Who is Using Tech Disc and is it Accurate?

[dmoore1998]

I definitely throw FURTHER with a run-up, just my disc speed isn't quite as good. I spend a good deal of time doing one-steps in my field work, I was just surprised that the disc speed was slightly better...I had imagined it was likely slightly worse given I throw 50-75 feet shorter. My accuracy on one-steps is horrendous though. Even short putter shots I almost always do a "run up" (even if it's horribly slow). That's one of the things I'm hoping to work on in the offseason is a one-step or standstill for the short touch shots.

I was definitely surprised though...better nose angle, better launch angle, better spin, more disc speed...and trying to figure out how in the heck that means I throw it shorter. My only real thought was that it's possible that my runup/timing inside my shed with a net in a more enclosed space may be different than what I do out in the wild. Or it's just possible to have literally every metric be better with a one-step and still not throw it as far (but again, I haven't figured out how that works yet).

 

[Nick Carroll]

Something to think about, Josh from OT was able to yeet a disc over 60mph with terrible form, but all arm. So clearly there's a ton of leeway in terms of what's needed to put speed on the disc. The key is doing as many of the correct things as possible, with as few of the incorrect things, so you get easier distance, and more of it.

 

[Sheep]

This is only true if you're not able to transfer the momentum through your x-step. Most people can't do it at all. I assume anyone who can do it has their own "speed limit" based on their form and athletic ability. Faster might not necessarily mean better for everyone—but many smooth, horizontally-focused throwers like Paul, Simon, and Eagle put significant speed into their longest shots.

Only to say—I don't think the advice is as simple as run-ups are worse or more speed is worse.

Oh for sure.

But to be fair why its an issue is generally to much going on, and timing gets way worse.

When you start making your body move far beyond its abilities to stay in time/balance/etc, you might still perform said task, you just perform it very poorly.

This is just good advice to newer players mainly, because a lot of players out there feel like they cannot throw far with a runup, but they never honestly try and throw far from standstills. And generally their shots are far more controled, better angles and disc work, better nose control, all the things. From a standstill.

But they continue to do "run ups" and yeet. Vs just access the better mechanics they have from a standstill.

It's just something I've always found amusing.

Because you dont need to "run" to brace good.
But that goes into brace mechanics.

I'd rather have low effort, low impact, high speed but look dumb standing still vs High impact, high effort low speed, just so I can look accepted in other disc golfers.

There is a level of "want to feel like the rest" when it comes to disc golfing.
It's generally why we practice practice practice, but it doesn't translate onto the course. Because our brain is stuck trying to impress others by trying to hard.

 

[Sheep]

I definitely throw FURTHER with a run-up, just my disc speed isn't quite as good. I spend a good deal of time doing one-steps in my field work, I was just surprised that the disc speed was slightly better...I had imagined it was likely slightly worse given I throw 50-75 feet shorter. My accuracy on one-steps is horrendous though. Even short putter shots I almost always do a "run up" (even if it's horribly slow). That's one of the things I'm hoping to work on in the offseason is a one-step or standstill for the short touch shots.

I was definitely surprised though...better nose angle, better launch angle, better spin, more disc speed...and trying to figure out how in the heck that means I throw it shorter. My only real thought was that it's possible that my runup/timing inside my shed with a net in a more enclosed space may be different than what I do out in the wild. Or it's just possible to have literally every metric be better with a one-step and still not throw it as far (but again, I haven't figured out how that works yet).

Yeah, as long as you didn't take it as a dig.

An inertia brace has its benefits in the kinetic chain vs a standstill which is highly mechanically driven.

 

[RowingBoats]

I'd rather have low effort, low impact, high speed but look dumb standing still vs High impact, high effort low speed, just so I can look accepted in other disc golfers.

Haha. At this point, being 100% stand-still, even off the tee, is part of my identity in my league.

 

[timothy42b]

This makes me giggle.
But dont take it personally.

I've screamed from mountain tops about people and runups. Seabass does, Brychanus does.

We "think" were getting more by running around, but it's quite amusing how much you loose if your timing is good.

I got to wondering about other sports. Ball golfers don't run, baseball batters and pitchers don't run. Discus and javelin players do.

A 175 g disc thrown a 70 mph has kinetic energy of about 86 Joules. (Some of these numbers are mine and some off the internet; some include rotational energy but most are linear speed only)

A golf ball at tour average is about 125 J

A pitched baseball, 90 mph, 117 J.

A batted baseball, 208 J. But wait, the bat had 448 before impact. From a one-step swing.

