The biggest thing holding this sport back is the fact that every hole is a par 3.
opcorn:
Watching someone shoot a -91 at the Worlds will bring the crowds!!!11!1!
:|
-
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)
specs and rules to move DG from kids game to pro sport
- Thread starter michael bacon
- Start date
Watching someone shoot a -91 at the Worlds will bring the crowds!!!11!1!
:|
I stand corrected.
The O.P. certainly did a fine job launching the thread, managing to package a a bunch of these topics with his height and shoe size, but kudos to everyone else for filling in the ones he missed.
jeverett
Double Eagle Member
Stepping around the questionable assumption that making scores closer to even 'par' will bring more spectators, I'm expecting that the Portland Worlds will do a fairly good job of keeping (negative) scores down a bit. The two Milo McIver courses are each par 60, with SSA's right in to 60 range. Blue Lake doesn't appear to have ever hosted a sanctioned round on the full ~10000ft. layout in fair weather before, but SSA's on the par 69 course so far have been in the 68-69.9 range. Trojan is similar. McCormick hasn't hosted a sanctioned event yet, so that one is an unknown factor.
Pier Park is the only one of the six courses that I'd expect to see Pros well under par on.
depster
Birdie Member
I'm pretty sure that ball golf is called "the greatest GAME ever played." So being that disc golf is designed after ball golf so would it not be prudent to embrace that it is a game and not try to get it recognized as a "sport"...either way sport or game, I ****ing love hucking discs.
I doubt that would be the case but playing everything as par 3 McBeth would have shot a -23 I think.
It's a small thing but still, a -23 looks more respectable than a -91. I shoot a -91 at putt-putt courses as long as I miss the clown and windmill.
teemkey
* Ace Member *
McCormick is a heavily wooded course, and at least as difficult as Milo for scoring -- it's very unforgiving of an errant shot. However, if a player can stay on the 20' fairways, good rounds could be lower than a good round at Milo. A lot will depend on the use of OB, and any tee/basket changes.
One thing about these courses, is the different challenges offered. Pier is trees, McCormick is trees & underbrush, Trojan is water, Blue Lake & Milo are more about distance & accuracy. Should be very interesting.
DiscinFiend
* Ace Member *
IS PDGA LEADERSHIP IN TOUCH WITH THE COMMON PLAYER?
The following is an excerpt from the current Disk Golf Magazine's (official publication of the PDGA) Editorial:
"Speaking of dreams. I had one recently that has haunted me and I'd like to share it with you because I think it's interesting, if not somewhat provocative.
More than once, when talking to folks about disc golf, I'll hear from ball golfers that, Well, yeah, but you're not putting into a little hole. More than one ball golfer has looked down his or her nose at me because they believe that our baskets are way too easy.
I agree. I know a few dozen disc golfers who have had more than 100 aces. I know very few ball golfers who have recorded more than one or two aces. It's just much, much harder to score an ace in ball golf. While I think that gives disc golf a certain attractiveness—I mean, who doesn't like to hit an ace!—it also holds us back. It keeps us in the game world rather than the sport world.
So my dream presented this solution. A much smaller basket. Virtually Mini sized, but modified to handle a full-sized disc after it's traveled a few hundred feet; I don't want to prevent aces, just make them more rare. So the new basket is perhaps lower, smaller, but noticeably beefier. The more I have been thinking about this, the more I like it, the more I think it makes sense. Yes, I know your scores will go up but we'll also make aces and when we do, wow, we'll have really done something. This is, of course, my own particular fantasy and in no way involves the PDGA; I'm out on a limb with this but I think it's worth discussing."
The above was written by Randy Michael Signor who is the Editor. I have a few questions of Mr. Signor which I will post here as there is no option to respond to the article via the magazine.
Mr. Signor:
What percentage of players have scored more than 100 aces as compared to those of us who have one or two or are still looking for our first?
If a few dozen as you say (I know of none) and assuming that everyone of them is a PDGA member (20,000 members) that would be about 0.02% which leads to the next question.
Does your mag purport to represent the majority of Disk Golf players? If so, how can it have an editor who represents an elite few and fosters "dreams" that would discourage current and potential future players?
How do you have the audacity to call our SPORT a "game"?
Who gives a bleep what the "ball" golfers say or think?
You say that your "dream" does not represent the PDGA position BUT with you being one of a handful of PDGA employees what can we expect?
How can you say your "dream" is "worth discussing" when you have the only soapbox?
I for one will not be renewing my membership in the PDGA until they get an Editor who represents the majority of the players. Cut his limb!
The following is an excerpt from the current Disk Golf Magazine's (official publication of the PDGA) Editorial:
"Speaking of dreams. I had one recently that has haunted me and I'd like to share it with you because I think it's interesting, if not somewhat provocative.
