United States disc golf championships

[elmexdela]

It seems the two most commonly-expressed opinions of the USDGC, seem to be It's stupid (course design and rules) and Why can't we watch?! (for free).

Admittedly, not always by the same people. But it certainly generates a lot of attention, and passion.

dont forget the third one

the old timers who cant let it go and what it "used to be"

things change and new traditions/standards are set yet some people stay stuck in the past

 

[txmxer]

It seems the two most commonly-expressed opinions of the USDGC, seem to be It's stupid (course design and rules) and Why can't we watch?! (for free).

Admittedly, not always by the same people. But it certainly generates a lot of attention, and passion.

There's a lot of "why can't everything be free" in DG.

 

[Steve West]

I probably understand you, but I'd rather not make logical leaps from that picture to what I think you're saying. What about that hole makes for a smooth punishment curve, and why would wider be better?

There's a chart in another thread somewhere. These walls of trees amplify the loss of effective distance as a function of inaccuracy. Because there are so many trees (and because squeaking through a gap between them is similar in punishment as hitting them) the result of the throw is almost entirely dependent on accuracy.


Say this 444-foot hole was wide open. A throw 5 degrees off-line would land about 39 feet left (and a little short) of the basket. So, 39 feet of punishment.


With the trees, that same throw would hit a tree about 75 feet down the fairway and land about 369 feet from the target. So, 369 feet of punishment.


Comparing the punishment with trees to the punishment without, we get a punishment multiplier of 9.5.


Because the trees are in straight lines, the punishment factor varies smoothly, from about 2.4 for really yanked (30 degrees off) throws to 17 for throws which hit the last tree.


As for the width: Because the corridor is so narrow, only a small percentage of throws would escape a large punishment multiplier. Throwing just 2 degrees off-line cuts the effective length of the throw to just 188 feet. So this hole basically only tests for perfectly accurate vs. not perfect. Wider would test a broader range of accuracy.

 

[KillerKoala777]

There's a lot of "why can't everything be free" in DG.

There's a lot of "why can't everything be free" in society.

 

[robdeforge]

DGN has said over and over, there will be post production made, for DGN subs, commentated by Sexton and someone else.

THERE WILL BE NO FREE COVERAGE THIS YEAR. The only way to watch is to pay now, or be a DGN subscriber and you will get it in a month. Nothing will be on YouTube (unless they agree on something different than what is currently agreed upon)

https://www.reddit.com/r/discgolf/c.../?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

quote from Ian from CCDG in response to "No coverage of any kind will be available to folks who are not DGN subscribers in the future? Or who bought the PVPV?"

Non DGN, I think it'll be on USA disc golf's youtube eventually (not certain of the timing)

I hope he's right although by the time it MIGHT come out I doubt I'll really care much to watch

 

[sidewinder22]

I never watched last year's USDGC coverage.

 

[drk_evns]

Whats the actual distance you have to carry in order to get in the circle on hole 10? 460?

 

[dehaas]

So a quick question for those who paid for coverage this year. I paid last year, and my biggest gripe was with accessing the coverage itself. You had to pull up the live coverage on an actual web browser, so my options were to do it from my laptop and chrome cast into tv or pull it up from the browser on my phone and airplay to Apple TV.

Not really a big deal except I was needing both to work from home and kinda had to bounce between devices when I needed to use the other.

Don't presently subscribe to DGN, but it looks like you can pay the $25 just for USDGC coverage, and if you're a DGN subscriber you get the discount? Any idea if the DGN app is available through the google play store directly on my tv? Apple TV is set up in the basement on another tv, could probably get it through Apple App Store?

Girlfriend is running the Boston Marathon on Monday so Saturday will be a travel day…would love to be able to catch some of the final day coverage here and there throughout the day so I'll probably go ahead and pull the trigger.

