FWIW.....If you asked me to hand you the most stable disc in my bag, I'm handing you my Stego, not my Hex.

Then what do you hand me when I ask for your most overstable disc?

Flight numbers are just an idea of how a disc might fly. It really just comes down to how it flies for you. For me, at 63 with a 42 MPH throw, if a disc thrown RHBH ends up going left - it is overstable, if it ends up right - it is understable, and if it ends up close to center - it is neutral. But here is the catch with flight numbers....overstable for me, may not be overstable for someone else. A person throwing 60 MPH is definitely going to have a different result than me. About the only thing I get from someone else is about different plastics - how does this disc fly in each of these plastics? Or which plastic is the most neutral for this disc? Those should be pretty accurate for any arm speed; if I want disc A, but I want a mostly neutral version....and people say X plastic is overstable, but Y is neutral. I know not to get X plastic....it doesn't matter how much overstable it is (it might not be as overstable with my arm speed, but it would still be overstable).

The same. I, like a lot of people, use more stable and more overstable to mean the same thing. Not saying it's correct, but that's the way I hear it the most. To me, something that flies straight is my most neutral, not most stable.


I've taken to not saying stable, and saying more overstable or flippier or things like that to eliminate confusion.

Not saying I'm right. But I'm pretty sure I represent a large section of discers.

I suppose if I asked you to hand me a beer you’d probably toss me an Old Milwaukee. Sicko.

Oh heavens no. Leinenkugels all the way!


Let me ask this. If "most stable" means straight, does "least stable" mean flippy? Why does the scale stop at the middle?

I dig their summer shandy on a hot day. By definition, maybe not a real beer but refreshing non the less.

As far as the discs, maybe the one number system Discraft always used wasn’t a bad idea after all. At least you kind of had an idea what a -1 or a 2.0 was going to fly like.

Maybe rather than positive and negative numbers just make a 0 to 10 scale with a zero being something like a Franklin Albatross and a ten being a Titl.

Heck with Discraft's single number. I liked the little arrow that showed the expected flight.

I mostly disagree with this. Discraft gave us one simple number that didn't at all inform us of how it got there, which I think is important. The 4 flight number system is very informative to everyone once you get used to it.

On one hand, let's say I've got average 300-350' distance on the course. I step up to a shot on a wooded course with several trees in the way. There's an obvious route that lets the disc turn right, then fade left to park it under the basket at 300'. If I pick up a 9/5/-2/2 disc that I've never thrown before, I've probably got a pretty good idea that I can get that disc to bend around the trees I need it to to make that shot. But if I've just picked up a Discraft disc that I've never thrown before with a .5 or 0 rating, I might not realize that it has both turn and fade and think it's more neutral, so I try more of a flex shot and it ends up kicking off a tree to the right.

And, let's say, for instance that I'm a 63yo with fading arm speed and I pick up a 9/5/0/2 disc. Even though my arm isn't as fast as it once was, I'm going to know this disc is going to be stable to overstable for me. If I pick up a 9/5/-2/1 disc, based on my experience, that might be neutral for me. Either way, once I know the 4 flight number system, as long as it's pretty consistent, I am informed on how it flies for me.

For instance, myself, a Patent Pending Crave flies pretty neutral with some fade, whereas a new model Crave flies with quite a bit of turn that I would call understable. Pre-flight numbers, if you were to ask me what the Crave was, I'd call it 7/5/0/1.5. When I saw the flight numbers that MVP added as 6.5/5/-1/1, I thought there's no way that's how a Crave flies, but yeah, apparently that's how they fly now, and that's what I would call my more recent Crave purchases that have those numbers. I feel informed that the flight is accurate, as I believe anyone new to the sport picking up a Crave would, even though for them it might fly more stable, their experience with it will cement what those numbers mean for their arm.

Except it didn't really show the expected flight. It was too short of an arrow to really show S curves. I forget which disc it was, but one of their drivers was like -3/3, but just had a straight arrow on it some 12 years ago or so.

Good point. I should have said the expected end result - in your example, straight ahead.

Y'all know that "what is stable?" is right up there with "what is par?", right?

There are definitions. There are casual ways that people use the term. And the two don't exactly match. Cue endless discussion. :p

That’s what Sharpies are for. Throw a disc, see how it flies, then draw the flight path right on top of the disc. When you step up and decide the shape of the shot you want to throw you just grab whatever disc has the right picture on it.

When I started out and really didn't know much, I did that on the bottom of my discs.

When I was experimenting with some MVP discs before they had flight numbers I would write my own on the bottom to remind me how each disc generally flew.

