What turn the key is missing

[Brychanus]

Ah, the reverend Bayes. I did a phd on that stuff without ever completely understanding it lol.

Regarding hands, I've literally never met anyone with longer hands/fingers than me (anyone for Thumb War?) and i always throw with an A grip of some sort.

Grip: I'm a short finger (esp. index), big palm guy so intuitively I'm starting to understand better why I'm more like B2.5 or B3 and use them most frequently on everything up to fairway drivers, but those same grips are harder on distance drivers due to straining the index finger's reach.

The A grip line gives more access of index finger for distance drivers, but changes the leverage and thumb/finger pressure depending on where I put the rear side/number.

One way to test and find out!

Edit: already some versions that have nose down, but nose of disc doesn't come all the way around. Small adjustments in that grip space seem to allow the nose to come more around and nose down. Trying to see what the sweet spot is. Will tinker a bit and test.

Edit 2: seems possible that between A and B is "best" for my distance drivers. Still trying to figure out what's going on for the numeric end.

 

[Brychanus]

Ah, the reverend Bayes. I did a phd on that stuff without ever completely understanding it lol.

Bayes was one of those special people.

For the visual types I always liked this way of showing it.

Basically your value (mean or median) and confidence (spread of data/distribution) in your prior beliefs vs. new evidence (mean or median and their spread) should cause you to update your beliefs ("posterior") as a function of both (assuming sound methods).

And yeah you can spend a career studying that basic idea and still understand new things lol

 

[BenjiHeywood]

Also, what i love about the dunning Kruger is that they didn't find what people think they found.

They found that people with lots of knowledge about something were less confident compared to their level of expertise. They didn't find that the most knowledgeable were actually less confident, only that their confidence didn't increase as fast as their knowledge did.

From Wikipedia:

"Nor does it claim that people lacking a given skill are as confident as high performers. Rather, low performers overestimate themselves but their confidence level is still below that of high performers."

 

[BenjiHeywood]

Bayes was one of those special people.

For the visual types I always liked this way of showing it.

Basically your value (mean or median) and confidence (spread of data/distribution) in your prior beliefs vs. new evidence (mean or median and their spread) should cause you to update your beliefs ("posterior") as a function of both (assuming sound methods).

And you can spend a career studying that basic idea and still understand new things lol

Yeah, the concept itself is simple and intuitive. And very clever.

I was applying some Bayesian Maximum Entropy software developed for improving resolution in astronomical photos and applying it to very sparse spatial distribution data of krill in the Antarctic ocean. Madness, but they paid me to study it so . I'd love to pretend i understood it properly. In the end i wrote it all up for an MPhil instead of a PhD because there was no viva where they could ask difficult questions.

 

[Brychanus]

Also, what i love about the dunning Kruger is that they didn't find what people think they found.

They found that people with lots of knowledge about something were less confident compared to their level of expertise. They didn't find that the most knowledgeable were actually less confident, only that their confidence didn't increase as fast as their knowledge did.

From Wikipedia:

"Nor does it claim that people lacking a given skill are as confident as high performers. Rather, low performers overestimate themselves but their confidence level is still below that of high performers."

Just to make things more juicy, there is more research about "trait" or overall confidence and domain-specific confidence. We humans are a complex bunch.

 

[BenjiHeywood]

Just to make things more juicy, there is more research about "trait" or overall confidence and domain-specific confidence. We humans are a complex bunch.

Definitely. Similarly, i always find it interesting that people can be fixed-mindset about some skills/traits while at the same time being growth-mindset about other skills. Quite odd when you have someone very coachable who suddenly turns out to be almost uncoachable about some other aspect.

 

[disc-golf-neil]

Grip: I'm a short finger (esp. index), big palm guy so intuitively I'm starting to understand better why I'm more like B2.5 or B3 and use them most frequently on everything up to fairway drivers, but those same grips are harder on distance drivers due to straining the index finger's reach.

The A grip line gives more access of index finger for distance drivers, but changes the leverage and thumb/finger pressure depending on where I put the rear side/number.

One way to test and find out!

Edit: already some versions that have nose down, but nose of disc doesn't come all the way around. Small adjustments in that grip space seem to allow the nose to come more around and nose down. Trying to see what the sweet spot is. Will tinker a bit and test.

Edit 2: seems possible that between A and B is "best" for my distance drivers. Still trying to figure out what's going on for the numeric end.

Connor O'Reilly says he moves from 2 to 3 for more anhyzer.

It might not literally change anhyzer but could indirectly make you want to throw more anhyzer if you normally are at B2.

For example I was confused before about pronation being nose up, bc when I pronate I have an instinct to adjust my swing plane so I'm still throwing towards the back of my hand because if you exaggerate pronation the disc does really want to rio and spin out, hence it's used for practice swings, easy to not release it.

