The direction of Disc Golf

[Cgkdisc]

Throwing frisbees in the woods is gimmicky. Any change or new thing could be considered a gimmick. If the basket was originally smaller do you think people would be asking for a bigger one? No, it would be what is normal. The large basket was designed for large discs which was normal in the 70's. The size should have changed with the times/disc evolution and skill level of the players.

The chains were designed for larger diameter discs, not the basket which really isn't the target. The basket barely fits an Ultimate disc on the bottom without touching the pole. Current players simply must fire accurately at the "chain wall" to score. The width of the chain catching area is about twice the width of a disc whereas the width of a golf hole is about 2.5 times the width of a ball. If anything, we should widen the basket even more for comparability with ball golf BUT also reduce the height of the target zone which also matters.

But why? Equipment innovations are designed to reduce scores because that's what players are trying to do. Players don't care what the game looks like for spectators or if it has more institutional credibility. What matters is does the innovation allow me to shoot lower scores or have more fun playing.

 

[davetherocketguy]

Yeah that is the difference and NO you shouldn't change any basket in not need of replacing! You ONLY replace them when they NEED replacing or if a new course is getting installed.

Yes I know you say all your club members would want what the pro's use. Just say too bad, give me 5 grand and we can talk. We're not changing baskets that are in good condition.

My point was you're going through all that effort and expense to reduce a top pros cx1 percentage by 8%. Hardly seems worth it to me.

 

[oldmandiscer]

The chains were designed for larger diameter discs, not the basket which really isn't the target. The basket barely fits an Ultimate disc on the bottom without touching the pole. Current players simply must fire accurately at the "chain wall" to score. The width of the chain catching area is about twice the width of a disc whereas the width of a golf hole is about 2.5 times the width of a ball. If anything, we should widen the basket even more for comparability with ball golf BUT also reduce the height of the target zone which also matters.

But why? Equipment innovations are designed to reduce scores because that's what players are trying to do. Players don't care what the game looks like for spectators or if it has more institutional credibility. What matters is does the innovation allow me to shoot lower scores or have more fun playing.

Players want the basket to catch everything. We shouldn't be doing what players want. They want it to be easy and shoot lower scores. For sure! They don't want to have to focus on a 10 or 12 footer. That's mentally challenging and more difficult. But it also would be what is best for the long term in my opinion. I fully understand that a smaller target would make playing a little tougher, my scores would go up. But I also believe that we could reduce if not eliminate raised baskets and most artificial OB too. So the trade off is worth it to balance out the game. Make it fairer and still offer legitimacy as a sport.

I remember seeing 70 or 80 under par years ago for Worlds, and my first thought was, is this a sport or just a game? It seemed crazy. But I also came from a ball golf background where par wasn't a bad score. Fast forward to today and courses have become way more difficult EXCEPT the basket. The basket has gotten bigger and easier! You keep making the basket easier and the courses will just have to keep getting harder and less fair (no fairways, etc.)

 

[oldmandiscer]

My point was you're going through all that effort and expense to reduce a top pros cx1 percentage by 8%. Hardly seems worth it to me.

Putting shouldn't be as easy for advanced players either. Remember that a hole isn't just about the long game. If a course designed in the deep woods is created maybe the designer allows for more fair lines to the basket versus what many courses are doing today. A smaller basket in an open field isn't an automatic up and down from 2-300 feet anymore. So the long term benefits are to make the long game more fair in exchange for more difficulty in putting. It would benefit all players and enjoyment I believe.

 

[davetherocketguy]

We shouldn't be doing what players want.

What???

You're talking about the very same players who support the local scene financially through event registrations, donations and volunteer hours? We aren't going to do what they want???

Again, good luck with that.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Players want the basket to catch everything. We shouldn't be doing what players want. They want it to be easy and shoot lower scores. For sure! They don't want to have to focus on a 10 or 12 footer. That's mentally challenging and more difficult. But it also would be what is best for the long term in my opinion. I fully understand that a smaller target would make playing a little tougher, my scores would go up. But I also believe that we could reduce if not eliminate raised baskets and most artificial OB too. So the trade off is worth it to balance out the game. Make it fairer and still offer legitimacy as a sport.