I will say, the MVP flight charts before they had flight numbers were generally very helpful before choosing a disc. Especially because they gave multiple flights based on power level. For the most part the charts were accurate with me falling kind of in the middle of the expected flights.

I think that was the spectra... easy to throw they said... all over the place! It might have been a 1 but lots of turn, lots of fade.

In some ways it was easier to just have one number, less *****ing about .5's... or this or that. Speed rating is the most important # to me now, then the other ones.

Heck take the uplink in the two plastics.. 5 5 -3 0.5 (I think). Neutron I'd go 5 5 -3 0.25 but how do you describe the late turn? Soft id say 5 6 -1 0.5 depending on how hard and clean you toss it. I get my softs flying 5 6 0 0 most of the time

I guess TBH the uplink deserves at least a -1. **** though I'm carving with that thing like my custom knives into a Thanksgiving turkey!

Anyone feel like discussing the rhythm?

I'm really taking a liking to that... I haven't run it against a relay but it's ability to go mostly straight and glide for days is making me feel like it's a longer uplink. I'm not gonna lie, I pooped it a few times but the results were still pleasing and to be expected lines.

Good distance, very straight more or less. Lost it uphill in the dark, too much anny for a hill climb , looked on the bottom circled around long, good thing it was way past and on top. Like 40' past. These are a deadly new series of molds.

I'd love to discuss the Rhythm, but they are not in Australia yet. Sounds encouraging.

Still can't decide between a swag of Crave's or my Servo/Relay combo. Servo bombs, Relay feels better in my hand than a Crave, but the Crave goes a little further.

I keep going back and forth on whether or not I want to try a Rhythm. I currently throw a Hokom Crave as my turnover disc and a Plasma Crave as my stable/neutral fairway. I like the control I have with the Hokom. From what I've heard, the Rhythm is a little less stable or similar to a Relay, depending on the run of Relay.

So on the one hand, I have a Crave that I like the control of and I'm used to.

But on the other hand, I'd get to try a new disc and Rhythm might just be the coolest name for a disc in all of disc golf.

Ray has it right here.
"Control drivers"

What we call a disc is absolutely silly sometimes. Cause some people call 4 speeds "putters."
And back in the day a 10 speed was a distance driver. when now days its more in the "control driver" category.

And as well, "distance" is relative to the disc design also. So even trying to describe it as a "distance driver" an be made in ignorance. (not calling you ignorant)
But, a Limit or an Energy are "not" distance drivers. But they are wide rimmed, so that makes them a distance driver?
See. Silly terms for silly things.

That's why the idea with "consistency for describing" becomes the argument, so were on the same page.
The problem comes from the atrocious language for almost everything disc golf. Listen to more and more modern teaching, and you'll notice the language changing. I've been pushing HARD on proper terms for coaching during the disc golf swing and its making huge differences. More and more people are picking up on it as well as more people start using more apt descriptors for the swing.
When we talk about disc flight, we should be using appropriate descriptors for them as well, which we technically do not.


This is exactly the issue. What does "stable" mean to the beholder. I Never hear people talk about "stable" as straight, but then you get that 1 guy who says Stable as meaning straight.
When a descriptor leaves to much up to the beholder to figure it out, then its a bad descriptor.
A description of something should be obvious. To say "but stable is obvious" is unfortunately proven wrong time and time again. Because everyones definition of it is different.
But if we changed "stable" to "straight" there would be no error in what the descriptor meant. we know what straight is.

This is mainly because the "speed" descriptor is looked at like golf clubs. People think 14 speed, that means it will go far. That's not true. The speed descriptor, while being one of the only things we can tie to an actual measurement, is more or less a descriptor of "how fast the disc needs to fly to perform to the numbers described."
Thus why flight numbers are not very great compared to a "flight chart" which would give you a better idea of the disc performance over skill level vs arbitrary numbers made up by the manufacturer that can change run to run or sometimes plastic to plastic.

Another example of the confusion and feel.
Because we pick up on most of this stuff based on the language of the people we play with.

haha. I hate "what is par"
Because par is irrelevant always. Your brain should never ever care what par is. Because it means NOTHING to the game. But everyone is focused on "birdies" not "how many strokes to get through the course"
Birdies and bogeys are irrelevant to your final "tally" of "all the shots."
Then we get to what Par means, and everyone wants to argue it in the dumbest ways. I digress.

100% agree.
They made sense, they made it easy and they were accurate.
As well, most didn't notice, the old Axiom stamps actually had a flight chart on the stock stamp.