For people with longer fingers, that's why I left 'C' on there because they could maybe actually reach while starting at C.

Also, @Brychanus in between is definitely a thing on letters. Dang. Now I wish I labeled those. A.5 just doesn't roll of the tongue very well.

A friend told me he's saw a good player holding the rim bisecting the middle finger to align it before gripping.

 

[Brychanus]

Connor O'Reilly says he moves from 2 to 3 for more anhyzer.

It might not literally change anhyzer but could indirectly make you want to throw more anhyzer if you normally are at B2.

For example I was confused before about pronation being nose up, bc when I pronate I have an instinct to adjust my swing plane so I'm still throwing towards the back of my hand because if you exaggerate pronation the disc does really want to rio and spin out, hence it's used for practice swings, easy to not release it.

For people with longer fingers, that's why I left 'C' on there because they could maybe actually reach while starting at C.

Also, @Brychanus in between is definitely a thing on letters. Dang. Now I wish I labeled those. A.5 just doesn't roll of the tongue very well.

A friend told me he's saw a good player holding the rim bisecting the middle finger to align it before gripping.

Yeah I do like how you have letters vs. numbers because that distinction is clear. You could maybe go A 1, 2, 3 for the finger side and B 1, 2, 3 etc for the palm side and then you can use numbers for both. Or F and P or something, respectively.*

Using the existing labeling system: Immediately It was clear if I am more "A.5" or an "AB tweener" on the finger side on the widest rim drivers, the fine line that is hard to put into words based on how I align it on the palm side is related to how the flow of leverage and pressure works, where the "best" grip "feels" very similar to what I use for my B2.5 to B3 grips for Putters, Mids, or Fairway drivers. The "hammer pound" is the "same" thing across them. I can test explicitly if the "best" one for the Distance drivers means I will tend to throw slightly less hyzer (preferred plane)/more anhyzer automatically. Quotation marks just to emphasize there's a little wiggle room in interpretation there.

Also, your middle finger bisection is interesting because it seems to naturally put my putters, mids, and fairways closer to that B2 or B3 range, and then makes it clearer why my distance drivers want to adjust to closer to A on finger side to account for maintaining grip/pivot off the index finger and leverage etc.


Makes more sense to me that C is theoretically an option with very long fingers, I would be curious to see in that case.


I think there's more to show/discuss about the end phase into the release point and how we're talking about the anatomical sequence because the pressure and "resistance" phase of committing the disc thru that release point is complex, but I want to get slightly more organized before I write anything.

*If you want to think about an anatomical system which seems a little tricky depending on what to emphasize:

Hand & Wrist Injuries & Surgery Types | OINT Hand & Wrist Care

Explore hand and wrist anatomy, injuries, and surgery types. Access expert care for various hand and wrist conditions with comprehensive solutions at OINT.

www.oint.org

 

[disc-golf-neil]

Albert Tamm surprisingly didn't seem to know about / have heard turn the key.

He tried it compared to his normal cue and within a few tries basically quadrupled his nose down and was very surprised and interested. However, this was throwing into the net and he was throwing lower launch angles so maybe his normal nose down cue produces more nose down when he throws higher launch angles.

 

[disc-golf-neil]

Yeah I do like how you have letters vs. numbers because that distinction is clear. You could maybe go A 1, 2, 3 for the finger side and B 1, 2, 3 etc for the palm side and then you can use numbers for both. Or F and P or something, respectively.*

Using the existing labeling system: Immediately It was clear if I am more "A.5" or an "AB tweener" on the finger side on the widest rim drivers, the fine line that is hard to put into words based on how I align it on the palm side is related to how the flow of leverage and pressure works, where the "best" grip "feels" very similar to what I use for my B2.5 to B3 grips for Putters, Mids, or Fairway drivers. The "hammer pound" is the "same" thing across them. I can test explicitly if the "best" one for the Distance drivers means I will tend to throw slightly less hyzer (preferred plane)/more anhyzer automatically. Quotation marks just to emphasize there's a little wiggle room in interpretation there.

Also, your middle finger bisection is interesting because it seems to naturally put my putters, mids, and fairways closer to that B2 or B3 range, and then makes it clearer why my distance drivers want to adjust to closer to A on finger side to account for maintaining grip/pivot off the index finger and leverage etc.


Makes more sense to me that C is theoretically an option with very long fingers, I would be curious to see in that case.


I think there's more to show/discuss about the end phase into the release point and how we're talking about the anatomical sequence because the pressure and "resistance" phase of committing the disc thru that release point is complex, but I want to get slightly more organized before I write anything.