I remember seeing 70 or 80 under par years ago for Worlds, and my first thought was, is this a sport or just a game? It seemed crazy. But I also came from a ball golf background where par wasn't a bad score. Fast forward to today and courses have become way more difficult EXCEPT the basket. The basket has gotten bigger and easier! You keep making the basket easier and the courses will just have to keep getting harder and less fair (no fairways, etc.)

Reference to "Par" or any stat from another sport should not be the motivation to tweak a sport's dynamics if they're solid as they are. The design mistake over the past 30 years is using a par reference to recommend changes versus recommending changes to make the game better and more fun. If the change messes up some idealized view from another sport, either change the definition for your version of par or create a metric that makes sense for your game's dynamics. Feldberg didn't truly shoot -100 to win Worlds on disc golf terms but on ball golf terms. Many of those holes he played were not at the correct par for disc golf.

 

[Reno]

Are you kidding me?

First post ever, might even be the last.... We are living in the Golden Age of disc golf right now, and many don't even realize it!

When I started 10 years ago courses were fewer and far apart, disc availability was limited, instruction was hit or miss, and I ran into the same players every tournament... and it was great! There was fun and challenge and passion, and the beauty of the sport was easy to experience.

But now it's even better. I can watch high quality disc golf every week, with superior video coverage, graphics, and commentary (and seemingly getting better every day), and all kinds of variety too. Not just great courses but great competition; mick'd up practice and competitive rounds, with both technical and mental game insights galore; look-ins to other cards and scoring; pros I can really root for, because I can get to know them in skins matches, the vlogs, and their sponsors' funded increases in visibility.

It's Jomez and UDisc, Central Coast DG, "BigBari", plenty of local C, B, and A-tiers to compete in, Marshall Street and DGU, leagues, this forum, K. McCoy finding yet another great site for a new course, portable baskets I can set up anywhere, the list goes on and on and on!

Argue all you want about basket size, ropes, and par. I'll keep getting great advice, encouragement, more birdies, and fun just the way things are! So quit typing and go pick out some discs for your bag and try to pure some new lines. Golden age, indeed!

 

[oldmandiscer]

What???

You're talking about the very same players who support the local scene financially through event registrations, donations and volunteer hours? We aren't going to do what they want???

Again, good luck with that.

With respect to course design and putting. Players want to make every putt. If it was up to many players the target would get bigger. But then TD's and course designers would have to make the long game design even harder. I'm already seeing 1 birdie on some holes for open division tourneys for the entire field. The entire poke and hope type of designs. Throw it great then play the lottery of missing the 30 trees. So when I say what players want, no we shouldn't listen to many of them with respect to the baskets in my opinion. The unintended results end up with tricked up courses and basically blind luck results on many holes.

 

[lee76007]

Might have been a birdie if par was set for his skill level. ;-)

I hadn't thought about that. The entire course is a par 3 with a short toe board for juniors. He didn't want to play the toe boards, he likes the concrete. We were playing at least 100 feet back from the toe board, so yes, I would think that would be a birdie for him.

 

[oldmandiscer]

Reference to "Par" or any stat from another sport should not be the motivation to tweak a sport's dynamics if they're solid as they are. The design mistake over the past 30 years is using a par reference to recommend changes versus recommending changes to make the game better and more fun. If the change messes up some idealized view from another sport, either change the definition for your version of par or create a metric that makes sense for your game's dynamics. Feldberg didn't truly shoot -100 to win Worlds on disc golf terms but on ball golf terms. Many of those holes he played were not at the correct par for disc golf.

I'm just pointing that out from a mostly casual outsiders view at the time. It looked a bit silly to me and I could see others view it the same.

