Cam Todd Pro Basket Prototype

[Mocheez]

Ball golf is doing the opposite and has been experimenting with larger holes to make the game more fun and draw more recreational players. (Can A Bigger Holes Save Golf?)

I think a switch to smaller baskets is probably necessary on a professional level. On the other hand, the baskets that currently exists are perfect for the recreational player. Aces are an exciting part of the game (seems like some people play for that reason alone). Last week I saw a guy **** his pants after he threw an ace on a wide open 160 foot hole. For that reason, I definitely like the concept of making the basket adjustable to maintain the fun factor for recreational players.

 

[Mixed Bag Madness]

Watch the Texas states videos and then tell me how easy putting is for the top pros. Simon misses a putt on the last hole that's 10ft max. Should we make the rims in basketball smaller now since Steph Curry and the like drain 3's SO EASY now?

 

[loki the trickster]

Ball golf is doing the opposite and has been experimenting with larger holes to make the game more fun and draw more recreational players. (Can A Bigger Holes Save Golf?)

I think a switch to smaller baskets is probably necessary on a professional level. On the other hand, the baskets that currently exists are perfect for the recreational player. Aces are an exciting part of the game (seems like some people play for that reason alone). Last week I saw a guy **** his pants after he threw an ace on a wide open 160 foot hole. For that reason, I definitely like the concept of making the basket adjustable to maintain the fun factor for recreational players.

Traditional golf is 9.8 times out of 10 on A) private land B) requires membership or fees to play. So basically traditional golf needs casual day to day golfers to spend money. So larger cups make sense to get more run of the mill casual golfers to play. Disc golf is for the most part on public park land, so it does not need any golfers to sustain or spend money to keep the park/course open.

As for hole in one... they are a luck shot and there is really no way around it. I am not saying i dont have any or dont like them but that i never plan to get any. A ace and or hole in one is about the same as walking down the street and a $20 bill comes tumbling in front of you.

 

[Jenga54]

If the pros are getting bored why don't we give them better courses to play on?

I don't understand why more missed putts make the game more exciting. Pros will be good at putting. If you want better golf in my opinion, have BETTER GOLF all around! Lets play on courses that require some decision making, some strategy, some risk/reward, some dangers! (Some par 4s!)

I love watching pros play Par 4s and Par 5s. Where does the first shot need to land? Where's the best approach come from?

Approach shots from the tee are boring, because they are all the same. I think the Par 72 group has the right idea.

Vista Par 60 - 6 Par 4 - 0 Par 5
Fountain Par 56 - 2 Par 4 - 0 Par 5
Fiesta Par 56 - 2 Par 4 - 0 Par 5
For an NT event like the Memorial, that's sad you have to admit.

 

[Slider]

There are a lot of courses where you have to work with the land you have and can't have many par 4's or even a par 5 and taking a couple inches off each side isn't too extreme and were not talking the bullseye basket. I also don't think disc golf has a "complex" with ball golf, but it really sounds a little silly from a non disc golfer to hear someone get 40 down, the game sounds easy. When you putt around, take a look at the basket and see if 2 inches would have affected too many of your putts? My guess is a lot of them hit the pole when practicing.

 

[dekdo]

If the pros are getting bored why don't we give them better courses to play on?

I don't understand why more missed putts make the game more exciting. Pros will be good at putting. If you want better golf in my opinion, have BETTER GOLF all around! Lets play on courses that require some decision making, some strategy, some risk/reward, some dangers! (Some par 4s!)

I love watching pros play Par 4s and Par 5s. Where does the first shot need to land? Where's the best approach come from?

Approach shots from the tee are boring, because they are all the same. I think the Par 72 group has the right idea.

Vista Par 60 - 6 Par 4 - 0 Par 5
Fountain Par 56 - 2 Par 4 - 0 Par 5
Fiesta Par 56 - 2 Par 4 - 0 Par 5
For an NT event like the Memorial, that's sad you have to admit.

I agree with this. We need better/bigger courses... not necessarily smaller baskets. McBeth himself even said he'd like to see bigger courses with actual fairways instead of just trees all over the place.

 

[1978]

Like Mr. Sauls, I don't want to start another discussion on "What is Par?" but I certainly agree that for our top Pros, par in DG is too easy.

Don't change the baskets, change the Par. When you see a top Pro park a Par 4, 500' hole and drop in for an Eagle, you got the Par wrong. Make it a 3. When you see 3 out of 4 Pros Eagle a Par 5, make it a Par 4.
If some noob or old hacker (me) steps up to the tee and struggles to even Bogey, either step up your (my) game or go to a shorter pad.
I'm not in favor of making DG like stick golf, but the easiest way to change a 100 under par at Worlds is to change the par, not the basket.

