[Question] Potential tech standards changes?

[scarpfish]

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with his idea, but I certainly disagree that throwing discs that you feel should no longer be used made by the company you own extremely strange.

I don't find it all that strange. There were 92 different molds on that list just posted that would be made illegal under the 10% rule. 15 of them are Innova's. And the people who make the other 77 molds don't have the selection of still legal molds that Innova has or the financial resources to make new ones that are legal.

Hence, Innova is in better shape in terms of market share in a world where those discs aren't available anymore.

 

[atay87]

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.

So rec players that use high speed drivers to get to 300 ft are ruining the sport? Why would the PDGA care about that?

 

[wildburn]

Does anyone have an example of a hole that has been made too easy or out of date by wide rim drivers?

There is a course in Wausau, Wisconsin called Memorial Park, only one of the holes is much over 300 feet, but the signage which is from when the park was put in in the early 2000s lists all the holes as par 4, most players play it as par 3, and even then half the time decent players are duecing or aceing the holes. So yes there are many examples of existing courses that are almost obsolete due to high speed drivers making the course very simple. In order for courses like Memorial to be "competitive" again they would almost have to double all the hole lengths and there really isnt room to do that without crossing over into the tennis courts, playground, boat landing and softball fields and pool. So sustainability is a huge issue in the case of older courses where even if they wanted to expand its not possible.

I could see PDGA doing something like limiting the "speed" of a disc per hole length as being more useful then just a broad smaller wing or wing to diameter ratio.


The other issue is while the pdga has limited the shape of discs, they honestly need to push for something where all the manufacturers use a certain rating system for flight. Its prevalent in every other sport, and would make it far easier for TD's and even casual players to understand what disc should be used on a hole because they wouldn't have to spend hours on the internet trying to find an accurate disc speed chart, which would cut down on people power throwing 250-350 foot holes with speed 13 drivers and hitting people.

Im not going to get to much into the safety thing, but I will agree that DG does need to move towards a dg only concept for course locations. Having walking paths and such pass through courses is a huge safety no no for this game, but it doesnt matter if your throwing a midrange or a high speed driver in that case, getting hit by hard plastic is going to cause damage.

 

[Discette]

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.

What Shawn said about the meeting is accurate. He was there. I just provided more details about the proposal Harold presented. Shawn's follow-up question suggested there may have been 150 class limit being discussed. It is my understanding that was/is not part of the proposal.

I do not disagree with Shawn. I agree strongly that he should ask questions like this since he is a BOD candidate. Shawn has a great insight to this sport through his years of experience as both a player and volunteer.

 

[shive]

A Board member's view

I was asked to comment on Harold's presentation on my campaign thread and did so (posts #235,237,238). I won't repeat those posts here, except to say in a general way that I don't believe that heavy drivers threaten the sustainability of disc golf in any way that I understand the term. But there seems to be some disagreement about just what Harold means by "sustainability", or why he believes heavy drivers threaten it. Best of course would be for Harold to put his proposal in writing so his meaning is clear to everyone.

I would like to point out, as a Board member, that I have certain special duties of care and obedience in matters like this. Harold was careful to say that his feelings come from deeply held and longstanding personal convictions. But this cannot disconnect him from his position as an Innova representative. Three of our seven current Board members (including myself) are sponsored by Innova, and none that I know of by any other disc manufacturer. This means that certain provisions of our Conflict of Interest policy must be observed.

Just how that policy would be applied depends on exactly what it is that Harold is asking for. Until we know that, the discussion is premature. Certainly, if what we're looking at here is an Innova guy asking for a change in technical standards for discs, we'd have to proceed very carefully indeed!

 

[smyith]

click and see

it has been said many times on here. the tech standards have nothing to do with safety, nor have they ever done a study to see if these standards are safe.

And here I thought they were going to raise the max weight and make the permitted values of the flex test inversely proportional to the sharpness of the disc's rim. But seriously, didn't Japan try this nonsense once, and it didn't go over well?

Logic and Reasoning are lost on the pDGA.

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

Why? why does this not hurt the game? They want to change an arbitrary number to another arbitrary number, for what reason?

