[Question] Potential tech standards changes?

[Cgkdisc]

I think another factor that may have helped redirect Harold and Dave's perspective has to do with lack of spectators. At one point several years ago, I remember discussing the concept of disc technology capping to match certain course parameters when we were developing the Super Class guidelines. At that time (2008), they were working hard to develop sufficient spectatorship at the USDGC that would be needed to "sustain" (justify) the higher added cash and payouts many hoped would be needed to support pros. Players throwing far (even farther) was seen as attracting spectators.

If we notice the changes in the USDGC formats since that time, I think hidden in there is a recognition that spectators aren't likely to come out in bigger numbers any faster as this sport develops even if players threw 1000 ft drives. The potential for spectators to help finance the pro world will only grow as the base of players grows.

 

[bradharris]

Yeah, I mean it's obviously not THAT simple. But I think the technology has blurred the skill and bunched people up. Regressing the technology would emphasize skill. (Frisbee skill, anyway.)

A similar, although not directly related anecdote:

In football's early years, the game looked much more like rugby. Forward passes were illegal. It was a game of runs and laterals. Scrums were bloody and sometimes deadly.

The rules committee met with the goal of making changes that would emphasize speed and skill rather than brute strength. So they considered widening the field in order to spread the players more. However, the new (and still in use) Harvard Stadium had been built with the stands in close proximity to the field. Widening the field would require major reconstruction of the stadium.

So instead the rules committee voted to allow the forward pass, dramatically altering the game of football and helping to shape it into the sport that we enjoy today.

I'm sure at the time there was plenty of debate, with many detractors trying to argue that it would ruin the game. However, now more than a century later, it is recognize as one of the most important moments in the growth and development of the sport.

 

[Kenny53691]

interesting...............

 

[wake911]

Why would players care what they are made to throw, as long as everyone is playing under the same set of rules? Is the tourney populace that immature? So you can no longer use wide rimmed drivers. So what? Neither can anybody else now. (Hypothetically)

Maybe it's time disc golfers grew up.

Agreed.

baseball (single wall, zero pop bats) softball (softer balls, weaker bats) and football (no head shots or leading with your head) they are all taking steps back, i can't say i'm against slowing the discs down.

Interesting from a Top player in the world.

It would hurt DC and Prodigy far more than Innova. Minor setback for a company whose flight chart is almost completely full, major blow to a company that has no 10/11 drivers and a company that sells more nukes than almost every other mold combined not including the buzz.

I disagree about Prodigy and DC. The prodigy plastic and usage by pros is what is selling it, not it's drivers. The M1-4 are fantastic mids. The D1/D3 are great for drivers, but i hardly ever use them. DC has fantastic mids and putters, so really it would lose the Nuke....not that big compared to Innova losing the most of anyone I'd think.

I haven't read the entire thread, but enough to get the scope.
Just my .02, and here goes:

A LOT of our older courses were designed on fairly small parcels of land. These courses are being out-dated by wide-rimmed drivers. Great courses, now marginalized by disc technology.
In order to keep up with the new technology, we are forced to build bigger and bigger courses on bigger and bigger pieces of land. Is that sustainable? As land (especially in urban and suburban areas) rises in price and scarcity, long quality courses will be harder and harder to get built.

I shouldn't even need to cover the Safety angle. Those things are dangerous.

How could we go back?
Here are some options:
1. Give these discs a two-year window and then ban them from all competition.
2. Designate certain competitions as Speed-Restricted (whatever you want to call it). Specify a max rim width and enforce it just like the Japan Open does with weight. Call it "Vintage Class" or something like that, similar to Super-Class competitions.

I don't have a strong opinion on how far we go back, but Speed 9 (TeeBird, FireBird) seems like a good starting point for debate. Speed 11 is as high as I would feel comfortable with.

Personally, I agree with Harold, so far.
I'm interested to see how far this goes.

Very good post. I agree with almost all of this.

Overall, I wouldn't be against it. BUT i am likely biased, since I am a big arm guy who normally doesn't use over a Teebird except for FH shots, so the effect of this would be positive for my competitive stance.

I think it would bring a skill back to the game, where the massive hyzers over trees (around intended path) would be reduced.