*If you want to think about an anatomical system which seems a little tricky depending on what to emphasize:

Hand & Wrist Injuries & Surgery Types | OINT Hand & Wrist Care

Explore hand and wrist anatomy, injuries, and surgery types. Access expert care for various hand and wrist conditions with comprehensive solutions at OINT.

www.oint.org

What do you think about just re-lettering and number them so that letters start at A but then B is the base of the index finger and C between index and middle, then D is base of middle finger, etc.

Then the numbers could have less space between them so there's less chance of having to ".5" them.

I need to relabel it soon if I'm going to though since I'm starting to use these labels in my tests, relabeling earlier isn't that bad but later on would suck.

Also the reason I think alignment is a better focus is because there's probably less variation in people's finger positions and definitely the wrist to forearm connection is pretty consistent (center of palm is pretty centered to the start of the forearm and is rarely significantly off center?). But finger length is a lot more variable and of course will affect things. But if the disc ejects cleanly with the alignment of the disc maintained, it should be easier to draw some generalizations there, like starting at A is more nose up and so would require certain grip pressure / finger positions or other adjustments to become more nose down.

 

[Brychanus]

What do you think about just re-lettering and number them so that letters start at A but then B is the base of the index finger and C between index and middle, then D is base of middle finger, etc.

Then the numbers could have less space between them so there's less chance of having to ".5" them.

I need to relabel it soon if I'm going to though since I'm starting to use these labels in my tests, relabeling earlier isn't that bad but later on would suck.

Also the reason I think alignment is a better focus is because there's probably less variation in people's finger positions and definitely the wrist to forearm connection is pretty consistent (center of palm is pretty centered to the start of the forearm and is rarely significantly off center?). But finger length is a lot more variable and of course will affect things. But if the disc ejects cleanly with the alignment of the disc maintained, it should be easier to draw some generalizations there, like starting at A is more nose up and so would require certain grip pressure / finger positions or other adjustments to become more nose down.

I think the finger side makes sense since there should be a consistent reference point for every normative hand.

Base of hand at wrist is tougher I agree. If you're using numbers I think you could either try to get more specific as you mention, or just use your existing numbers and accept intermediate values. I guess it depends on how well defined and consistent the anatomical reference points are from hand to hand.

If I understand what I think you mean hand centered on forearm I would guess that's "good enough" as a base assumption.

I think you hit the "nail on the head" (pun intended) with the "A" alignment profile and maybe my short index finger is a helpful extreme. If I go closer to the "A" with the distance driver but don't have the correct "hammer-like" flow of the arm action that I use with my putters or fairways, the tension+pressure of the move releases early, and it is more likely to end up "rolling over" my wrist and going nose up without bringing the nose all the way around. If I'm careful to flow through like those other moves it clearly works better (nose angle, nose coming around, velocity advantage etc). So isolating the "sweet spot" is kind of revealing to how it works overall.

 

[Sheep]

In my own case Sheep has me pinpointed: I'm usually doing my best to talk along the lines of what I think I "know" while being open to all sources of input and all bases of disagreement. Sometimes I'm being a little conservative, others a little more risky. I see no problem and only benefits in being civil in discussing them, including and especially when disagreements arise. People disagreeing privately in their echo chambers and either ignoring or yelling at each other in public is a big part of our problems these days, disc golf or otherwise.

I want people to disagree with me and challenge my idea's. This is how we ALL get better. When I respond to people, it's not to tell you your wrong, but to throw my multiple years of experience onto the equation.

But it gets really old when people just make things up as hard statements with no experience to back it up, or much else.
It's perhaps my fault as well because when I talk about things I know, I say them boldly standing behind my point and people are afraid to ask questions back.
It's perhaps partly my issue as well because I put down my experience in respond and people find it as an attack because I'm not asking questions, then it devolves into them thinking I'm attacking their character or something.

But then I've spent lots of time asking other people questions to be disregarded as not good enough to speak to or answer.

If we had all these conversations in person, none of these conversations would ever devolve into any of us getting mad at each other for attitudes or idea's or attacking each other. Because in person you can tell that someone isn't attacking you personally, they are attacking your idea, they want to discuss it with you and others to come to a conclusion. Nobody who meets me in person goes "man that guy is so horrible." I am faaar more blunt in person.

And its also important we dont' hold onto our theories and idea's so dead set as well. My mind has been changed by brychanus in here probably more than anyone causing me to re-think things in really weird ways. Because when he comes at you, he comes at you with data and no attacks or attitude.

I admit I suck at responding to some people Because I see someone get emotional and start responding to me that way and I have a natural desire to butt heads at that point. But it's my fault to engage, because you can't win an argument when someone is arguing emotionally.

 

[Sheep]

What do you think about just re-lettering and number them so that letters start at A but then B is the base of the index finger and C between index and middle, then D is base of middle finger, etc.

Then the numbers could have less space between them so there's less chance of having to ".5" them.

