United States disc golf championships

[Ryan P.]

Isn't landing further away from the basket a punishment or punishment enough? Why do we add strokes? Why do we have to add strokes? Why do we pick up our discs and place them in the fairway?

How about making the circle a hazard itself. Players try and land outside 33 feet but close to the edge and then make a putt. (I might have just given them an idea.:gross: )

Maybe even better make the entire hole hazard so every time you don't land in the basket you take an extra shot. That should make up for the easiness of the course/putting.

Don't fret; your circle-as-hazard idea has been considered before.

Your statement that "isn't landing further away from the basket punishment enough" assumes that throwing outside the ropes is further away from the basket; that's not a correct assumption. First, players who throw farther are more likely to be erratic. Second, holes that bend one way are closer to the basket on the inside OB.

All of your other ideas aren't problems with rope, but problems with how we penalize OB.

Also, I only interact with you so people can see thoughtful alternatives to your ideas.

 

[araytx]

Nope, one disc is on the line but in bounds, one is out by an inch. The other shot would be 60 feet further away.

Two shots thrown virtually identical taking different scores. Two shots thrown vastly different taking the same score.

I think it's fairly easy to understand.

But DUH!!
That can happen on any course, whether there is rope to define the OB, or a creek bank/pond bank/lake's edge, etc. That scenario is NOT unique to courses with marked OB... Double DUH!

Ultimately I think all of this comes from the fact that the property is BIG enough to be championship caliber, but it is not GOOD enough to be championship caliber. The ropes are necessary because the property simply doesn't fit championship caliber disc golf. The ropes add to the strategic play, I agree. They serve the intended purpose. But they do not solve the fact that they are an effort to shoehorn a championship caliber course onto a property that is not on its own championship caliber. The ropes have, sure, helped the course remain "relevant" as the property has been increasingly outgrown - but I'd argue that a better agenda would be for Innova to invest in actually developing a championship caliber property. They've chosen to go with (for the sake of nostalgia, convenience, and cost) sticking it out on a property that just isn't nearly on the level with much of what else is on tour.

They're in the Carolinas - there are places. Disc golf is booming Innova, come on: lets wean off of the rope addiction and start developing a property that can truly be developed toward the purpose of a United States Disc Golf Championship - instead of shoehorning the event onto a college campus that the sport has simply outgrown (if it was ever truly appropriate in the first place).

I appreciate nostalgia, convenenience, and cost - but at some point you should look at the place objectively. You can have your experimental major at some place more appropriate, you don't NEED to stick it out at Winthrop for the sake of the past.

Innova and Winthrop have an agreement through 2024 per a recent podcast (either Nick and Matt or the Upshot). So set your hopes for 2025 USDGC Chris.

I'm not convinced that they should move; at least not yet. DG is still in a growing phase, especially as far as course design goes. I wouldn't be surprised if in a decade the worst touring pros are all throwing as far as Eagle is now. If they dump a lot of money into developing a property and what I said happens (even if its in 20-30 years), the course might be considered a middling course and not one worthy of the USDGC. That might be worth it; it might not. Do I personally want it to go in that direction? Definitely.

I realize that a course like this could (and should) be designed with ample space between holes (allowing Innova to lengthen it in a decade or two). However, that would require a significant amount of work. While DG is still growing, ropes allow greater flexibility than trees. While I don't like them, they've made a lot of sense in the past. Let's not be shortsighted and demand that now is the time to change.

And everyone remember it's still Innova's event. Nobody is gonna change that. So unless some new entity ponies up NEW money fresh and clear -- competes against USDGC on the same weekend with enough pull to keep pros away from Winthrop -- unless all that happens, then the best you can hope for is for Harold DuVall and the Innova brass to change their minds of their own volition. Otherwise it's Innova's brand and no one can call their event the United States Disc Golf Championship.