 

[atay87]

There is a course in Wausau, Wisconsin called Memorial Park, only one of the holes is much over 300 feet, but the signage which is from when the park was put in in the early 2000s lists all the holes as par 4, most players play it as par 3, and even then half the time decent players are duecing or aceing the holes. So yes there are many examples of existing courses that are almost obsolete due to high speed drivers making the course very simple. In order for courses like Memorial to be "competitive" again they would almost have to double all the hole lengths and there really isnt room to do that without crossing over into the tennis courts, playground, boat landing and softball fields and pool. So sustainability is a huge issue in the case of older courses where even if they wanted to expand its not possible.

By your definition of obsolete, this course was obsolete several years before it was installed when fairway drivers were introduced (or even earlier when mids were introduced). If people really don't want 300 foot holes to be reachable from the tee then everything but super class would need to be made illegal.

 

[smyith]

Three of our seven current Board members (including myself) are sponsored by Innova, and none that I know of by any other disc manufacturer. This means that certain provisions of our Conflict of Interest policy must be observed.

here's an idea. how about no sponsored players or DG manufacturer employees be allowed on the BoD.

By your definition of obsolete, this course was obsolete several years before it was installed when fairway drivers were introduced (or even earlier when mids were introduced). If people really don't want 300 foot holes to be reachable from the tee then everything but super class would need to be made illegal.

:clap:
high speed drivers changed the game for the better. they made it more feasible to have actual golf style courses with true par 4 and 5.

 

[wildburn]

By your definition of obsolete, this course was obsolete several years before it was installed when fairway drivers were introduced (or even earlier when mids were introduced). If people really don't want 300 foot holes to be reachable from the tee then everything but super class would need to be made illegal.

Yes and no, the course is fairly technical with trees and heavy wind off the lake that runs along the side of the entire course, with hs drivers you can ignore all that and just bomb over or around everything and get to the pin in one. Trying to do the same with a mid, or even the shorter fairway drivers makes it much more difficult. Not impossible, but more challenging. Thus increasing sustainability of the sport and making these shorter courses more relevant.


I should state, Im not arguing against hs drivers, I throw them myself, Im just playing devil's advocate as to where Harold could be coming from.

 

[anathematize]

I know its selfish (and probably not sustainable) but I have absolutely no issue with disc golf moving fully to pay-to-play. I think everybody is tired of trying to share public park space with disc golfers. And disc golfers are tried of not having their own space to play in.

I think what Three Rivers Parks is doing in the MSP/STP area is a model that seems to be successful. The courses are beautiful, the money clearly goes back into them and danger to the general public is kept to an absolute minimum. I'm not sure if anybody on here is more intimately involved with Three Rivers, but I'd be interested to hear if, internally, they consider what they are doing successful.

 

[mashnut]

:clap:
high speed drivers changed the game for the better. they made it more feasible to have actual golf style courses with true par 4 and 5.

How so? The same design principles would apply if players were maxing out at 400' instead of 550', those par 4 and 5 holes would just be a little shorter. It actually gets harder to find the land to build well designed higher par holes with players throwing farther.

 

[Toro71]

Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but this sounds like bullcrap to me, especially if we're to believe that safety isn't at all a part of this....if we're to believe that a rule change is required to protect "sustainability," when no one seems to be able to define what it means in this context to begin with...

"The USDGC and Innova would strongly support the initiative." Shocker.

What do I know? Except, I'd be pretty chaffed if I thought my membership dues went to support sanctioned market share "sustainability."

 

[smyith]

How so? The same design principles would apply if players were maxing out at 400' instead of 550', those par 4 and 5 holes would just be a little shorter. It actually gets harder to find the land to build well designed higher par holes with players throwing farther.

before the HS drivers, there was very few courses pushing forr longer more difficult holes. Shortly after the HS drivers took off, course design took the next step.
additionally, i don't believe most course designers make their choices for what a top end player can do with a slower disc. I think they consider more of what a casual will be able to do on the course. So the HS drivers allowed for the casuals to reach further distances and thus allow for course designers to push the boundries more.
I totally agree with you about the land though. But that will come when the pDGA pulls their heads out of each others behinds and actually grow the sport (different topic all together).

What do I know? Except, I'd be pretty chaffed if I thought my membership dues went to support sanctioned market share "sustainability."

like your taxes do....:wall::thmbdown:

 

[Dan Ensor]

By the same virtue of hs drivers ruining old courses, wouldn't getting rid of them ruin courses? I've been slowly making a course at my house, and if no one is using anything faster than a buzzz, the 3 most beautiful holes seem retarded to play (all 1000'+). The beauty is defined by the tee and pin locations, so making it not retarded would make it less beautiful.

