WHY WORLDS

[WildlyMediocre]

I described it as "...the dreamland where we become a spectator sport...", because there's little evidence that people want to watch disc golf, in anything like sufficient numbers to support it. Lots of people have put a lot of effort into trying. (I'm of the school of thought that disc golf isn't inherently interesting to watch, and will never draw more than a tiny following, in person or online).

If anyone ever cracks than nut and proves me wrong, it will of course be a game-changer: with spectator and sponsor dollars, we could do a lot of things differently. Including having more command over how and when and where the championships are held.

True enough. No one is building stands for people to watch the 18th hole at Maple Hill. Many of our courses aren't designed for massive gallery numbers (or even mediocre galleries). Ours was never really designed to be a spectator sport.

On the flip side, we do have a step up on some of the other professional sports in our wheelhouse (as much as you can pin down different levels of pro sports). We do have a growing exposure. You don't see pro paintball or ultimate frisbee on the SC Top 10.

Now, I know a lot of people who say sports like soccer or tennis are boring to watch. But there's enough of an audience to warrant $60 MLS game tickets and $500 weekend passes to the US Open. Personally, I would rather watch golf on TV than in person because I can watch it cut back between different players, see technology map out the shots, cameras follow the ball's flight, etc. It's certainly a much more dynamic experience than camping out on a fairway and hoping Rory waves in your group's direction after 4 hours.

But we do have events like the GBO which are becoming strong destination events. Maybe a hybrid situation? What if, for example, the GBO did everything it does now but the PDGA makes the Open division a small, invite-only, premier title like the Worlds? Two days at the end of the week-long event. $50 to watch. You're already down there to play, would pay to stay and watch the top 16 pros go at it?

 

[lyleoross]

I haven't gone through the bowels of this thread, but David Sauls comes closest by what I've read over the years. The World Championships wasn't started as a way of crowning the best, it is a social event. Chuck would have a better feel for that than me. It was an opportunity for the community, or leaders in the community (leaders including top players) to come together. If you don't do something like that, growing the sport in any way is going to be tough as each region would have it's own vibe.

At this point, the Worlds has less value - if my interpretation is correct, and you need something different. Last year there was a thread discussion a grand slam situation with four or five major events meant to define the best players. EO, USDGC, Worlds, and DeLa or similar. The points in those events defines the best or season winner.

 

[DavidSauls]

True enough. No one is building stands for people to watch the 18th hole at Maple Hill. Many of our courses aren't designed for massive gallery numbers (or even mediocre galleries). Ours was never really designed to be a spectator sport.

On the flip side, we do have a step up on some of the other professional sports in our wheelhouse (as much as you can pin down different levels of pro sports). We do have a growing exposure. You don't see pro paintball or ultimate frisbee on the SC Top 10.

Now, I know a lot of people who say sports like soccer or tennis are boring to watch. But there's enough of an audience to warrant $60 MLS game tickets and $500 weekend passes to the US Open. Personally, I would rather watch golf on TV than in person because I can watch it cut back between different players, see technology map out the shots, cameras follow the ball's flight, etc. It's certainly a much more dynamic experience than camping out on a fairway and hoping Rory waves in your group's direction after 4 hours.

But we do have events like the GBO which are becoming strong destination events. Maybe a hybrid situation? What if, for example, the GBO did everything it does now but the PDGA makes the Open division a small, invite-only, premier title like the Worlds? Two days at the end of the week-long event. $50 to watch. You're already down there to play, would pay to stay and watch the top 16 pros go at it?

The argument, and one that I agree with, is we're destined to be an ever-growing participation sport, but not a spectator sport.

Steve Dodge and the DGPT have been working hard to make it a spectator sport, in person or online, including a limited-field finals. Innova has poured a bunch of money into the USDGC over the years, creating some nice galleries of disc golfers. Videographers are working hard to produce ever-better live and post-produced videos, hoping to reach a bigger audience. So far, all have had very limited success.