Let's assume that we went to a smaller basket. All of a sudden easy rec courses in the open park become reasonably challenging. TD's don't need to set up miles of rope or raise the baskets to raise the scores and create a challenging layout. Baskets no longer need to be 10 feet next to the lake. The trees in the middle of the "fair"ways can be removed to create a fair line. Having a higher percentage of players landing in C1-C2 isn't as bad anymore since less putts will be made.

Easy courses become more difficult and challenging courses become fair.

 

[oldmandiscer]

First post ever, might even be the last.... We are living in the Golden Age of disc golf right now, and many don't even realize it!

When I started 10 years ago courses were fewer and far apart, disc availability was limited, instruction was hit or miss, and I ran into the same players every tournament... and it was great! There was fun and challenge and passion, and the beauty of the sport was easy to experience.

But now it's even better. I can watch high quality disc golf every week, with superior video coverage, graphics, and commentary (and seemingly getting better every day), and all kinds of variety too. Not just great courses but great competition; mick'd up practice and competitive rounds, with both technical and mental game insights galore; look-ins to other cards and scoring; pros I can really root for, because I can get to know them in skins matches, the vlogs, and their sponsors' funded increases in visibility.

It's Jomez and UDisc, Central Coast DG, "BigBari", plenty of local C, B, and A-tiers to compete in, Marshall Street and DGU, leagues, this forum, K. McCoy finding yet another great site for a new course, portable baskets I can set up anywhere, the list goes on and on and on!

Argue all you want about basket size, ropes, and par. I'll keep getting great advice, encouragement, more birdies, and fun just the way things are! So quit typing and go pick out some discs for your bag and try to pure some new lines. Golden age, indeed!

Don't get me wrong, I love disc golf. I like watching it too. Which is why I would like to see improvements from my view. I think lots of sports could use tweaking as well. I think soccer is boring but if they made the goal larger we would see more goals. Less 0-0 draws. etc. More long range shots would be taken and made. Even if it's the most popular sport in the world, doesn't mean it couldn't be made better. (I don't understand why anyone likes watching 0-0 games). But whatever. lol

 

[BeRReGoN]

Don't get me wrong, I love disc golf. I like watching it too. Which is why I would like to see improvements from my view. I think lots of sports could use tweaking as well. I think soccer is boring but if they made the goal larger we would see more goals. Less 0-0 draws. etc. More long range shots would be taken and made. Even if it's the most popular sport in the world, doesn't mean it couldn't be made better. (I don't understand why anyone likes watching 0-0 games). But whatever. lol

I don't watch much soccer but I don't think making the goal bigger is a good idea. The success rate in penalties or in one on one situation is very high so I think the low scoring game is more a problem that controlling the ball is better than all out attack. Maybe less players on the field (I doubt player associations with like it) or some kind of attack clock like in basketball so the team with the ball has to attack or give away the ball.

 

[lee76007]

My observation from my first year playing is that DG is progressing in a positive direction, in at least the past 15 years. When I read reviews, I like to look at the year the course was built, and a majority of those seem to have been in the past 15 years, with those the majority in the past 7 years. Smaller cities that Virginia Beach have a cluster of courses, like the Richmond area. The network tournament coverage seems to have improve the past few years, plenty of instructional videos, and always seem to be a new disc coming out, meaning the demand is there.
Virginia Beach is lagging behind. In a city of 400 thousand we only have two 18-hole courses, Munden Point 15 miles from the city which can be a lonely walk on a weekday, and Bayville in the city that starts getting pack as the day progresses. Both courses are 30 miles apart. We need at least two more courses in the city.
However, Covid has boost DG in Virginia Beach. Munden Point can now be busy on the weekend. A sporting good store that had good disc selection prior to Covid, cant keep up now. I went in there today to pick up a new bag (the one I have now only lasted 6 months, err), and they were gone. There had always been bags available. Out of the three discs shops I frequent, only one is keeping up with demand. It will be interesting to see if the boost keeps up in the long run. Regardless, I think the sport is doing quite well.

