WACO Charity Open presented by Prodigy

[dmoore1998]

This is an issue that DGN needs to figure out. I appreciate very much all the action they are trying to show, but it is very hard to keep up with all the shots and where the player is when they switch to their shot. They also have to figure out a better system of showing the scores. Many times you see a certain player is -15 on the leader board, then they show that players putt for birdie a few minutes later that putt him to -15 and you think he just went to -16. Overall it is challenging to keep up with what exactly is going on during the live broadcast.

Like when Hammes was teeing off and they showed him 2 strokes lower than they'd just showed him. And since he was at the top of the field and they were closely tracking scores it was evident. Oh look, i bet he aces here.

 

[robdeforge]

I was going to say the same thing. The aerial shot, with each drive marked with the player's initials, really showed you well what each one was looking at for their second shot. That is a great hole to do that on and very insightful.

I was going to embed this image but it's huuuuge, so if you want to see what it looks like:
https://i.imgur.com/XXXnRXp.jpg

Like when Hammes was teeing off and they showed him 2 strokes lower than they'd just showed him. And since he was at the top of the field and they were closely tracking scores it was evident. Oh look, i bet he aces here.

oof I'm happy I missed that

 

[ChrisWoj]

Wow...

Just saw that Jared Stoll of Michigan cleared the woods on 17 3X this past weekend.

He took a 3 on a made 27 footer after his drive went OB on the green.
He took a 3 on a missed C1 putt after his drive landed in bounds.
And he took a 4 on a missed C1 putt after his drive went OB on the green.

Seeing someone able to do it three consecutive rounds... would anybody be surprised if more guys with less confidence in their overhand accuracy chose to just let'er rip and fly the green next year? Or is his power just substantially more to the point that other guys are way too afraid they won't get over the trees and will wind up totally screwed?

 

[Steve West]

I analyzed the scores for the WACO 2023 MPO players rated above 969 (which was all 166) and the 45 players in the FPO field rated above 899.

While there were no "bad" holes for MPO, what immediately jumps out is that the most popular scores on the MPO course are often also the lowest reasonable score. This makes it hard to pull ahead of the field. For example, even if a player got a legit birdie 2 on hole 1, they didn't really pull ahead much because 59% of the players also got a birdie.

Actually, it doesn't matter whether the lowest score is birdie or par, legit or not. If a lot of players are getting the same lowest score, this kind of distribution pretty much assures a cluster of players tied at the top.

But, hey! Drama is more important than actual competition, right? (At least until the top players figure out that all the skills they've honed won't help them win, so they stop showing up.)

The most effective hole for MPO was #18. It added more to the information content of the final total scores than any other hole.

The most random hole seemed to be #9. Despite the huge scoring spread width on that hole, it contributed very little to the final sorting of players. Which makes me wonder if the back-up was worth the wait.

In contrast, the FPO holes offered a lot of chances to get a low score that not too many other players got. Even though there were a lot fewer FPO players, the FPO course gave out just about as many different scores to FPO as the MPO course did to MPO. Without the cluster at the top.

There were a couple of holes on the FPO course that actually destroyed information. Holes #13 and #16 pinched most players into a score of 4, and any lower or higher scores seemed to be doled out mostly by luck.

 

[biscoe]

But, hey! Drama is more important than actual competition, right? (At least until the top players figure out that all the skills they've honed won't help them win, so they stop showing up.)

The most effective hole for MPO was #18. It added more to the information content of the final total scores than any other hole.

For professional sports seeking viewers drama may not be more important than competition but it is **** near. You probably don't enjoy the NCAA basketball tournament because the best teams don't always win.

18 offers information to your desired end in the same way that the courses for the Memorial always have- it is a distance contest with an accuracy component therefore predictable. The more boring the golf the better the odds become that the best throwers of the disc wind up on top. It does serve its real purpose of being an entertaining final hole with a chance for a swing in scores as well though.

The presence of some randomness in outcomes is what gives sports their beauty. Obviously there is a threshold where things become too random but that threshold lies well above zero.

 

[DavidSauls]

While there were no "bad" holes for MPO, what immediately jumps out is that the most popular scores on the MPO course are often also the lowest reasonable score. This makes it hard to pull ahead of the field. For example, even if a player got a legit birdie 2 on hole 1, they didn't really pull ahead much because 59% of the players also got a birdie.