And what about runup sports, discus and javelin? I found 354 J for discus and 392 for javelin, but this chart has slightly different numbers:

Kinetic Energy of Human-propelled Objects – Thoughts on Energy

At any rate, there isn't an obvious reason why we can't throw really far with a coil and step like baseball does.

 

[HyzerRoc]

A 175 g disc thrown a 70 mph has kinetic energy of about 86 Joules.

A pitched baseball, 90 mph, 117 J.

And what about runup sports, discus and javelin? I found 354 J for discus and 392 for javelin, but this chart has slightly different numbers:

Discus and Javelin weight more, therefore it should be comparatively easier to get more energy on them through muscles, something we cant do with frisbees.


I ran the same calculation for this throw, assuming Anthony Barela used a 175g disc for it and it comes out to 132 joules. However that is the highest measured speed that I know of in discgolf and baseballers can throw do 105 mph balls.

Anyone know what speed Ryan Sheldon can throw a submarine baseball vs. a forehand disc? I googled some but couldnt find something on it.

 

[HyzerRoc]

Just kept on googling and according to this video



Ryan Sheldon used to throw "low 80s" early in his career as a baseball player however the style of throw is not specified. He has also thrown a 82 mph forehand during a tournament round.

Now I gotta wonder if people throwing 105 mph baseballs could do the same with forehands.

 

[Sheep]

I got to wondering about other sports. Ball golfers don't run, baseball batters and pitchers don't run. Discus and javelin players do.

A 175 g disc thrown a 70 mph has kinetic energy of about 86 Joules. (Some of these numbers are mine and some off the internet; some include rotational energy but most are linear speed only)

A golf ball at tour average is about 125 J

A pitched baseball, 90 mph, 117 J.

A batted baseball, 208 J. But wait, the bat had 448 before impact. From a one-step swing.

And what about runup sports, discus and javelin? I found 354 J for discus and 392 for javelin, but this chart has slightly different numbers:

Kinetic Energy of Human-propelled Objects – Thoughts on Energy

At any rate, there isn't an obvious reason why we can't throw really far with a coil and step like baseball does.

There is this fella down in Arizona. His name is Graham Russel.
Graham throws 450+ on standstills.

This is where I get a bit of a giggle about pro's crying when you bring up foot fault rules and "okay, lets move to standstill after the tee pad"

and they are over there crying "But we wont be able to throw as far!" ... my thoughts on this are far far deeper than what I posted in my video on foot faults the other day and how stupid people are about them.

But we are using inertia to generate the brace.
You can theoretically 1 step and get close to the same power in a sense.

But lets look at it in a slightly different way as well. Because Graham shows us you can make massive power from a standstill with good mechanics.

The movement of the x-step and such Carries us "through" the brace.
We are trying to arrest only so much of the momentum and drive it into our kinetic chain and also carry it "through" the shot.

I look at stuff like Javilin throwing as a good source of what bracing and driving kinetic chains can provide. but it's a different thing. A throw isn't necessarily a swing. And if we watch baseball pitchers, they are also carrying through the pitch. Because some of what they are doing is "longevity" while I'd not really consider javalin throwers to be looking at longevity. It's 2 or 3 shots and done. That Gif that brychanus posts. That dude totally fucks his knee, but he put EVERYTHING into it. Didn't hold back.
If you want to continue to some level, you have to hold back.

Which is why we got guys like eagle with bummed elbows hyperextending their arms. I swear almost all big throwers are wearing elbow braces now because they are pushing their bodies really hard.

Anyways, we can carry inertia through the shot with a runup/walk up.

And we can carry a pure inertia brace, such as like james conrad, or drive slower pushed brace like drew, paul, simon and such.
But as I've also explained before.

If you are driving a brace from slower movements pushing into the brace then pushing back, you an always add a longer movement to drive higher inertia.
IE, see paul and simon when they bomb.

While conrad always has to rely on throwing his inertia into the brace.

 

[Sheep]

Discus and Javelin weight more, therefore it should be comparatively easier to get more energy on them through muscles, something we cant do with frisbees.


I ran the same calculation for this throw, assuming Anthony Barela used a 175g disc for it and it comes out to 132 joules. However that is the highest measured speed that I know of in discgolf and baseballers can throw do 105 mph balls.

Anyone know what speed Ryan Sheldon can throw a submarine baseball vs. a forehand disc? I googled some but couldnt find something on it.

I forgot who it was, but there was a sidearm pitcher posting videos during covid and... good lord i've never seen discs scream like that from any disc golfer ever.

I'm surprised the stamp didn't peel off the dude threw it so hard.

 

[sidewinder22]

Graham used to be on DGCR.

There was video of another guy throwing 500' standstill in my Standstill and Figure 8 Motion thread, but vid seems to be private or deleted now.

