The 5 Most Important Discs of the Decade

[Frank Delicious]

What would be interesting is if there were "rim classes" of competition: You can't throw anything with a bigger rim than a standard midrange, etc.

That would be really fun and it seems like the Superclass tourneys are a step in that direction.

 

[Cgkdisc]

What would be interesting is if there were "rim classes" of competition: You can't throw anything with a bigger rim than a standard midrange, etc.

Ahem... I wonder what that Super Class initiative last year was all about (Edit: Excellent Frank!)

 

[Timko]

I was looking for more of a class competition that doesn't require you to find older discs no one throws normally, allowing a competitor to use some of the discs that they currently use in the restriction free disc golf events.

How about a competition that allows nothing but 119g 40 molds? I know that they're in Vintage Class, but I've never heard the PDGA doing anything to support Vintage Class.

Throwing 40 Molds for golf: now THAT takes some skill.

 

[Frank Delicious]

A throw back tourney would be cool though, just not as far back as your are talking. Discs have to be on the approved disc list before a certain date. In fact I might hold a "Lets throw like it's 1999" tourney and all discs have to be from the twentieth century.

 

[Timko]

I'd actually like to see a non beveled edge competition (so everything before the original Eagle).

 

[Cgkdisc]

Nothing to prevent hosting a PDGA X-tier sanctioned event where discs on the master PDGA approved list are restricted by some characteristics like date, rim config, weight, diameter, etc.

 

[Mason65]

What would be interesting is if there were "rim classes" of competition: You can't throw anything with a bigger rim than a standard midrange, etc.

I would really like to see a "retro" class in Disc Golf. All molds must be 15 years or older on the PDGA approval list to be legal. This would be great for new players and oldtimers alike, and make near obsolete molds (Gazelle, Stingray, Cobra,) useful once again. As time progresses more discs become legal in retro, so right now would be 1995 in retro class, but 5 years from now it would be like a re-release of the Teebird for that class. Courses designed 20 years ago would seem less obsolete.

EDIT: ha, had this typed up for a couple hours and forgot to submit. Looks like yall beat me to it, but I wold dtill like to see more of it. You don't have to find extinct molds, people would be throwing Cyclones, Vipers, Cobras, Classic Rocs, Aviars, etc. Most of those are readily available at my local academy. Probably wouldn't hurt manufacturers sales either.

Has Superclass been very succesful? I never hear about it.

 

[Timko]

Nothing to prevent hosting a PDGA X-tier sanctioned event where discs on the master PDGA approved list are restricted by some characteristics like date, rim config, weight, diameter, etc.

I probably wouldn't sanction event if I did it. Our club has insurance, so I don't need that from the PDGA.

What is the benefit of an X-tier event? Are those ratings part of a player's rating?

 

[Cgkdisc]

X-tiers are looked at case by case based on the reason for the X-tier in terms of whether ratings could be valid. PDGA sanctioning would be for points and also archiving the results online for player stats and reference. Just seeing your historical event results all in one place regardless of ratings also seems to be an important benefit for many members and simplifies posting for TDs who don't have a website to put the results.

 

[Vegan Ray]

PDGA sanctioning would be for points and also archiving the results online for player stats and reference. Just seeing your historical event results all in one place regardless of ratings also seems to be an important benefit for many members and simplifies posting for TDs who don't have a website to put the results.

Wow, when you lay it all like that, $75 for PDGA membership (not to mention the event's at least $50 sanctioning & $3 per-player fees) seem like a bargain at twice the price! :roll:

 

[some call me...tim?]

A throw back tourney would be cool though, just not as far back as your are talking. Discs have to be on the approved disc list before a certain date. In fact I might hold a "Lets throw like it's 1999" tourney and all discs have to be from the twentieth century.

I really like the sound of this one...I may have to plagiarize one day.

 

[JHern]

The race toward wide rim high speed drivers qualifies. Maybe the Destroyer or Boss typifies this best. Some may not like these discs, but their "importance" is undeniable.

Because of the 2008 revision to the PDGA technical standard, we now know there will be a limit to how wide a rim can be. Every manufacturer I talked to told me that they felt discs would continue to get faster. Will overmolded discs be the trend over the next ten years, or will there be a new technological breakthrough? Only time will tell.

As a member of both the PDGA Tech Standards and Course Committees, I will be biased toward blocking any advances in speed that can be prevented, via modification of tech standards, as detrimental to the game. Faster discs have already undermined the quality of the game balance in relation to what designers are able to do with updating course designs.

