Requirements to be 1000 rated.

[erb]

This has been on my mind for a few days now. I was recently asked on here, what are the holes in my game other than putting. Although I answered it, it was not really the answer they were wanting. The reason for this is that I just don't know what the standards are, of say a 1000 rated player. Therefore I cannot tell how good I am supposed to be in different aspects of my game. Well, after some looking around on the internet it seems like the only requirement info one can find is distance and putting. Though distance can be argued that it can be done without, it still then is a highly suggested skill with the newer courses being built. But, there's still the lack of info out there on the abilities of top players. Sure one can play the same course that say Doss has played and compare the scores, but that doesn't really tell you anything other than you're no Nate Doss. So I'm wanting to start some sort of discussion that people have observed, heard, been told, analyzed, or by other means, of what the 1000 rated players seem to be able to do with a disc, other than be good at putting. This is to help the development of the people of this forum, by giving some goals to practice towards. I believe pooling all our knowledge should help each other out.
Some examples that I can give of what it takes to be 1000 rated (not necessarily correct).

Required: be able to throw more than just you're primary shot, one that optimally does something you primary shot does not.
Highly suggested: be able to get the disc at least 400' accurately by any means, and the more ways the better.
Highly suggested: Be able to park your mids in the putting circle from a minimum of 250' at least 80% of the time.
Suggested: be able to throw all your discs on about any shot, in case you lose some in a tournament and have to substitute.
Suggested: have a great mental game.

Again those are not necessarily correct, to be honest I pulled them from my ass to give you an idea of what I'm talking about.

But then I am reminded of something I heard of Climo once (not sure if it true) and that is, If you want to have your best chance to beat him, then play a course that will make him keep his mids in his bag. Is that to suggest that he is "The Champ" because he is skilled in one area of the game and merely average (compared to 1000 rated) in other parts? If so, what are the other top player's skills, and how good are they at it? This also brings up the question from above of "What is an average skill for a 1000 rated player?"

So then there is a third choice if it's not one of the above two, and that is, "are all the 1000 rated players just simply doing the right thing at the right time?" Could also be called luck by some. Well than, how the hell do you practice for that?

 

[VictorB]

not a bad list, but

Required: have a great mental game.

ftfy

 

[black udder]

Blake had a list up of putting distance and percentage of makes. I know a couple guys that I play with and here's what I've seen:

1) Can throw a disc dead straight (be it hyzer flip or flat, whatever) and has insignificant skippage.
2) 95% or better putts made at 30', 80% or better at 40', close to 50% at 50' and below 50% outside of that, but enough that it wouldn't be unusual to see them go in on a regular basis. Kicker is that 85% of 1st putts are inside the 30' ring.
3) Confidence. They know what they're going to do before they step on the tee. They can see their shot and rarely step up and THEN wonder what they'll throw or where they'll throw it.
4) They all get out of trouble in 1 shot. Me, I'll throw in the shule real bad and take a couple strokes to get to a reasonable lie. They're out in 1 and put the next shot inside the 30' ring. Thus, worst case is normally 1 stroke penalty for a horrible shot.
5) Consistency. They can repeat the same shot over and over. I watched Brian Schweb throw a handful of tumbers at a hole about 270' away and they were all inside 30'. I routinely watch a guy throw down narrow fairways and not stray from the fairway.
6) Variety of shots. Chris Hysell has more shots than I have discs. Schweb is another with a million shots in his bag. They can also execute these shots when necessary. Can't tell you how many times I'm thinking on a tee and Chris says something like, "it's just a cut roller to the right, just land it there about yeah angle and it'll roll right up." Uh... yeah, Chris, whatever you say.
7) Something Dan has been talking about - the desire to play well (or win, or killer instict). They're driven to practice and play so they can perform their best. While I will putt every couple days for 5-10 minutes, I know people that putt like I watch TV (and yes, that's a lot). And it shows up in their game. I know folks that go out to a field or the course and throw practice shots they don't normally throw so they can improve.

Throwing a 1,000+ rated round or being a 1,000 rated player means you've hit the pro calibur ranks and it's by no means easy. For me, it's a whole round of amazing shots back to back.

 

[t i m]

There are less than 120 players in the world rated 1000+. So that's truly the elite of the elite. And there is an exponential decline as you descend from the top of the stack at 1041... There are more players rated 1000-1009 than there are from 1010 on up. So I think even within the pro ranks, there are levels of pros.

