Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app! It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
The real DISCussion, imo, is what tournaments could/should be "Majors". Once the Majors are selected, then the composition of the Grand Slam is set. However, the PDGA has not always selected Majors based solely on a tournament's historical prestige. Heck, there isn't even a standard number of MPO Majors from year to year. I don't personally think a specific quantity is "required" to constitute a Grand Slam, but the number should at least be consistent year to year!
So I guess I see the motivation why some would try to cherry pick which tournaments "should" constitute the Grand Slam of disc golf. But, as long as you're doing that without regards to the Majors, you're approaching the issue from the wrong end.
I 100% agree in theory. From the PDGA's perspective, from what I'm able to glean, is that there's not a critical mass of experienced TD's that can handle producing events of that size, so there's not always the demand.
For example, since the untimely end of the Japan Open, Jussi has been the majority driving force for all overseas majors (Aussie, European Open, European Masters, and Konopiste).
The two biggest needs in the sport right now are competent, talented TD's and better course design. I'll bet we will see some shifting of the Majors in years to come, though I highly doubt European Open, USDGC, and Worlds ever leave that list barring some catastrophe.
It's going to be 20 years before anything akin to this can even be considered. Worlds and USDGC are the only two candidates you could seriously consider at the moment, and even they due to recent changes have lost some of their mystique.
I find myself agreeing with Throwbot's logic. It doesn't have to be that way, but what he writes makes sense. For me the question them becomes, how do you codify?
The real DISCussion, imo, is what tournaments could/should be "Majors". Once the Majors are selected, then the composition of the Grand Slam is set. However, the PDGA has not always selected Majors based solely on a tournament's historical prestige. Heck, there isn't even a standard number of MPO Majors from year to year. I don't personally think a specific quantity is "required" to constitute a Grand Slam, but the number should at least be consistent year to year!
So I guess I see the motivation why some would try to cherry pick which tournaments "should" constitute the Grand Slam of disc golf. But, as long as you're doing that without regards to the Majors, you're approaching the issue from the wrong end.
I 100% agree in theory. From the PDGA's perspective, from what I'm able to glean, is that there's not a critical mass of experienced TD's that can handle producing events of that size, so there's not always the demand.
For example, since the untimely end of the Japan Open, Jussi has been the majority driving force for all overseas majors (Aussie, European Open, European Masters, and Konopiste).
The two biggest needs in the sport right now are competent, talented TD's and better course design. I'll bet we will see some shifting of the Majors in years to come, though I highly doubt European Open, USDGC, and Worlds ever leave that list barring some catastrophe.
I agree with both of you We have at least 2-3 events that make the list but we need to wait to see if the changes make the game at these events better or worse. I know with World Disc Golf Championships they are taking one of the rounds off, Not sure about the others if they are getting major changes. Better Course Design is needed,
I say the 4th spot should be the Pro Tour Championships mostly due to the number of top players from around the world in that but, the event has a bit odd playing system and was at least one year not a PDGA sanctioned event when that Player Got a temporary ban from the PDGA just before that event and I do not remember if event stayed Non PDGA sanctioned.
I agree with both of you We have at least 2-3 events that make the list but we need to wait to see if the changes make the game at these events better or worse. I know with World Disc Golf Championships they are taking one of the rounds off, Not sure about the others if they are getting major changes. Better Course Design is needed,
I say the 4th spot should be the Pro Tour Championships mostly due to the number of top players from around the world in that but, the event has a bit odd playing system and was at least one year not a PDGA sanctioned event when that Player Got a temporary ban from the PDGA just before that event and I do not remember if event stayed Non PDGA sanctioned.
I'm all for giving the DGPT props when they do things well, but their championship event is too odd to be a Major IMO.
I'll toe the traditional line here and say standard stroke play is the only format that should be a proper Major. I fully enjoy match play, stratified stroke play, etc. but it's not the same game at that point.
I'm all for giving the DGPT props when they do things well, but their championship event is too odd to be a Major IMO.
I'll toe the traditional line here and say standard stroke play is the only format that should be a proper Major. I fully enjoy match play, stratified stroke play, etc. but it's not the same game at that point.
My own feelings are the opposite. I'd have no problem with a match play event being part of a Grand Slam---I find some value in winning the top events across a variety of formats.
Not right or wrong. Just a difference in taste.
But I don't think the DGPT championship is there, in status. At least not yet.
....I've been musing for years that, one day, the PDGA will introduce the term "Super Major", for those top events, to distinguish from the "Mere Majors".
My daughter used to dance with a competition team. The awards that were given out at those things were First place, Top First place, and Elite Top First place. Always seemed stupid to me, like we're trying to preserve people's self esteem by calling everyone a first place winner. Set a high standard, and don't give the credit to anyone who doesn't get there.
Same with majors. Set a standard, and anyone who doesn't get there doesn't get the adjective "Major." It's that simple. If people want to get butt-hurt about it, then they need to do some growing up.
There are some tournaments that will always be considered big, whether they are CALLED majors or not.
