"NAGS" Zone (from DGR)

[BrotherDave]

keltik brought up an interesting discussion over on DGR, so I'm stealing it over to here.

Originally Posted by keltik

So I've been reading the latest Disc Golfer magazine, and the John Houck article about designing par 5 holes mentioned the NAGS zone. NAGS stands for Not A Golf Shot. Houck asserts that shots from 100-150 ft away from the basket are NAGS. I don't know that I necessarily agree with this sentiment. You still have to throw a disc at the basket.

What is so bad about a short up shot on a long hole? Do I need to be a 990 rated player to understand what he's talking about?

To clarify, NAGS are boring upshots that result from when your great drive still leaves you 100-150' of hole left, presumably open, so that everyone lays it up and then there isn't really any scoring separation.

For example: 500' hole, mostly open. Your drive is 350' and you're left with a dinky 150', unrewarding upshot.

[Connor Jones]

I can think of a particular hole on my home course that is like this..don't get me wrong, I mess it up all the time, but then again i'm not a highly ranked player.

I think if I was going to design a course I would try and do my best to avoid those type of shots, I'd rather have to put together two 300+ great golf shots and get the bird(par 4 scenario) look then bomb something down an open field, then get up and down for a 3

[optidiscic]

I would avoid thinking of holes this way

So a designer attempts to rectify the "NAGS" zone......designs some tricky approaches and tough greens...problem solved

Nope you just took away any advantage a big arm has as he will lay up in the same approach zone as weaker arms

So a designer attempts to rectify the "NAGS" zone by changing the distance either shorter or longer so its reachable in 1 shot or requires 2 shots

Nope Again you are taking the advantage away from the big arm and requiring him to throw like a lesser arm either 1x or 2x

Bottom Line for any hole that is a big arm hole the lesser arms should have a NAGS and the big arms should have a putt

NAGS is what you are left with if you cant park a 430 foot hole....deal with it...its ok to reward the big guns a few times on a course

[keltik]

you're welcome Broseph David.

[Cgkdisc]

optidiscic -Bottom Line for any hole that is a big arm hole the lesser arms should have a NAGS and the big arms should have a putt

Absolutely poor design unless you mean the bigger arm is in a higher rating/skill class than the lesser arm.

[Connor Jones]

First designing discussion I am excited for.

Commence my entertainment operation please

[Cgkdisc]

We've got the kernels starting to pop...

[optidiscic]

Originally Posted by Cgkdisc

Absolutely poor design unless you mean the bigger arm is in a higher rating/skill class than the lesser arm.

so you are against distance as an obstacle? I don't think there is anything wrong with a few holes that favor the bigger arm and leave the lesser arm with a long look

[biscoe]

Originally Posted by optidiscic

I would avoid thinking of holes this way

So a designer attempts to rectify the "NAGS" zone......designs some tricky approaches and tough greens...problem solved

Nope you just took away any advantage a big arm has as he will lay up in the same approach zone as weaker arms

So a designer attempts to rectify the "NAGS" zone by changing the distance either shorter or longer so its reachable in 1 shot or requires 2 shots

Nope Again you are taking the advantage away from the big arm and requiring him to throw like a lesser arm either 1x or 2x

Bottom Line for any hole that is a big arm hole the lesser arms should have a NAGS and the big arms should have a putt

NAGS is what you are left with if you cant park a 430 foot hole....deal with it...its ok to reward the big guns a few times on a course

430 foot open holes are among the very worst holes in disc golf. the "reward" for having a big arm should generally be that you are able to throw a more controlled, higher percentage shot than someone who has to max out their distance to reach the same spot. free scoring ops for big arms should be as few as possible although it is very difficult to avoid some here and there.

[Cgkdisc]

optidiscic - so you are against distance as an obstacle? I don't think there is anything wrong with a few holes that favor the bigger arm and leave the lesser arm with a long look

Only on par 5s. Those who throw farther or more powerfully already have an advantage on every hole and every throw except a short downhill hole. To design holes specifically where only the longest arms of a skill level can reach it without risk is simply poor and unfair design.