Can't a TD just make everyone play with mids or slower if a course is "ruined" by drivers? And if you want it to be interesting for casual play ... can't you just leave the drivers at home?

 

[Dan Ensor]

BTW, I think Innova wants to get rid of hs drivers because they don't have any good ones. Ya know ... discraft people almost all throw the nuke or os, prodigy people throw their Ds ... but innova people don't seem to throw apes, bosses, katanas, vulcans, etc. They use destroyers; an older mold that isn't as fast as nukes, cannons, etc. I think innova has the most consistency problems when going to speed 13, also. I've thrown bosses out of the box more stable than any forces I've thrown, and less stable than any nuke SSs I've thrown.

But I'm an Innova hater, so grain of salt and crap.

 

[tomte]

1. Are you the players ok with the owner of the largest disc manufacturing company in our sport making a recommendation to the board about changing disc tech standards without all manufactures having a say?

Yes and no. I don't like the way it happened and I would rather have them make suggestions and back them up with something.

2. What are the reasons for Innova making these recommendations?

Money and money only. They could sell a lot of new discs if standards change.

3. Would our sport be the safer if all discs were 150 class and no sharper than a midrange? Would you want to get hit in the face with this disc by Ricky or Catrina?

I don't think so. But I wonder if technical standards for ball golf should change because of safety - the ball is a lot harder and a lot faster than any disc. And you pretty much can't even see it at all.

4. Would our sport be better or worse it we went backwards in technology?

Define backwards. I wouldn't call a tech standard change backwards per se.

But I prefer heavy discs since I have better results in windy conditions with them. And I never played my home course without any wind...

And there is another point with spectators: they seem to love fast flying long range shots. Just listen to commentary on the tournament videos. Sure putting has some tension - but the focus is on the drive. And you get the most "oohs and aahs" for long and fast shots.

 

[Halcón]

if no one is using anything faster than a buzzz,

The game thrived with Rocs as drivers. It could do it again, if necessary.

 

[spikodelhyzer]

By the same virtue of hs drivers ruining old courses, wouldn't getting rid of them ruin courses? I've been slowly making a course at my house, and if no one is using anything faster than a buzzz, the 3 most beautiful holes seem retarded to play (all 1000'+). The beauty is defined by the tee and pin locations, so making it not retarded would make it less beautiful.

Can't a TD just make everyone play with mids or slower if a course is "ruined" by drivers? And if you want it to be interesting for casual play ... can't you just leave the drivers at home?

You can still make your course and play rounds on all you want with nukes. And a 1000' hole with a buzzz (don't know where the mid came from considering you would still be able to throw wraiths) would still be a par 5. 3 320'~ drives and a couple of putts.

BTW, I think Innova wants to get rid of hs drivers because they don't have any good ones. Ya know ... discraft people almost all throw the nuke or os, prodigy people throw their Ds ... but innova people don't seem to throw apes, bosses, katanas, vulcans, etc. They use destroyers; an older mold that isn't as fast as nukes, cannons, etc. I think innova has the most consistency problems when going to speed 13, also. I've thrown bosses out of the box more stable than any forces I've thrown, and less stable than any nuke SSs I've thrown.

But I'm an Innova hater, so grain of salt and crap.

The destroyer would be banned under the proposal so...

 

[Cgkdisc]

I think the only way this proposed change will happen would be these steps:
1. The disc product manufacturers create a trade association.
2. They make a proposal to the PDGA.
3. The proposal/timing might be tweaked between PDGA Staff, Tech team and manufacturers reps.
4. The PDGA will poll the members.
5. The PDGA BOD will approve, deny or send back proposal to the manufacturers to tweak it.
6. Maybe something will happen.

 

[drblam]

Some people are saying that the high speed drivers are the only ones that some new/weaker players can hit 300 ft, but I would suggest that the only way a new player will be able to throw a max distance driver to its proper distance and flight characteristics (400 ft+) is to play extensivly with the slower discs. Most big arms will tell you not to use a max d driver until you can throw your mid 300ft.
Slowing the game down by only having discs under speed 9 or 10 may actually help new players get better faster and stay less frustrated.
Also, marking each hole with its max allowed disc (putter, mid, or fairway holes) could guide new players to pick better discs for a hole, help them lose less, and make the experience more entertaining while also informing them that the other classes of disc exist at all.