This Malaska vid seems relevant to the speed discussion.

 

[HyzerRoc]

I forgot who it was, but there was a sidearm pitcher posting videos during covid and... good lord i've never seen discs scream like that from any disc golfer ever.

I'm surprised the stamp didn't peel off the dude threw it so hard.

Any chance you can dig that up?

Graham used to be on DGCR.

Do you remember his username? Then I can look this guy up myself.

 

[sidewinder22]

Any chance you can dig that up?


Do you remember his username? Then I can look this guy up myself.

gcrussell4

www.dgcoursereview.com

 

[Nick Carroll]

Speaking for myself, a 52 year old man playing rec-level disc golf, I walk-up on the tee. Either a full walk-up, a 3-step (really just the X-Step) though if the footing is bad, I'll resort to a standstill. When I'm off the tee, I'm a lot more likely to drop down to the 3-step or standstill, as it's still a challenge to place my plant foot legally behind the lie when I'm moving.

I lose next to no distance moving from 4-5 step walk-up to a 3-step, and I'm generally a little more accurate. Wooded tunnel shots, and terrain issues will usually force me to dial it down. When I standstill, I am losing 10-20% of distance, though I have a much better chance of hitting my line. I'm just glad I did enough personal testing to suss out these details, because it's helped me significantly. I'll be testing these differences a lot when these devices finally come in.

 

[Sheep]

Graham used to be on DGCR.

There was video of another guy throwing 500' standstill in my Standstill and Figure 8 Motion thread, but vid seems to be private or deleted now.

This Malaska vid seems relevant to the speed discussion.

He got super busy with family stuff.

The last time I think he played a major was pre-covid.

He did build a course here the other year. he lives in ... arizona now. I forget exactly where.
Super dude from what I'm told. Never met him personally.

 

[Sheep]

Any chance you can dig that up?

It was on instagram, so probably not.

I think it was posted in here at one point possibly as well. It's hard to remember 4 years ago essentially.

I just remember baseball side arm picture.
Sunny outside.
I do believe the disc was Innova. People complaining about how he's gonna blow his arm out.
And there were tree's and he just laserbeams one for like 400-450 at what seemed like mach 2 down a row of tree's.

 

[Sheep]

Speaking for myself, a 52 year old man playing rec-level disc golf, I walk-up on the tee. Either a full walk-up, a 3-step (really just the X-Step) though if the footing is bad, I'll resort to a standstill. When I'm off the tee, I'm a lot more likely to drop down to the 3-step or standstill, as it's still a challenge to place my plant foot legally behind the lie when I'm moving.

I lose next to no distance moving from 4-5 step walk-up to a 3-step, and I'm generally a little more accurate. Wooded tunnel shots, and terrain issues will usually force me to dial it down. When I standstill, I am losing 10-20% of distance, though I have a much better chance of hitting my line. I'm just glad I did enough personal testing to suss out these details, because it's helped me significantly. I'll be testing these differences a lot when these devices finally come in.

The 3 step is all like 95% of players need. Not a "run up" but..
you know.
We should just start calling it a 3 step, vs a "run up" cause... Run up is such a terrible term anyways.
I've always said Walk-Up, because I want to encourage the action I'm saying, not put a false name on an action. whatever, you know what I mean.

I've watched so many people just try and run at their brace for years and get nowhere, but I've noticed as well that a lot more people have slowed down to a 3 or 4 step style walk up. I even did the run up stupidity at one time.

And we were talking about in here with Josh I think it was in here... Was it . whatever.
Talking about throwing with your arm at high speeds.

I threw further when I threw poorly with my arm and muscled shots. I also scored better with bad form as well. I also, at that point, blew my shoulder out 2 times throwing incorrect. Which is why I'm such an A-hole about muscling throws in disc golf.

Point being, good form is for longevity and health, not necessarily distance and score.
We just want good form to have the bi-product of good score and distance.

 

[Nick Carroll]

Agree 100%. At this point I'm for safe and efficient, then effective. Distance honestly I couldn't care much about. I'm not playing pro-level courses, and quite frankly I'm fine with rec-level disc golf. I'm just trying to clean up my form and throw more accurately.

 

[Sheep]

Agree 100%. At this point I'm for safe and efficient, then effective. Distance honestly I couldn't care much about. I'm not playing pro-level courses, and quite frankly I'm fine with rec-level disc golf. I'm just trying to clean up my form and throw more accurately.

I like distance to be a biproduct of all the other work I put in.

I want that accuracy and I wanna do it as lazy as possible with the lowest impact to my body.

 

[drk_evns]

anyone experimented with a wide rail and manipulating spin rates on purpose with the tech disc?