Originally Posted by alcstradamus
Curious as to why a small target is a better approach than more obstacles? The point of making putting harder is to conform to the ball golf notion that 2 putts should be the norm, correct? Well, if we are going to conform to ball golf then why not look at it this way: the challenge in putting in ball golf is the slope of the green and the path your ball must roll in order to land in the cup. In disc golf, our "slope" is the air route that the disc must take. So changing the air route that a disc must take (going around obstacles) would be the closest equivalent, correct?
Note that I am not saying that this should happen, I'm just trying to understand people's perspectives. All of this is arguing is silly in my opinion though, in the end nothing will change and nothing should change other than courses being designed for gold level play rather than gold level players playing on red/blue courses.
One reason is that the physics of disc flight prevents much lateral motion on short distance throws. I personally think that the combination of wind and elevation is the best analogy to slope on a ball golf green. The other problem is that because we are allowed to straddle our stance, it would take ridiculous obstacles to prevent pros from making essentially all the same putts they do now.