#91  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:28 AM
VictorB's Avatar
VictorB VictorB is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Years Playing: 14.1
Courses Played: 91
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,820
Niced 1,071 Times in 535 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hurricaine View Post
correction. CCDG is catching up. Not the field.
CCDG is a peer to Jomez, they have different ways of doing things and keep the screen very clear of graphics for a reason. Actual production quality is absolutely just as good, not a step behind, and if you think that then your subjectivity is showing.

Gatekeeper, GK Pro, and a few others are way higher quality than you'd expect from such young channels and relatively inexperienced crews.
Sponsored Links

Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:31 AM
hurricaine hurricaine is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: MICHIGAN
Posts: 183
Niced 108 Times in 49 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Streets View Post
Emerson? He's Lat64 and Clemons is solid but streaky. Melton is probably the best/most consistent MPO player DD has.
sorry was counting trilogy as one
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:31 AM
hurricaine hurricaine is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: MICHIGAN
Posts: 183
Niced 108 Times in 49 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorB View Post
CCDG is a peer to Jomez, they have different ways of doing things and keep the screen very clear of graphics for a reason. Actual production quality is absolutely just as good, not a step behind, and if you think that then your subjectivity is showing.

Gatekeeper, GK Pro, and a few others are way higher quality than you'd expect from such young channels and relatively inexperienced crews.
i was more trying to say that i think Jomez is the top, CCDG is barely just inches below them. And then comes everyone else
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:41 AM
perklc perklc is online now
Par Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Courses Played: 4
Posts: 124
Niced 156 Times in 52 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorB View Post
keep the screen very clear of graphics
In r/discgolf Ian said that they are working on getting scorecards that stay on the screen. I imagine that they'll still be a bit more minimalist as that seems to be a style that Ian favors.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 09-19-2019, 03:00 PM
Ryan P.'s Avatar
Ryan P. Ryan P. is online now
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Asheboro, NC
Years Playing: 13.6
Courses Played: 56
Posts: 1,691
Niced 50 Times in 31 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JTacoma03 View Post

Is Winthrop a picturesque course? Not really, but it's not horrible. Is the scoring separation "natural"? No, but who said it has to be? I don't understand (generally) why an artificial requirement for "natural" obstacles is applied in course comparisons, and arbitrarily so oftentimes from my POV.
I think there's a distinction to be made within how we compare courses. Specifically, it is not fair to apply the artificial/natural distinction to the hole design/how the hole plays, but it is fair to apply the artificial/natural distinction to the aesthetics of holes.

Artificial vs. natural requirements shouldn't be a factor within the design of the holes. Any island hole, whether it is a natural island or an artificial one, is still an island; the hole plays the same either way.

However, if someone says that there is a difference aesthetically between natural vs. artificial obstacles, that's a fair critique. Some people may not care about this from an aesthetic standpoint, and that's fair too.

Niced: (2)
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 09-19-2019, 06:24 PM
JTacoma03's Avatar
JTacoma03 JTacoma03 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Baton Rouge, LA and SF, CA
Years Playing: 10.6
Courses Played: 133
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 4,273
Niced 1,341 Times in 405 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fish58320 View Post
'Sup.
Of course YOU would turn it down...

Come on the pod soon!

Quote:
Originally Posted by toddnick View Post
Well, I'm glad that I invited several comments...

And call me wrong for saying it...

But when I spend my money to spectate a tournament, I want a gorgeous (or mainly asthetically pleasing course (not just a spectator friendly or course that just tests skills)...that is my preference...

Vermont has this...Pittsburgh has this...and other places have this...but not USDGC...

Tradition is great and I understand the appeal...but I believe that USDGC isnt really worthy of a major (despite the great tounament logistics and crowd)...i believe that Smuggs would be a better site for a major than USDGC...and I've been to both...forgetting history, does anyone disagree that it is an equal or better test with a much more appealing set of courses?
I have no qualms with it being an aesthetic critique for a spectating experience (see more below).

...but are you honestly advocating that you put aesthetics above an experienced, skilled, and profitable event team that has a full scale distribution center a few miles away to use as home base? If that's your logic then Emporia should have never gotten all of those major bids either.

The USDGC is the only major that has never moved. I'm fine if we disagree on our assessments of the place, but it really seems like the argument you're articulating for it not being a Major is simply because you don't like the course as much. That's a pretty serious case of throwing baby out with the bathwater, not to mention Fox Run Meadows is a contemporary of Winthrop Gold in terms of design elements.