If I am to be wrong, I think it will come from something that's pretty much off-the-radar now: Schools. College competitions, with their built-in fan bases, high schools, youth leagues, getting kids hooked, and kids are natural-born fans. Perhaps all of that will create a critical mass. I don't think so but, if I'm wrong, I think that's where it'll come from.

I also think that a match-play event will be much more dramatic than stroke play, and has a better chance of gaining eyeballs.

In the meantime, we're a participation sport, and should keep that in mind. Worlds, the tour, and everything else are primarily for the participants, and should be made best for them, first.

 

[lyleoross]

The argument, and one that I agree with, is we're destined to be an ever-growing participation sport, but not a spectator sport.

Steve Dodge and the DGPT have been working hard to make it a spectator sport, in person or online, including a limited-field finals. Innova has poured a bunch of money into the USDGC over the years, creating some nice galleries of disc golfers. Videographers are working hard to produce ever-better live and post-produced videos, hoping to reach a bigger audience. So far, all have had very limited success.

If I am to be wrong, I think it will come from something that's pretty much off-the-radar now: Schools. College competitions, with their built-in fan bases, high schools, youth leagues, getting kids hooked, and kids are natural-born fans. Perhaps all of that will create a critical mass. I don't think so but, if I'm wrong, I think that's where it'll come from.

I also think that a match-play event will be much more dramatic than stroke play, and has a better chance of gaining eyeballs.

In the meantime, we're a participation sport, and should keep that in mind. Worlds, the tour, and everything else are primarily for the participants, and should be made best for them, first.

I can see us being a spectator sport. Better than golf in fact. First, you have to be able to connect to the sport. Once that golfer hits that ball, you're searching. It's a bit like hockey. The disc is easy to find and it's easy to relate to a good throw. Second, it's easy to see errors and how they play out. Watching scrambles is fun and unique. For a non-action sport, it is by definition, better than many. That doesn't mean success, just that the disc is big enough and the scope is small enough, that is each hole, that you don't inherently leave the fans out of the action.

I've always argued that we couldn't grow the sport through participation. I will stand by that. Distance or road running is the example I give. Running doesn't make a good spectator sport unless it's on a track. You can't control the crowd, and you can't charge to watch, or at least not well. Small vendors can make some money, but only from food. No one buys running gear at a running event. But road racing allows unlimited participation, in theory. A major event starts at 2,000 participants and goes up. We can't do that. We max out at 500 or so. If you get up to 1,000, logistics kills you. That limits us to revenue based on spectator dollars.

Furthermore, you can't beat trophy discs as a connect to the event item (once we get there). It's ready made. So, the potential is there, and I admit, I never saw that in my youth, i.e. five years ago.

 

[DavidSauls]

I disagree---and I recognize it's 90% a matter of opinion. I think disc golf is, and always will be, boring to watch, except to the devoted.

I've played golf 3 times, and doubt there'll be a 4th. I find golf vastly more interesting to watch.

Moreover, it's clear that a lot of people do.

The other 10% of my doubt comes from the failure, so far, for anyone to find a way to get people to watch disc golf. We can hardly get disc golfers to watch it. And it's not for lack of trying.

 

[NegaSnapples]

True enough. No one is building stands for people to watch the 18th hole at Maple Hill. Many of our courses aren't designed for massive gallery numbers (or even mediocre galleries). Ours was never really designed to be a spectator sport.

On the flip side, we do have a step up on some of the other professional sports in our wheelhouse (as much as you can pin down different levels of pro sports). We do have a growing exposure. You don't see pro paintball or ultimate frisbee on the SC Top 10.

Now, I know a lot of people who say sports like soccer or tennis are boring to watch. But there's enough of an audience to warrant $60 MLS game tickets and $500 weekend passes to the US Open. Personally, I would rather watch golf on TV than in person because I can watch it cut back between different players, see technology map out the shots, cameras follow the ball's flight, etc. It's certainly a much more dynamic experience than camping out on a fairway and hoping Rory waves in your group's direction after 4 hours.

