

[Three Putt]

Word. I agree. The question is how can we accommodate the PMs and RW's in a sport in a way that is feasible givie the lack of revenue in disc golf over all? That's a very tough question.

It's a "careful what you wish for" scenario. People love to play in A tiers and come home to tell stories about hanging out with top pros. You hang out with top pros becasue they show up at A tiers to earn some cash. The sport isn't big enough to support pros with a separate set of events for pros only with us as spectators. You get to go to A tiers and be a peer to McBeth becasue he is gofing and you are golfing...it's part of the vibe people love about disc golf.

Get to a point where the sport can accommodate someone with the talent of McBeth, and that will be gone. That little sport vibe where we were all in this together becasue we are disc golfers and there are so few of us that we need each other? Gone. Those events we like to go to becasue you get to hang out with sponsored pros? They won't have sponsored pros at them anymore.

Basically making disc golf into the kind of sport that will accommodate the PMs and RWs will fundamentally alter what we have and take a lot of what people love about this sport away. Is accommodating the PMs and RWs worth it? Depends on who you ask.

 

[Aim For The Chains]

par is just mislabled for many "gold" level players.

All about the tee signs.

 

[air show]

I have been a spectator at many N.T.s and have watched the MPO every time they come to town. Twice I have seen them play my home course. Wysocki won the last round I watched and was listed at 14 under par. I'm not sure who or how they set par but by my standards he would have only been 7 under par. That being said par has never meant anything to me while watching a N.T.

Going forward I believe par and the types of courses played will not be determined by disc golfers but by spectators. I have many times been disappointed by courses played in a N.T. from a spectators point of view. It seems many times the T.D.s don't consider the spectators when choosing courses or play off holes or etc. etc.

Furthermore, while being a spectator at many N.T.s I have found that putting is the least impressive part of the MPO. I have seen many great putts but many many missed putts. For this reason a smaller or harder basket IMO is not an option.

 

[SD86]

Just because he put up a super low number doesn't mean it was easy to do, which is what you are saying when you say that -16 isn't enough of a test.

No I am not saying it was easy to do. And it's not the same thing as saying -16 isn't enough of a test.

I *am* saying that -16 (or -15 and -14), especially in a tournament of the prestige of the World Championships, shows that the course is not providing a good test of these players.

 

[Pbmercil]

No I am not saying it was easy to do. And it's not the same thing as saying -16 isn't enough of a test.

I *am* saying that -16 (or -15 and -14), especially in a tournament of the prestige of the World Championships, shows that the course is not providing a good test of these players.

But -6 is? Even if it provides the same scoring spread as -16? Why? What are you trying to test that isn't happening?

 

[Steve West]

Convert everything to par 3. Problem solved lol

Pretty much.

par is just mislabled for many "gold" level players.
All about the tee signs.

Preliminary stats say par for Jones East should have been 53. Only #9 is a par 4 for Gold.

It is easy to set par correctly for Open players. See here.
Even if we do, we still likely need harder courses.

 

[DanJon]

I can assure you that to these so called outsiders, such a forensic examination of the nuances of our sport wouldn't even cross their minds because outsiders don't think about things they aren't involved in that specifically.

You know who does worry about that sort of thing? Insiders with an inferiority complex who will never be happy with disc golf as is, no matter how many improvements are made, because they're hell-bent on turning it into another homogenized product for their comforts, and not an activity for people to enjoy, even if that future involves greens fees, dress codes, and being relegated to spectating athlete worshippers buying the man's corporate clothes, and drinking the man's corporate beer, because that's what the man wants them to do.

So on behalf of all of us who want to keep disc golf (even the competitive kind), a weird aberration from our monotonous lives, and a relatively affordable pasttime, could you all just quit this sanctimonious concern about what people you made up in your heads think about us already?

Thanks guy, but I'm not one of the people in your little ramble.

I rarely play sanctioned competitive events.

Could care less, just making a point in the context of world's and the courses.

 

[DanJon]

THANK YOU. I wanted to say something along those lines when he posted that but I couldn't think of a good way to articulate my thoughts.

Deleted.

 

[Aim For The Chains]

Pretty much.



Preliminary stats say par for Jones East should have been 53. Only #9 is a par 4 for Gold.

It is easy to set par correctly for Open players. See here.
Even if we do, we still likely need harder courses.

Thank you. I was only "sorta" kidding. Agreed':thmbup:

 

[corin_brown]

It ends up taking a special piece of property to keep those guys close enough to par to make the scores compare to what someone is expecting to see coming over from ball golf.

This is a good point. One of the biggest constraint to putting on big showcase events, like World's, is the dearth of adequate venues/courses.

The folks who don't like the way things are now should just build the ideal course/venue/complex and big and host World's every year: no holes under 300'; a course long enough to include plenty of par fours and par fives AND simultaneously spread out the scoring; located near a vibrant city that's easy to get to; unlimited internet connectivity to enable flawless broadcasting of the action; world class accommodations for players and fans in attendance; abundant parking; vending infrastructure. No big deal. Problem solved.

But until that happens, because disc golf is a tiny sport with almost zero money in it, we're stuck with what we have now: only a handful of people willing to even bid on hosting a World's and fewer courses suitable to play on.