I need to relabel it soon if I'm going to though since I'm starting to use these labels in my tests, relabeling earlier isn't that bad but later on would suck.

Also the reason I think alignment is a better focus is because there's probably less variation in people's finger positions and definitely the wrist to forearm connection is pretty consistent (center of palm is pretty centered to the start of the forearm and is rarely significantly off center?). But finger length is a lot more variable and of course will affect things. But if the disc ejects cleanly with the alignment of the disc maintained, it should be easier to draw some generalizations there, like starting at A is more nose up and so would require certain grip pressure / finger positions or other adjustments to become more nose down.

I think the finger side makes sense since there should be a consistent reference point for every normative hand.

Base of hand at wrist is tougher I agree. If you're using numbers I think you could either try to get more specific as you mention, or just use your existing numbers and accept intermediate values. I guess it depends on how well defined and consistent the anatomical reference points are from hand to hand.

If I understand what I think you mean hand centered on forearm I would guess that's "good enough" as a base assumption.

I think you hit the "nail on the head" (pun intended) with the "A" alignment profile and maybe my short index finger is a helpful extreme. If I go closer to the "A" with the distance driver but don't have the correct "hammer-like" flow of the arm action that I use with my putters or fairways, the tension+pressure of the move releases early, and it is more likely to end up "rolling over" my wrist and going nose up without bringing the nose all the way around. If I'm careful to flow through like those other moves it clearly works better (nose angle, nose coming around, velocity advantage etc). So isolating the "sweet spot" is kind of revealing to how it works overall.

So, I did short track this in the video by accident. but it was 20 minutes.

What exactly is it ya'll are not quite understanding that I presented in the video about finding how to grip the disc the easy way that has inspired this conversation about all sorts of weird grips?

I kinda feel this is how sidewinder looked at me 3 or 4 years ago when I started this journey and was asking him questions and all I could decipher from the words he responded with was what i took to be bewilderment and "good luck."

Because I can soap box a 20 min video on just the grip stuff that makes it even more confusing. I'd rather not do a 20 minute video on that though, because good lord its to much for anyone to really work with.
It's just important to help people learn the quickest way to get close without trying to over complicate it with numbers and letters on a hand. But also finding a way for them to find "Their" grip with 0 influence from other throwers who's bodies, wrists and hands work nothing like theirs. So I'm not quite understanding what we got going with this conversation, because what I was trying to hint at before was that "there was a lot of words that didn't say anything."

Has nothing to do with my inability to understand.

 

[Sheep]

The most ironic thing is that the Dunning Kruger Effect is talking about you.

Neil brings in legitimate evidence from a different source but since you know a little something about one tiny area of grip you think you see the whole iceberg.

Brychanus, who you repeatedly admit is more knowledgeable than you, is not even as certain in his knowledge of the topic and is still learning.

You'd do a great deal better to follow in his footsteps in practice as much as knowledge.

Actually the problem is that we can all stand from remembering it.

Neil is new. Really new. He does bring a unique perspective. But I've also watched him type in here from day 1 when he joined. I've read his questions, seen his posts the whole time. I can, in a moderately educated manor, point a finger as to his experience. You are throwing the situation back at me knowing nothing of my background studying or teaching disc golf or any other sports. I have stacks of questions here. I've been working on this for a long time. It's one of my main issues disc golfing personally, and an issue that plagues the community as a whole. I am not the expert on it, but I've spent 3+ years on it and am just now speaking out publicly about what I've been finding. Not rushing to the computer after 5 minutes of practice in the yard with a tech disc.

You get where I'm coming from here? You're mistaking my ability to speak with conviction on the topic as arrogance because you don't know my experience, you just see me whacking someone with a yard stick about what they said. And.. That's really my bad there.

It's very very difficult to get to the point of knowing what you don't know. Were on a topic here I've devoted years to at this point. It doesn't mean that Neil doesn't' know anything, but he's new to disc golf in general. He provides a great newcomer perspective when he asks questions. Because he used to ask a LOT of questions.

So the issue is partially my fault for not responding as a mentor, but responding as a detractor because I know more on the subject than he does.

It's somewhat difficult to admit that I respond poorly at times. But it's generally a build up over time of my patience and kindness running out.

As for admitting that brychanus is smarter than me. He is. He's an incredibly intelligent intellectual who is capable of speaking in a manor that all can understand and turn concepts into words that people can relate to while he does it with a soft hand.

I'm an engineer. I think like an engineer, I talk like an engineer. I'm not an academic like Brychanus who's well versed in writing in a poetic fashion. I write like an engineer. I say what I have to say. I'm not here to give people hugs.

