PDGA World Championships 2022

[ChrisWoj]

Nothing to get defensive about, just expressing the generally held opinion about prestige amongst the Grand Slams.

Which I had only a minimal understanding of. Like, I knew Wimbledon is prestigious. And I know that it has the deepest history. But I had no idea that, in the modern era, it really mattered "more." Like - I don't hear player success identified specifically by how many Wimbledons they have (as in disc golf we'd identify a player's success by how many Worlds they've won) - we hear how many Grand Slams they have. The Grand Slam count is the important number, and it doesn't seem to matter much in the discourse what proportion of those are Wimbledon wins.

 

[araytx]

Worlds is an event that predates a tour where there was an easy way to say "this guy had the best year". It gave the sport a "World Champion" even though it was really just the guy who won that weekend. It was part of the "fake it 'til you make it" thing.

Now fast forward 40 years and there really is a tour where you could determine who was the best player over the course of a season instead of who won on a given week, but you also have a 40-year tradition of crowning your World Champion one weekend in August. How much tradition are you willing to toss out to keep Ricky Wysocki happy?

The number of rounds thing was reduced due to complaints by the touring pro players, so that's on them. The tournament that feels like just another week on tour because it is run like every other week on tour is what they wanted, so it's what they get.

It's kinda a "duh" moment, though. Back when there wasn't an NT or USDGC, Worlds was the only time most of the best players were in the same place at the same time. Even after the USDGC and NT started, not many players could fully tour and Worlds was still a special gathering of the top players. It wasn't just for Open players, either. All the Masters divisions were there, so it was the best players from today and yesterday, all together. It really was a cool event.

Now? It's just another week. All the top players are on tour every week. The players you expect to be in contention at Worlds are the same ones that you expect to be in contention the event before and the event after. All the other divisions have been run off, so it sets up just like any other DGPT event. The actual event has lost so much of what made it special that really all that is left is the prestige of the title winning it brings.

Tradition and prestige mean something, though. Both '21 and '22 saw great endings and showcased pro disc golf exactly like you would want to. No plodding, season-long "race for the player of the year award"-type Champion could bring the drama and excitement like the last two Worlds have.

To me, Wysocki was just sour grapes bitching about an event that both this year and last delivered dramatic finishes and did exactly what they were supposed to do. If it ain't broke...

NO doubt all that is true. You can certainly go by who finished where the majority of the time and count points, etc., counting all the events similarly, to determine the who had "best year." But in sports the big events matter more. They just do. In tennis, this year, is Carlos Alcaraz, world #1, the "Player of the Year"? Or is it the guy who won two of the four majors? Or the guy who had all his points for winning Wimbledon stripped, and wasn't allowed in two of the four majors? Ditto for golf. Or NASCAR. And many individual sports. Some events matter more. Is Eli Manning getting into the Hall of Fame having only won playoff games in 2 of his 16 seasons, with his career pedestrian 84 passer rating and 60% completion rate in the era of the forward pass? Why of course he is. Some events just matter more.

 

[Lurp Nuts]

When I started out, the way you knew a player had made it was when they had their name on a disc, and the only way to get your signature out there for everybody to see was to win Worlds. It would then seem obvious that the more World Championship X's in the stamp, the better the disc. I know that's not really the case, but when you're starting out, thats how you think. That's a lot of world titles on that Roc, must be way better than the Wasp...
Now, everybody has a tour series disc, or a tournament triumph stamp, or whatever. So it seems that aspect has been diluted somewhat. Not saying it's a bad thing, obviously it's good for the players, it's just different.

 

[araytx]

Yes, I already acknowledged the perspective of the tennis majors by those "in the know." I'm just saying that, myself as an anecdote, have not really seen Wimbledon as more than just "one of four" Grand Slams. I certainly haven't had, really until this conversation, seen any reason to think of the Australian Open as something "lesser." But my personal opinion is only barely significant next to the importance of what money has done to continually increase the prestige of the event.

The event has grown into literally the most attended tennis tournament annually in the world, a demonstration of the prestige that money can buy. Though you noted that the Australian Open has been recognized wholly as a Major since 1925 - it did not receive recognition as a Major by the organizing bodies outside of the ITF until the 1990s. Hell, you brought up Bjorn Borg - Borg attended the event ONE TIME when he was 17 years old, and never did so again. It only became what it is, treated by the tennis world as a Grand Slam, with growing prestige that has turned it into the most attended event in the world in the last 35 years. You brought up McEnroe - he didn't bother attending the event until 1983 at which point he'd already earned 4 Major wins.

You've also got to throw travel factors into those equations; not just prestige or players "didn't want to go play the Australian Open because they didn't feel it." Hopping a plane to get to anywhere you wanted in the world WASN'T NEARLY as easy then as it is today. It's not just Borg (who might have seen the opportunity as a 17-year old to get out of another month of school, or move to a summer-ish climate from a winterish one that one time to go to Australia), but MOST of the American and European players didn't go to Australia back before the Aussies started throwing more money that way. Because the travel was both expensive and limited to Australia. Mush, much easier then traveling to NYC and Europe.

As evidenced, if you'll look to the tennis grand slam champs who won most of theirs in the 70s or earlier, outside of Borg (SWE, all in Europe) and Tilden(USA, only US Opens & Wimbledons) the next group are all Australians who DID play in Australia AND on the other continents. Prior to the 80s this type of travel was mostly viewed (and available) as an exclusive thing.

 

[araytx]

We can have this same talk again in a few weeks about #17 at USDGC

USDGC is an X-tier, and hole #17 is one of the reasons why. X-tier meaning ratings won't apply as they normally would.

 

[TheOtherBill]

Donation for Worlds aces paid to the Disc Golf Association of the Philippines (only $100, will have to budget the rest for next year)
For $13 US dollars via Paypal, you can help grow an amazing org with some really dedicated people behind the effort - Disc Golf Association of the Philippines