That dude.... every time I watch him play, I'm like "visually, this guy is doing it wrong, yet he is so good!" That run up is pure gold. lol..
-
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)
Paul and Paige vs. The Field(s) at Worlds?
- Thread starter jjmiller
- Start date
That dude.... every time I watch him play, I'm like "visually, this guy is doing it wrong, yet he is so good!" That run up is pure gold. lol..
I'll take Josh for Runner-Up against the field for sure.
which wouldn't surprise me)
Streets
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2012
- Messages
- 10,506
Poor Anthon...the constant #2
<---refrains from making a poop joke
<---fails, knowing that mentioning it IS the joke
Really on that first sentence??? FTFY. Hard for me to see 5 rounds of 1059 golf (Barsby), or 5 rounds of 980 golf (Bjerkaas) at Smuggler's Notch as a "fluke". Paige B would have shot her SECOND 1000-rated round if she doesn't get all giddy on #18 the final day and throws her second shot OB marching to the win.
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
One thing that could be fairer with the current Pro Worlds format experiment is to play 9 holes on each course in the semi final round. Consider that the two courses at Smuggler's were quite different and this will be the case at Peoria. Presuming some players play better on one type of course than the other, doesn't it make sense to keep things balanced 50/50 in the semi round after they've played the two different courses twice to get there?
Last edited:
Lurp Nuts
* Ace Member *
You're not wrong, but playing nine holes, driving 14 miles, then playing another nine seems like a pain in the butt for everyone involved - spectators, volunteers, players, everyone.
Hopefully they'll play the tighter fairways in Eureka and skip the less dramatic hyzer holes.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
Kevin Jones.
Streets
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2012
- Messages
- 10,506
After this weekend...I can see him being real contender. Dude can throw the frisbee.
Which one is the semi-final round?
tomdizzlefizzle
Eagle Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2009
- Messages
- 558
Yes some courses suit players better then others but there's many variables to why that is and IMO just slicing two courses isn't going to bring more balance. You could be taking away the two nines from courses that favor X player while giving Y player the two nines that favor his game. Also I don't think it matters too much about courses with the top level players.
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
I missed the edit window remembering last round is now Final.
ThomasOrion
* Ace Member *
Paul will win everything for the rest of time and in the future when Disc Golf surpasses all other sports Comparing Paul McBeth to Jordan or Brady will be a joke because Paul will then be President and will expand the US territories to Haiti, Cuba, and Australia....sorry mate, ya'll are 'Murican's now
jakebake91
* Ace Member *
That escalated quickly....
I was talking about this the other day with a buddy. Clear favorites are Paul vs Ricky. Kevin Jones has some momentum rolling and has the skills to tame both courses.
I'll take the field if I was laying down my $.
I'll take the field if I was laying down my $.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 2,692
i think we'll see the lead card featuring Paul, Ricky, Kevin, and James Conrad most rounds. i don't think either of the crush boys has what it takes yet to finish Worlds on top. i'm curious to see if players like Heimburg, Dickerson, and Seppo can stick around near the top of the leaderboard.
i usually root for underdogs and i would love to see Simon win a Worlds but i think i'd have to put money on Paul. i think Kevin Jones is his biggest threat.
i usually root for underdogs and i would love to see Simon win a Worlds but i think i'd have to put money on Paul. i think Kevin Jones is his biggest threat.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
Something to chew on, Paul, has traditionally, in events with more than three rounds, had a down round. If Kevin plays consistently round to round and Paul does that, Kevin has a shot. Consistency will be the key IMO. Also, Paul's strength is transitioning from open to tight. These More open courses may give Kevin an advantage. Ricky likes them too.
For what it's worth, McBeth just won a tournament going away on one of the courses being used at Worlds, and the other is supposedly more wooded. So I don't think there's much of an advantage to be had over him from an open course, at least not this year.
Though you do make a good point about McBeth sprinkling in an off-round. At Worlds last year, among the players that finished top 5, he was the only one to shoot a round above 59. He was also only one of two to shoot a sub-50 round (Ulibarri was the other). So five consistently good rounds is what it took to beat him...just barely.
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2008
- Messages
- 4,783
So I'm with VictorB, and many others that think Worlds is too important to scale down to 4 or 5 rounds.
I have seen three or four things discussed as a reason to scale back the number of rounds:
1. The players want it. It's hard playing 6+ rounds (especially 2-a-days), especially in the summer heat.
2. Fewer rounds makes it easier/cheaper on the Host and thus adds bid choices for the PDGA. (This one actually is the strongest argument, IMHO).
3. Overall, fewer rounds makes it easier on the PDGA (see above).
There may be other reasons as well.
But here's my question:
Is the PDGA's main purpose to "run the event" or "find the best player this year"?
It has become abundantly clear that "running the event" has become the dominant purpose.
If our purpose is to "find the best player of 2019", then you have to play 6 or more rounds.
I have seen three or four things discussed as a reason to scale back the number of rounds:
1. The players want it. It's hard playing 6+ rounds (especially 2-a-days), especially in the summer heat.
2. Fewer rounds makes it easier/cheaper on the Host and thus adds bid choices for the PDGA. (This one actually is the strongest argument, IMHO).
3. Overall, fewer rounds makes it easier on the PDGA (see above).
There may be other reasons as well.
But here's my question:
Is the PDGA's main purpose to "run the event" or "find the best player this year"?
It has become abundantly clear that "running the event" has become the dominant purpose.
If our purpose is to "find the best player of 2019", then you have to play 6 or more rounds.