It makes it possible to fall behind the field, though. There's something to be said for watching players stumble -- I certainly remember, in other sports, not just the great plays that won, but the mistakes that lost.

(Thanks for running the numbers and posting them).

 

[Steve West]

For professional sports seeking viewers drama may not be more important than competition but it is **** near. You probably don't enjoy the NCAA basketball tournament because the best teams don't always win.

18 offers information to your desired end in the same way that the courses for the Memorial always have- it is a distance contest with an accuracy component therefore predictable. The more boring the golf the better the odds become that the best throwers of the disc wind up on top. It does serve its real purpose of being an entertaining final hole with a chance for a swing in scores as well though.

The presence of some randomness in outcomes is what gives sports their beauty. Obviously there is a threshold where things become too random but that threshold lies well above zero.

I actually agree with all that. For this course, I'm more concerned with the absence of the chance for good luck. To use the NCAA analogy, it would be like if all the teams were limited to a score of no more than 70 to create "excitement".

 

[araytx]

I understand why, but I hope they'd prioritize private courses (maybe they are? IDK) over driving ranges.

One other issue DGPT needs to consider (IMHO) is how many events will be on temp courses. DG'ers in general like to play nice looking courses they have seen on camera, so the more of their events that end up being temp courses, the less this will happen. I would love to play the Ledgestone Lake Eureka layout, but will likely never be able to.

Conversely, we also like watching pros play on courses we are familiar with, so if they are always playing on courses no one but 1000+ rated players have tried, that will impact viewership.

That's why I like the Idlewild and Toboggan events so much, I am very familiar with both courses, and really can appreciate the drives the pros make.

Just something to think about...

Interesting seeing two opinions on what DGPT should do being so divergent. Developing and using private courses with all the challenging elements AND playing on courses everyone has access to just feels like (imho) they are antithetical to one another.

I've never played there or even looked it up--is the normal layout quite different than what we see? Kind of like Lake Eureka?

It's the exact same layout as normal. Back in 2017 before DGPT was this big, the age-protected divisions played on the same day and I got to play it (MP50 then)

Wow...

Just saw that Jared Stoll of Michigan cleared the woods on 17 3X this past weekend.

He took a 3 on a made 27 footer after his drive went OB on the green.
He took a 3 on a missed C1 putt after his drive landed in bounds.
And he took a 4 on a missed C1 putt after his drive went OB on the green.

Seeing someone able to do it three consecutive rounds... would anybody be surprised if more guys with less confidence in their overhand accuracy chose to just let'er rip and fly the green next year? Or is his power just substantially more to the point that other guys are way too afraid they won't get over the trees and will wind up totally screwed?

Woj,

It's been tried before several times that I know, though I HAVEN'T seen the tomahawk version. I've seen lefty spike hyzers and righty anhyzers over the top. Once a couple years back at WACO, Ricky tried anny over the top in the final round trying to eagle it, came up just short of getting back inbounds, so he had a mark up against the OB woods (before the optional relief rule about pulling back on the LOP if OB). So his next throw was another anny over the top this time with a tougher angle because he was 1 meter from those woods. Ironically he stuck it on the green and got a par 4.

 

[ChrisWoj]

Interesting seeing two opinions on what DGPT should do being so divergent. Developing and using private courses with all the challenging elements AND playing on courses everyone has access to just feels like (imho) they are antithetical to one another.



It's the exact same layout as normal. Back in 2017 before DGPT was this big, the age-protected divisions played on the same day and I got to play it (MP50 then)




Woj,

It's been tried before several times that I know, though I HAVEN'T seen the tomahawk version. I've seen lefty spike hyzers and righty anhyzers over the top. Once a couple years back at WACO, Ricky tried anny over the top in the final round trying to eagle it, came up just short of getting back inbounds, so he had a mark up against the OB woods (before the optional relief rule about pulling back on the LOP if OB). So his next throw was another anny over the top this time with a tougher angle because he was 1 meter from those woods. Ironically he stuck it on the green and got a par 4.

I'm just thinking if you're worried about being one of the 28% or so of the scores taking 4 or worse... You could do a lot worse than trying to fly the in bound area down there. If you can reliably avoid getting knocked down early it definitely feels like a simple approach for par.

 

[ejvogie]

Interesting seeing two opinions on what DGPT should do being so divergent. Developing and using private courses with all the challenging elements AND playing on courses everyone has access to just feels like (imho) they are antithetical to one another.

