Pro Vs. Avg Joe- Skill Gap

[BigSky]

Originally Posted by PMcBeth

Most pros can toss a putter straight 260 then make a 40 footer for bird. Smaller basket and that number decreases. I don't think that hole is to short for a par 3 make it a smaller target then it's a tough bird unless your 10 feet

This is the kind of hole I'm talking about. Paul says "most pros" but I'm sure there's a good chance they hit a tree, or miss that 40 footer, and get a three. And a Joe would surely hit a tree, or two, and get himself into trouble for a 5, or worse.

What a beautiful shot by the way. I'd love to test my Anode on a hole like this.

[Casual Squishy]

Originally Posted by Cgkdisc

I think the thread shows the opposite of needing change. Things change for a reason, not just to change, except maybe fashions. If there were a compelling reason for our play parameters to change, it would have happened. The ideas for how to change have been there for years even farther back than the 2005 thread. But the compelling reason to change has not yet materialized.

That pretty much says it all much more elegantly then "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Most of these type discussions have been going on since the early to mid 90's and I kind of tried to say the same thing in an earlier post. The length and layouts of courses HAVE changed to accomodate the skill level of the top pros, just with varying degrees of success depending on the course owner, the land available and the course designers. The top pros HAVE some reasonable tests of their skills, but to expect it on every course, on every hole at this point in the sport without a much bigger pay for play market in impossible and impractible.
To limit tourneys to better courses just eliminates more chances to expand the sport. Think about it, in the first 40 years of ball golf so many want to compare us to (which we should for marketing purposes but should NOT when thinking creatively) how many of today's current PGA tournament level courses do you think there were on earth?
The sport will grow on its own as long as brand new players have a park with baskets nearby and and a store that sells discs handy.
The difficulty level and caliber of champion courses will grow as the player base grows and demands it, the "Pay for play" and private type courses barely existed 20 years ago, and are becoming more common all the time, but they rely on private ventures and will for the forseeable future.
I'd love to see a top player that wants to increase the difficulty level win the lottery and open a chain of gold level courses around the country, but that's about the only way it would ever happen overnight. For the average player, those courses without shorter tees for them are already murder, so that need to be kept in mind too because we need to keep the Ams duffers and newbies playing or eventually there would be less pros instead of more.

For the top pros, ask some of the oldest names (ask a Klimo or a Palmeri or a Houck, hell, ask Chuck!) if they didn't have the same dreams and aspirations for the sport when they started playing and that while Disc Golf hasn't already come farther then their wildest dreams, it's certainly gone way past reasonable expectation in such a short amount of time.

Things take time, even if the will and the work is there. And the money certainly won't be, at least not until we have a PDGA number 500,000 more more, not 55,000. BUT IT WILL GET THERE as long as there's a disc to throw, somewhere to throw it, and someone to throw it with.

And with it will come the courses Pros dream of, and there will be no need to talk about changing the basket.

(I still don't mind the idea of maybe using the bullseye type ones for finals in NT's, but maybe Paul or Chuck can tell, is there really so little seperation already that we even need that? how many NT's have ended up in ties for first or even first-5th or even any courses that are higher then an SSA of 60-65ish?
The top pros may be able to take those 20 footers for granted, but if they treated them that way carelessly you'd see some scoring seperation pretty fast. Between 2 players at that level it's more tiny mistakes adding up over time anyways on most non perfect courses and most courses will remain imperfect forever unless they're built by millionaire disc golfers or parks with unlimited budgets. and there's nothing anyone can do about it, except try and make them the best they can be within REALITY.

Just be patient, or wish you were born 30 years from now ;p
And do what you can to support the sport in any way you can.

[Casual Squishy]

Let me add one more little comment:
When I started playing Disc Golf maybe 1 in 500 people knew what I was talking about.
In the early 90's it was probably down to maybe 1 in 200.
By the mid 90's maybe 1 in a hundred.
Now lately it seems to be about 1-2 in 10.
That's progress. Not Youtube or facebook Viral progress, but still.. AMAZING since neither one of those take acreage and public funding and permits and massive manpower.

[Casual Squishy]

"impractible."
Before someone catches that, I meant impractical.
But it does sound like it should be a real word.

[duckychucky]

Originally Posted by optidiscic

as for the greens vs basket size argument

to me its simple.....the basket size is fine...we need more creativity from designers in making interesting and difficult greens

I think this is especially the case on par 3 holes.....I think a tough green at the conclusion of a TOUGH not easy par 5 or 4 is not really needed but on par 3s or easier par 4s and 5s I think designers should experiment and try to put baskets on edges of hills, close to cliffs, blocked from 1 side by trees/obstacles, near water, in jail trees, elevated, and on and on....a solid pro will make more putts on such greens from within 10-12m and lesser players will lay-up or miss and get penalized

Yep!

[Toro71]

Originally Posted by Casual Squishy

"impractible."
Before someone catches that, I meant impractical.
But it does sound like it should be a real word.

It does sound real...Dictionaries evolve from usage, and not the other way around. So, start using it in sentences, you know, casually, like you know what you're doing, and it'll make it's way into the lexicon.

[unclemercy]

Originally Posted by Toro71

It does sound real...Dictionaries evolve from usage, and not the other way around. So, start using it in sentences, you know, casually, like you know what you're doing, and it'll make it's way into the lexicon.

this concept is almost even more intriguing then smaller baskets or requiring oversized putters.

[Lewis]

Originally Posted by unclemercy

this concept is almost even more intriguing then smaller baskets or requiring oversized putters.

It's what most people do every day already, only they don't know they're doing it.

[Casual Squishy]

I love it when a good typo comes together.

I'll submit it to webster's, and define it as "Not Practiceable"

[sloppydisc]

Originally Posted by optidiscic

as for the greens vs basket size argument

to me its simple.....the basket size is fine...we need more creativity from designers in making interesting and difficult greens

I think this is especially the case on par 3 holes.....I think a tough green at the conclusion of a TOUGH not easy par 5 or 4 is not really needed but on par 3s or easier par 4s and 5s I think designers should experiment and try to put baskets on edges of hills, close to cliffs, blocked from 1 side by trees/obstacles, near water, in jail trees, elevated, and on and on....a solid pro will make more putts on such greens from within 10-12m and lesser players will lay-up or miss and get penalized

This is a sloppydisc approved post.