 

[Flick Maniac]

Short answer is NO... I suspect it will be an experiment that will not be repeated, And that's because it misses a marketing opportunity with all of the additional (free to the viewer) post production coverage. Live coverage might be thrilling for some people, and that pay per view long view look provided by the live coverage model is what gets their jollies. But, the rest of us enjoy the condensed post produced to a two part coverage without all of the navel gazing conversation that fills the airtime with words. And that's because post produced coverage is easier to digest.

uh.... last time was also ppv. (and perhaps the time before that too but I cant remember) so its not "experiment that will not be repeated"

USDGCFAN21 coupon code ought to get you -20%

 

[glassila]

There's a lot of "why can't everything be free" in DG.

My gripe isn't that it's not free, my gripe is that it costs $25.
I had the Disc Golf Network all summer so I was watching 3 or 4 events a month for $10 a month.
I just can't see paying $25 for the USDGC when for that same $25 I can watch 8-10 events.
(financially I am pretty well off, but that does not change the fact that I am pretty cheap. )

That's just my 2 cents on the matter.

 

[Ryan P.]

There's a chart in another thread somewhere. These walls of trees amplify the loss of effective distance as a function of inaccuracy. Because there are so many trees (and because squeaking through a gap between them is similar in punishment as hitting them) the result of the throw is almost entirely dependent on accuracy.


Say this 444-foot hole was wide open. A throw 5 degrees off-line would land about 39 feet left (and a little short) of the basket. So, 39 feet of punishment.


With the trees, that same throw would hit a tree about 75 feet down the fairway and land about 369 feet from the target. So, 369 feet of punishment.


Comparing the punishment with trees to the punishment without, we get a punishment multiplier of 9.5.


Because the trees are in straight lines, the punishment factor varies smoothly, from about 2.4 for really yanked (30 degrees off) throws to 17 for throws which hit the last tree.


As for the width: Because the corridor is so narrow, only a small percentage of throws would escape a large punishment multiplier. Throwing just 2 degrees off-line cuts the effective length of the throw to just 188 feet. So this hole basically only tests for perfectly accurate vs. not perfect. Wider would test a broader range of accuracy.

Thanks. Great thoughts here. I don't know that it's a fair comparison to measure it against a hole with no trees, but I understand there needs to be a baseline, and I can't think of a better one. Also, I'm going to ignore the fact that it's not perfectly smooth punishment, because a shot that barely misses one tree only to hit another and fall down is technically better than a shot that barely hits the first tree I mentioned and is redirected back online. Those things will happen unless we get rid of trees, and that's not gonna happen (well hopefully not).

I think that having the fairway be wider at the beginning and become narrower as you go down the fairway would help with the idea of fairly punishing shots. I don't mean a steady narrowing, but a narrowing that slowly decreases in size until close to the landing zone, where it pinches off quickly before the LZ.

A separate thought is that the thicker the wall of trees, the "fairer" it is in punishment, but also the harder it is to recover. Natural OB is in the same realm as rope to some people.

 

[elmexdela]

Thanks. Great thoughts here. I don't know that it's a fair comparison to measure it against a hole with no trees, but I understand there needs to be a baseline, and I can't think of a better one. Also, I'm going to ignore the fact that it's not perfectly smooth punishment, because a shot that barely misses one tree only to hit another and fall down is technically better than a shot that barely hits the first tree I mentioned and is redirected back online. Those things will happen unless we get rid of trees, and that's not gonna happen (well hopefully not).

I think that having the fairway be wider at the beginning and become narrower as you go down the fairway would help with the idea of fairly punishing shots. I don't mean a steady narrowing, but a narrowing that slowly decreases in size until close to the landing zone, where it pinches off quickly before the LZ.

A separate thought is that the thicker the wall of trees, the "fairer" it is in punishment, but also the harder it is to recover. Natural OB is in the same realm as rope to some people.

lets also not forget that technically hole 4 the rough on the right side is terrible but if you pop out on the left side you have the clear rhfh route that you can save 3/4

of course these technicalities are splitting hairs but i dig what steve was saying great example of a hole

 

[Ryan P.]

lets also not forget that technically hole 4 the rough on the right side is terrible but if you pop out on the left side you have the clear rhfh route that you can save 3/4

of course these technicalities are splitting hairs but i dig what steve was saying great example of a hole

Yeah, there are all of those kinds of nuances that make hole design great. It's not "Here's how you make a good hole," but "here's one way to make a good hole, and another, and another, and another, etc."