I'm really digging the rhythm, but its more in the flippy compared to the Relay.
It's closer to a Signal.
As for the choice between the 2, I'd take the Relay. But also, the relay is 16mm class, and the Rhythm is a 18mm class.

Then the argument comes to PP relay or newer relay.
Cause they sure screwed that mold up, though the more recent ones seem to have come out a bit better.
However I am throwing a newer Relay in neutron. And its not quite the old relays, but It's in the acceptable range. It will handle big power with less effort put in by me with my angles, which the older relays really were more fussy due to their likeness to turn over. But it was hard to beat the old PP Relays on hyzer flips.

I enjoy the crave, but the Rhythm has way more turn than the crave. Even lighter ones. Crave is generally straight. My Max weight gives me a fade, and my 150 class gives me straight or slight turnover.

This is absolutely false. I wish people would stop posting this.

Well, somebody has a little free time this morning.

Definitely not going to quote all of that but to touch on whether a 4 speed is a putter depends on if I want to throw a Zone or Harp in a putter only round. If I do then it’s a putter. But if you show up with a Roc (also a speed 4) then that’s cheating. Everyone knows a Roc is a mid.

I see where you are coming from, widths etc but I somewhat disagree, I'm curious why you think that.

I see a lot of newer players run out and get speed 13+ because they think they fly faster and further on a 200' hole... then are immediately *****ing about how it didn't work for them or they don't see the proported -2 turn but they sure see the 2 fade.

It works best for me to think about it in stages of bare minimum power and obviously you can cheat beyond your bracket with a little OAT and some 155g discs....
1-5 good for anyone, 6/7 ams/average players over 150' of power , 8/9 advanced over 220', 10/12 over 295', 13+ over 350'


I've got a 161 rhythm coming in the mail, I suspect Sheep is right about it being less stable than a relay but I'm loving the extra glide. The new R2 signals seem more stable than my previous visitation to the mold. Haha in this case the higher speed means it has a bigger wing and will fly further.

Multiple reasons. One, it's come out of Dave's mouth too many times. He has said basically,
From the Innova site:
Plus, the other statement breaks down as speed gets lower. If the false statement were true, high power players would never be able to throw mids effectively.


Look, speed has been handled pretty poorly by the manufacturers, but it's they are basically using rim width. Otherwise, there's no way a Firebird and a roadrunner would both be 9s. I would love to see a system where speed was determined by throwing discs from a machine ndoors at a given speed and then tested for speed loss at a given distance.

I am pretty on board with most of this. I don't mind that Control Drivers became a thing, and it makes sense, but has since fallen out of favor to just lump them in with Fairways, and I don't really like that because I see a much greater gap between 6 and 10 speeds than between 9 and 14 speeds, even though the numbers would tell you otherwise, once you get into those much wider rimmed drivers, the speed has diminishing returns, at least for how fast a human can throw. Simon Lizotte has one of the fastest throws, and throws 12 speeds IIRC as his furthest discs.

I'd also be very content to change the first number in the flight chart to something else other than Speed, if we could get all manufacturers on board with it. But I still like it as a number to know generally the width of the rim, especially when I'm purchasing a disc online. As it is, Speed is informative enough, even though there is some obvious confusion about what it means, at least most people know what it means for the rim width of the disc.


I 100% disagree here. When playing in a tournament, sure, your goal is the overall score, but when playing for fun it's extremely satisfying to get a birdie or eagle on a hole that is hard to get. It keeps the overall round more fun throughout than just looking at your overall strokes and saying "I'm at 39 so far, having a great round". With Par, each hole is its own unique challenge and can have small celebrations of success even with an otherwise poor round. Even in tournament play, when you're playing poorly, and well behind the leader, sometimes just getting that Eagle, or getting a Birdie or two in a row can spark some confidence and make you play better for the rest of the round.

As far as what Par is? I don't really care all that much. I just let the course designer call it and play towards that. If it's a very easy Par, I take that into account in my head, but still enjoy the occasional Eagle. If it's a very difficult Par, set more towards pros than my particular skill level, I take that into account as well, and get extra enjoyment when I do get those harder to get Birdies. I'm not going to spend a lot of time arguing what the Par "should have been" for the course. The course designer set it, and that's enough for me. When I design my own course, I'll take the experiences of all the courses I've played in the past into account and try to set my Pars accordingly.