The battle here is whether the game is intended to simply be 18 holes of various varieties of reachable par 3 holes (basically disc darts) or evolving more toward a golf model with a healthy mix of bona fide par 4s & 5s. I would hope we could strive for the latter but technology, the need for speed/something new, and what seems to be more popular with rec players may force the sport to remain mostly in the par 3 world. The majority of existing courses can't be extended since they are landlocked either physically or by dictate from the parks department for the amount of land available.

Ball golf has been locked in this technological battle for many years to retain their balance in the game. Our sport wasn't smart enough to do the same thing as fast. Our "technology horse" is already too far out of the barn but maybe can be kept in the corral if you also believe our game should include par 4s & 5s.

Good points...the thing is, disc golf isn't a money game like ball golf, and the land won't be available for some years. The key, I think, is to focus on technical difficulty. OK, so maybe technology allows one to reach the basket in terms of distance, but if the available lines are very tight and difficult to penetrate, then it will more than compensate (e.g., if you have to hit a 10 ft hole apex 200 ft from the tee, turning over to make it the rest of the way to the basket at 350 ft). There is nothing I hate more in a course design than one that tries to be like most ball golf courses: wide open fairways. Note that the wide open ball golf courses are designed to make old men feel better about their game, instead of presenting truly unique challenges (it's like training wheels). Pro ball golfers hate those courses too, might as well hit balls in an open field.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Wow, when you lay it all like that, $75 for PDGA membership (not to mention the event's at least $50 sanctioning & $3 per-player fees) seem like a bargain at twice the price!

Roll your eyes as you are prone to do but I and other PDGA staff regularly respond to emails from current and non-current members worrying whether their playing records will remain intact if they take a membership break for a year or more because maybe they can't afford the money or won't be able to play as much in tournaments for a year or two due to other obligations or interests. The answer is that the PDGA retains a player's tournament records and continues to process ratings for people who have member numbers but aren't current. They just can't see them until they renew again. No hype involved. Just another benefit that matters to some members.

 

[Vegan Ray]

No hype involved

:lol:

 

[Timko]

Chuck, on a somewhat unrelated note, what kind of relationship does the PDGA have with discgolfunited? They use the PDGA's rating system, so I assume either the PDGA charged some sort of upfront fee for it, or get a percentage of the fees or something like that.

I've often wished for the ratings formula to be made available with a creative commons license of some sort, but that's the open source proponent speaking. I understand there are business decisions to be made as well, since the PDGA isn't 501 (c) 3.

 

[Cgkdisc]

The connection is thru me in terms of calculations. I was asked by Innova who created DGU to help them develop their handicapping leagues. I asked the PDGA if it was okay to use the same ratings process but to produce handicaps. The core calculations are the same. But calculating handicaps over time has some different ramifications in a primarily league environment so how that is done is different from player ratings. For the moment, DGU uses a relatively static SSA in their process for each course layout but the values were derived from available PDGA tournament data in many cases.

Take a look at the front page of the PDGA site today and you'll see the free offer for PDGA members to subscribe to the DGU service. You can maintain your own handicaps for your rec and tournament rounds even if there aren't any DGU league rounds to play in your area.

 

[Timko]

I saw that. However, I wanted to change the rating to a potential rating (a la the pga's handicapping method, where only the best 10 of 20 rounds are used) instead of the average rating using by the pdga. In handicapped golf, I would rather the winner be someone who plays at or above their potential rather than at or above their average.

The reason I ask is because I am going to try to run a handicapped league in KC this year.

 

[Cgkdisc]

DGU has a canned system that would make your life as TD much easier. The DGU process has dynamic adjustments to prevent sandbagging. Most leagues are less than 20 weeks in the first place so getting the 10 best rounds out of 20 is impractical. If handicaps are done the way the USGA does them, a player will only beat their handicap roughly 25% of the time. That's not really how a "fair" handicap league should be run.

While it shouldn't be a completely level playing field for all skill levels, the odds shouldn't be stacked like ball golf. Part of the reason their calcs are so stingy is that so many people who play in handicap events, pad their handicap by not reporting their best rounds, so it probably balances out. This is from the people on the USGA Handicap Committee who I talked with at USGA HQ in NJ about handicaps and ratings about 10 years ago.

The most successful leagues I've seen have two divisions: one uses scratch score which is most of your pros and other low handicappers and one uses handicaps which is most of your lower level players. Players can switch between divisions if they wish depending on what they want to do that week. The pros typically don't like having to add back throws to their scores in handicapping and are worried that at least one faster improving am will always beat them each week due to their handicap not coming down as fast as their game is improving.

 

[Timko]

Chuck, I'm going to quit derailing this thread and move league and handicapping discussion to the league thread. I'd appreciate it if you could respond after I'm done posting.

 

[DiscGolfTeeSigns.com]

i'm tired of refreshing this thread hoping for compliments and seeing all this geek geek goose.