Is putting too easy? too hard? Just right?

[optidiscic]

I am the rare one who thinks larger baskets would be good for the game.

If its all about video coverage seeing shots from 100+ ft away being attempted more often and made often would make for a more entertaining viewing experience

Its totally impractical but its simple more makes from distance more incentive to go for makes is much better than players missing a smaller target or endless coverage of lay ups after lay ups

Baskets would be more pricey and heavy hulking masses of monstrostity lol

 

[tomte]

Paul McBeth really got us talking - in two threads already...
I like it, this will grow discgolf no matter if we change basket sizes.
I wonder if the touring pros discuss this as well and how they discuss it. I hope those who read along here do have the time to comment from their perspective.

 

[Halcón]

The guy plays on a completely different level than 99.99% of disc golfers. What Paul McBeth wants is not what we want.

 

[Quinum]

I think basket size is fine. Putting is still a challenge for most of us mere mortals.

 

[Carpy]

This

 

[jjpitt29]

While I think basket size and putting is just fine, I think I should hope for smaller baskets. I'm a fairly bad putter. If putting is harder I would score better. I lay up on many putts the way it is. I usually get killed by people who putt much better. If they can't knock down the 25-40 footers (or less) with as much regularity, than I will do better comparatively.

Smaller baskets = better for bad putters!

 

[optidiscic]

ironically the smaller basket would be better for
bad putters but no one seems
to recognize that

 

[jjpitt29]

ironically the smaller basket would be better for
bad putters but no one seems
to recognize that

LOL, read the post before yours!

 

[Cgkdisc]

Embedded in the idea (among some top pros) for making baskets smaller is the idea that this would widen the scoring spread. However, unless the change also makes short putts tougher, scoring spread could narrow rather than increase even though scoring average on holes would increase.

Consider that making the target narrower will reduce the number of putts made from say 15-50 ft among pros. However, it's likely the number of misses from 15 ft and shorter will likely not go up much, certainly not as much as the percentage increase in misses outside 15 ft. What's important here is that pro misses in DG from outside 15 ft typically end up inside 15 ft for almost automatic hole out on the next putt. So while the number of 1-putts will go down with narrower baskets, the number of 3 putts may barely increase at the pro level thus narrowing the scoring spread.

However, if you look at the proposed basket changes in post #94, not only will you reduce the number of putts made outside 15-50 ft, those 7-15 ft will not be as automatic leading to more 3 putts. This change would be more like the ball golf dynamic where a significant percentage of their pros missing putts from 30+ ft end up far enough from the hole (2+ ft) that they are not automatic hole outs on their next putt.

This scoring spread dynamic is why the current basket works well for players below say 950 rating because a first putt thrown from 15+ feet has a good distribution of holing out from immediately to 1, 2 or sometimes more putts needed. However, as the player rating increases above 950, this reasonable Am scoring spread for putting on current baskets decreases. That's why having an alternative set of challenges for pros to hole out, that maintains the wider putting scoring spread amateurs see on current baskets, would be needed to achieve what some top pros would like to see happen with tougher baskets.

 

[onemilemore]

I am the rare one who thinks larger baskets would be good for the game.

If its all about video coverage seeing shots from 100+ ft away being attempted more often and made often would make for a more entertaining viewing experience

Its totally impractical but its simple more makes from distance more incentive to go for makes is much better than players missing a smaller target or endless coverage of lay ups after lay ups

Baskets would be more pricey and heavy hulking masses of monstrostity lol

I've never thought about it from this perspective, but I tend to agree with you. Some of the best "ohhhh!" moments while watching coverage have been on those crazy long runs to the basket. Hell, did anyone see Sexton's putt during warmups at the GCC that was floating around yesterday? More crazy long putts would be more fun, for sure.

But yes, huge baskets would be a logistical nightmare, haha.

 

[mm1315]

Played at a temporary course where they had the "bullseye" baskets, nice challenge on holes that weren't challenging on the drive or upshot. But definitely wouldn't want that on every hole. Maybe 3 per course on some of the shorter holes to make them a but more risk reward. Only thing is no aces with that style basket.

 

[jjpitt29]

Embedded in the idea (among some top pros) for making baskets smaller is the idea that this would widen the scoring spread. However, unless the change also makes short putts tougher, scoring spread could narrow rather than increase even though scoring average on holes would increase.

Consider that making the target narrower will reduce the number of putts made from say 15-50 ft among pros. However, it's likely the number of misses from 15 ft and shorter will likely not go up much, certainly not as much as the percentage increase in misses outside 15 ft. What's important here is that pro misses in DG from outside 15 ft typically end up inside 15 ft for almost automatic hole out on the next putt. So while the number of 1-putts will go down with narrower baskets, the number of 3 putts may barely increase at the pro level thus narrowing the scoring spread.

