Disc minimalism vs Mold minimalism

[jdggna]

The only benefit I see is the grip is the same for many of your discs. The way I see it, if you're carrying many discs in different stages of wear you're carrying different discs.

I think you aren't appreciating the benefit of having different discs that are the exact same shape as well. I feel like that adds to the value in a very important way: A consistent release. Some discs that compliment each other have very different feels to them. I loved Predators, but the bead was killing my releases, making them dirty as shit. The C-PD doesn't have a bead, and since I was already throwing PDs, switching to it for overstable duties was very easy/natural. I know it isn't the same disc, but it was very easy to switch to and get consistent throws from. Its the same reason I stopped throwing the Wasp. The bead didn't feel right. I just keep a relatively new Z Buzzz in my bag for wind and fades that I used to rely on my Wasp for.

Also, Lithicon is right in saying that mold minimalism keys on finding versatile molds. Practicing mold minimalism with R-Pro Bosses, Stingrays, and Polecats would be pretty pointless.

EDIT: JR, that was a mini-novel. I stopped reading when I realized there were more than two full paragraphs. Headed back to finish it now.

 

[banzai7]

Most people don't play enough rounds to really *know* all the discs they are carrying. If you carry 20 discs, it doesn't matter if you've got 20 molds or 7 molds in diff. weights/plastics/wear. If you don't know how they fly, then they're useless.

The idea is to pick up a versatile disc in base plastic. As it wears, you learn the mold. When it's beat, you pick up a new one, and *you already know how it will fly*.

Is it a magical formula to makes your scores lower? No. But is it a useful exercise for growing players? Yes.

 

[banzai7]

Oh yeah, and there's nothing funnier than seeing someone shank a Roadrunner, and say "I knew I should've thrown my Beast ... either that or my Sidewinder ... or my Valk."

 

[Frank Delicious]

I don't play enough to learn more molds than I already have in my bag.

 

[Frank Delicious]

Mold minimalism is not for everyone. It takes longer to get down good, required you to have more discs on hand and it can get frustrating. If a person wants to have a mold minimalist bag that person needs to be comfortable throwing only 4-6 molds for a while, rotating discs in and out of the bag, and be willing to watch random dudes throw good shots with single use discs. I don't/didn't mind doing those things for a while and I like where my game is because of it. I like having discs that are a year or two old in the bag that I know inside and out and that I have other discs in the bag that are getting there.

I will say that if you think your game would suffer if you had to use a bag consisting only of 1 putter mold, 1 mid mold, 1 fairway driver mold, 1 distance driver mold, and an overstable driver mold then your game would benefit from some mold minimalism. And for the record I don't follow that bag set up anymore but I did for a year or so and really benefited from it.

Plus I love the fact that people think certain rocs/wizards/eagles/preds whatever are too beat up after a while and will trade/sell them to me for next to nothing. That is super useful.

 

[garublador1]

I think the purpose of mold minimalism is really misundestood. The point is not that it's the ideal way to play the game and score your best. The point is not to "learn" discs. The point is to develop as many skills as possible. Once you've developed these skills then it's not nearly as important.

 

[Spike1]

I think the purpose of mold minimalism is really misundestood. The point is not that it's the ideal way to play the game and score your best. The point is not to "learn" discs. The point is to develop as many skills as possible. Once you've developed these skills then it's not nearly as important.

Yes, but don't you mean keeping down the number of discs (including molds), rather than the molds alone? I don't really get the point of using Cyclones in three different plastics and count them as one just to be a mold minimalist. You might as well use three different discs since a Z Cyclone is a totally different thing than an X Cyclone.

 

[juju1]

Yes, but don't you mean keeping down the number of discs (including molds), rather than the molds alone? I don't really get the point of using Cyclones in three different plastics and count them as one just to be a mold minimalist. You might as well use three different discs since a Z Cyclone is a totally different thing than an X Cyclone.

Good point, but who throws Z Cyclones?

 

[Eric O]

nice, JR is back in full effect :lol:
tl/dr

indeed!


As far as mold minimalism, I think garu said it best with fewest words.

I think the purpose of mold minimalism is really misundestood. The point is not that it's the ideal way to play the game and score your best. The point is not to "learn" discs. The point is to develop as many skills as possible. Once you've developed these skills then it's not nearly as important.

 

[garublador1]

Yes, but don't you mean keeping down the number of discs (including molds), rather than the molds alone? I don't really get the point of using Cyclones in three different plastics and count them as one just to be a mold minimalist. You might as well use three different discs since a Z Cyclone is a totally different thing than an X Cyclone.

Good point, but who throws Z Cyclones?

Yeah, pointing out exceptions doesn't make the rule invalid. The fact that Z Cyclones do not fly like Cyclones is one of the reasons they're almost never recommended by people who promoting minimalism.

