Cam Todd Pro Basket Prototype

[whentherainscome]

Cam's basket would really throw off uphill/downhill putts. Down hill, you have a big bowl with less top to get in your way = way easier. Uphill might be impossible unless you throw your disc like a free throw.

 

[Highway Bill]

The reality is, DG is young grasshopper with much to learn. Out of the 3500+ courses out there, how many were constructed specifically for DG using shaping machines to carve out fairway undulations or build appropriately challenging greens? Zero. Seriously, the NT's and A-tiers are still played on predominately par 3, multi-use park courses. I can't see why anyone would want to change the basket size before the 1st great courses are even constructed.

That would be like changing the hole size in golf before realizing you can create challenging swale on the putting surface or that green side bunkers leave you scrambling to get up and down.

 

[Steve West]

So, we need baskets that make putting harder for pros, but not much harder for rec players, and never have inconsistent catching ability because of the chains.

Once again, the target that meets everyone's goals is to get rid of the chains altogether. Just have the tray on a pole.

 

[Moose33]

I'm not surprised that Cam has come up with this, and that it is something he's been thinking about for a while. The only well above average part of his game is putting and if he feels like it would improve the field for short game gurus and take away some birdies from the distance monsters, why not push it?

As a pretty mediocre putter, I score well by being good enough at accurate drives and approaches that I hopefully don't have to rely on being a good putter to score well. So this would likely not change a round for me much, but it would probably make guys lien Cam, Niko, Yeti Eric score better and iffy putters like Koling and Wiggins fall a bit.

 

[Smigles]

Why do we need new baskets to "solve the evolution of disc technology"?

As far as I know, the putters did not change nearly as much as the drivers did.

A real solution would be more courses with longer holes, par 4 and par 5s etc. Come away from the pitch and putt style some of the old courses have. We dont need new baskets for that.

And no, I dont like making putting harder either. What we would need is a solution for spit outs. No wonder that Cam came up with this idea, putting being the best part of his game and all.

 

[The Ox]

Why do we need new baskets to "solve the evolution of disc technology"?

As far as I know, the putters did not change nearly as much as the drivers did.

A real solution would be more courses with longer holes, par 4 and par 5s etc. Come away from the pitch and putt style some of the old courses have. We dont need new baskets for that.

And no, I dont like making putting harder either. What we would need is a solution for spit outs. No wonder that Cam came up with this idea, putting being the best part of his game and all.

Today's baskets were designed at about the same time people were playing with larger diameter discs such as the Aero.

Not every course designer will be able to use the land they need to make longer "harder" holes.

There are tons of variables when it comes to course design dictating difficulty of play, but the basket itself is a constant, it doesn't change ... but what if it did ?

There was once time everyone thought the world was flat ...

 

[DiscFifty]

Not every course designer will be able to use the land they need to make longer "harder" holes.

There was once time everyone thought the world was flat ...

What's your opinion on making fairways harder rather than longer? Like you said once the land is secured it's impossible to make things longer and longer doesn't make it more challenging other than who has the furthest arm and c'mon, hyzer 400ft, putt...hyzer 400ft, putt...gets boring for the pros as well I'm sure.

So what about putting in islands, mandos, etc, to existing holes to make them harder? Granted pin wheels, light houses, etc, are out of the question but seems so logical to add things like big boulders surrounding a green or a basket, creating an island mando half way down the fairway, etc, these are creative things that can be added to any course to make them harder and I don't see many people on board with these ideas. Perhaps I'm missing something?

 

[IHearChains]

I think the touring pros get dialed in on the par 3 courses during practice, so that every shot they take during the round is one they've already thrown 10 times in practice.

Par 4/5 courses are the way to go, especially with careful design of the 1st landing zone. Create the need for everyone on the card to assess different lines from their lie. Every time you play the hole, when you walk up to the lie for your 2nd drive, it's going to be a slightly different location with a different line. That's the fun part of the game, planning a new and different line, and executing it despite never practicing it before. A more cerebral game will be more fun for recs and more challenging for pros.

Putting isn't cerebral, it's standardized and routine for the most part (with some exceptions like wind or trees in the circle). So with putting, success/failure usually comes down to whether you execute the usual routine, not whether you solved a mental puzzle, thought clearly and planned effectively.

So my opinion is NO don't change the baskets. Making the target smaller takes a routine, standardized part of the game and makes it more frustrating, but not more interesting at all.

 

[Smigles]

Today's baskets were designed at about the same time people were playing with larger diameter discs such as the Aero.



There was once time everyone thought the world was flat ...

The aero that innova is still producing that is an amazing 0,5 cm wider than normal drivers? 21.7 cm vs 21.1. That is not really that big a difference.


And i really dont know how that passive aggressive flat world comment does your presentation of your case any good.