 

[ChrisWoj]

And everyone remember it's still Innova's event. Nobody is gonna change that. So unless some new entity ponies up NEW money fresh and clear -- competes against USDGC on the same weekend with enough pull to keep pros away from Winthrop -- unless all that happens, then the best you can hope for is for Harold DuVall and the Innova brass to change their minds of their own volition. Otherwise it's Innova's brand and no one can call their event the United States Disc Golf Championship.

PRESSURE. PRESSURE. PRESSURE. We aren't going to be their minds, but we can keep pressuring them to change them themselves. A part of that can come from the sport moving forward and the fans, who will be increasingly, a motivating factor as the viewership increases the potential advertising revenue associated with live coverage, making noise. The more outcry there is, the better chance that one day they decide to put their event on a property that actually finally fits the skill level of the competitors.

I can be completely aware of the point you made - and still have and be happy to put to words all my frustrations with the fact that our US Championship is on THAT course.

 

[Disc Golf Chuck]

I just want to know more details for the next-day condensed coverage so I know if I want to spend money on it. I don't have time to watch several hours a day of the live coverage. So who is producing the next-day condensed coverage? I know it's not JoMez Pro unfortunately. Is it just going to be video of shots taken from the live coverage? If so, that's not worth $25. Does anyone know what the next-day condensed coverage is going to be like? Last year, it was Central Coast Disc Golf and it was solid as usual. If the DGPT wants my money, they need to let me know what I'm buying or thinking about buying.

 

[oldmandiscer]

Don't fret; your circle-as-hazard idea has been considered before.

Your statement that "isn't landing further away from the basket punishment enough" assumes that throwing outside the ropes is further away from the basket; that's not a correct assumption. First, players who throw farther are more likely to be erratic. Second, holes that bend one way are closer to the basket on the inside OB.

All of your other ideas aren't problems with rope, but problems with how we penalize OB.

Also, I only interact with you so people can see thoughtful alternatives to your ideas.

Considering the basket will be inside the ropes, we can assume the vast majority of time an errant shot far "OB" is going to be in a worse position or further away from the basket.

 

[oldmandiscer]

Agreed, the result is literally the same if the line is water or rope, the only difference is in aesthetics.

I forgot we are pretending. Water will also play different, rollers don't work too well.

 

[oldmandiscer]

But DUH!!
That can happen on any course, whether there is rope to define the OB, or a creek bank/pond bank/lake's edge, etc. That scenario is NOT unique to courses with marked OB... Double DUH!

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

 

[DavidSauls]

Part of the rationale for using Winthrop is to be able to put on a spectacle, and they've done it better than anyone else. The USDGC put prestige into an event, at a time when tournaments were all about the same -- and Worlds, just more of the same (more rounds, more days).

There'll be a large gallery following the event. They've sold out of $200 tickets and $50 tickets, and the remaining 1-day tickets are $20. Nowhere else are large crowds of people paying real money to watch disc golfers in person.

Yeah, it's not the greatest property for disc golf, and some of their experiments have flopped. But I'm willing to cut them some slack, for what they've accomplished. And people still seem to care more about this event, than any other except (perhaps) Worlds.

 

[ChrisWoj]

Part of the rationale for using Winthrop is to be able to put on a spectacle, and they've done it better than anyone else. The USDGC put prestige into an event, at a time when tournaments were all about the same -- and Worlds, just more of the same (more rounds, more days).

There'll be a large gallery following the event. They've sold out of $200 tickets and $50 tickets, and the remaining 1-day tickets are $20. Nowhere else are large crowds of people paying real money to watch disc golfers in person.

Yeah, it's not the greatest property for disc golf, and some of their experiments have flopped. But I'm willing to cut them some slack, for what they've accomplished. And people still seem to care more about this event, than any other except (perhaps) Worlds.

The consistent financial support of the event year over year over year is more important to getting those spectators than the property. I'd bet the only reason the MVP Open isn't significantly bigger is the years of more fallow support over time than the fact that it isn't as easy to watch as Winthrop. And we are seeing Dodge demonstrate that you can build in those spots for spectators. Winthrop easier to set up for spectators, but Innova could invest and do it at a property more suitable for disc golf. And that does not even mean choosing a property where it is densely wooded like Maple Hill. They could choose an easier property to work than that.