As has been pointed out by others, utalizing minimalism the way I said requires intelligent mold and plastic choices. You can't do it with any set of molds and plastics. If you don't want to do it, don't do it. Setting up straw man agruments isn't really getting anything accomplished.

 

[Spike1]

Yes, but don't you mean keeping down the number of discs (including molds), rather than the molds alone? I don't really get the point of using Cyclones in three different plastics and count them as one just to be a mold minimalist. You might as well use three different discs since a Z Cyclone is a totally different thing than an X Cyclone.

Good point, but who throws Z Cyclones?

Yeah, pointing out exceptions doesn't make the rule invalid. The fact that Z Cyclones do not fly like Cyclones is one of the reasons they're almost never recommended by people who promoting minimalism.

As has been pointed out by others, utalizing minimalism the way I said requires intelligent mold and plastic choices. You can't do it with any set of molds and plastics. If you don't want to do it, don't do it. Setting up straw man agruments isn't really getting anything accomplished.

It seems as your comments goes for disc minimalism in general. Not about disc minimalism vs. mold minimalism, as the original post was about.

 

[jdggna]

It seems as your comments goes for disc minimalism in general. Not about disc minimalism vs. mold minimalism, as the original post was about.

Mold minimalism is essentially just taking disc minimalism to a greater extreme.

 

[Spike1]

It seems as your comments goes for disc minimalism in general. Not about disc minimalism vs. mold minimalism, as the original post was about.

Mold minimalism is essentially just taking disc minimalism to a greater extreme.

Yes.

 

[Lithicon]

No, he's saying that if you practice mold minimalism, like I said you'll achieve disc minimalism to a degree. The versatile molds builds a set of skills which you can translate from there to any bag you choose to carry. But, to practice this requires an intelligent choice of molds and plastics. Which essentially brings you to achieving some form of disc minimalism.

It seems as your comments goes for disc minimalism in general. Not about disc minimalism vs. mold minimalism, as the original post was about.

Mold minimalism is essentially just taking disc minimalism to a greater extreme.

No, Disc minimalism is taking Mold minimalism to a greater extreme. Because I can carry 5 molds, but still carry 20 disc.

But, at the same time I can carry 2 molds, and 3 or 4 disc.
1 Dart, and 2 Rocs, or 2 Darts, and 2 Rocs. Of course I could continue.
But, since I can throw a Dart give or take 350' and Roc relatively 400' I could play nearly any course with them. Excluding situational/specialty shots. But, it can be done. There are disc that could help me perform better, that's why I carry around 5 molds and 12-16 disc in various stages of wear. Mold minimalism with versatile molds forces you to learn skills some molds won't. Then as Garu said you can essentially do whatever you want once you learn those skills. But, most people that learn with versatile molds, see no reason to change. As they'll do everything they need, just as well as one other mold for a specific shot.

 

[FierceTable]

Lithicon, can you explain what you mean when you say, "Mold minimalism with versatile molds forces you to learn skills some molds won't." Taking any disc (versatile or not) and learning to throw it on different lines teaches you different skill sets...no? Can you give an example to follow up your statement to help me better understand what a "versatile mold" teaches you to do that less versatile molds can't?

This is probably a bad example, but there was a brief time where I threw a star T-bird as my only driver. Most people would agree this is not a very versatile disc...it goes straight really well with a consistent fade and it can hold hyzer lines reasonably well, but that's about it. I learned how to introduce a controlled amount of OAT into my release so that it would fly turnover lines like an Eagle/Cheetah might. I stopped throwing it for every drive and have since lost my ability to control OAT to achieve this effect, but it was an interesting skill that probably has more use than I currently give it credit.

 

[Lithicon]

Lithicon, can you explain what you mean when you say, "Mold minimalism with versatile molds forces you to learn skills some molds won't." Taking any disc (versatile or not) and learning to throw it on different lines teaches you different skill sets...no? Can you give an example to follow up your statement to help me better understand what a "versatile mold" teaches you to do that less versatile molds can't?

This is probably a bad example, but there was a brief time where I threw a star T-bird as my only driver. Most people would agree this is not a very versatile disc...it goes straight really well with a consistent fade and it can hold hyzer lines reasonably well, but that's about it. I learned how to introduce a controlled amount of OAT into my release so that it would fly turnover lines like an Eagle/Cheetah might. I stopped throwing it for every drive and have since lost my ability to control OAT to achieve this effect, but it was an interesting skill that probably has more use than I currently give it credit.

A versatile mold is able to teach you a broader set of skills that a not so versatile disc is able to teach. Where some versatility really drops is outside the fairway driver range. Most drivers or molds in and below the fairway driver area have some versatility to them. Even the Teebird. But, you can OAT a more versatile mold the same as you could a Teebird and often achieve the same results.