(all numbers below based on ratings current as of this posting -- historical trends will vary slightly)

1 = # of players 1040+
8 = # of players 1030 - 1039
8 = # of players 1020 - 1029
34 = # of players 1010-1019
65 = # of players 1000-1009
93 = # of players 990 - 999
192 = # of players 980- 989

Being 1000+ rated requires -- above all -- consistency and confidence. 1000-rated pros don't make many mistakes. And when they do make mistakes, those mistakes, on average, probably cost them less than one stroke per mistake. I've noticed that as I've gotten better, (I'm ~970), I make a lot more crazy shots to make up for my mistakes. If a pro hits a tree off the box, they're still likely to walk up, find a line through the trees, and pure some crazy flick anhyzer through the trees to give themselves a shot at a 3. Often, a pro's mistakes don't end up costing them any stokes, because they can make up for it the next time.

Also, most pros have more "luck" than most normal players. They pure more hard lines and get more good tree bounces and whatnot. That's usually because they are giving themselves a good shot to begin with. A good shot is more likely to get "love" from the course than a bad shot. Playing pro is a mix of skill and luck, but fundamentally good shots tend to have a higher percentage of favorable results. So the appearance, when watching a pro, is that there is more "love" on the course.

Also, pros can consistently putt within the 30' circle. The difference between being able to hit a 20' putt consistently and a 30' putt consistently is HUGE. Work the math: the area of a 20' circle around a pole is 1256 square feet; the area of a 30' circle around a pole is 2826 square feet; the area of a 40' circle around a pole is 5024 square feet.

So the real world difference between a 20 and a 30' putting ability is that you've more than doubled your possible landing area for your upshots. That's huge. That means a pro only needs half as much accuracy as an am on their upshots to achieve the same score. And if a pro can make a lot of 40' putts (which ams seldom make in tourneys), then you've almost doubled that putting area again.

Think about hitting a 1256 sq. ft. target vs. hitting a 5024 sq. ft. target. Yep -- that's a 4x larger area. That's HUGE. And if my target area for putting 4x the size of yours, then that makes my drives a lot easier, since I can take a much broader range of lines and still land in my "putting circle". That makes upshots a lot easier for the same reason.

Every player over 1000-rated can putt, and it's because putting well opens up all kinds of other possibilities. When you've got that huge target -- that huge "putting circle", then suddenly, you can take big hyzer shots over trees and crazy skips down 90-degree alleys and all sorts of other options and not worry about threading the finest line possible.

A lot of playing pro is removing luck. A pro looks at any shot, and says: what are my highest odds of getting where I need to land (for my upshot or my putt). And then they take the highest odds.

The other thing that helps is that a 1000-rated pro knows their own limits. If a hole is 450' across a field and into a tight gap, and they know they can't throw 450' on a bead, then the smart option -- the pro option -- is to throw 300 or 350 or whatever is max-controlled distance and land with a good line on the gap, so that it's an easy three. An AM would huck as far as possible, hoping for a crazy run at a 3, and end up left or right wide with a really hard angle on the upshot. A pro makes the smart decisions, knows their own limits, and takes the high-percentage 3s when they need to.

All that ultimately matters is the final score, not the highlight reel. And 1000+ rated pros play for the final score, within their own limits... it's up to everyone else to win or lose the game. A pro plays only the course.

 

[Cgkdisc]

One thing I've noticed with the better players is they are less likely use a variety of disc molds and move slower toward using new molds. It's more important to have consistent results from throwing a disc rather than maybe get more distance sometimes at the price of less accuracy. That's one reason the T-Bird has been staple disc for many pros - it will do the same thing every time under the same conditions more than many molds.

Regarding Climo's comment about mid-range discs, all of the top players can throw a more rounded edged disc as far as we can throw a more beveled disc. Cumulatively, they will be more accurate as a result. If I could throw a Roc 350, then I could knock 3-5 shots off my round versus needing to throw Destroyers, Rogues or LFs to go that far.

 

[optowesome]

It is about that accuracy and consistency. I don't think you need to be able to throw 400 ft. Although nice if you could hit a 20 ft target at 320 feet and shape your line you could 2 or 3 most holes, do that consistently and you win.

 

[black udder]

It is about that accuracy and consistency. I don't think you need to be able to throw 400 ft. Although nice if you could hit a 20 ft target at 320 feet and shape your line you could 2 or 3 most holes, do that consistently and you win.

I don't believe you can be a pro and not throw well over 400'. I believe you can score well and be competitive on some courses, but the guys who can throw long and accurately have a distinct advantage. Just watched over at clashdvd.com the tournament on Myrtle Beach (Tupelo Bay) and while there were some guys there that could throw long (Mike Robinson for one), Avery crushed the competition. He had some crazy holes - 935' hole... in 3. Just sick. Another guy, a local, came up to a 717 foot hole and with a 400'+/- drive then a 300'+/- drive over water made a 20' putt for 3. I'd be looking at a 4 at best. One long, one approach to the water, one over the water and hopefully that's close enough to put in.