But we do have events like the GBO which are becoming strong destination events. Maybe a hybrid situation? What if, for example, the GBO did everything it does now but the PDGA makes the Open division a small, invite-only, premier title like the Worlds? Two days at the end of the week-long event. $50 to watch. You're already down there to play, would pay to stay and watch the top 16 pros go at it?

I just want to point out that Ultimate does get on the SC Top 10 at times. I've seen it on there more than DG tbh. Ultimate is growing quickly as a spectator sport. USA ultimate recently signed a TV deal with ESPN: http://www.usaultimate.org/news/usa-ultimate-espn-reach-multi-year-agreement/

It's more of a spectator sport than DG is imo... DG I'm assuming is kind of like golf with no Tiger... you aren't going to have many people who don't play the sport also watch the sport.

 

[DavidSauls]

I've always argued that we couldn't grow the sport through participation. I will stand by that. .

By which, I assume you mean, that we can't grow it as a spectator sport, merely through participation.

Because it can grow and be a very big participation sport, without ever being a spectator sport. There are plenty of other sports that are big on participation, without having any spectators. That's the future I envision for us.

 

[lyleoross]

By which, I assume you mean, that we can't grow it as a spectator sport, merely through participation.

Because it can grow and be a very big participation sport, without ever being a spectator sport. There are plenty of other sports that are big on participation, without having any spectators. That's the future I envision for us.

Nope, it means the primary money generator is participation in the sport. At events.

 

[DavidSauls]

Then I don't understand "We can't grow the sport through participation." I'm missing something. If participation keeps increasing, the sport, as a participation sport, is growing.

What am I missing?

 

[lyleoross]

I disagree---and I recognize it's 90% a matter of opinion. I think disc golf is, and always will be, boring to watch, except to the devoted.

I've played golf 3 times, and doubt there'll be a 4th. I find golf vastly more interesting to watch.

Moreover, it's clear that a lot of people do.

The other 10% of my doubt comes from the failure, so far, for anyone to find a way to get people to watch disc golf. We can hardly get disc golfers to watch it. And it's not for lack of trying.

My position is based on two things. First, that it is watchable. This is based on the physical size of the holes and the equipment. That doesn't mean it will be more watchable, just that it's inherently suited to watching, based on other sports. Secondly, five years ago if you'd of told me that there would be any non playing fans at any event, I would have laughed. If I had a 100 million dollars I could hire a marketing expert and move the sport mainstream. It's time or money IMO.

Not every sport is going big, I admit that. And I would have placed disc golf in that category. But what's happened counters that. We will see.

 

[lyleoross]

Then I don't understand "We can't grow the sport through participation." I'm missing something. If participation keeps increasing, the sport, as a participation sport, is growing.

What am I missing?

Most assuredly. What's your goal? The guy who runs the Boston Marathon and his staff all make a good living, all of them. They do it full time. You can't duplicate that in our sport. That means events are based on part time and volunteer work. You also have to have a sales component. The BM has 10,000 runners, each pays 200 bucks. We just can't duplicate that. They don't need spectators, they don't need ad dollars. Participation drives the process.

In disc golf, even at $500 per player, you just can't get participation to drive the process. Single events aren't self sustaining. BG is based on spectators for this reason. Most sports are. So yes, you can grow participation like crazy, but you're not gonna get the cash flow to drive a big picture process. You'll just add more and more events without the ability to go really big. That may be good enough, but it doesn't fit the model that members ask of the PDGA. You're not gonna grow a Pro class making good money, through and through. Below three or four guys, you're annual income is pretty low.

 

[DavidSauls]

Ah, the "money" is what I was missing. Thanks.

 

[lyleoross]

Ah, the "money" is what I was missing. Thanks.

Sorry about that. Show me the money!

 

[lyleoross]

BTW, you're correct participation will grow. But without money infusion you'll reach a balance between volunteers, burnout and player pool. We're not generating enough cash to pull some out of events for pro payout at a higher level. More pros will spread the payout and keep pro pay low overall. You need cashflow from something else. Advertising or fans or a combination there of.