 

[teemkey]

The thing is that if you make a course harder for Wysocki & McBeth, although they'd probably shoot higher scores, they'd also beat the rest of the field by more than they do now.

 

[Steve West]

The thing is that if you make a course harder for , although they'd probably shoot higher scores, they'd also beat the rest of the field by more than they do now.

That would be a good thing. Also, we would be better able to tell the difference between Wysocki & McBeth.

 

[Rondpitt]

The thing is that if you make a course harder for Wysocki & McBeth, although they'd probably shoot higher scores, they'd also beat the rest of the field by more than they do now.

I seem to remember that ball golf went through a phase of attempting to "Tiger Proof" their courses. The articles that I read seemed to say that A) they never really did and B) partly the cause of decline of the player base of rec/casual.

Is there anything for dg to learn from that? Maybe someone with better memory and more data could speak to that.

Ron

 

[SD86]

I seem to remember that ball golf went through a phase of attempting to "Tiger Proof" their courses. The articles that I read seemed to say that A) they never really did and B) partly the cause of decline of the player base of rec/casual

Some courses did "Tiger proof", to an extent. Those that didn't are not part of the PGA Tour. But I would disagree that the "Tiger proofing" caused a decline in the the rec/casual golf base. I'd say the overall economy caused that.

 

[JC17393]

Some courses did "Tiger proof", to an extent. Those that didn't are not part of the PGA Tour. But I would disagree that the "Tiger proofing" caused a decline in the the rec/casual golf base. I'd say the overall economy caused that.

I agree. The thing is, the "Tiger-proofing" happened to courses that hosted or wanted to host PGA Tour events that, you know, Tiger would actually play. It didn't really impact the other 98% of golf courses that weren't ever going to be played by Tiger or any other PGA Tour players. Even before the "Tiger-proofing" happened, most courses on the PGA Tour or equivalents were insanely difficult for your average player. There is a significant gap skill-wise between the courses that are used by professional tournaments and the ones that most of the rec/casual base are playing on a daily basis.

Such a gap doesn't yet exist in disc golf. If we want to see true tests that set apart the McBeths and Wysockis and Dosses and Ulibarris and Locastros of the game, that gap is going to have to be created. Just another reason that eventually, our sport needs to graduate beyond relying so heavily on installing free courses in public parks.

 

[disctildeath]

I agree. The thing is, the "Tiger-proofing" happened to courses that hosted or wanted to host PGA Tour events that, you know, Tiger would actually play. It didn't really impact the other 98% of golf courses that weren't ever going to be played by Tiger or any other PGA Tour players. Even before the "Tiger-proofing" happened, most courses on the PGA Tour or equivalents were insanely difficult for your average player. There is a significant gap skill-wise between the courses that are used by professional tournaments and the ones that most of the rec/casual base are playing on a daily basis.

Such a gap doesn't yet exist in disc golf. If we want to see true tests that set apart the McBeths and Wysockis and Dosses and Ulibarris and Locastros of the game, that gap is going to have to be created. Just another reason that eventually, our sport needs to graduate beyond relying so heavily on installing free courses in public parks.

Yeah, but without those free parks, who would actually play that much disc golf? Cost (also include the fact volunteers and grants help get the work done) and availability are the main reasons disc golf is even on the radar at all. Another issue I see is there are some epic courses, but they don't have the facilities or would be a total pain to try and film play or have spectators, for example Sugaree in NC, amazing mountain course , would love to see some pros play that one, but how do you pull off the logistics of a major tournament there?

 

[DavidSauls]

No I am not saying it was easy to do. And it's not the same thing as saying -16 isn't enough of a test.

I *am* saying that -16 (or -15 and -14), especially in a tournament of the prestige of the World Championships, shows that the course is not providing a good test of these players.

No, it only shows that "par" is defined and set in a way that results on those scores.

You could change the definition, change the signs and scorecards, and the same players on the same course would be shooting -5. There would be no difference in how tough the test is for those players.

Arguments about "par" have been made ad nauseum, and won't be settled here.

Whether certain courses provide sufficient challenge can't be determined in relation to par alone---or by SSA, or winning scores, or even scoring spread on individual holes. These numbers can be bolstered by good design, but also by bad design.

We're still in the era of volunteers, where premier events are in places that have both suitable courses and people willing to undertake running these events. This rather limits what we can demand, in terms of challenging but fair gold-level courses.

 

[Stardoggy]

MOAR OB

Seriously, if these guys are that good, give them smaller spaces to land the disc.

 

[TimSyl]

I don't know, I think it's different than ball golf. It's easy to go for a putt in ball golf and only end up a foot or two away from the hole each time, which is a gimme. But there's no consistent way to do the same in disc golf. So although the putting is harder in ball golf, it's easier to make your second shot than it is in disc golf.

The courses need to be less open and have more shot shaping requirements and instead of relying on OB to punish players on stray shots, make a course that has punishing rough.

If you think making a 2 or 3' slider in golf is easier than making a 10-15' putt in disc, well, you probably haven't played very much tournament golf.

 

[Stardoggy]

If you think making a 2 or 3' slider in golf is easier than making a 10-15' putt in disc, well, you probably haven't played very much tournament golf.

I was thinking the same thing. I'll take a 15' putt in disc golf over a 2' putt in golf 100 times out of 100.