Disc Golfer Houck Article madness

[optidiscic]

So local players who suck and hit trees love to cite Houcks latest article in the magazine as a reason courses are designed poorly......Thank You for spreading the concept that all trees should be cleared except for thick clusters in the center of the fairway

You are doing disc golf a true service by giving poor tree hitting players an excuse and you should be commended

In all seriousness, this is just madness....I get the concept but please I could do with silly acronyms that "officialize" marginal concepts that are just opinion disguised as science.

[Karl]

Opti,

People will "read into" or "interpret" words to fit their own means - this is human nature.

Let me be so bold as to paraphrase that entire article (John can shoot me next time he sees me):

Designed / intended flight paths should be totally unobstructed.
Note that I stated nothing about how many there are to be per hole or how big any one should be; just that that which the designer sees as a viable gap be nothing but air (and all that isn't a gap not allow a disc through).

But using MY words makes for a very boring, short magazine article....

Karl

[optidiscic]

yeah I did not read the article...the PDGA screwed up my registration this year and I have not gotten the mag

But you are probably correct......I just love when people who cannot hit a lane accurately can now blame the designer using silly made up terminology

[DGRZ001]

IMO, "Fair"way is like "Fair" weather. "Fair" means good, not impartial. There should be a good way to get to the basket. Sure, the line can be tight, but that should mean that the fairway is tight, not that you have a tight shot between trees that are in the middle of the fairway.

[optidiscic]

yeah I get the concept
a look at the top 10 of this site shows many of these poorly designed fairways

[ceteebird999]

Originally Posted by optidiscic

yeah I get the concept
a look at the top 10 of this site shows many of these poorly designed fairways

I'm looking at Flip City right now I see mostly open shots with a few technical shots mixed in, which is how true golf should be. Even previous #1 Flyboy Aviation was that way too. Wouldn't it make more sense that the pure type of golf would be the kind that allows the disc to take on its full flight, with some accuracy and shot placement, rather than bouncing off trees for 18 holes? I think the top course ratings reflect this as well.

[optidiscic]

Originally Posted by ceteebird999

I'm looking at Flip City right now I see mostly open bombs with a few technical shots mixed in, which is how true golf should be. Even previous #1 Flyboy Aviation was that way too. Wouldn't it make more sense that the pure type of golf would be the kind that allows the disc to take on its full flight, with some accuracy and shot placement, rather than bouncing off trees for 18 holes? I think the top course ratings reflect this as well.

no

good courses should demand you shape your shot and hit specific lines

I am from PA and you are from Texas

We typically like a few open bombs where a shot is more about placement and we enjoy hitting lines through woods where we are required to shape our disc to avoid trees and have the ability to make recovery shots

[scarpfish]

Originally Posted by ceteebird999

I'm looking at Flip City right now I see mostly open shots with a few technical shots mixed in, which is how true golf should be. Even previous #1 Flyboy Aviation was that way too. Wouldn't it make more sense that the pure type of golf would be the kind that allows the disc to take on its full flight, with some accuracy and shot placement, rather than bouncing off trees for 18 holes?

It would make more sense for people to stop turning their course preferences into some sort of gospel to cover the fact that that certain types of courses aren't going to cater to their skill set, despite the fact that other players have demonstrated success on such courses. Any proclamation that there is some "pure" type of golf is just a cover excuse by people who want to homogenize things.

I think the top course ratings reflect this as well.

Having played #3 and #10 on the list, I think not.

[disc gopher]

I wholeheartedly agree with the article. skinny trees in the middle of fairways are poor design. if there is one tree in the middle of a fairway poor shots can be rewarded and shots that are really only inches away from being straight down the gut can hit that single tree and kick off into oblivion. A horrible shot which is feet from the intended line can find that other gap and have a much better lie than one which was inches from the correct fairway

[optidiscic]

define skinny tree?
I would guess any tree you hit is too skinny

A fat tree or a cluster is better how?
Can you not get a lucky kick off a fat tree

Do we really want to go down this road?