That is, if you get a big enough player pool, outside venders may want to advertise to them. In the past that couldn't happen. The YouTube allows it.

 

[Jabumbo]

I've always been a strong believer that individual sports don't really run on a "season."

Why does the turn of the calendar mean anything? Who says that June is mid-season? There are events going on 12 months a year, so it's not like there is really a true off season. For a player in Australia or South America, June could very well be the last time they can play for a few months.

While I think some of the proposed options for an elite field to compete in a new World Championship are great, I don't think it can really be feasible until you have 4-5 times of that proposed field competing with each other week in and week out.

Imagine if you had this 36 player elite field - can you even come up with 100 names of people that would be able to compete? If it were just a points thing, I could quit my job, sign up for a tourney every weekend and place mid-pack every week and end up as a top qualifier just based on volume alone. I don't think disc golf has the sheer numbers of top end talent to be able to pull something like that off.

 

[schumijr]

To the posts debating on whether it's more interesting as a spectator to watch ball golf versus disc golf, also keep in mind that most PGA golf events are just that - an event - for whatever area they are hosted in. I live near a course that hosts a PGA tournament, and based on experience, a huge portion of the "spectators" are there to see a few impressive shots, meet or see a few celebrity athletes up close (that just happen to be golfers), but mainly there to walk around, enjoy the nice scenery and weather, stop by parties at houses on the course, and just generally hang out. Similar to Indy 500 - it's more about the event/spectacle of it than the actual sporting action.

Now of course there's chicken and egg. At some point it wasn't a spectacle to go to a PGA event... the first crowds were much more diehard golf fans. And there had to be some kind of growth curve that eventually made it into a spectactle/event-for-events-sake type of event. But I think we can all agree disc golf has a long way to go on the curve.

 

[roblee]

If anyone doubts how important Worlds is to those who win, just watch Ricky's wrap-up with Terry. Has he ever been more animated? Or watch JohnE's reaction after wining Pro Master last year. My guess is it's just like that for everybody in every gender, age, & skill level who wins a World title. That's why players want to play Worlds.

 

[brutalbrutus]

True enough. No one is building stands for people to watch the 18th hole at Maple Hill. Many of our courses aren't designed for massive gallery numbers (or even mediocre galleries). Ours was never really designed to be a spectator sport.

On the flip side, we do have a step up on some of the other professional sports in our wheelhouse (as much as you can pin down different levels of pro sports). We do have a growing exposure. You don't see pro paintball or ultimate frisbee on the SC Top 10.

I just want to point out that Ultimate does get on the SC Top 10 at times. I've seen it on there more than DG tbh. Ultimate is growing quickly as a spectator sport. USA ultimate recently signed a TV deal with ESPN: http://www.usaultimate.org/news/usa-ultimate-espn-reach-multi-year-agreement/

It's more of a spectator sport than DG is imo... DG I'm assuming is kind of like golf with no Tiger... you aren't going to have many people who don't play the sport also watch the sport.

The night that ricky made the walk off ace there was an Ultimate play in the SC top10 and ricky wasn't.

 

[araytx]

It's not A CUMULATIVE title, at least not untiul there is some type of qualifying required. It's a single tournament victory. I get that people who've not been around dg for a long time say it feels like "just another NT", but at one point it was the biggest event.

 

[rhatton1]

I get that people who've not been around dg for a long time say it feels like "just another NT", but at one point it was the biggest event.

This year did just feel like another NT and possibly not even as big as some of the others. Previous years have felt different, there has been more hype in the build up and something about the longer format and it almost being an endurance event made it stand out.

When I first started following the sport on line (around 2007) Worlds was the big one and always got me following threads on PDGA or DGR forums, aside from that only USDGC was interesting, often because I knew someone there but also because of staying up till early mornings for the terrible live streams.

Worlds this year felt like a smaller deal than some of the big events in the US (not even majors) and any of the Major European events of the last couple of years.

Maybe it's time for Worlds to jump the pond for a year, freshen things up a bit?