IMO, "private" and "everyone has access" don't have to be mutually exclusive. See: Flip City, Maple Hill, Rollin Ridge, Bucksnort, Hawk Hollow, Blue Ribbon Pines, Harmon Hills,...

 

[txmxer]

I really liked the "Birdie Zone" (not sure what it was actually called) where they showed a satellite view of the hole and the locations of the 4 drives.
I think it was only used on hole #1 each day. I imagine it would be difficult to do this during live coverage which is why it was only done on one hole.

I liked that as well. I know they used it on 17 and I think a few others.

Ps, I think they used the drone for that.

 

[Flick Maniac]

Discdots3D

 

[txmxer]

But, hey! Drama is more important than actual competition, right? (At least until the top players figure out that all the skills they've honed won't help them win, so they stop showing up.)

What skill challenge/requirement was missing from Waco that would divide the players?

The course offers tight lines, horrendous rough, difficult "greens" and it doesn't heavily favor right or left handed players. Typically weather is a more significant issue than this year. Even when the wind picked up, it wasn't continuous, nor was it blowing as hard as it normally does.

So, I'll ask again, what is missing from Waco in your opinion?

 

[Steve West]

What skill challenge/requirement was missing from Waco that would divide the players?

The course offers tight lines, horrendous rough, difficult "greens" and it doesn't heavily favor right or left handed players. Typically weather is a more significant issue than this year. Even when the wind picked up, it wasn't continuous, nor was it blowing as hard as it normally does.

So, I'll ask again, what is missing from Waco in your opinion?

Slightly less tight lines, slightly less horrendous rough, slightly less difficult "greens", slightly less distance, so that a few players on each hole could get a score lower than the pack.

 

[txmxer]

Slightly less tight lines, slightly less horrendous rough, slightly less difficult "greens", slightly less distance, so that a few players on each hole could get a score lower than the pack.

Slightly less tight lines, slightly less horrendous rough, slightly less difficult "greens"

As opposed to what course? How many courses and which ones do you believe meet all three of those criteria?

Particularly the greens. Lots of elevation, water adjacent, trees--not all of course, but on many holes.

 

[araytx]

IMO, "private" and "everyone has access" don't have to be mutually exclusive. See: Flip City, Maple Hill, Rollin Ridge, Bucksnort, Hawk Hollow, Blue Ribbon Pines, Harmon Hills,...

We might disagree, but it seemed like the poster was talking about private courses WITH all the intentional design elements needed for appropriate DGPT challenge on every hole. That by design would include dedicated areas for spectators in those tough tightly wooded holes (like Idlewild/Maple Hill has for example). THAT course will likely be difficult to both keep up/in shape while still providing access to all (b/c it'll be expensive to make).

 

[Steve West]

Slightly less tight lines, slightly less horrendous rough, slightly less difficult "greens"

As opposed to what course? How many courses and which ones do you believe meet all three of those criteria?

Particularly the greens. Lots of elevation, water adjacent, trees--not all of course, but on many holes.

I'm just saying WACO doesn't let many players score better than the pack. And, loosening any of these on the holes where the highest percent of players are getting the lowest score would help, it wouldn't take all of them on all holes.

 

[txmxer]

I'm just saying WACO doesn't let many players score better than the pack. And, loosening any of these on the holes where the highest percent of players are getting the lowest score would help, it wouldn't take all of them on all holes.

You are suggesting it would be better if they made the course easier?

 

[Steve West]

You are suggesting it would be better if they made the course easier?

Li'l bit, yeah.

On about half the holes.

 

[JoeyH]

I was thinking about something after the tournament. I was interested in seeing how the scores compared over the past seven years we have been part of the pro tour. I did leave out 2020 due to the tournament being shortened to only 2 rounds.

MPO Score Top 10 Separation Top 50 Separation FPO Score Top 10 Separation
2017 167 10 28 190 28
2018 168 8 20 194 31
2019 158 12 29 189 25
2021 163 12 19 185 19
2022 166 8 18 192 11
2023 158 8 17 187 9

Score totals are fairly close and are probably affected by playing condition somewhat. It looks to me that the level of play from the field, seems to be improving more than the top players. It looks especially true in the FPO. I'm assuming that has quite a bit to do with scoring separation. I'm sure Steve will comment on this and I would like to hear his take.