• Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
    It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)

DGPT: 2019 Memorial Championship

Man, I wish Paul & Ricky were battling for first instead of fourth. It's high drama whenever they're on a lead card together. No two human beings on the planet despise each other more than those two.

Oh, I dunno about that.. Not saying they like each other, far from it. But 'despise'?

'Course, I can go into a few divorce courts and find some real hatreds...
 
Really? I think Risley is hilarious

and he stays more on topic then one of the two sets that do CCDG. in the one of San Francisco Open CCDG gets off topic when it is obvious that the top player is going to win, has a 13 stokes down on everybody in final 9 holes. I did not care for him and the other guy basically had to carry the commentary.
 
I think it's a west coast thing, and Arizona is west coast, no matter what your map may tell you.

It is more a California and Arizona thing, more an old person thing in those states as the og disc golfers of those states still live there and are used to the 2 meter rule. Personally I like it for a tree or two that would be dangerous to climb on course but not the whole course, that PDGA bans use of it on whole courses.
 
It is more a California and Arizona thing, more an old person thing in those states as the og disc golfers of those states still live there and are used to the 2 meter rule. Personally I like it for a tree or two that would be dangerous to climb on course but not the whole course, that PDGA bans use of it on whole courses.

I bet If this was in effect then these two states just declare a single tree on each hole not in the 2 meter rule, one that does not need a 2 meter rule like a palm of some kind that less then 10% of field get stuck in or another tall tree that does not have a branches until high up and less then 10% of Field gets stuck in.

Rule for PDGA would have to be no more then 25% of the trees being allowed on the entire course as the 2 meter rule in effect and they must be marked somehow obvious.
 
I bet If this was in effect then these two states just declare a single tree on each hole not in the 2 meter rule, one that does not need a 2 meter rule like a palm of some kind that less then 10% of field get stuck in or another tall tree that does not have a branches until high up and less then 10% of Field gets stuck in.

Rule for PDGA would have to be no more then 25% of the trees being allowed on the entire course as the 2 meter rule in effect and they must be marked somehow obvious.

Or you could just not have the rule altogether 'cause it's stupid. If the real concern is people climbing trees to get discs then the TD just has to say, "New rule for the tourney, no climbing trees to get discs during the tourney for safety reasons." Done.
 
Or you could just not have the rule altogether 'cause it's stupid. If the real concern is people climbing trees to get discs then the TD just has to say, "New rule for the tourney, no climbing trees to get discs during the tourney for safety reasons." Done.

Makes even more sense, just ban it for all though a particular tree on each course or hole should still be allowed for a 2 meter thing. a few trees on some courses have just too many players over 65% of the top Amateur and the Pros would be getting a 2 meter rule on if it was in effect and you are trying to limit on the course by making the players pay attention. Though some trees if 85% would be getting a 2 meter rule on if it was in effect or more could be due to wind and other factors outside the players control so I would pay attention to see if that is the case if one is going to be getting it due to factors outside the players control.

I had this at the South Dakota State Disc Golf Championships in 2008 my dad one of the directors they keep the location same place for 2 years made a tree have the 2 meter effect as off the tee too many players including a few of the pros were getting stuck in the tree. So to try to make people contentious of the tree we added a 2 meter rule to that tree only and down went the percent of players that had a disc stuck in tree by about 10% or so.
 
JohnE is such a badass. How many other guys on this leaderboard are over 35? Or even 30? Such respect for that man.

Man I gotta say, watching him play and seeing his scores make me happy and gives me hope maybe in the next 6 years when I get to my 40's I'll still be improving. The guy's a machine.
 
An average of 1042.75 and 1043.5 was only good enough for a tie for 9th...:eek:

McBeth averaged 1059.5 and only got 4th...

Eagle had an average of 1090.7 for the first 3 rounds and overall was 1076.75...

I wonder what the highest average for a 4+ round event is?
 
Shusterick had an average of 1081 winning at the Memorial in 2013... but actually had a lower average than McBeth's 1081.25

paul beat that in '12 with 1081.5... Man that course gives up some big ratings.
 
Last edited:
I think it's a west coast thing, and Arizona is west coast, no matter what your map may tell you.

West Coast, Seneca Creek in MD and apparently the Hambrick are the places still penalizing random bad luck.

The following is pure supposition on my part: it would not surprise me if the only reason the 2 meter rule still exists is that the head of the Rules Committee is a Californian and has been for many years.
 