 

[DavidSauls]

The property doesn't draw the spectators, but it handles them very well.

Yeah, there are spectators at other events now. I don't know if they're paying the same kind of money, which is in indication of just how much people want to watch. But when the USDGC started, they raised the spectacle bar considerably.

 

[DavidSauls]

Not that I am a fan of rope but all 3 of the shots would have the same result at Winthrop without ropes.

...and your determination that one shot which lands inbounds near rope and one that lands out of bounds near rope are of the same quality is demonstrably incorrect. It is not like the players don't know the rope is there.

Yes, and throws that land 40' from the rope, rarely end up OB.

I've never quite understood the "two nearly identical shots" argument, myself. I see a lot of sports where a "matter of inches" separates success and failure on nearly-identical plays. I'm also used to sports where odds matter; you do this, and the odds are in your favor; you gamble on doing that, and you run a greater chance of a bad result. Not a certainty, just a greater chance.

 

[elmexdela]

Yes, and throws that land 40' from the rope, rarely end up OB.

I've never quite understood the "two nearly identical shots" argument, myself. I see a lot of sports where a "matter of inches" separates success and failure on nearly-identical plays. I'm also used to sports where odds matter; you do this, and the odds are in your favor; you gamble on doing that, and you run a greater chance of a bad result. Not a certainty, just a greater chance.

yah i agree paul macbeth is just lucky the most

 

[nothinbuttree]

I see a lot of sports where a "matter of inches" separates success and failure on nearly-identical plays.

You mean like Worlds final round final hole this year? Before "The shot", we had Paul's drive just barely stay in-bounds, and James' drive just barely hit a tree and then barely stay dry itself. Any one of those shots being a few inches in a different direction and who knows how it plays out.

 

[brutalbrutus]

 

[Flick Maniac]

PRESSURE. PRESSURE. PRESSURE. We aren't going to be their minds, but we can keep pressuring them to change them themselves. A part of that can come from the sport moving forward and the fans, who will be increasingly, a motivating factor as the viewership increases the potential advertising revenue associated with live coverage, making noise. The more outcry there is, the better chance that one day they decide to put their event on a property that actually finally fits the skill level of the competitors.

I can be completely aware of the point you made - and still have and be happy to put to words all my frustrations with the fact that our US Championship is on THAT course.

Whoa whoa whoa... Fits the skill level? Its too easy? Or what are you saying. If its the old adage about woods golf forget it. Woods can be arbitrary too. Hit tree dead on, drop to perfect spot. Glance off it miles into the rough. Solution? Dont hit the tree. Also solution: dont throw OB (or land in a place with speed, disc type and angle to skip OB).

Anywhooo.... Groups are out. 2nd card is straight up fire with Eagle, Paul, Kyle and Gilbert. Top card kinda meh.

 

[Ryan P.]

Yes, and throws that land 40' from the rope, rarely end up OB.

I've never quite understood the "two nearly identical shots" argument, myself. I see a lot of sports where a "matter of inches" separates success and failure on nearly-identical plays. I'm also used to sports where odds matter; you do this, and the odds are in your favor; you gamble on doing that, and you run a greater chance of a bad result. Not a certainty, just a greater chance.

Agreed. DG is inherently lucky. I enjoy courses that reduce the amount of luck involved, but throwing round objects (discs) in-between round objects (trees) inherently involves some luck. No one (that I know of) is arguing to remove trees from courses despite the fact that they might punish a bad shot harshly while punishing an awful shot much less.

The core of the discussion about ropes is the same. You might argue that bad shots are unfairly punished; but that's the same issue with trees.

As long as good shots are rewarded and bad shots are generally punished, I'm okay with course design. Maybe someday someone will figure out how to fairly punish bad shots. But the problem isn't with rope, artificial OB, or any of that. The problem is that course designers haven't figured out a great way to consistently punish bad shots a little, worse shots a little more, and to punish awful shots a lot. We've roughly (pun intended) figured out how to punish bad/worse/worst shots on this curve, but its very inconsistent.