Would it be good for the game? i don't know. But most people in the world aren't powerful enough to really throw these large rimmed drivers correctly, so I don't see after the initial issues , it really being a big deal.

 

[Three Putt]

The proposal was to open dialog on lowering the weight ratio to 8.0 grams per centimeter. The current ratio is 8.3 grams per centimeter. The new ratio of 8.0 gms/cm would only be applied to discs with a rim width exceeding 2.1 cm.

Therefore 169.60 grams would be the max weight for a 21.2 cm disc with a rim width exceeding 2.1 cm

Dropping a destroyers max weight by 5 grams seems immaterial to the stated concerns.

I realize Discette has a pathway to insider info, but what she's saying doesn't make sense in relation to what was described in the OP.

Suzette probably knows what this is all about. Shawn (by his own admission) was confused by what Harold did. So if what Suzette and Shawn say are not matching, I'd go with Suzette on this one.

 

[bradharris]

Interesting from a Top player in the world.

Take that with a bit of a grain of salt though. He is sponsored by the proposer of this change.

 

[The Hammer]

My feeling is that once you let the genie out of the bottle (making and selling wide rimmed drivers), you can't just put him back in. I think it will be a hard sell to the DG masses that the wide rimmed drivers that they have paid for, amassed collections of, learned to play with, and currently play with, are now illegal. I think the PDGA will piss off a lot of people if this is the direction they go. I'm not saying I necessarily agree or disagree.

 

[JBryant]

I see a "disc buy back/exchange program" kind of like bringing in an illegal gun of the street. We, the players, bring in our illegal drivers in exchange for a putter, mid, or approved driver.

 

[Innovadude]

All I could see happening would be manufacturers not caring at all, pumping out faster heavier drivers, and players not joining the PDGA or playing PDGA events. It wouldn't affect what we throw, or what's available to throw.

 

[WhiteyBear]

Happens all the time in larger sports, newest tech get banned even if it's been out there and companies lose temporary profit because of it. Guess what, people are still going to play discgolf and people are still going to buy discs.

NASCAR did it with the "car of tomorrow", golf has a uniform ball size (even though Nicklaus is 100% behind making every ball exactly the same, to put the emphasis on skill and not technology), baseball only allows wooden bats. Yada yada yada....

It'd be interesting if there was a tourney where the PDGA said you could use three molds, and they have to be within these exact standards (fairway driver, mid range, putter). The emphasis would be on the skill of what you could throw, not the technology. The best in the world can still outplay, out throw, and out putt the vast majority out there.

There is a reason the super condor was made illegal in the PGA, even I could wail that ball a country mile.

 

[oddjob]

Suzette probably knows what this is all about. Shawn (by his own admission) was confused by what Harold did. So if what Suzette and Shawn say are not matching, I'd go with Suzette on this one.

right, but does a 5 gram reduction on any ultra-HS driver make any meaningful impact on:

Lowering weights is not just about safety, but also about raising the skill level and reducing the strength necessary to throw. This tends to help level the playing field between large and small players.

It's a 3% reduction in mx wt. Wouldn't this also bring up the age-old issue of requiring TD's to have scales to enforce weights?

 

[dekdo]

Sure would be nice if you would quit comparing apples to oranges, might stop your posts from sounding so clueless. How many more times is the real issue going to fly over your head before you finally grasp what is being discussed? :doh: :wall:

Paintball is played in a confined private area where everyone is required to wear proper gear to participate. It is not played in the middle of a public park with innocent non-playing bystanders roaming about.

Oh yeah hockey is another highly popular public park sport. Oh wait, no it is not, is is again played in a designated area where participants are required to wear proper safety gear to play and the general public is forced to sit in the stands behind glass and netting, not allowed to roam freely on the playing surface.

Do we need to cover football too, or did the NFL schedule Jets vs Giants in the middle of Central Park and I missed the memo?

And please give up the ball golf arguments as well, they have their courses on private property where the general public is not allowed to roam freely about.

The topic of safety is not player safety so much as it is innocent non-playing bystander safety in the middle of a public park we are forced to share. We players know we are on a course, no the holes and lines and are fully aware plastic will be flying in the air. But mom, dad and their kids having a picnic in the park may be clueless a DG course is right next to them. As long as we keep sharing the parks with other non-playing people we will be forced to account for them with our safety standards.