We do agree on FRM though...top 5 course in the world in my book, and that place should host big events every single year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan P. View Post
I think there's a distinction to be made within how we compare courses. Specifically, it is not fair to apply the artificial/natural distinction to the hole design/how the hole plays, but it is fair to apply the artificial/natural distinction to the aesthetics of holes.

Artificial vs. natural requirements shouldn't be a factor within the design of the holes. Any island hole, whether it is a natural island or an artificial one, is still an island; the hole plays the same either way.

However, if someone says that there is a difference aesthetically between natural vs. artificial obstacles, that's a fair critique. Some people may not care about this from an aesthetic standpoint, and that's fair too.
I'm 100% with you, and that's a great clarification to make. I have no issue with complaining about the aesthetics of a venue. Many places that we run big events in feel like "compromises" in various ways, so I get it when you compare to some of the courses, sights, vibes that you can go play with your buddies...tour events are more about the golf than the views.

When we're talking about tier status though, even as a media guy, I can't get behind a priority order that risks stability of the pro scene by over-indulging in aesthetics. I mean look at posts in this thread that want to rank and critique media companies (for no real purpose other than to make a list for the hell of it)...you can't please everybody aesthetically.

Last edited by JTacoma03; 09-19-2019 at 06:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 09-19-2019, 08:28 PM
disctildeath disctildeath is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Hudson, NC
Years Playing: 12.5
Courses Played: 10
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 587
Niced 45 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plastic Thunder View Post
Innova has made a number stupid moves this past year. They let the best player in the world get away and he schooled all the new talent they signed this year on what a winner should perform like.

Innova apparently likes using all the second best talent...................
Ricky had a messed up hand and only got beat by a single stroke at Worlds, I think otherwise Paul wouldn't be 5x right now.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 09-19-2019, 11:42 PM
toddnick toddnick is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: buffalo, ny
Years Playing: 1.4
Courses Played: 73
Posts: 150
Niced 193 Times in 59 Posts
Default

...but are you honestly advocating that you put aesthetics above an experienced, skilled, and profitable event team that has a full scale distribution center a few miles away to use as home base? If that's your logic then Emporia should have never gotten all of those major bids either.

That is a quote from a previous post...

I want both aesthetics and a great course that tests the best...is that too much to ask for a major?

I saw it in Vermont and Pittsburgh and Worcester and Freeport/Augusta and York and Charlotte...these courses exist...and I'm sure that both exist in places that I haven't visited...

That is what should be (eventually, if not now) the standard for a major...Jarva and Konopiste fit the bill..so why can't we in the US provide beautiful courses as well for majors?

I guess that aesthetics aren't important for a lot of folks here...but it is for me...

And Winthrop Gold as well as Eureka Lake (which I also attended this year at Worlds) don't give me the aesthetics with sidewalks, parking lots, baseball fields, tiki triple mando wood structures, water towers, etc...

There are so many courses that are aeshthetically pleasing and a great test of golf...and yet this years World's had 3 rounds at a course that doesn't fit this profile (Northwoods was amazing though) and Winthrop Gold has the same lack of visual appeal ..

Maybe the courses that bost both visual appeal and a true test of golf aren't logistically ready for a major...but I'd rather see Vermont and Pittsburgh (Moraine/Deer Lakes) alternate World's every two years than see 3 rounds played at Eureka Lake...or 4 rounds played on the middle 9 holes at Winthrop Gold...and Emporia, ugghhh....

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 09-20-2019, 07:49 AM
bhadella bhadella is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Years Playing: 21.2
Courses Played: 156
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 3,163
Niced 154 Times in 101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by toddnick View Post
...but are you honestly advocating that you put aesthetics above an experienced, skilled, and profitable event team that has a full scale distribution center a few miles away to use as home base? If that's your logic then Emporia should have never gotten all of those major bids either.

That is a quote from a previous post...

I want both aesthetics and a great course that tests the best...is that too much to ask for a major?

I saw it in Vermont and Pittsburgh and Worcester and Freeport/Augusta and York and Charlotte...these courses exist...and I'm sure that both exist in places that I haven't visited...

That is what should be (eventually, if not now) the standard for a major...Jarva and Konopiste fit the bill..so why can't we in the US provide beautiful courses as well for majors?

