[Question] Should the PDGA have their own flight chart?

[McFer]

The only thing I don't like about Joe's chart is that the discs are ordered by HSS within power ranges.

Marshall Street needs to add all putters to their chart, IMO.

 

[mattc]

The only thing I don't like about Joe's chart is that the discs are ordered by HSS within power ranges.

it does take some time to really be able to read and understand

 

[TalbotTrojan]

If you want to have the most complete ratings system, you have to use Vibram's Flight ratings. They are the only one that gives you ratings based on a target actual speed that is part of the ratings, not a theoretical speed number.

 

[MattMan]

It seems pointless for the PDGA to do this. You really only need a universal set of flight characteristics, if those numbers were going to be precise to each and every player. Since every person, every disc, and in fact, every throw is different, you lose all possibility of having precision.

As is, all the flight numbers from different companies are fairly basic to understand, and any non-beginner could be given the set of numbers, and then give a range of discs that fit near that category.

 

[HiFi]

1. It seems pointless for the PDGA to do this. You really only need a universal set of flight characteristics, if those numbers were going to be precise to each and every player. Since every person, every disc, and in fact, every throw is different, you lose all possibility of having precision.

2. As is, all the flight numbers from different companies are fairly basic to understand, and any non-beginner could be given the set of numbers, and then give a range of discs that fit near that category.

1. The point is not to have the numbers precise from one player to another, the point is to give the player a point of reference within their own throwing styles.

2. The idea here is to give a point of reference between manufacturers. I will never spend $20 on a Latitude 64 just to try it without having something to compare it to. I have thrown Discraft and Innova since I started 12 years ago, so when I look at their charts I at least have a general idea of what the disc I am buying should be doing compared to the others that I have thrown. It reduces the chance I am buying a worthless disc imo.

That being said, considering the fact that even a different plastic can completely change the flight of a given model, having a universal rating system seems virtually impossible (although I would love it). This week I bought a Pro Destroyer and a Star Destroyer and they don't even seem like the same model in terms of flight. In the end buying a disc you haven't thrown before is almost always a crap shoot, but perhaps a universal rating system could reduce the risk.

 

[Cgkdisc]

I was asked by PDGA HQ if our Tech Standards group would be able to develop a PDGA chart. Our answer was "no" and "not advisable" even if we had the resources to do testing and could possibly figure out a fair and sensible way to do it. As has been pointed out, the variations in plastic within molds and consistency from run to run would make any testing numbers suspect or have such a wide standard deviation to reduce any reliability.

If you even tried to create a throwing device like the Iron Byron used in ball golf, release points for rollers, BH, FH and thumbers would be different and have to be mechanically reproduced along with adjusting the speed, spin and nose angles on the test throws. Other than producing some numbers whose meaning is unclear and spending additional money for doing that testing both at the manufacturer and the PDGA raising costs, we're pretty sure sufficient benefits would likely never materialize to justify the effort. If it's worth doing, then an entrepreneur hobbyist should take on the project and cash in with a new worthwhile service.

 

[craftsman]

Lol.....more flight chart requests?!?
Why!?.....seriously.
My discs fly, if im lucky , where i put them. Flat, straight, distance shots are rarely used for any disc in my bag.
Comparitive charts are the best for dg currently. Yes vibram's system is more absolute, and i applaud their trying, but its dumb. Who thows the same speed all the time or even thinks in terms of mph or whatever.

 

[Dyoel182]

If you want to have the most complete ratings system, you have to use Vibram's Flight ratings. They are the only one that gives you ratings based on a target actual speed that is part of the ratings, not a theoretical speed number.

That's what I said earlier but good luck having them do it for everyone.

 

[RHINESEL]

I think everyone is getting too caught up on the PDGA doing the testing.

I would settle for the PDGA determining a standard of measurement (ie, Vibram, Innova, whatever) and having the MANUFACTURER submit ratings based on those standards when a disc is submitted for approval. This way anyone can produce a chart (in whatever format they like) that is based on a consistent standard.

If the technical minds at PDGA can't even determine a standard of measurement, I'm not sure what they are doing approving equipment in the first place.

If a sport want's to be taken seriously, the governing body has to perform seriously. And yes, I know the PDGA isn't the be all "governing body", but it is as close as the sport has.

 

[optidiscic]

I think everyone is getting too caught up on the PDGA doing the testing.

I would settle for the PDGA determining a standard of measurement (ie, Vibram, Innova, whatever) and having the MANUFACTURER submit ratings based on those standards when a disc is submitted for approval. This way anyone can produce a chart (in whatever format they like) that is based on a consistent standard.

If the technical minds at PDGA can't even determine a standard of measurement, I'm not sure what they are doing approving equipment in the first place.

If a sport want's to be taken seriously, the governing body has to perform seriously. And yes, I know the PDGA isn't the be all "governing body", but it is as close as the sport has.

I never thought about that....interesting

 

[Cgkdisc]

The PDGA would have to consider it important enough for the sport or for safety reasons to even consider trying to herd the cats (manufacturers) into developing flight standards they could agree with. Note that this will raise the cost of the discs and potentially be too expensive for some of the smaller manufacturers to hire staff and buy the equipment for testing.

If standards were developed, you would want every batch of discs to be tested for quality control, not just a one time test when a disc was first released. The PDGA would still be forced to buy equipment and do testing to spot check manufacturer claims. Otherwise, the standards may become ineffective. BTW, the PDGA currently does spot check random samples of production discs to see if they continue to meet specs.

 

[RHINESEL]

Are you saying, that if the PDGA came out and said, "Hey everyone, when you submit a disc you have to also submit flight ratings in the Innova style." that all of a sudden disc costs will jump, small manufacturers will go out of business, and the PDGA will have a mountain of expensive equipment sitting in a room to perform tests umteen hours a day?

As far as I know (and I admit I know little), no one uses actual mechanics, tools, and measurements to predict flight patterns. It is all a rough estimate based on trial, error, and some field work.

You have to start SOMEWHERE. Distance, turn/fade (based on how far lateral from centerline of flight), and intended throwing speed are really not to much to ask of a manufacturer.

 

[iacas]

The PDGA would have to consider it important enough for the sport or for safety reasons to even consider trying to herd the cats (manufacturers) into developing flight standards they could agree with. Note that this will raise the cost of the discs and potentially be too expensive for some of the smaller manufacturers to hire staff and buy the equipment for testing.

To be fair we're just talking about a customized clay pigeon thrower, right? I mean, it's not going to be THAT expensive...

 

[Cgkdisc]

If you haven't noticed, the PDGA has historically been pretty minimalist in terms of regulating equipment and holding manufacturers accountable. The PDGA has allowed all kinds of technical enhancements over the years so discs could be thrown farther, obsoleting course designs until the wing width maximums were finally set. I don't think anyone has made a case that flight measurement is that important, or more importantly, would be meaningful in a way that players would find it more useful than what the manufacturers produce now.

If anything, a higher priority would be to establish a specific basket design that anyone could manufacture. But I don't see that happening.

 

[garublador]

How well the discs perform is completely outside the scope of the PDGA. They should, and do, have rules about the dimensions and specifications of various aspects of how a disc can be made, but there is no reason for them to judge how well any disc performs. There is no good reason for them to do it. Retailers have the most motivation to make a universal flight chart, which is why you see them making them now.