I'm not critiquing course designers in general; it's difficult with the obstacles we have at hand to have fair punishment for bad/worse/worst shots.

 

[oldmandiscer]

Yes, and throws that land 40' from the rope, rarely end up OB.

I've never quite understood the "two nearly identical shots" argument, myself. I see a lot of sports where a "matter of inches" separates success and failure on nearly-identical plays. I'm also used to sports where odds matter; you do this, and the odds are in your favor; you gamble on doing that, and you run a greater chance of a bad result. Not a certainty, just a greater chance.

The difference with a rope is, it's very hard to see and undefined from 300-500 feet away. The player has no clue sometimes of they are OB or not. If it's that random then it's just plain dumb.

 

[DavidSauls]

Ryan, I don't see it as unique to disc golf. Other sports I watch, have nearly-identical plays with different results, both from lucky/unlucky incidents, and from plays on the edge of borders.

In baseball, if you hit the ball hard, sometimes you line out. If you bloop it, sometimes it falls in for a hit. But if you hit the ball hard consistently, you'll end up with a better average than if you don't. Similarly, if you land more of your throws near the center of a roped fairway, you'll end up with a better average than if you land more of your throws near the rope. (Similarly, on a tree-line fairway on a wooded course, a throw in the middle of the fairway has better chances than one along the edge, which may or may not hit trees, and then may or may not kick right or left or just fall).

In football, if you throw a pass to the sideline, sometimes it will be caught inches inbounds....sometimes, inches out of bounds. Nearly-identical throws and catches, with vastly different results. And I don't even want to talk about the strange kicks when a live football hits the ground.

Just a few of dozens, if not hundreds, of examples in other sports, of nearly-identical plays with vastly different results. I don't know if disc golf has any more

 

[oldmandiscer]

Agreed. DG is inherently lucky. I enjoy courses that reduce the amount of luck involved, but throwing round objects (discs) in-between round objects (trees) inherently involves some luck. No one (that I know of) is arguing to remove trees from courses despite the fact that they might punish a bad shot harshly while punishing an awful shot much less.

The core of the discussion about ropes is the same. You might argue that bad shots are unfairly punished; but that's the same issue with trees.

As long as good shots are rewarded and bad shots are generally punished, I'm okay with course design. Maybe someday someone will figure out how to fairly punish bad shots. But the problem isn't with rope, artificial OB, or any of that. The problem is that course designers haven't figured out a great way to consistently punish bad shots a little, worse shots a little more, and to punish awful shots a lot. We've roughly (pun intended) figured out how to punish bad/worse/worst shots on this curve, but its very inconsistent.

I'm not critiquing course designers in general; it's difficult with the obstacles we have at hand to have fair punishment for bad/worse/worst shots.

Bad shots are punished by being FURTHER away from the hole. Making up pretend lakes and tall weed hazards is the epitome of gimmicks.

Just take any of the holes out there pretty much. Ropes are 35 feet from the basket. One player lands 25 feet, one player lands 65 feet long. But then he picks up his disc then plays from 35 feet. Like wth is he doing? Your 65 feet away, why are you picking up your disc and moving it to 35 with a stroke penalty?

Or I forgot we are pretending. I guess I'm not a good pretender.

 

[ChrisWoj]

Whoa whoa whoa... Fits the skill level? Its too easy? Or what are you saying. If its the old adage about woods golf forget it. Woods can be arbitrary too. Hit tree dead on, drop to perfect spot. Glance off it miles into the rough. Solution? Dont hit the tree. Also solution: dont throw OB (or land in a place with speed, disc type and angle to skip OB).

Anywhooo.... Groups are out. 2nd card is straight up fire with Eagle, Paul, Kyle and Gilbert. Top card kinda meh.

Not necessarily woods. But one that does not require so many gimmicks to match the skill of the players.