 

[davetherocketguy]

Reference to "Par" or any stat from another sport should not be the motivation to tweak a sport's dynamics if they're solid as they are. The design mistake over the past 30 years is using a par reference to recommend changes versus recommending changes to make the game better and more fun. If the change messes up some idealized view from another sport, either change the definition for your version of par or create a metric that makes sense for your game's dynamics. Feldberg didn't truly shoot -100 to win Worlds on disc golf terms but on ball golf terms. Many of those holes he played were not at the correct par for disc golf.

I think I said something very similar several threads ago and was summarily ignored and dismissed even though I made a good point:

https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3618440&postcount=546

 

[mostlynorwegian]

Some of us just want access to the possibility of getting bored of having to use the regular sized baskets. Cool your jets with the other options

 

[hiflyer]

You misrepresent what a smaller basket means. It doesn't mean to make "disc golf like ball golf." It simply means to make putting a little more difficult. Let's take Eagles 88% C1X. A smaller target would reduce that to maybe 80%. So a little under 9/10 currently to 8/10 from say an avg of 25 feet (c1x). That IS NOT like ball golf. Ball golf is 40% from 10 feet. We would need a mail slot to make it that hard. That would be silly.

Yet, nearly every single "argument" you present contains "in ball golf..."

Second this poll isn't even the right question. The question at hand is raised baskets and artificial OB or smaller baskets and more specifically for the professional game and then over many years hopefully trickling down to most courses. The goal is to get rid of raised baskets and artificial OB. Not make disc golf like ball golf.

HAH HAHHAHAHAHA HAHAH HAHHH HAAHH. Stop! Please. My sides hurt!!

Because here is the problem. Players have been getting really good over the last 5-10 years. To counteract this artificial OB and raised baskets are being implemented to challenge the players. The OTHER option is to simply make the target harder and get rid of the other gimmicks as much as possible.

So why haven't you designed, funded, and built your own mini basket course? You seem to be the expert here. Maybe you can try and get a position with the PDGA. I'm sure they could benefit from a person so "in tune"* with the disc golf community.


*these are air quotes, btw.

 

[davetherocketguy]

So why haven't you designed, funded, and built your own mini basket course? You seem to be the expert here. Maybe you can try and get a position with the PDGA. I'm sure they could benefit from a person so "in tune"* with the disc golf community.

Funny, I suggested something very similar a long time ago to the same individual and was summarily dismissed and/or ignored.

 

[ru4por]

And........now there are three smaller basket thread for the same troll. SMH

 

[Steve West]

...
Let's assume that we went to a smaller basket. All of a sudden easy rec courses in the open park become reasonably challenging. TD's don't need to set up miles of rope or raise the baskets to raise the scores and create a challenging layout. Baskets no longer need to be 10 feet next to the lake. The trees in the middle of the "fair"ways can be removed to create a fair line. Having a higher percentage of players landing in C1-C2 isn't as bad anymore since less putts will be made.
...

That sounds a lot like saying if you put less ice cream into a sundae you wouldn't need any hot fudge or caramel to be able to finish it.

No thanks to both parts of that idea.

 

[txmxer]

With respect to course design and putting. Players want to make every putt. If it was up to many players the target would get bigger. But then TD's and course designers would have to make the long game design even harder. I'm already seeing 1 birdie on some holes for open division tourneys for the entire field. The entire poke and hope type of designs. Throw it great then play the lottery of missing the 30 trees. So when I say what players want, no we shouldn't listen to many of them with respect to the baskets in my opinion. The unintended results end up with tricked up courses and basically blind luck results on many holes.

I enjoy watching pro's play and I just do not agree with your assessment and I think most here feel similar.

Although we can throw around a few statistics, 99% of your argument is your personal opinion on the status if the sport and what would make it "better".

You might be right. But you might not. Your only option seems to be to put forth the personal investment to create your dream and prove you are right or just let it go.

We have ample evidence you are not changing anyone's mind by repeating your opinion over and over and are in fact creating antagonism amongst fellow interweb DG members.