It'd be great if there were a few more trees left of the LZ to make that second shot harder for drives that miss left.

 

[araytx]

So a quick question for those who paid for coverage this year. I paid last year, and my biggest gripe was with accessing the coverage itself. You had to pull up the live coverage on an actual web browser, so my options were to do it from my laptop and chrome cast into tv or pull it up from the browser on my phone and airplay to Apple TV.

Not really a big deal except I was needing both to work from home and kinda had to bounce between devices when I needed to use the other.

Don't presently subscribe to DGN, but it looks like you can pay the $25 just for USDGC coverage, and if you're a DGN subscriber you get the discount? Any idea if the DGN app is available through the google play store directly on my tv? Apple TV is set up in the basement on another tv, could probably get it through Apple App Store?

Girlfriend is running the Boston Marathon on Monday so Saturday will be a travel day…would love to be able to catch some of the final day coverage here and there throughout the day so I'll probably go ahead and pull the trigger.

Some SmartTV operating systems have DGN in the store and some don't. It'll depend.

Hell you could argue that since they shortened Worlds from 8 rounds + final 9 to 5 rounds that Ricky, Barsby and James have been the benefit. On old format of 8+ rounds, Paul comes back (higher rating) and beats all of them, and is a 9 time consecutive and current world champ.

Maybe Ricky wins in 17, he looked really solid that year, but if I had to bet, I'd bet on Paul beating both Barsby and James if there are 3 more rounds.

Or conversely, Paul could be very lucky that it wasn't shortened sooner. Like in 2014 where Paul held the outright lead for exactly one hole of the entire tournament before winning in a playoff. That kind of "luck" works both ways.

I guess when I see freshly mowed grass I don't see the lake. What's the hazard though? Is that tall weeds?

Water doesn't have to be OB either. That's a TD's/course designer's choice. They could make it casual if they wanted to.

 

[txmxer]

My gripe isn't that it's not free, my gripe is that it costs $25.
I had the Disc Golf Network all summer so I was watching 3 or 4 events a month for $10 a month.
I just can't see paying $25 for the USDGC when for that same $25 I can watch 8-10 events.
(financially I am pretty well off, but that does not change the fact that I am pretty cheap. )

That's just my 2 cents on the matter.

It will all work out in the numbers. They should be able to make some kind of evaluation between what they make this way and would make otherwise. Could also compare to Worlds and see how it worked out.

 

[TurnedOver]

I don't expect coverage to be free. I expect it to be paid for with advertising like a normal event.

 

[Ryan P.]

I don't expect coverage to be free. I expect it to be paid for with advertising like a normal event.

If you aren't paying, you're being sold.

 

[adlacro]

Spoiler

Drew Gibson aced hole 7

 

[Dcinmd]

It seems the two most commonly-expressed opinions of the USDGC, seem to be It's stupid (course design and rules) and Why can't we watch?! (for free).

Admittedly, not always by the same people. But it certainly generates a lot of attention, and passion.

Meh, I am a month and a half behind on my free disc golfing viewing. And I am only that current because I skipped 4 tournaments before worlds.

I might watch it around Christmas if it is available.

 

[glassila]

It will all work out in the numbers. They should be able to make some kind of evaluation between what they make this way and would make otherwise. Could also compare to Worlds and see how it worked out.

I guess the fact that they've done this $25 thing two years in a row means they are satisfied with the financial results.
It just seems to me that the optimal cost would be lower, like around $10.
I have a hunch that if they get 100,000 viewers at $25 they would get 300,000-400,000 at $10. (I have absolutely NO idea what their viewership numbers are)