Everyone speaks we need tolerance with each other. And people try and brow beat my attitude as the problem while telling me I need to be accepting and comforting of other peoples attitudes first while nobody ever tries to understand or accept mine.
That's really fair right?
So when people are more concerned with me changing my attitude to fit what they want, but unwilling to ever respond in a kind fashion to who I am, what in all reality at the end of it is it going to look like?
It looks like I'm an awful person because people tell ME to change, but they are never willing to meet me half way.

Understanding people is a fun topic. Understanding how peoples brains think and process is part of social engineering. Some of it still perplexes me because I cannot logic out how they come to that attitude.
But when you understand the generally way in which people think, such as the classic Architect vs Engineer thing. Artist brains think far differently than Engineer brains.
How we communicate is a big one. I can talk to other's of like mind with ease and simplicity as we spend almost no time wasting words on ball coddling and reach arounds. But when I talk to a designer on site with a build, I have to spend extensive effort speaking with them to make sure they are not offended by me telling them their idea's are unbuildable and stupid. It's absolutely exhausting to have to speak to anyone in any such fashion as I spend a massive amount of effort not using big words and explaining things in a way to not hurt someone's feelings so I don't loose my job.

So yes.
I communicate harshly. And it is on me.
But it's also on others to put some effort in. As I do put in extensive effort typing on this site and eventually people wear me out and I stop being kind. I start saying meaner things and I start saying how I feel. Because I can only take someone being shitty with me so many times before I stop trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Brychanus]

I want people to disagree with me and challenge my idea's. This is how we ALL get better. When I respond to people, it's not to tell you your wrong, but to throw my multiple years of experience onto the equation.

But it gets really old when people just make things up as hard statements with no experience to back it up, or much else.
It's perhaps my fault as well because when I talk about things I know, I say them boldly standing behind my point and people are afraid to ask questions back.
It's perhaps partly my issue as well because I put down my experience in respond and people find it as an attack because I'm not asking questions, then it devolves into them thinking I'm attacking their character or something.

But then I've spent lots of time asking other people questions to be disregarded as not good enough to speak to or answer.

If we had all these conversations in person, none of these conversations would ever devolve into any of us getting mad at each other for attitudes or idea's or attacking each other. Because in person you can tell that someone isn't attacking you personally, they are attacking your idea, they want to discuss it with you and others to come to a conclusion. Nobody who meets me in person goes "man that guy is so horrible." I am faaar more blunt in person.

And its also important we dont' hold onto our theories and idea's so dead set as well. My mind has been changed by brychanus in here probably more than anyone causing me to re-think things in really weird ways. Because when he comes at you, he comes at you with data and no attacks or attitude.

I admit I suck at responding to some people Because I see someone get emotional and start responding to me that way and I have a natural desire to butt heads at that point. But it's my fault to engage, because you can't win an argument when someone is arguing emotionally.

I will engage here because I hear part of you are saying, and I know you care, which is why you engage and get hot sometimes. I write this next part with a lot of love. Then I will get back to the contents.

I get as hot as anyone I know deep down inside. It has motivated me to do many good things and stand up for things I care about, and also required me to learn. One of my mentors said (equal parts compliment (too kind) and life lesson) "you are like a supercomputer mounted on a tiger." I channeled my childhood frustrations into weightlifting and bodybuilding and martial arts. But I was lonely. Then, I gained a lifetime of experiences including some personal work, community building, challenging voluntary discussions about "-isms," training and interests in a wide range of topics that forced me to interact with many kinds of thinkers and professionals to get anything valuable done. I am almost never the smartest person in the room I am in. For a long time and still sometimes occasionally, I fear that what I am and do will always be inadequate and that my life will be to some extent "wasted." Then I learned to look at all of that, stop and smell the roses, and enjoy much more of the ride. Everyone is walking some kind of line between narcissism, confidence, and doubt, and everyone is walking some line of incompetence and competence.

My tone is practiced because I am highly emotive by nature. Over the years, I realized how much that I wanted people to engage with my outrageous level of curiosity and energy. When they don't, I'm more depressed. I just want the world to get better in the time I have here, and me and others to be better (or at least want to be, in whatever way is most meaningful). Disc golf is now just a part of that.

It is important in general to know when you are getting emotional about something, to step back, and to wonder about what the best response for is - often, you will find one that's pretty good for the people around, you, and if you practice it, it's also good for you too.

So, I did short track this in the video by accident. but it was 20 minutes.

What exactly is it ya'll are not quite understanding that I presented in the video about finding how to grip the disc the easy way that has inspired this conversation about all sorts of weird grips?

I kinda feel this is how sidewinder looked at me 3 or 4 years ago when I started this journey and was asking him questions and all I could decipher from the words he responded with was what i took to be bewilderment and "good luck."