 

[teemkey]

This i agree with. I think smaller targets for the NT makes a lot of sense at this point. Lead cards at 40 or 50 odd-number under par just seems crazy. It's competitive between those guys, and that's the point, but it does seem that courses have gotten way too easy for the top guys. Smaller targets seem like a good way to slow down that trend. Good luck with the fund-raising.

An easier way to avoid excessively under par scores is to adjust the par for the pros. Take the top 25% of the pro scores from previous events and adjust to taste. Cheap, easy, and available to everyone with a spreadsheet.

 

[cjdiscgolf]

Basket changes are needed. We know this. Putting is way too easy.

This site has 4,893 courses listed. Between 9 holers and courses with more than 18 holes, let's say the average is 18 holes.

That's 88,074 baskets to change.

I don't know how this is remotely possible. Some people can't get a town to understand why we need tee-signs and we are supposed to sell them on the idea of a fully functional basket that is no longer used?

Good luck. Glad I don't have to have those conversations.

 

[loki the trickster]

Today's baskets were designed at about the same time people were playing with larger diameter discs such as the Aero.

Not every course designer will be able to use the land they need to make longer "harder" holes.

There are tons of variables when it comes to course design dictating difficulty of play, but the basket itself is a constant, it doesn't change ... but what if it did ?

There was once time everyone thought the world was flat ...

This takes so many words out of my figurative mouth!

you can make the baskets more challenging and make courses that have history relevant. That just one part of what a smaller basket will do.

The second is it will make the 45'- 100' jump putt vanish. People keep saying look at the top pros when they are not doing so hot.... they miss putts as close as 20'. Your right! They Do and will miss 20'-30' putts all the time. But at the same time it makes the green/circle far more relevant! No more oops i hit the tree on my drive i have 200' to go, but if i can get the disc some where near 50'-60' mark i have a easy chance to save par.

I dont see why a master or amateur should dictate what is good for the sport! If you are never going to play tournaments then why worry about how small people want to make a basket? every player in your feild will be using the same dam basket if the basket standards change and you do play tournaments.


Amd just to re state the obvious the game of disc golf is based on what a professional can do with a expert drive and 2 putts! Also in tournament play par is irrelevant cause to be the top player you just need to do netter then the rest of the feild. You can be a pro and shoot +5 par and win ifthe next golfer shoots a +6.

 

[loki the trickster]

An easier way to avoid excessively under par scores is to adjust the par for the pros. Take the top 25% of the pro scores from previous events and adjust to taste. Cheap, easy, and available to everyone with a spreadsheet.

This is pointless cause par does not matter in a tournament. pros usually don say eagle, birdie or par they say 3,4,5 or 8. What a smaller target does is reduce the +45' jump putt makes. So no more sloppy appproach shots that land 60' out and oh well I'll just jump putt this in and ah i just saved that stroke shots.

Is short it does not give any player a high percentage of making the long stroke saves after a bad drive and approach. Basically it makes the circle more relevant.

 

[CaptainAnhyzer]

Once again, the target that meets everyone's goals is to get rid of the chains altogether. Just have the tray on a pole.

Makes me wonder why we added all them chains and made the tray twice as deep.

12 outer chains was enough.
I got my first 7 aces on Mach 1's

 

[Smigles]

An easier way to avoid excessively under par scores is to adjust the par for the pros. Take the top 25% of the pro scores from previous events and adjust to taste. Cheap, easy, and available to everyone with a spreadsheet.

And it would bring PAR closer back to what PAR actually stands for. I am all for that

Par does not matter though. It's just a number. It's not like in ball golf where it is actually used for a handicap system and stuff.

 

[Smigles]

No more oops i hit the tree on my drive i have 200' to go, but if i can get the disc some where near 50'-60' mark i have a easy chance to save par.

Yeah please make a video of you hitting "easy" 50-60 footers consistantly and you'll have a point.

Till then :hfive:

 

[simpletwist]

If/when the baskets get harder say bye bye to the growth of disc golf.

 

[Nemmers]

Basket changes are needed. We know this.

I disagree. Who's "we?"

Putting is way too easy.

Speak for yourself! If it's so easy, why do players miss from the circle so often?

This site has 4,893 courses listed. Between 9 holers and courses with more than 18 holes, let's say the average is 18 holes.

That's 88,074 baskets to change.

I don't know how this is remotely possible. Some people can't get a town to understand why we need tee-signs and we are supposed to sell them on the idea of a fully functional basket that is no longer used?

Good luck. Glad I don't have to have those conversations.

Agreed, but not because changing all the baskets on all the courses listed on DGCR would take a Herculean effort -- which isn't even the point of the OP -- but because it's completely unnecessary.

 

[Nemmers]

If/when the baskets get harder say bye bye to the growth of disc golf.

 

[Cgkdisc]

If basket size ever had any bearing at all on the growth of disc golf, Steady Ed would have made the basket huge. I don't see it as relevant to this discussion. Here's a case where size doesn't matter in terms of growth.