Thoughts on standardizing baskets for tournaments?

[illuminatefreak]

As I'm watching different tournaments, they advertise different things from the sponsors. One of them are baskets which makes me curious what the overall opinion might be about standardizing baskets for major tournaments (ie. Pro Tour, World Tour, etc.).

Most sports have a standard "goal" (basket, net, etc.) that has to be used. I'm on the fence about it, but curious what your thoughts are on something like that happening for disc golf.

 

[1978]

1. The work required to replace all baskets for the "standard" one would be pretty crazy and probably not feasible or cost prudent
2. If a major basket manufacturer wanted to pay for the rights and manage the conversion...that could be a money maker.
3. In many areas disc golf companies subsidize courses. For example here in CHarlotte. Innova donated 18 baskets to Hornet's nest for the 2012 worlds. It might not be good form to pull them and replace with Prodigy's new basket if the Pro Tour came to town and they were the sponsor.
4. most baskets have some sort of catching flaw. It is what it is.
5. other things that im not thinking of....

 

[JC17393]

They already have minimum standards for major tournaments (Tech Standards). I don't see why there would be a need for anything more than that, especially if the next step is choosing a specific design or manufacturer for all courses used in big events. IMO, basket design is an element of course design. If a designer wants his course to have Discatchers rather than MachX or Chainstars or whatever, more power to him. I'd hate to see courses homogenized too much.

 

[Putt for D'oh]

Most sports have a standard equipment used due to a lucrative contract with a particular manufacturer, that has to be used.

FTFY

Some good some bad results from this. Plenty of examples out there of the athletes upset, and times when their personal contracts take a hit, like the clothing contract with UFC. Some where the equipment being used is universally hated like the micro fiber ball in NBA some few years ago.

If one of the manufacturers wanted to go out and contract with the PDGA assuming they were also willing, then there would assume some kind of discount baskets would be supplied to the tournament venues.

Could happen, I guess, but probably a little ways off.

 

[Pbmercil]

The biggest problem is the bajjion baskets in the wild that would need to be replaced. Who's going to pay for all that?

 

[Noill]

I don't like the idea... Part of the fun is uniqueness including baskets, design, land, fauna, flora, etc...

 

[ilmcgee]

If a course is to have a major tournament, they should have baskets that meet the minimum standards. I like the minimum standard, it lets each manufacturer have their own feel within a limit.

 

[sillybizz]

I don't like the idea... Part of the fun is uniqueness including baskets, design, land, fauna, flora, etc...

:thmbup: This all day long.

 

[davetherocketguy]

I don't like the idea... Part of the fun is uniqueness including baskets, design, land, fauna, flora, etc...

This. In fact, I would argue if someone is good enough to be on tour then they ought to be good enough to adjust the putting to accommodate the baskets on the course.

People don't seem to remember there isn't just a material cost to replacing baskets. There's a rather sizable labor component to it as well - especially if the new ones require different sized sleeves. It's a simple process but holy smokes is it a lot of work.

 

[Trey H]

Many good reasons not to do this already mentioned. One I would add: Standardizing baskets would prevent innovation. Baskets are still evolving, albeit very slowly at this point. I think it's important that within certain standards companies have room to try to improve them.

 

[Jenga54]

All the other "major sports" just have a standard size metal hole to go through. Catching is a whole different ball game.. er, disc game

 

[tomte]

Other sports also have different field sizes or different arenas. They all have standards to make them comparable, but enough room to still be individual. So our tech standards are just fine.

 

[scarpfish]

The biggest problem is the bajjion baskets in the wild that would need to be replaced. Who's going to pay for all that?

I was under the impression the OP meant baskets that would be temporary sit-ins for tournaments on courses that held them, not replacing all baskets on courses everywhere.

 

[DavidSauls]

This. In fact, I would argue if someone is good enough to be on tour then they ought to be good enough to adjust the putting to accommodate the baskets on the course.

I agree.

I also hold to the lonely and heretical view that the differences in catching quality between the top baskets is minor enough to not be an issue.

Combining the impracticality of replacing baskets with the minimal gain in doing so, and it's a non-issue. To me, anyway.

 

[dashiellx]

I agree.

I also hold to the lonely and heretical view that the differences in catching quality between the top baskets is minor enough to not be an issue.

Combining the impracticality of replacing baskets with the minimal gain in doing so, and it's a non-issue. To me, anyway.

I'm not sure Feldberg agrees. Didn't he say something a few years ago about basket standards?

 

[Jenga54]

Ok this discussion gets boring every three months. Just another thread saying what "they" should do. Notifications off.

 

[JC17393]

I was under the impression the OP meant baskets that would be temporary sit-ins for tournaments on courses that held them, not replacing all baskets on courses everywhere.

Even in that case, it's still a cost and labor-intensive endeavor for arguably a minimal gain. As has been noted, the differences between most of the highest caliber targets is subtle if there's a difference at all. I mean, how much is really changed if one were to swap out the Discatchers at Winthrop for Chainstars? Or the Mach Xs at Fountain Hills for Prodigy targets?

Now if we're talking changing courses over to a narrower target (a Bullseye/Marksman type) for top level events, then the equation changes a bit. That's a whole other quagmire for another thread.

 

[davetherocketguy]

I'm not sure Feldberg agrees. Didn't he say something a few years ago about basket standards?

I like Feldberg but as far as that's concerned he can wish in one hand and poop in the other and see which fills first.

Just in case anyone has forgotten the raw costs of switching baskets let's take a look at the GBO which if I am not mistaken was played on 3 different 18 hole courses and we want to switch out all the non standard baskets with standard ones that the pros play. 54 baskets X ~$300/basket = $16,200. That's material costs only for ONE NT tour stop. Doesn't even begin to account for the rather large number of man hours it would take to complete the task.

How much would it cost to switch out just the NT courses to make the pros happy? $100k? Where in the world is that money going to come from?

To me, different baskets on different courses is what makes disc golf great. It's the variety. No two courses are the same and you just have to adjust your game which adds to the challenge. Sure there are courses that have absolute junk baskets but just figure out what works and what doesn't. It's called good course management.

 

[JC17393]

I like Feldberg but as far as that's concerned he can wish in one hand and poop in the other and see which fills first.

Just in case anyone has forgotten the raw costs of switching baskets let's take a look at the GBO which if I am not mistaken was played on 3 different 18 hole courses and we want to switch out all the non standard baskets with standard ones that the pros play. 54 baskets X ~$300/basket = $16,200. That's material costs only for ONE NT tour stop. Doesn't even begin to account for the rather large number of man hours it would take to complete the task.

How much would it cost to switch out just the NT courses to make the pros happy? $100k? Where in the world is that money going to come from?

To me, different baskets on different courses is what makes disc golf great. It's the variety. No two courses are the same and you just have to adjust your game which adds to the challenge. Sure there are courses that have absolute junk baskets but just figure out what works and what doesn't. It's called good course management.

If there was ever a decision to standardize the NT targets to one particular model, I think rather than force all NT/Major locations to swap their existing targets to the standard model, there would have to be a designated set (or multiple sets) of these standard targets that could be trucked from NT venue to NT venue. That way, they could temporarily replace the permanent targets with the NT ones for the event without forcing every NT venue to spend thousands of dollars they may not have to refit their courses.

Without that, I can't see the standardization ever happening.

 

[DavidSauls]

I'm not sure Feldberg agrees. Didn't he say something a few years ago about basket standards?

I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised. I'm not sure if anyone agrees---I did, after all, characterize my statement as a "lonely and heretical view".

Then again, I'm a bad player capable of missing the entire basket from 20 feet. When you do that, they're all the same.