Because I can soap box a 20 min video on just the grip stuff that makes it even more confusing. I'd rather not do a 20 minute video on that though, because good lord its to much for anyone to really work with.
It's just important to help people learn the quickest way to get close without trying to over complicate it with numbers and letters on a hand. But also finding a way for them to find "Their" grip with 0 influence from other throwers who's bodies, wrists and hands work nothing like theirs. So I'm not quite understanding what we got going with this conversation, because what I was trying to hint at before was that "there was a lot of words that didn't say anything."

Has nothing to do with my inability to understand.

I don't think I misunderstand what you are saying and in fact it led me down a path to pay much closer attention to the arm, wrist, hand, and grip moves that can "work" and what I really thought I took away from "hammertime." The problem with "hammertime" is that you literally have to do it correctly to "understand" what it teaches. And that takes a lot of time, and some people never get it. And others clearly learn in different ways, and not all top throwers threw hammers.

Your comments about the nose etc. made me think and pay more attention to the very end of the move and start to figure out why I think everyone is basically partly talking past one another in one way or another in this thread. When I have a puzzle, I usually don't like to let it go. Personality strength and weakness for me.

When I first started writing Fundamentals, @sidewinder22 told me on the phone that he found the first draft "hard to read." I asked him why, and he said that the writing seemed very frustrated. And he was right - I came here because I found the endless pile of cues, words, and priorities and concepts overwhelming, and I just wanted to learn how to throw the stupid frisbee farther without getting hurt. Over time, I started to realize there was a real "method to the madness" that no one else did, which is why I started writing. After I wrote it, I started to become much less frustrated, and far more curious again. It was easier to understand what he meant, and why other people seem to disagree - and why sometimes it's really not a disagreement at all and they were just stuck on something. Other times it is a real disagreement, but people are operating in echo chambers too often. And as I realized those things, I got better and happier, and began to "understand" (in his meaning) things better the more I just let certain things go. And it has been wonderful. And then I got even more curious again.

People like Neil are analytic, want to work with tools, want to do analyses, and want to figure some things out themselves. I get it. I learn from people like that. I am one of those people.

People like Sidewinder are also very analytic, but also have somewhere at the bottom "just do it" in their approach to learning. I am also one of these people. An inestimable advantage Sidewinder had when he became obsessed with all this and started his drill set was being a D1 athlete. I was not one of those people. It is not surprising that it took me a lot longer to "understand." Some of it was purely intellectual. That is why I write. But the lion's share was moving.

People like Josh are trying to grab whatever they can that makes people improve, regardless of its source or attribution, and make students better, and learn to make students better. I am also now one of these people.

I think if everyone just stopped to think about their assumptions and intentions and place in life and lead with curiosity and realize that people and their priorities and histories and backgrounds and so on can all differ, we could go far. It is the only reason I am still active here. I have hope that it can remain a special place, and perhaps become even more than that. What can happen here and sometimes happens here is wonderful even if many of the people who try to learn to throw here just end up confused. I don't like being confused. And if I am not learning, I get bored and depressed and disconnect and would rather not be there. So here I remain.

 

[Brychanus]

Neil is new. Really new. He does bring a unique perspective.

I will leave the rest of that for OverthrowJosh to respond, but just wanted to say something that has been on my mind:

I would characterize Neil as the perfect exemplar of "reverse engineering meets forward engineering."

I am not as good a forward engineer as Sidewinder from his own model and content, but I probably do a better than average job now. I have used the same exact concepts he describes and literally added 100+' to people already throwing 500'. It works in the right hands. It is much, much, much much much much easier in person, or at least a real time call. You can do the same move, watch someone one time, and go "nope, right here." And then we didn't spend all that time trying to jam motion through a forum in stillframes. You gotta move it. IMHO teaching on this forum is literally the hardest way to teach people I can imagine (well, maybe if pictures and videos weren't allow it would be far worse). It's why I also learned from RowingBoats just saying over and over "you gotta just go do the thing to learn the thing" in one form or another.

So whenever I see Neil move or talk or touch a disc or think about diagrams I think "yeah, been there." But I am fascinated because he is trying to learn "good form" from basically the opposite strategy I took. I don't share everything I did with a TechDisc because I am still deciding what role I think it plays in the broader space of tools, just like I didn't share the first version of Fundamentals with anyone but Sidewinder before deploying it - I wanted to have some confidence in the methods and conclusions in the broader context. It's ok if not everyone does it the same way, and that's why I'm learning from them, too. What I frankly find alarming is that I haven't yet encountered anything that was completely inconsistent with the lion's share of the "forward engineering" takeaways I gained from the Sidewinder school of thought. People are using different words and emphasizing different things and talking about details and getting confused and so on, but already I see Neil doing things, kind of discovering things I already "knew" before he showed me a single bit of TechDisc data, and I say "aha! either it's all bullshit and delusion, or maybe we're getting somewhere." For now, I keep most of it to myself while I continue to decide what to do with that, if anything.