But, when it comes to true line shaping, by release angles (not to insinuate OAT can't be used effectively in line shaping, as I'd suggest it once you fully grasp when and how to manipulate it.) But, by release angles some disc just can't cover the entire spectrum of stability in every genre. Some disc can hold more lines, teaching a broader skill set, including those you can get while using a slightly less versatile disc. I should have reworded that, as it doesn't force you to, the minimalism part is what forces you to use those versatile molds to cover all the shots, instead of relying on one less versatile mold thrown one way to cover a shot. Yes, even those disc can cover some shots, but some disc cover nearly all stabilities with proper angles, given plastic and wear usually increase their ability to cover more stabilities.

 

[thatdirtykid]

I think that when blake started doing the write ups on minimalism it was more a starting point to help people learn to throw better than learning a few shots and picking the disc that does it. He has mentioned how guys like feldberg who carries a lot of different discs can throw all sorts of lines with all sorts of discs, and found a bag that obviously works well for him.

 

[JR]

I think it's great when people are able to overcome disc selection and disc familiarity limits with throwing skill. If one starts playing with minimal molds they don't get to experience other discs so fast and it may be luck to find the disc that is the best one for that player for any role and getting a bag that compliments each disc with the others not leaving any holes in the throws one needs to make is truly lucky. Without the knowledge of what else is out there. Sticking with few discs won't make learning what's out there faster usually. I don't know if a stickler to a couple of discs would learn new discs as fast as somebody who's experimented more.

Shape of the disc handling is a huge limiting factor for a friend of mine that putts with Beasts and Roadrunners more than putters and sometimes throws a Champ 175 Valk on drives. He doesn't take advice well... So he carries those and a putter for rare nose up stall approaches. What mids and fairway drivers? He has a 150 Leopard that I haven't seen him use after last year and he doesn't carry it. Surprisingly that guy has holes in his bag and can't throw every shot to every distance accurately with fine control over sideways placement. Not to mention height or sticking close to where the disc lands. Relative to his power. One thing he has learned little but not well is playing in the winds with those discs. He improves slowly but steadily. He's a good putter with those drivers because he's done that for about five years and there's a definite familiarity and routine going on there. Results speak for themselves. And yes he does blow by far sometimes. Not bad at all on average as he's developed good distance control and usually lasers to metal from closish ranges and is great at getting the disc to fade toward the bucket so the disc drops quickly past the basket from longer ranges. Outside the green he's too minimalist for his own good. But kudos for good putting and extreme minimalism almost never using a putter at least for putting -but is that good for him overall? Score wise yes only for putting not the other throws. Sometimes he gets perfect putting rounds with every putt going in from any height and distance. Including long ones.

 

[Lithicon]

I think that when blake started doing the write ups on minimalism it was more a starting point to help people learn to throw better than learning a few shots and picking the disc that does it. He has mentioned how guys like feldberg who carries a lot of different discs can throw all sorts of lines with all sorts of discs, and found a bag that obviously works well for him.

Yeah, it's a great starting point. I just find that the more people that switch to it, find they don't really need anything else as they get attached to these versatile molds. I for one did, but I still carry things like Valks and Destroyers to do things slightly different every now and then.

Once someone learns the skill sets and they choose to move on to more molds and possibly less versatile molds, the skill set translates, and makes them better, and are still able to perform just as well. I for one never said that the people that spend time learning all their molds couldn't perform just as well. But, mold minimalism forces you to learn the shots with every disc a little faster usually.

 

[grizzles]

I was always under the impression that minimalism=mold minimalism on this board. I practice that to some degree, but definitely not disc minimalism. With mold min two of the most compelling arguments (to me) are: 1) learn a handful of molds very well 2) have rotations of discs at various stages of wear (so you don't have a huge hole in your bag when you lose one).

I can think of no compelling arguments for disc minimalism.

I carry 3 wraiths, 4 teebirds, 3 leopards and 3 buzzz on the course not because each disc of a given mold is slightly different than the others (of course, they are), but because I can practice the SAME shot 3-4 times on a given hole. There's also something to be said for practicing several different shots, but for me practicing the same one is more effective. In any case, I can't think of any situation where NOT practicing shots due to dogged adherence to disc minimalism is beneficial.

Of course, if you are interested in disc min (perhaps you want to carry only 3-4 discs b/c you run the course), then you MUST practice mold min. I could take 5 discs (above + putter) on a trip where I was somehow limited in discs and not have a single hole in my bag.

Mold min works for me, but I would never argue that it is the right way to do things. On the other hand, I cannot think of any benefit to carrying an arbitrarily low number of discs in any number of molds.

J