However, if you look at the proposed basket changes in post #94, not only will you reduce the number of putts made outside 15-50 ft, those 7-15 ft will not be as automatic leading to more 3 putts. This change would be more like the ball golf dynamic where a significant percentage of their pros missing putts from 30+ ft end up far enough from the hole (2+ ft) that they are not automatic hole outs on their next putt.

This scoring spread dynamic is why the current basket works well for players below say 950 rating because a first putt thrown from 15+ feet has a good distribution of holing out from immediately to 1, 2 or sometimes more putts needed. However, as the player rating increases above 950, this reasonable Am scoring spread for putting on current baskets decreases. That's why having an alternative set of challenges for pros to hole out, that maintains the wider putting scoring spread amateurs see on current baskets, would be needed to achieve what some top pros would like to see happen with tougher baskets.

Don't you think this would lead to more lay ups (lag putts) instead of actually trying to make long ones?

I think this would lead to less exciting golf to watch and play. One of the big things that is fun about disc is the ability to "throw one in". Whether that's from 200ft or 50ft.

The courses need more challenge not the basket. Creating longer holes, creating greens with a preferred side to hit etc are much better ways to create challenge rather than making the basket smaller.

Driving is already a huge huge part of being good at disc golf. Making the basket smaller would only increases the importance of driving while lowering the importance of putting.

Disc golf and ball golf are based in the same concept, but are so fundamentally different in how they are actually played that trying to make them the same is a losing proposition.

**OB within 20 feet of a basket is stupid and bad design IMO. Sorry for the sidenote.

 

[BirdieMachine]

I don't think going overly narrow is the answer either, just a bit, maybe 4 inches or so. This would also reduce the number of cut throughs also I think and make the catcher more reliable without adding extra chains.

 

[BirdieMachine]

Don't you think this would lead to more lay ups (lag putts) instead of actually trying to make long ones?

I think this would lead to less exciting golf to watch and play. One of the big things that is fun about disc is the ability to "throw one in". Whether that's from 200ft or 50ft.

The courses need more challenge not the basket. Creating longer holes, creating greens with a preferred side to hit etc are much better ways to create challenge rather than making the basket smaller.

Driving is already a huge huge part of being good at disc golf. Making the basket smaller would only increases the importance of driving while lowering the importance of putting.

Disc golf and ball golf are based in the same concept, but are so fundamentally different in how they are actually played that trying to make them the same is a losing proposition.

**OB within 20 feet of a basket is stupid and bad design IMO. Sorry for the sidenote.

Disagree, driving would still be important but getting inside the circle or closer would be the priority. No gimmes from 25 feet. The best putters hit dead center more often thus mediocre putters would be missing more often.

 

[jjpitt29]

Disagree, driving would still be important but getting inside the circle or closer would be the priority. No gimmes from 25 feet. The best putters hit dead center more often thus mediocre putters would be missing more often.

Um.... what you said contradicts itself. You said getting inside the circle would be the priority. Hence making driving/upshots more important!

 

[Rocaholic74]

I vote for keeping them the same! If the Pros want to narrow the basket size then let it apply to them only when they play tournaments. I already have a hard enough time getting the putter in the basket. I can drive for show for my level of a player but can't putt for sh!t. The days when I'm on, I'm really on but when I'm off, I'm telling you a blind person has a better chance of making that putt then I do. Making the baskets smaller would only make people think I have tourettes with the amount of profanities that would be coming out my mouth!!

 

[krupicka]

Don't you think this would lead to more lay ups (lag putts) instead of actually trying to make long ones?

Most top pros don't seem to care about risk or deem it important. Seldom do they make the "safe" play.

 

[jjpitt29]

Most top pros don't seem to care about risk or deem it important. Seldom do they make the "safe" play.

Because they feel their chance of making the long putt is pretty high. And they feel that they have a very good chance to make that come back putt.

If those %'s start to significantly drop, you don't think they would adapt their game?

Maybe for some of the top guys it won't have a huge effect in how they approach stuff and what they go for, but it will have an effect on the % of made putts. The guys that are a little less confident will probably start laying up to ensure the "tap in". As chuck said, I bet that would narrow the scoring spread. Which could be argued whether that is good or bad. But I think the game would lose a good bit of excitement in that process.

 

[jmhoekst]

Most top pros don't seem to care about risk or deem it important. Seldom do they make the "safe" play.

I disagree. Watch coverage of the Masters Cup from last year and you'll see a ton of layups on those DeLa greens. The top pros as just so good that they attack the shots that Ams like me would shy away from. It doesn't mean they don't play safe, they just have a different definition of what constitutes a dangerous throw.

 

[BirdieMachine]

Um.... what you said contradicts itself. You said getting inside the circle would be the priority. Hence making driving/upshots more important!

Right, when you said driving it didn't mention only par 3's. But yeah accuracy and putting would be more important with a narrower basket. Your mediocre putter would get punished more often then the top putters would.