It is notable to also point out that I have witnessed people use a techdisc, get rigid and robotic and do weird things with their bodies and never get better. Then there are some people who move well, put on 100' of distance and move better. I have never (yet) seen someone use a techdisc and develop "ideal" posture control on their own, so that's interesting. I've seen that organic, natural motion control and balance happen far more often from the "forward engineering" motor learning perspective because it's very hard to fake balance, but then again it doesn't work as well on everyone.

Fascinating.

Phew! Back to the day job. Happy Monday, DGCR!

 

[OverthrowJosh]

I wrestle with the proper response here because I see so much of myself in you. I considered writing in such a way as to put together a million quotes that confronted you with your manner of communication, but I'm not trying to bludgeon you.

I genuinely feel that we have the same defense mechanisms when confronted with our own problems. I feel VERY empathetic to you so I will give you the blunt statement and you can do the heart check on your own.

I believe that you WANT to be the guy that responds to challenges with logical counterpoints and you WANT to be the guy that is open to learning, but your response to being challenged is often emotional; that you take counterarguments as a personal attack on your knowledge/experience. And I think you hate this about yourself and because of that you go back and justify your words/actions as "tough love" or "the truth hurts."

Again, this is my natural tendency as well. I am especially experienced in the scenario of justifying burning bridges and coming out blaming the people on the other side. It protects us from our shortcomings. And in a world where the thing we contribute is knowledge it hurts to admit you're unknowledgeable; after all that's the only reason we feel we are useful to people.

It usually comes out the most when people challenge our ability to throw a disc or score well. We WANT to throw far. We WANT to play well. Logically of course there would be an extra level of understanding of feel cues that we'd have access to if we threw 500'. But if we give credence to that then we are met with our own insufficiency to teach that aspect of the game so we vehemently oppose the benefit of throwing far as a coach and there goes the baby with the bath water. It is a defense mechanism triggered by our desire to play/throw better.

It sucks.

It is easier to throw out TechDisc data than to be confronted with the fact that you can't throw well and for it to show you that with every throw.

You've got to fight that in yourself.

I admire the crap out of John for how he responds to things, but I don't respond that way yet. I'm working on it.

Low hanging fruit for yourself is to stay away from the phallic responses. If you start talking about genitalia you should probably know that you went too far into the emotional side. It is vocabulary unbefitting a coach.

In case it wasn't abundantly clear, I am/was one of the worse offenders of this myself. I could blame it on the fact that I was raised by two marines or that I was bullied or blah blah blah, but I choose to take responsibility for it.

And to quote the greatest disc golf coach of our age "Hey. Hi. I'm the problem it's me."

I severed relationships with people like John because it wore on them too heavily over time. You cut out too many people like that in your life and you have some regrets. I do.

 

[ninjabq]

"Saying the Word "You" Is A Good Way to Start Fights and Make People Mad"
- signed, an engineer who has spent a lot of "blunt" words making people mad

 

[Sheep]

I am almost never the smartest person in the room I am in. For a long time and still sometimes occasionally, I fear that what I am and do will always be inadequate and that my life will be to some extent "wasted."

Far from, And that's why I make sure to complement your intelligence.
You're able to hold your tongue better than me and stay calm. While sometimes my frustration starts to show through and manifest harshly upon others even if its not my intent.
Intelligence comes in many forms. Sometimes it's as simple as knowing when to stop making you smarter than someone else.

You have a strong tendency to exude humility and humbleness while speaking intelligently. That's a trait that a lot of people cannot muster. I suck at it.

I think if everyone just stopped to think about their assumptions and intentions and place in life and lead with curiosity and realize that people and their priorities and histories and backgrounds and so on can all differ, we could go far. It is the only reason I am still active here. I have hope that it can remain a special place, and perhaps become even more than that. What can happen here and sometimes happens here is wonderful even if many of the people who try to learn to throw here just end up confused. I don't like being confused. And if I am not learning, I get bored and depressed and disconnect and would rather not be there. So here I remain.

Confusing is bad. And I could admit I over reacted. But it was just that, confusing. A lot of words not really saying a lot. Forums are not a good place to sort out raw thoughts before putting some level of publishing on them unless you're specifically starting a thread to discuss the raw thoughts.

So things compound as we argue like idiots over things sometimes.

I don't share everything I did with a TechDisc because I am still deciding what role I think it plays in the broader space of tools,

It is notable to also point out that I have witnessed people use a techdisc, get rigid and robotic and do weird things with their bodies and never get better. Then there are some people who move well, put on 100' of distance and move better. I have never (yet) seen someone use a techdisc and develop "ideal" posture control on their own, so that's interesting. I've seen that organic, natural motion control and balance happen far more often from the "forward engineering" motor learning perspective because it's very hard to fake balance, but then again it doesn't work as well on everyone.

