#31  
Old 10-10-2012, 11:06 AM
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is offline
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 25.4
Courses Played: 586
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,630
And my question is (for this particular game format): "Why should you be able to progress until you have executed an appropriate throw inbounds?"
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-10-2012, 11:56 AM
_MTL_ _MTL_ is offline
I think I'm important
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 21.3
Courses Played: 105
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,947
Send a message via AIM to _MTL_ Send a message via Yahoo to _MTL_
I don't think people really are questioning the re-throw aspect of the rules, rather the non-penalty stroke on top of it.

Stroke and distance the last two year was too crazy and this year was too simple.

A hybird of the rules is really what is best, imo. Holes like 10 and 12 needs stroke and distance to make them tougher. Holes like 13 and 17 don't need it b/c they are hard enough.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-10-2012, 12:07 PM
DiscJunkie's Avatar
DiscJunkie DiscJunkie is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Wilmington, NC
Years Playing: 6.3
Courses Played: 32
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 3,413
If I may weigh in with a personal observation to go along with all the expert analysis on this thread:
This was one of the most fun USDGC's to watch...ever.
Friday, I was standing between the last two groups on #8.
As the 2nd card left the basket, I stood on the edge of the wood chips at #8's basket to watch the first card tee off.
Will threw first and threw it all the way to our feet. We were stunned that he made it that far.
Nikko threw two good, but unlucky, rollers that didn't make it through a small OB "pocket" area. Then he threw an airshot that made it past where the rollers died.

All those things would not have happened with a normal OB rule.
They wouldn't have risked it.
Whether or not the rule was a good thing can be debated by everyone, but for a couple spectators, it was "just right".
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-10-2012, 01:51 PM
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is offline
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 25.4
Courses Played: 586
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,630
T&D should never be used in the field of play as a risk/reward design element. Too punitive relative to other offline throws. As in ball golf, it should only be involved when players throw off the course property and hopefully there are few property lines near fairways.

If we had a game where there were two levels of poor throws similar to rough and heavy rough in ball golf, T&D might make sense as the second tier of bad shot. For example, imagine double lined fairways on both sides where if you landed in between the lines on either side, you got an OB penalty but still threw from that lie. If you threw beyond both lines, it would be T&D where you rethrew plus got a penalty.

This design structure would provide stepped risk/reward that matched the badness of a throw where there was a 1-shot penalty zone then a 2-shot penalty zone with just 1 shot increase when crossing the next border. The problem with T&D as part of our current course risk/reward structures is a slightly offline shot goes from being good to 2 shots worse being only an inch farther off line. That 2-shot step is not justified and is too much for smooth scoring separation.

The evolution of hole 17 at Winthrop over the years has illustrated this point. In the earlier versions using T&D penalties from the tee (even with a drop zone after 2 misses), it produced a scoring distribution with lots of 2s and 4s (and 6s and 8s and a 17 or two) and hardly any 3s on what was supposed to be a par 3 hole. Even on ball golf island holes, they have more 3s than 2s or 4s and they never require Stroke & Distance penalties. There's always an optional drop zone.

The more recent versions of hole 17 with the optional lay up area used frequently when T&D was the rule or the buncr rule used for a few years produces more 3s than any other score and the scoring distribution has become more normal.

Last edited by Cgkdisc; 10-10-2012 at 01:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-10-2012, 02:45 PM
grodney's Avatar
grodney grodney is online now
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Years Playing: 32.7
Courses Played: 117
Posts: 2,503
Or maybe DG needs to deviate from BG and have stroke-and-distance everywhere, to make it a legit game.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-10-2012, 02:48 PM
_MTL_ _MTL_ is offline
I think I'm important
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 21.3
Courses Played: 105
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,947
Send a message via AIM to _MTL_ Send a message via Yahoo to _MTL_
Quote:
Originally Posted by grodney View Post
Or maybe DG needs to deviate from BG and have stroke-and-distance everywhere, to make it a legit game.
Only way to make disc golf harder with making things dumb is simply make the baskets smaller.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 10-10-2012, 03:04 PM
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is offline
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 25.4
Courses Played: 586
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,630
Or make the putter diameter bigger (Pros must use Super Class for putting).
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-10-2012, 03:12 PM
_MTL_ _MTL_ is offline
I think I'm important
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 21.3
Courses Played: 105
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,947
Send a message via AIM to _MTL_ Send a message via Yahoo to _MTL_
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
Or make the putter diameter bigger (Pros must use Super Class for putting).
IMHO, anything that changes what is thrown or how it's thrown (aka Stand and Deliver and crap like that) is a TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE idea.

The only thing fair is simply reduce the size of the target. That way no one is forced to chance the way they play.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 10-10-2012, 03:12 PM
gdub58 gdub58 is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Cincinnati
Years Playing: 6
Courses Played: 103
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
T&D should never be used in the field of play as a risk/reward design element. Too punitive relative to other offline throws. As in ball golf, it should only be involved when players throw off the course property and hopefully there are few property lines near fairways.

If we had a game where there were two levels of poor throws similar to rough and heavy rough in ball golf, T&D might make sense as the second tier of bad shot. For example, imagine double lined fairways on both sides where if you landed in between the lines on either side, you got an OB penalty but still threw from that lie. If you threw beyond both lines, it would be T&D where you rethrew plus got a penalty.

This design structure would provide stepped risk/reward that matched the badness of a throw where there was a 1-shot penalty zone then a 2-shot penalty zone with just 1 shot increase when crossing the next border. The problem with T&D as part of our current course risk/reward structures is a slightly offline shot goes from being good to 2 shots worse being only an inch farther off line. That 2-shot step is not justified and is too much for smooth scoring separation.

.
I don't completely agree with your ball golf comparison. While a fair amount of OB is "off course property", it is generally placed to take one side of the hole out of play - it carries the harshest penalty (same as a lost ball) because the course designer is telling you to err on the opposite side, and on the toughest holes there is something (bunkers, lateral hazard) on that opposite side. I've seen OB on a dogleg hole where there is another fairway in the OB area to discourage players from trying to cut the dogleg and hit someone in the other fairway.

I think the buncr rule should be used to create something analagous to very heavy rough or a sand bunker in ball golf, and as such should be enforced differently as you have suggested - you play from the buncr area, but you add a shot rather than throwing your original shot again without penalty.

There should be a mix of penalties, but I don't think a graduated system as you propose is ideal. Have some T&D penalties - it's like a mando in the sense that the T&D OB areas are there to greatly discourage certain shot shapes or mistakes on one side of the rough. This would be comparable to OB areas in ball golf.

Some roped-off areas should have drop zones, which is a lesser penalty than full T&D but is still worse than a buncr area, which would carry a penalty throw but you throw it from where it lies.

Three levels of penalty, each useful in certain circumstances. Having mostly/only one level is a bit lazy IMO.
Reply With Quote
 

  #40  
Old 10-10-2012, 03:13 PM
grodney's Avatar
grodney grodney is online now
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Years Playing: 32.7
Courses Played: 117
Posts: 2,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by _MTL_ View Post
simply make the baskets smaller.
Well, it's not simple on a widespread scale, but I've been advocating it for years.

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 08:44 AM.


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