The problem with changing the definition of par on a course is that pros birdie holes from 0-550' 0-400 regularly. I'm not sure I exactly like this basket, haven't tried it...but I think par 2's is a WAY dumber idea. That's the only way you change pars on holes under say, 430'. Also, who cares if people get birdies. Stop putting up "under par" and put up total score. Done. No changes needed. This is all a visual thing. The best players are still going to be the best players regardless of if you call all holes par 1 or if we put in a skinny basket. Why do people care so much what par is. I come up on par 3's I KNOW are par 4s and vice versa. I still have to play the hole.

 

[1978]

There is nothing lazy about Stan McDaniel. He has worked harder to grow this sport than most people could imagine. Hundreds if not thousands of hours running a chainsaw. Suggesting that he has a stake in this vestment is absolutely incorrect. Send him a PM, I'm sure he'd enjoy conversing.

Thousands if not 10's of thousands of hours of just saw running. Maybe 10 times that in other course building activities.

 

[Mocheez]

Traditional golf is 9.8 times out of 10 on A) private land B) requires membership or fees to play. So basically traditional golf needs casual day to day golfers to spend money. So larger cups make sense to get more run of the mill casual golfers to play. Disc golf is for the most part on public park land, so it does not need any golfers to sustain or spend money to keep the park/course open.

As for hole in one... they are a luck shot and there is really no way around it. I am not saying i dont have any or dont like them but that i never plan to get any. A ace and or hole in one is about the same as walking down the street and a $20 bill comes tumbling in front of you.

You are right, the parks don't need people to spend money to keep it open. On the other hand, we wouldn't have touring professionals if there weren't recreational players buying discs and other merchandise from the companies that sponsor the pros. Recreational players are necessary to support and sustain both sports.

I do agree with you on hole-in-ones. I am about as non-chalant as you can be when it comes to aces. Mainly because I don't feel a sense of achievement after spraying shots all over the place on previous holes. If you throw the disc at a basket enough times, it's bound to go in at some point.

 

[tomdizzlefizzle]

Its just a sweet looking basket. What's the big deal if pros choose to play on them? I feel putting wouldn't be that much harder(at least inside the circle) on these you still aim for the pole and if you hit your mark you probably make your putt. These baskets will allow for more missed putts not to stick. Pretty sweet. Nice work cam

 

[1978]

An XC-Tier like that would be a step in the right direction to generate some really good data and is something Cam has talked about.

The true target audience is Pros. It's understandable that casual/Rec players would not be overly welcome to the idea of having less of a basket area to hit.

There are no, Pro only courses. Pro's are like less than 1% of over all players, and No offense to pros, have even less influence in the growth of disc golf all together. We know the names but 99% of the people buying discs dont, unless they recognize them from a beast, boss, leopard, or valk. The best way to grow the sport is to have killer courses (not difficulty necessary) but maintained, safe, with amenities. This is what brings the rec player back time and time again. They wouldnt even notice the basket difference. If Cams basket is on a crap course, no ones going to play it. if its on a baller course, people will play it regardless.

 

[loki the trickster]

The problem with changing the definition of par on a course is that pros birdie holes from 0-550' 0-400 regularly. I'm not sure I exactly like this basket, haven't tried it...but I think par 2's is a WAY dumber idea. That's the only way you change pars on holes under say, 430'. Also, who cares if people get birdies. Stop putting up "under par" and put up total score. Done. No changes needed. This is all a visual thing. The best players are still going to be the best players regardless of if you call all holes par 1 or if we put in a skinny basket. Why do people care so much what par is. I come up on par 3's I KNOW are par 4s and vice versa. I still have to play the hole.

I was going to make that statement last night but i was to tired.^^^

if par is what a expert golfer will do with a "perfect" drive and 2 putts then you change how par is calculated such as a drive and a putt then you are still not changing how well a golfer plays you are only changing how the score is perceived. tournament are scored on strokes taken. So you only need to win by one stoke. So if that means if you are +1 par and the next best is +2 the +1 is good enought to take the win.

 

[DiscJunkie]

Nevemind.
Don't want to say what I was going to say...

 

[nolangherity]

never heard of cam todd (lol i almost typed tam codd) but that basket is tight!

im imagining that you could have a rope and pulley system on the adjuster unit and you could set up your basket all the way from the tee square. ive got a lot of ideas for DG regarding rope and pulleys.