Tech Disc is a great tool. But my initial impressions of it are becoming more and more true. People using it to prove points, or chase data, but not necessarily measure data.
As I've stated, throw it a few times, gather data.
Practice other things. Come back and measure again.

See if that data changes or sticks. Otherwise you're chasing data because you're trying to influence the measurements vs take the measurements.

 

[Sheep]

I wrestle with the proper response here because I see so much of myself in you. I considered writing in such a way as to put together a million quotes that confronted you with your manner of communication, but I'm not trying to bludgeon you.

I genuinely feel that we have the same defense mechanisms when confronted with our own problems. I feel VERY empathetic to you so I will give you the blunt statement and you can do the heart check on your own.

I believe that you WANT to be the guy that responds to challenges with logical counterpoints and you WANT to be the guy that is open to learning, but your response to being challenged is often emotional; that you take counterarguments as a personal attack on your knowledge/experience. And I think you hate this about yourself and because of that you go back and justify your words/actions as "tough love" or "the truth hurts."

Again, this is my natural tendency as well. I am especially experienced in the scenario of justifying burning bridges and coming out blaming the people on the other side. It protects us from our shortcomings. And in a world where the thing we contribute is knowledge it hurts to admit you're unknowledgeable; after all that's the only reason we feel we are useful to people.

It usually comes out the most when people challenge our ability to throw a disc or score well. We WANT to throw far. We WANT to play well. Logically of course there would be an extra level of understanding of feel cues that we'd have access to if we threw 500'. But if we give credence to that then we are met with our own insufficiency to teach that aspect of the game so we vehemently oppose the benefit of throwing far as a coach and there goes the baby with the bath water. It is a defense mechanism triggered by our desire to play/throw better.

It sucks.

It is easier to throw out TechDisc data than to be confronted with the fact that you can't throw well and for it to show you that with every throw.

You've got to fight that in yourself.

I admire the crap out of John for how he responds to things, but I don't respond that way yet. I'm working on it.

Low hanging fruit for yourself is to stay away from the phallic responses. If you start talking about genitalia you should probably know that you went too far into the emotional side. It is vocabulary unbefitting a coach.

In case it wasn't abundantly clear, I am/was one of the worse offenders of this myself. I could blame it on the fact that I was raised by two marines or that I was bullied or blah blah blah, but I choose to take responsibility for it.

And to quote the greatest disc golf coach of our age "Hey. Hi. I'm the problem it's me."

I severed relationships with people like John because it wore on them too heavily over time. You cut out too many people like that in your life and you have some regrets. I do.

I would genuinely argue strongly that you really don't know me very well based on what you've said here.
And that's fine. Everyone reacts from negative things, never from positives. 1 bad things will destroy 100 good things.
We always remember that bad interaction, we don't ever remember the good interactions. Especially if the first interaction we had with someone was negative.

I could be none of those things you mentioned there in 99.9% of my life, but you only need to see my frustration once and suddenly your view is colored of who I am.

However when it comes to throwing discs, I have never once ever claimed to be a good disc golfer or a great one. I have 2 blown out knees. multiple crushed discs in my back and a blown out shoulder. I am only occasionally on point with my disc golf game.
I'm happy as hell to walk somedays when I wake up. I spent years now studying disc golf and form theory because this is the only sport I can play now. (or ball golf, but who plays that.. psh) And I got sick of hurting myself. My brain, however, isn't broke.

We can all make excuses for our attitudes and its history. But its not always that which is the problem. A lot of the problems with people interacting is the unwillingness to meet in the middle. Telling someone they are the problem with not ever thinking that you could help bridge the interaction by trying to understand someone better is not really a good thing.

I give people lots of chances, cause everyone is different, and to discount someone cause they don't communicate in a way that I feel is the way they should communicate and telling them they need to change is... Well Selfish and poor. "oh but you're doing that right now." yeah, after spending a lot of time being kind to someone. But people remember only when I changed my tone.

A lot of this is really just people taking the internet WAY to seriously and not giving others grace when they don't understand. Myself included. I have been frustrated with Neil, and lacked understanding. Brychanus broke it down for me and it makes way more sense, and that's all on me for being that way. As stated before, not being a mentor, but a detractor.

So we can realistically choose to accept each other for who we are and be forgiving to each others nature and forget about any past stupidity.
Or we can continue to cross swords.
You can take that as a dick joke or not, that's up to you.

But again, people take shit way to seriously sometimes. And it compounds into degeneracy. And I can't help but keep shoveling shit on the pile by responding the same way. A lot of times people forget what a joke is because they are looking to be offended. And.. It's far easier to be offended on the internet cause you can't hear the sarcasm in someone's voice.