Ok so we put up signs or nets to help block out the public in the park. It's sad that this was never considered in the course designs from the beginning.

I only went off on the safety because one of the top pros seemed to have an issue with it, and he has far more weight in what might happen with all of this than you and I.

 

[dekdo]

Take that with a bit of a grain of salt though. He is sponsored by the proposer of this change.

Exactly.

 

[wake911]

I think it would do disc golf well as a sport for: 1) its players to acknowledge or at least understand that it involves many skills other than simply throwing far; and, 2) its governing bodies to prevent players who can throw 500' from gaining too much of an advantage over very good players who can't throw much past 350.

I disagree completely with all this. There is no reason that someone who can throw 500' should "lose an advantage" for being able to throw farther. Distance is 1/3 of the game, and dominant players can do it all.
also, if someone is throwing 500'+ with high speed drivers, they are still able to throw 400'+ with lower speed discs, so the distance difference will still be there, just will be at a lower point. Instead of 500' to 350' it'll be 450' to 300'. Big arms will still be big arms. Hell Ricky Wysocki thorws his putter 400'. I've see GG throw a putter 450'. You aren't stopping them from throwing 500'.

No very good players are only throwing 350'. Even the shortest real pros are in the 400-425' range.

Take that with a bit of a grain of salt though. He is sponsored by the proposer of this change.

While I agree he is sponsored by Innova so he wouldn't want to say anything disparaging. At the same time, he seems like a smart enough guy that he wouldn't interject just to boost his sponsors statement. He would have not stated his opinion. Also, i really don't see a top level pro disliking this. They don't have to rebuy all their discs, and they can throw any disc far, so this would help separate them from the run of the mill player.

 

[jobwilson]

Does anyone have an example of a hole that has been made too easy or out of date by wide rim drivers?

Holes 1 through 18 at Otter Creek in Brandenburg, KY.

 

[mashnut]

If DG were officially classed an "active use" (controlled sport venue) versus "passive use" (other activities like walking allowed in the area) sport, then many courses may eventually be pulled and not get approved. We've (course designers) tried to walk the line with parks departments that DG is a tweener sport between active and passive use. That's been important because in many locations they have master plans and even legal requirements for what percentage of parkland is dedicated to active, passive and natural use.

Ok so we put up signs or nets to help block out the public in the park. It's sad that this was never considered in the course designs from the beginning.

I only went off on the safety because one of the top pros seemed to have an issue with it, and he has far more weight in what might happen with all of this than you and I.

Reread the post I quoted above yours. If we want to block off our courses, we'll have to be ok with losing most of them.

 

[atay87]

Does anyone have an example of a hole that has been made too easy or out of date by wide rim drivers?

Holes 1 through 18 at Otter Creek in Brandenburg, KY.

I haven't played this course, but the longest hole is 315 ft. So each hold can be easily reached with a fairway (narrow rimmed) driver.

 

[dekdo]

Why not do as politicians do and modify the rules and legal requirements..lol

Does anyone really see the sport evolving into something bigger if its confined to parks where anyone could just stroll on through? How did ball golf make it through this transition?

I haven't played this course, but the longest hole is 315 ft. So each hold can be easily reached with a fairway (narrow rimmed) driver.

Could be easily reached by many with just a putter and midrange.

 

[_MTL_]

I haven't played this course, but the longest hole is 315 ft. So each hold can be easily reached with a fairway (narrow rimmed) driver.

But for a casual player or a rec player, getting a disc to go 300 feet is a huge difference. I can easily throw a midrange or low speed driver to those holes, but I'm also rated 945. We forget than likely 90% of disc golfers can't throw 300 feet and these high speed drivers are what is keeping a lot of them playing and from an economic standpoint is driving the industry in disc sales (this is an opinion, not proven fact). A new player never asks what putter goes in more, they ask what disc they can throw to get more D.

 

[mashnut]

Why not do as politicians do and modify the rules and legal requirements..lol

Does anyone really see the sport evolving into something bigger if its confined to parks where anyone could just stroll on through? How did ball golf make it through this transition?

They charge huge amounts of money, and are now shutting down courses because many people feel that it's simply too expensive. Again, if you want to make that transition we would lose most of our public park courses and make the game a whole lot less accessible.