When it comes to smaller or wooded courses, they can still have an advantage because holes where you may reach for a mid are still in their putter range. For me, 330' is a standing driver shot, for a guy I played with, he put a wizard about 30' away. His landed flat, mine skipped away from the hole about 30' (had it landed flat, I was probably 20').

Not saying distance is everything, just that if you have two equally accurate players, the one who can throw significantly further will have the advantage.

Btw, the Tupelo Bay footage on clashdvd.com was pretty good. It's on a ball golf course, so made for some interesting holes.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Climo doesn't throw golf drives more than about 375 and you'll find many of the 1000+ rated players don't throw "golf drives" more than that. That doesn't mean they can't throw a distance shot in an open field farther. Avery doesn't fare as well on shorter courses which are much more common. However, his power does give him the chance to play well on long wooded courses like Maple Hill where he can reach holes with a mid-range. Tupelo is a fluke among courses played over a year with wide open fairways on a golf course.

 

[optowesome]

I will agree with you that distance is a distinct advantage, but most holes are not over 350 ft. There are holes where that player will lose a stroke, but a supremacy of control is what I am talking about. Just imagine a player that could ace run ever hole less than 320 and still make the comeback putt because it was throw so it is not too far past. I can accurately drive up to 320, but there is a difference between me and somebody who has mastered this. I think there can be players that don't have a 400+ power throw that could be 1000+ rated. Is it as likely...no, but it is not a requirement.

 

[Ziggy]

1 thing i notice not on the list that needs to be said.

Ratings are only acquired in tourney specific courses.

You will see these 1000 rated pros practicing on these courses and their lines over and over.

They do not play a traditional 18 holes.

I doubt they will show up and play blind.

They will throw 3..4..10.. throws per drive, approach and a couple putts. Often moving their approach factors around.
They will often walk to an area where they feel they may land and try to work from that placement.
They do not play the traditional drive, approach, putt during practice rounds that amateurs tend to do.

 

[charris414]

I've gotten to play with Sjur and Bard Soleng here in CT (sponsored by Innova and Discraft respectively). They're both 1000+ rated, and although they do throw 400+ on big drives, it is their ability to hit tight gaps on wooded holes with maximum accuracy. They do this by being able to throw putters and mid-ranges as far as casual players will be able to throw a driver, but with a much higher degree of accuracy and margin for error.

 

[discspeed]

I've played a couple of tournament rounds with Kenny and I'd definetely give him 400' of golf D on a million different lines. Over that and his shot selection becomes more limited and roller dominated. Chuck is definetely right that Kenny prefers not to throw hard. He is also using his midranges less than in the past. He chooses drivers or Roc rollers for 300' shots for the most part, rarely pushing his Rocs that far in the air.

Kenny's putting impresses me the most of all his abilities. He feels so much different about a 30' putt than I do. He does not put pressure on himself to park tighter holes on risky lines when he can play a safer gap/line and get within 30-40'.

 

[Frank Delicious]

Kenny's putting impresses me the most of all his abilities. He feels so much different about a 30' putt than I do. He does not put pressure on himself to park tighter holes on risky lines when he can play a safer gap/line and get within 30-40'.

that is so key. It is so easier to play when you don't have to be under the hole.

 

[erb]

Chuck K.
I'm glade to see this post has gotten your attention. You probably have noticed that about all we can do is speculate and observe to gain knowledge of 1000 rates abilities. Although good with what we have available, you can't say it's accurate. Yeah, observing works to find out answers like can 1000 rates throw more shots than a backhand? But not really for any questions involving numbers. Like I can lookup some MLB player's avg. batting stats per year, because it's been recorded. Then I can compare these to mine to know if I need to work on homeruns or Batting average, etc. But by playing with someone, or watching someone on a DVD you can't really say "They are 50% likely to park it in the circle from 300 ft." or "90% of 1000 rated players make 95% of their puts in the circle." You don't have the statistics to back that up. Or go about trying to find out.
I can see where baseball analysis is easier than disc golf's due to the nature of the sport. We will probably never have a site like fangraphs.com which is solely dedicated to statistical analysis of baseball. But, I do believe though that we can get some sort of stats. If you've ever seen a golfers profile page on espn.com they keep things like driving accuracy, putts per hole, greens hit in regulation, etc. And these are just each player's stats, they record all kinds of stats for the PGA tour as a whole all the time.
Is this something that we just don't have the resources to do with our current size? And if so, then what would it take to first get stats recorded for a whole like in "A" or major tournaments, so that we can get to know what the capabilities of the people going, since we can't do each players. That would give us sort of an "Avg. of 1000 rated".