I guess that aesthetics aren't important for a lot of folks here...but it is for me...

And Winthrop Gold as well as Eureka Lake (which I also attended this year at Worlds) don't give me the aesthetics with sidewalks, parking lots, baseball fields, tiki triple mando wood structures, water towers, etc...

There are so many courses that are aeshthetically pleasing and a great test of golf...and yet this years World's had 3 rounds at a course that doesn't fit this profile (Northwoods was amazing though) and Winthrop Gold has the same lack of visual appeal ..

Maybe the courses that bost both visual appeal and a true test of golf aren't logistically ready for a major...but I'd rather see Vermont and Pittsburgh (Moraine/Deer Lakes) alternate World's every two years than see 3 rounds played at Eureka Lake...or 4 rounds played on the middle 9 holes at Winthrop Gold...and Emporia, ugghhh....
This is the 2021 Majors bid structure:

https://www.pdga.com/files/2021_gene...kage_final.pdf

Aestheticly pleasing doesn't make the list. Of course it's a great plus to have (and depending on how you view it, a Winthrop or Peoria or Emporia may or may not have it) but it's not on the criteria. We are still at a point that the PDGA has to make sure:

1) The event is financial viable
2) The event is logistically viable
3) The courses are appropriate to the skill level

Fatigue is real from a TD/Event Staff. Look at how Selinske bombed at Maple Hill. A Pittsburgh or Smuggs or Eureka or whoever is always at risk of running out of energy or resources (Pro events are really hard financially). I don't think anyone could realistically sign up for every other year dealing with Pro Worlds.

Reply With Quote
 

  #100  
Old 09-20-2019, 08:11 AM
JC17393 JC17393 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Years Playing: 21.8
Courses Played: 150
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 7,749
Niced 3,571 Times in 1,492 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bhadella View Post
Fatigue is real from a TD/Event Staff. Look at how Selinske bombed at Maple Hill. A Pittsburgh or Smuggs or Eureka or whoever is always at risk of running out of energy or resources (Pro events are really hard financially). I don't think anyone could realistically sign up for every other year dealing with Pro Worlds.
This is dead on. Though I don't know if I'd characterize the Selinske as having "bombed", but I do think that many of its shortcomings can be put down to staff fatigue. The MVP was the week before and by all accounts was its usual success. Putting that effort in back-to-back weeks is difficult.

But even if the events were 6 months apart, that's no guarantee that the event would have come off any differently. Smuggs gets held up as this great venue (and it is) but Masters Worlds wasn't a shining perfect event. Some of the same complaints (from some of the same folks) that were leveled at the Selinske were brought up at Masters Worlds. Just watching the coverage of GMC I saw a bunch of differences in how the courses were prepared and set up for that versus Worlds. It was clear that Masters Worlds didn't quite get the same level of attention that Worlds the year before or GMC got. I put some of that on being earlier in the year, especially after a long winter and wet spring, but that can't have been all of it. It was still a very good event from my perspective, but it wasn't a GREAT event. (though I must say that for events that don't have the spotlight players...MPO/FPO...expecting the same level of spotlight attention might be expecting too much in the first place)

Having said all that, I'm doubly impressed by what Nate Heinold and his crew pulled off in Peoria. The Ledgestone was the Ledgestone and then six weeks later he pulled off a pretty impressive Worlds on the same venues. I haven't heard any comments that either event suffered in any way that could be attributable to staff fatigue. That's the exception and not the rule though.

I'm sure if they could transport the facilities and courses from Smuggs or Maple Hill or Milo McIver to Rock Hill and use them instead of Winthrop, no one would object. But Rock Hill is where the staff and support for USDGC is, and Winthrop is the facility they have to work with. I think they do a hell of a job and that course is a great venue for the event and a great test for the players.

Niced: (2)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Jomez Productions Flick Maniac Tournaments & Leagues 403 10-07-2019 09:00 AM
Jomez Appreciation Thread Titan037 General Disc Golf Chat 5 08-19-2019 03:03 PM
Jomez tour turbosteve General Disc Golf Chat 83 12-05-2018 04:42 PM
Tensor, Sabertooth, DX Jomez Teebird youdidwell The Marketplace 1 08-23-2018 09:00 PM
Why Do You Like Jomez? Zanguini General Disc Golf Chat 73 06-03-2018 07:40 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.