#41  
Old 03-05-2014, 07:00 PM
Questatement's Avatar
Questatement Questatement is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: So. Cal.
Years Playing: 0.5
Courses Played: 23
Posts: 838
As long as everyone competing faces the same conditions on the course for the same round, it's uniform.

If course differences prevent course owners from charging $15-$40 per round, or more, like ball golf, f-n fantastic!
Sponsored Links

Last edited by Questatement; 03-05-2014 at 07:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 03-05-2014, 07:00 PM
DSmith's Avatar
DSmith DSmith is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Greens-bro North Cacka-lacka
Years Playing: 9.6
Courses Played: 131
Posts: 686
You are required to light your putter on fire and yell "BOOSH! " when it hits the basket. (Also on fire)
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 03-05-2014, 07:01 PM
disc qualified disc qualified is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: more cowbell
Posts: 897
i guess i was going for the character angle

different stadiums have their own character just as courses have theirs and sometimes that happens to include an elevated basket

home runs all count the same no matter how far or how high they are hit.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 03-05-2014, 07:19 PM
mashnut's Avatar
mashnut mashnut is offline
*Super Moderator*
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Temecula, CA
Years Playing: 12.8
Courses Played: 816
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 13,966
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Puttsalot View Post
Also a good point, but standardizing how past/present/future baseball stadiums are built is not synonymous to some standards on basket placements.

Perhaps a better analogy would be altering the height of pitchers mound at different stadiums.
Are you also opposed to baskets on slopes? On those you have to putt up or down at them, how is that any different than somebody creating the same effect when they can't use natural terrain to do so?
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 03-05-2014, 07:20 PM
davetherocketguy's Avatar
davetherocketguy davetherocketguy is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Southwest Michigan
Years Playing: 10.3
Courses Played: 37
Throwing Style: RHFH
Posts: 864
Quote:
Originally Posted by _MTL_ View Post
While I agree baskets should be smaller, I can't imagine de-standerizing every basket on the planet used in PDGA events is going to happen. Beyond the costs of it, the parks will view it as unnecesary work.
Agreed. People who suggest, "just make the baskets smaller" are not fully understanding the widespread implications in terms of cost. Let's look at the numbers...

There are 4511 courses listed on this site alone. Assuming an average of 10 holes per course (a rather conservative assumption IMHO and an attempt at not counting the object courses) that means there are 45,110 baskets out in the wild. A PDGA ruling stating that now all of these baskets are out of spec means tournament directors are faced with replacing every one of these baskets at a cost of roughly $300 per basket - a low cost for a permanent basket...That means to bring every course listed on this site into PDGA's new compliance ruling would cost a staggering $13,533,000. This of course doesn't include the private courses not listed on this site and is far and away a very conservative estimate. The reality is the number is probably much higher...meanwhile someone at Innova's basket factory just stroked out.

Ok, well let's just say we don't need to replace all of those baskets. Because not every course has a tournament on it. Let's just replace all the ones that host PDGA tourneys. If you go to the PDGA tourney directory page thingy and select all of the tournaments all over the world there are 30 pages of tournaments with 25 events on each page. That comes to 750. Well, some courses are going to host more than one tournament so for the sake of argument let's say there is half of that number of unique courses - 375. If a course is hosting a tournament that probably means it has at the very minimum 18 baskets soooo...

375 courses x 18 baskets/ea x $300 per basket = $2,025,000.



Again, a very conservative estimate because there are plenty of courses that have more than one 18 hole course - Lemon Lakes that hosted Worlds last year has four 18 hole courses.

But lets break this down to a more localized level. Let's say you're a tournament director on your local 18 hole course. So the PDGA comes up with this new regulation prior to your B-tier and in order for your tourney to count you need to replace 18 baskets.

18 x $300 = $5400

Keep in mind, all of these numbers I've been talking about only involve BASKETS. There are exactly zero $$ for labor costs thrown in there. One would hope there is enough labor force out there to do it for free but not every pace is so fortunate I imagine.

So where are these funds going to come from? Burden them on the locals? Really? Do that, and the local directors may just say, "screw it, I have a full time job. I don't have time for this nonsense. Hello, unsanctioned status." Is the PDGA going to cough up well over $2 mill so they can have their beloved rule change come to fruition? Not likely, especially considering this is a sport that has a hard time supporting about 10 full time pros. Sponsors? Sure, maybe a few courses to put a dent in it but they are going to have costs in changing their manufacturing processes so they are not going to be real willing.

Unless you can come up with a funding source please stop suggesting changing the baskets.

Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 03-05-2014, 07:44 PM
Kodachrome's Avatar
Kodachrome Kodachrome is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: South St. Paul, MN
Years Playing: 2.7
Courses Played: 16
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigSky View Post
I read Randy's article in Discgolfer and basically said, "Meh."

I think I'm kind of past the whole "grow the game" phase. Let's just keep throwing plastic at metal cages. Whatever happens will happen.
done and done.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 03-05-2014, 07:44 PM
Agricolae Agricolae is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: East Carolina
Years Playing: 3.5
Courses Played: 44
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Hammer View Post
What was the point of giving us your measurements?
I think he is suggesting that we adopt the "bacon" as the new standard of measurement for disc golf. The putting circle becomes 5.47 bacons. Sure, this would be better.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 03-05-2014, 07:44 PM
The Hammer's Avatar
The Hammer The Hammer is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Valley of the sun.
Years Playing: 6
Courses Played: 36
Posts: 4,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmcnelly View Post
I finally agree with you! Once the NFL season starts again that won't happen.
Ha! We can agree 8 months of the year, after that it's welcome to the thunderdome.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 03-05-2014, 07:48 PM
KniceZ's Avatar
KniceZ KniceZ is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: King George VA
Years Playing: 3.8
Courses Played: 54
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 873
I am interested in peoples thoughts on how smaller baskets would change the "game". Would it be more interesting because it's harder or reduce the excitement because the chance of making a 20m (65.6ft) putt would be much less?

I understand that it could cost alot but it could be slowly phased in. And there's not reason you couldn't allow something like removing a layer of chains or moving the chains on existing baskets to a smaller diameter. You'd just have to be sensible about how to change a "standard" to maximize backward compatability.

And it's not like cost always prevents change - Remember changing the TV standards to digital. Should we not have done that because replacing all the millions of TVs and station transmitters will be too expensive and people won't do it?
Reply With Quote
 

  #50  
Old 03-05-2014, 08:00 PM
kerplunk kerplunk is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Austin, TX, USA
Years Playing: 6.8
Courses Played: 31
Posts: 995
Quote:
Originally Posted by KniceZ View Post
I am interested in peoples thoughts on how smaller baskets would change the "game". Would it be more interesting because it's harder or reduce the excitement because the chance of making a 20m (65.6ft) putt would be much less?
I am interested in this too. I personally think that smaller baskets would lead to more layups and more boring golf, but I am open to contrary opinions. I also think that the make/miss ratio is pretty good right now, when watching top pros play a round you will usually see a few made 40+ footers and a few missed 20- footers, which I think is about right.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.