 

[Cgkdisc]

I actually developed a personal stats system that was tested at a PDGA HQ event two years ago called PSTATS. It has all of the typical ball golf stats and more. However, we don't have the resources to implement a program and it hasn't gotten high enough priority yet to move forward.

 

[black udder]

Climo doesn't throw golf drives more than about 375 and you'll find many of the 1000+ rated players don't throw "golf drives" more than that. That doesn't mean they can't throw a distance shot in an open field farther. Avery doesn't fare as well on shorter courses which are much more common. However, his power does give him the chance to play well on long wooded courses like Maple Hill where he can reach holes with a mid-range. Tupelo is a fluke among courses played over a year with wide open fairways on a golf course.

Point I was hoping to make was that if you max out at 400', then throwing 350'-375' isn't exactly easy. If you throw almost 500', then you get to use fairway drivers or midranges in the 300'-400' distance which gives you more control and a lower power throw. Increasing your accuracy. Thus, when I say I believe a pro would need over 400' of distance it's not because they'll use it regularly, but because it allows so much more control overall.

I don't know for sure, but it sure does seem that more and more holes over 400' are popping up and they're not just placement holes either. Don't Feldberg, Doss and those new kids all throw over 450'?

 

[Cgkdisc]

Yes they do. But the original post was about just getting to 1000 rating, not 1030. And no more than 400 distance is really needed to get you there if you can execute the other things needed. I throw 350 busting a gut and have several 1000+ rated rounds. Longer distance or luck didn't get me there. It was making a few more putts and not taking some risky options. So head game and putting can get you there also which is what older 1000 rated guys like Dave Greenwell and Stan McDaniel can do.

 

[black udder]

I will agree with you that distance is a distinct advantage, but most holes are not over 350 ft. There are holes where that player will lose a stroke, but a supremacy of control is what I am talking about. Just imagine a player that could ace run ever hole less than 320 and still make the comeback putt because it was throw so it is not too far past. I can accurately drive up to 320, but there is a difference between me and somebody who has mastered this. I think there can be players that don't have a 400+ power throw that could be 1000+ rated. Is it as likely...no, but it is not a requirement.

While most holes aren't over 350', there are more than I would have thought. You take 4-5 holes in a course that are 350' or better and it makes a difference. Pros that play around here have told me it's a such an advantage that they won't travel to courses like New Quarter because so many of the holes are past their distance, they don't really stand much of a chance. They're guys that throw in the 300'-325' max range. That was fine on the older courses where most holes were around 300', but New Quarter has a bunch of holes in excess of 325' which is long enough for even the good AMs to reach, but they can't. Thus, at least a handful of extra birdie opportunities are given to the longer throwers.

Even Discspeed has said that his distance of around 440' isn't long in FL where there are a lot of long throwers. Even that controlled distance up to 320' won't give you options on shots that a player who can throw 450' gets. I agree, it's possible, I just don't think it's probable. With the AMs and lower tier pros that I've seen, they're all at 400' or better and guys throwing under that just don't cash.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Poor course or hole length choice is why those throwing 400 have an advantage on some courses. Any relatively open, level hole in the 375-450 range is a poor distance for fair competition for pro level. The distance between 375 and about 525 on medium to open terrain should be avoided for gold level players. The same problem would occur in ball golf if they made most of their par 3s in the 250-325 yard range. They don't.

The reason Kenny and Barry do so well at the USDGC and the longer throwers sometimes struggle is the layout rewards accurate throws that don't have to be more than 325 on any hole. that was actually the design philosophy by Harold and Dave from the beginning.

 

[black udder]

Poor course or hole length choice is why those throwing 400 have an advantage on some courses. Any relatively open, level hole in the 375-450 range is a poor distance for fair competition for pro level. The distance between 375 and about 525 on medium to open terrain should be avoided for gold level players. The same problem would occur in ball golf if they made most of their par 3s in the 250-325 yard range. They don't.

The reason Kenny and Barry do so well at the USDGC and the longer throwers sometimes struggle is the layout rewards accurate throws that don't have to be more than 325 on any hole. that was actually the design philosophy by Harold and Dave from the beginning.

Your comment about the USDGC is exactly what I'm talking about. I'm under the impression that to throw 325' with a controllable disc (say a fairway driver or even better, a midrange - something that won't skip), then you'd want to be able to throw 400' (or there abouts) to be able to make that comfortable 325' shot. I'm just imagining that the players that can make that throw all day will have the advantage. It can't be a fluke that while Kenny and Barry have done well there, that Nate & Dave have both won it recently and that when you look at the tournament winners, the younger players are taking more wins. Even Avery who hasn't won the big 4 yet is always placing high. I believe that Kenny's mental game is just head and shoulders above many players and that goes a long way in competition.

Appreciate your insight and comments, Chuck.