That was one of my favorite things about the Axiom stamps. I think they still do it for the most part, other than the Signature lines, though I have mostly bought blanks/wiped the stamps of all my recent purchases, so I could be wrong, but my turn to digress.. Anyway, yes, flight charts are great, but I think there is still a place for flight numbers that are universally accepted.

Really depends on the Crave nowadays for me. The first runs of Hokoms flew almost identical to PP Relays for me. The subsequent runs of Hokoms have all flown more or less like an Inspire with turn of -1.5 and fade of 1, which is right about where I want my turnover disc to be, just slightly less stable than neutral. Or whatever other word we can come up with for stable, because technically, understable is an invented word for disc golf. What runs of Craves are you referring to compared to the Rhythm?

100% agree with you regarding speed as intended flight. It has a small measure of truth as not throwing fast enough will affect all discs flights, but throwing an Envy at 60mph will allow it to retain its 'intended' flight with proper form just as well as throwing it at 45mph, the 60mph throw will just go further. There is a point where a disc will turnover more, all else being equal, based more on its stability than its 'speed', though the width of the rim is going to be a factor in its stability. The bigger thing I think the rim width affects is how long a disc will hold its spin. The larger wings require more force to get them spinning fast enough to not slow down too soon, whereas a smaller rim can get up to rotational speed easier and so maintain its true flight longer. So if you have good snap, even at 50mph, you can get the 'intended flight path' of a 14 speed disc, and it'll probably go further than someone else who doesn't get it spinning as fast also throwing at 50mph. But it still won't go as far as someone throwing it at 65mph, even if they don't get it spinning as fast. Theirs will just fade differently.

And, of course, the whole point of MVP's overmold, is to enhance this experience. You supposedly need to get a little more spin control to get the disc up to its intended spinning speed so it can maintain its proper flight longer than a less gyroscopically enhanced disc. That's why most people say to go lighter with MVP for the same flight as a solomold. It's because with the same form, the MVP disc is a little harder to get that speed. If that all makes sense.

Enlightening.. Thanks! That makes sense to me I will think about it differently.

I still think there is some sort of minimum power requirement there though but not necessarily a maximum limit. (Though there are some discs with a max limit, like the Wave doesn't work for 400'+ players).

Just for fun, since I have another hour on the ferry... :D is there any speed 13/ 14 discs you could recommend for someone throwing 250'?

(I was going to ask about speed 11 but haha that's Wave/ Vanish/ Photon on the easy end of the chart, most people can get decent results with those at a 250+ level.

No lol. I really think the Sidewinder is the best driver for most under 300.

I know it wasn't a question directed towards me, but, I can tell you as someone who throws about 300' now (used to throw 350'ish before some injuries and getting older), I played a round with a friend who let me toss one of his understable 14 speeds, and I was surprised at the easy distance I got from it. I don't remember what it was for sure, but it was Dynamic Discs. It definitely went further than I was throwing my normal driver, at the time, which was an Insanity. It was less stable than the Insanity, so for something faster, I would think a Tenacity or Excite might be decent for that shot. If you can get good spin on it, I think you could have some decent results.

And here's the other thing about higher speed discs. A lot of people say, if you can't throw 300' or maybe 350', don't throw faster discs, but that's not necessarily true. If you throw a more US faster disc, it might get 10-20' more distance than your 9 speeds, or whatever it is you're throwing to get there, depending on the rest of your form outside of arm speed, because arm speed is just one part of the equation. As I said above, I've lost some distance because if I get my hips into the throw more to add the power I need, it hurts my hips, so I don't put full power on it, lowering my speed, but I still have good spin control and whatnot, I just do it a bit slower, so discs tend to have their intended flight for me, just at 250-300' instead of at 350'+. So, YMMV, cause there's a lot going into a disc throw. But those are the discs I'd try if I wanted to add a few feet to my drives where I'm currently at.

Diameter is a factor.

I’ll need to see the whole algorithm so I can properly work the system.

I cut my (sidearm) teeth on an FL! Hmm. I'll have to get the Motion that I bought several years ago out of storage & give it another whirl. Thanks for sparking my interest.

Well I was drinking a little that week :D

It has more hookup and skip than an FL but it also travels better for me than a fireball. It OH's tighter like my FL and it's likely the OS utility disc I've been looking for. Still in sporadic testing :) I don't often need more than a tesla...

Ordered some Rhythms around 162. Looking forward to seeing how they fly.

Two are described as "somewhat flat", and two as having "neutral flatness" so we shall see whether that makes any difference.

Generally I prefer when manufacturers mold discs consistently, so I can order replacements with no surprises.

It's really nice that OTB does that.

Agreed

The conversation continues here.