Should a rotating European tourney be considered a Major? I dont see it on my list for this year the only ones that are left are Konnopiste and European Championships. Or is it's slot a Major as the biggest tourney in Europe... This year Konnopiste, next EO, next European Masters?
Should a rotating European tourney be considered a Major? I dont see it on my list for this year the only ones that are left are Konnopiste and European Championships. Or is it's slot a Major as the biggest tourney in Europe... This year Konnopiste, next EO, next European Masters?
Well, European Open is already a Major. I just want to make that point first.
It's not a "rotating event" in the same way that Worlds is. European Open, as well as the President's Cup, only happens every other year (odd years). For purposes of practical discussion consider this event a surefire bid winner.
Paragraph under spoiler tag is just kinda extra info, a bit tangential to the discussion. Feel free to skip.
Konopiste is a Major this year because of all of the uncertainty around Jarva, and also I don't believe European Masters exists anymore as a brand/tournament. Jussi owns that IIRC and I think he has stepped back a bit from working with Jarva in favor of working in places like Czech Republic, Estonia, etc. Maybe some of our European counterparts can fill in those details if they're pertinent, but that's my long-distance understanding...so grain of salt, ya know?
To better understand all of this we have to have a good understanding of how Majors are awarded, which is through bids, and by region. The PDGA's goal is to have at least one Major in Europe and one in Oceanasia each year, according to their International Bid Guidelines.
A quick look at the past 5 years:
2013: Copenhagen Open (EU), European Open (EU), PDGA Worlds (USA), USDGC/USWDGC (USA) 2014: Japan Open (OA), European Masters (EU), PDGA Worlds (USA), USDGC/USWDGC (USA) 2015: Aussie Open (OA), Scandanavian Open (EU), European Open (EU), PDGA Worlds (USA), USDGC/USWDGC (USA) 2016: European Masters (EU), PDGA Worlds (USA), USDGC/USWDGC (USA) 2017: Aussie Open (OA), European Open (EU), PDGA Worlds (USA), USDGC/USWDGC (USA)
So they're trying to conform a basic pattern, while still allowing for positive deviations - such as Europe hosting 2 Majors in a year in 2013 and 2015. There's also the issue of Oceanasia not having a strong enough scene in general which means that without Shimbo-san (Japan Open TD and frisbee legend) or Jussi (who essentially vouched/consulted for Aussie Open), they're lacking in the experience necessary to handle an event of that caliber.
I say all of this just to give some proper context to the bigger discussion about Majors. In my opinion, formed from my own experiences as well as my relationships with the top pros and "movers and shakers", is that the Majors-as-awarded-currently by the PDGA are events that are seen as the pinnacle of our sport. Especially when talking about the "Big 3" of USDGC, Worlds, and European Open, those events have all of the prestige, tradition, history, and notoriety that is needed to motivate players to play their best. I think 99% of pros will agree that those are the most sought after titles in the sport.
So my sort-of-beef with the posture of this thread is that we already have everything we need in our Majors...in fact we have too much. I think they would stand out much more if we tightened the definition (meaning Amateur and Age-protected events need to no longer be called "Majors"). IMO there should be 4-5 Majors per year, and only 5 if the 5th wheel event deserves it, and we should more properly highlight those events on our calendars as fans (and media!).
My own feelings are the opposite. I'd have no problem with a match play event being part of a Grand Slam---I find some value in winning the top events across a variety of formats.
Not right or wrong. Just a difference in taste.
But I don't think the DGPT championship is there, in status. At least not yet.
I would be 100% OK and would totally encourage a Doubles, Match Play, etc. style event as a National Tour event. In fact even the PGA Tour now does this - the Zurich Classic became a doubles event I believe in 2016.
Most of the time I'm pretty progressive, but in this case I'd prefer consistency personally across Majors since there are fewer (3-4 annually) than NT events (6-7 annually).
Let me ask this question - would Paul's Grand Slam in 2015 be less meaningful if one of those five wins was a Doubles or Match Play event? What if he got through Match play never having to face another Top 5 ranked player?
Let me ask this question - would Paul's Grand Slam in 2015 be less meaningful if one of those five wins was a Doubles or Match Play event? What if he got through Match play never having to face another Top 5 ranked player?
The distinction between match play and doubles is that match play includes someone else's effort, to a much greater degree. Match play might involve luck---or some lower seed knocking a higher seed out for you---but it's still an individual accomplishment.
Four great accomplishments in four different forums has a certain appeal. Worlds and USDGC already have significant differences, though not as much as they did when Worlds was more of a marathon. NT points championship is yet another, though because it's accumulated over a half-dozen events, it's not as dramatic.
But it's a matter of how far from the norm something can go, and still be included. I'd include match play---if a match play event otherwise rose up to the status and prestige of the others---but would draw the line before doubles or team play. I understand how someone else would draw the line on the other side of match play.
^VTI and WVTI bring the supreme match play scenarios. They are team events so they couldn't play a part of any "grand slam." Regardless, they're pretty "major" in my opinion.