More than once, when talking to folks about disc golf, I'll hear from ball golfers that, Well, yeah, but you're not putting into a little hole. More than one ball golfer has looked down his or her nose at me because they believe that our baskets are way too easy.
I agree. I know a few dozen disc golfers who have had more than 100 aces. I know very few ball golfers who have recorded more than one or two aces. It's just much, much harder to score an ace in ball golf. While I think that gives disc golf a certain attractiveness—I mean, who doesn't like to hit an ace!—it also holds us back. It keeps us in the game world rather than the sport world.
So my dream presented this solution. A much smaller basket. Virtually Mini sized, but modified to handle a full-sized disc after it's traveled a few hundred feet; I don't want to prevent aces, just make them more rare. So the new basket is perhaps lower, smaller, but noticeably beefier. The more I have been thinking about this, the more I like it, the more I think it makes sense. Yes, I know your scores will go up but we'll also make aces and when we do, wow, we'll have really done something. This is, of course, my own particular fantasy and in no way involves the PDGA; I'm out on a limb with this but I think it's worth discussing."
The above was written by Randy Michael Signor who is the Editor. I have a few questions of Mr. Signor which I will post here as there is no option to respond to the article via the magazine.
Mr. Signor:
What percentage of players have scored more than 100 aces as compared to those of us who have one or two or are still looking for our first?
If a few dozen as you say (I know of none) and assuming that everyone of them is a PDGA member (20,000 members) that would be about 0.02% which leads to the next question.
Does your mag purport to represent the majority of Disk Golf players? If so, how can it have an editor who represents an elite few and fosters "dreams" that would discourage current and potential future players?
How do you have the audacity to call our SPORT a "game"?
Who gives a bleep what the "ball" golfers say or think?
You say that your "dream" does not represent the PDGA position BUT with you being one of a handful of PDGA employees what can we expect?
How can you say your "dream" is "worth discussing" when you have the only soapbox?
I for one will not be renewing my membership in the PDGA until they get an Editor who represents the majority of the players. Cut his limb!
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
Randy is not a PDGA employee. He's contracted to produce the magazine. He also wrote those remarks as an "editorial" which is a personal opinion, not a PDGA position. BTW, I think you'd discover several more closely affiliated PDGA employees, contractors, committee and Board members who personally believe the sport, not the game, might be somewhat improved with a smaller target (or wouldn't be against it). But most recognize the impractical aspects of pursuing a smaller target at this point in DG development. So it remains a dream, just like Randy's.
biscoe
* Ace Member *
so many trolls, so little bridge...
I paid $75 today for a PDGA membership that'll give me a magazine I don't read, and.... I won't have to pay $10 to play in tournaments. This year I'm planning on playing 20 tournaments or so, maybe. If I have time. So in terms of the possible penalty for not being a member - I'm benefiting. Aside from that? I don't care about my rating anymore, and I rarely get out for a tour event. Once every four or five years? I'm basically paying a premium so... ... ... ... um... Well... No idea. So I have $10 more in profits per event as a player the rest of the year?
Dear PDGA, why am I paying more than the amateurs again?
Dear PDGA, why am I paying more than the amateurs again?
biscoe
* Ace Member *
now that is a legit question.
Instant classic.
Halcón
Free At Last
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2012
- Messages
- 12,038
What would be the pros and cons of pros paying less than ams?
blkwizardsonny
Newbie
it should be the same price imo
At the risk of feeding the troll thread, that's fine with me as long as the PDGA cuts those programs that only benefit pros to make that happen. I don't know (or really care) how effective those programs are but cutting those to bring the pro membership price down might be worth discussing.
30 years disc golf, 7 aces. Why do people keep assuming most players want to "take the sport to the next level"? Why does anyone attempt to wish our sport to compete with swat golf. The only changes I can ever advocate is more courtesy and less litter and vandalism. @ChrisWoj, why would anyone, into our game, not want to at least glance through the disc golfer mag?
Don't you think that the window for that has passed? Really the only shot you would have had at a smaller target was the window right after the patent expired before the number of courses exploded.
By now there are so many baskets that would have to be replaced that if you went that direction there would be a decade or more where the pro game played on baskets that were significantly different from the vast majority of permanent courses. At lot of courses would choose to a) never change or b) pull the course rather than change targets. With every course in the ground that situation gets worse. If it's impractical now, it's going to be more impractical next year and even more impractical the year after.
So it's a dead end. It's an old idea, it hits the rounds every couple of years. It's an idea that just can't be done. Saying that it is impractical at this point is misleading. It's impractical. Period.
Similar threads