Last edited:
I've said it before and I'll say it again...the 2-meter rule as it currently exists is perfect. It makes it a design-oriented option in the same vein as OB, hazards, relief areas, and mandatories. That some areas/courses use it lazily by declaring it in play throughout the entire course rather than just in the specific areas of the course where it actually makes sense shouldn't be held against the rule itself. Poorly designed OB doesn't lead to discussions of getting rid of that rule...poorly designed use of the 2-meter rule shouldn't lead to its removal from the book either.
 
If you're 2m up in a tree it is a self-penalizing situation therefor an additional penalty stroke is just punitive. Much like making thick shule OB its just unneeded IMHO. If a disc is 2m+ up that means one of two things: it was a crap throw or the disc was going to fly MUCH further than it did. Besides, most of the time the spot under the disc is terrible to throw from because its in the middle of thick brush or the tree itself interferes with the next throw in some manner.
 
Just watched all the videos i couldn't see live, and i must say i liked the FPO more than MPO.

MPO is mostly a CTP competition, 4 players. . Hyzer, Hyzer, Hyzer, Hyzer. .putt. putt, putt, putt and maybe another putt. . and to the next hole.
More different lines and shots on the FPO side, much more fun to watch
 
If you're 2m up in a tree it is a self-penalizing situation therefor an additional penalty stroke is just punitive. Much like making thick shule OB its just unneeded IMHO. If a disc is 2m+ up that means one of two things: it was a crap throw or the disc was going to fly MUCH further than it did. Besides, most of the time the spot under the disc is terrible to throw from because its in the middle of thick brush or the tree itself interferes with the next throw in some manner.

I agree with most of that. Which is why I think making the 2m rule a blanket rule for the whole course is lazy and poor design. BUT there are instances where using the rule and the penalty to dissuade certain types of shots makes sense.

It's the classic example that folks who like the rule will cite...a green with a big tree on it where some players might find it easier to bomb a drive at it and hit the tree, figuring as long as the disc hits a branch and drops down on to the green, they'll be in good shape. And if the disc gets stuck, they mark below and make their putt anyway. No penalty, that's a deuce (or a three if it's a par-4 length hole) and they're rewarded for making a less than accurate shot. With the penalty in play, aiming to hit the tree is no different than trying to carry over an OB instead of throwing along the inbounds line. If you make it through and the disc falls on the green, no problem. If you don't, and it sticks, you're penalized.

But there's no need to make the trees 300 feet away from the basket and 50 feet off the fairway carry the same penalty just to have a risk-reward type penalty on that one green. If anything were to be changed about the rule, I'd remove the option to make it blanket across the entire course. Force designers and TDs to be as specific about where the 2m penalty applies as they have to be about OB areas.
 
I agree with most of that. Which is why I think making the 2m rule a blanket rule for the whole course is lazy and poor design. BUT there are instances where using the rule and the penalty to dissuade certain types of shots makes sense.

It's the classic example that folks who like the rule will cite...a green with a big tree on it where some players might find it easier to bomb a drive at it and hit the tree, figuring as long as the disc hits a branch and drops down on to the green, they'll be in good shape. And if the disc gets stuck, they mark below and make their putt anyway. No penalty, that's a deuce (or a three if it's a par-4 length hole) and they're rewarded for making a less than accurate shot. With the penalty in play, aiming to hit the tree is no different than trying to carry over an OB instead of throwing along the inbounds line. If you make it through and the disc falls on the green, no problem. If you don't, and it sticks, you're penalized.

But there's no need to make the trees 300 feet away from the basket and 50 feet off the fairway carry the same penalty just to have a risk-reward type penalty on that one green. If anything were to be changed about the rule, I'd remove the option to make it blanket across the entire course. Force designers and TDs to be as specific about where the 2m penalty applies as they have to be about OB areas.

I get what you are saying about a big tree on the green but the reality is, you are using the natural elements to your advantage. Much like hyzering into a slope to get the disc to stick in the ground. Or using a low throw with a wide rimmed driver to skip off of hard ground to gain distance or direction. Or utilizing a roller when the groundskeeper has cut the grass really short. Or like we saw at the Ledgestone last year, Ried Frescura was intentionally skipping discs off the water to get them to stick to the green on 17. I say if a part of the course can be used to gain an advantage then that's just smart play. Why penalize it?
 
Top