 

[broomerang]

Obviously my opinion is for leaving the baskets as is, at least until harder courses are designed and the pro circuit is more formalized. I have made my points earlier in the thread.

My response to some very valid points from the other side would be as follows:

Since these efforts of improvement to the PRO sport are being aimed at only PRO players. If this basket, or any basket with a similar design has the support of so many high level, influential pro players (lizotte, Mcbeth, Feldy, Cam, and others based on comments in the thread) then a full scale test on an already challenging and established event is the only true test of their effectiveness.

Therefore instead of asking for money from a recreational and amateur community of players, Cam should be asking EVERY 1000+ rated PRO to sign a petition to get his basket PDGA approved and placed at the USDGC.

The USDGC is the perfect test bed for any smaller basket. Its an established course with limited room to expand holes. It has limited ability to modify holes in a way that introduces new challenge without construction costs for object placement (like the triple mando hole), and it already has a TON of marked OB to increase challenge.

Winthrop is pretty much at its peak for challenge, the only thing that could make that course more challenging without huge cost or major radical changes to the landscape (which would never happen) is introducing a smaller basket.

If the PRO players really believe that this is the next step in DG, then lets see them back it up with THEIR approval and support. AND ideally, their monetary donation to improve the PRO circuit.

 

[thatdirtykid]

Obviously my opinion is for leaving the baskets as is, at least until harder courses are designed and the pro circuit is more formalized. I have made my points earlier in the thread.

My response to some very valid points from the other side would be as follows:

Since these efforts of improvement to the PRO sport are being aimed at only PRO players. If this basket, or any basket with a similar design has the support of so many high level, influential pro players (lizotte, Mcbeth, Feldy, Cam, and others based on comments in the thread) then a full scale test on an already challenging and established event is the only true test of their effectiveness.

Therefore instead of asking for money from a recreational and amateur community of players, Cam should be asking EVERY 1000+ rated PRO to sign a petition to get his basket PDGA approved and placed at the USDGC.

The USDGC is the perfect test bed for any smaller basket. Its an established course with limited room to expand holes. It has limited ability to modify holes in a way that introduces new challenge without construction costs for object placement (like the triple mando hole), and it already has a TON of marked OB to increase challenge.

Winthrop is pretty much at its peak for challenge, the only thing that could make that course more challenging without huge cost or major radical changes to the landscape (which would never happen) is introducing a smaller basket.

If the PRO players really believe that this is the next step in DG, then lets see them back it up with THEIR approval and support. AND ideally, their monetary donation to improve the PRO circuit.

That would be awesome. I am sure that people would be afraid if its a flop that it would ruin how prestige the title is, but I am all for it. (I want to play Winthrop Gold someday...)

 

[broomerang]

That would be awesome. I am sure that people would be afraid if its a flop that it would ruin how prestige the title is, but I am all for it. (I want to play Winthrop Gold someday...)

They could organize it during the practice rounds. Obviously Innova will not let anyone replace their branded baskets during the competition itself.

Which only brings up another problem we're facing with all of the new innovations to baskets in the last 10 years. There is no standardized basket, and even worse, they all catch differently. We really need everything to be the same (on the pro circuit, meaning National Tour and Majors) other than branding if the sport is going to move into the next level.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Moving to the "next level" will require a significant jump in spectators to justify the cost to get there. A smaller basket could be even less interesting to watch than our current baskets (more misses) even if it turns out to be more challenging and interesting for the pros to throw at.

 

[tomdizzlefizzle]

They could organize it during the practice rounds. Obviously Innova will not let anyone replace their branded baskets during the competition itself.

Which only brings up another problem we're facing with all of the new innovations to baskets in the last 10 years. There is no standardized basket, and even worse, they all catch differently. We really need everything to be the same (on the pro circuit, meaning National Tour and Majors) other than branding if the sport is going to move into the next level.

I am a little opposite on standardized baskets. Kind of how baseball has different ballparks, disc golf courses have different targets giving different personalities. I like that.

 

[broomerang]

I am a little opposite on standardized baskets. Kind of how baseball has different ballparks, disc golf courses have different targets giving different personalities. I like that.

I'm sorry but that is completely different analogies.

Disc Golf Course Hole design being different is the same as Baseball Park outfield design being different. Not basket type.

The Infield Diamond is exactly the same at all Parks, a basketball hoop is exactly the same, and a football goal is exactly the same (in their respective league, not sure if it varies between sanctioned bodies, it probably does)