#31  
Old 11-04-2015, 09:14 PM
Aim For The Chains's Avatar
Aim For The Chains Aim For The Chains is offline
FROLF OFF!
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: MINNESOTA
Years Playing: 11.5
Courses Played: 134
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 17,068
Niced 1,098 Times in 739 Posts
Default

I like the idea of it and hope it makes the sport better for everyone. Solid group of people listed i look forward to seeing what comes from it.
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-04-2015, 09:14 PM
optidiscic's Avatar
optidiscic optidiscic is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Discopolis Pennsylvania
Years Playing: 17.5
Courses Played: 156
Posts: 6,874
Niced 11 Times in 10 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to optidiscic
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
Testing and comparing ideas like these was the primary catalyst for the GDT Coordinators, who hatched this R&D team concept at Pro Worlds, to lobby the PDGA Board at the September Summit meeting to approve creation of this group.
I just hope it doesnt become a popularity contest and since this very popular player says its best everyone decides to fall in line

I truly think how the sport films is important and small targets imo will dull the youtube experience

a basket near a slope, water, or with some interesting obstacle is far more dramatic and tests the mental confidence putt game just as much

imagine a windy day at the glass blown open and watching players either 3 putting or laying up on bullseye baskets...not exactly spectator friendly
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-04-2015, 09:21 PM
optidiscic's Avatar
optidiscic optidiscic is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Discopolis Pennsylvania
Years Playing: 17.5
Courses Played: 156
Posts: 6,874
Niced 11 Times in 10 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to optidiscic
Default

I think as far as Stand n Deliver goes.....either u make the plant area larger or u do not allow run ups......as it stands now in the am ranks over half the throws in tourney play are illegal but never called

In the pro ranks a high percentage of throws are not called a penalty because nobody wants to be that guy

either tighten the rule up and force no run ups or loosen the rule and allow a bigger plant area BEHIND the marker.....as it stands now its wildly inconsistent and unfair to many players who strive to not break the current rules vs those who bully their way through tourneys and recklessly break rules that few will call them on
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-04-2015, 10:29 PM
ncbrett92 ncbrett92 is offline
Bogey Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Years Playing: 4.6
Courses Played: 96
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 77
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by optidiscic View Post
I know the subject has been beaten to death but

IMO smaller targets will be disasterous for the sport

players will lay up more and not go for it

3 putts

less incentive to make long runs at the basket

fewer amazing shots from distance

All of this will make for awful filming and make our sport appear boring

laying up from 60 ft away? zzzzzzzz

I think the answer is sloped greens or more dangerous or interesting greens that wiill film well

Sure the top players might think its a better solution but I think a
better means to an end would be to toughen up the greens instead of limiting the size of the baskets
So much truth in this.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-04-2015, 11:02 PM
Meulen's Avatar
Meulen Meulen is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Years Playing: 10.5
Courses Played: 14
Posts: 507
Niced 14 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Back to the topic at hand... GDT

My initial thoughts was that this was a brand new board created with the members yet to be added based on some yet to be decided qualifications, however, it looks like the members of the board are already added.

The article makes it sound like they are going to potentially entertain changes, yet the "Projected Coordinators" are golfers that have been around for a long time (conclusion based on PDGA numbers). Maybe a little bit of fresh thinking from golfers who haven't been on the scene for decades is what is needed. If nothing major has been changed within the last decade, what can be expected to change now? I have nothing against anyone on the board, but it would be nice to see a more diverse group of board members.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-04-2015, 11:22 PM
Cgkdisc's Avatar
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is offline
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 30.7
Courses Played: 692
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 12,262
Niced 1,621 Times in 735 Posts
Default

Several of the GDT members have been some of the most innovative in the sport over a long period. Take a look at their resumes on the Hall of Fame site. We are not decision makers but idea conduits, testers and evaluators to provide better information for the decision makers. It's the decision makers where one would hope any new thinking might be able to move forward when shown to be viable and appropriate with this new vetting process.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-05-2015, 12:02 AM
Meulen's Avatar
Meulen Meulen is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Years Playing: 10.5
Courses Played: 14
Posts: 507
Niced 14 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
Several of the GDT members have been some of the most innovative in the sport over a long period. Take a look at their resumes on the Hall of Fame site. We are not decision makers but idea conduits, testers and evaluators to provide better information for the decision makers. It's the decision makers where one would hope any new thinking might be able to move forward when shown to be viable and appropriate with this new vetting process.
Understandable, and I am in no way trying to discredit all the work that has gotten the sport/game where it is today. My point is that it can be beneficial to introduce a new view point once in a while. I'm not saying that the GDT is ever going to run out of ideas, but a fresh perspective is always nice.

While you're here and we're on the topic, I have several questions for you regarding the current set of standards.

1. Why the minimum disc diameter of 21cm and the max diameter of 30cm?
2. How was it arrived upon the max weight should be 200g?
3. Why not allow perforations and depressions?
4. How was it arrived upon that the flexibility rating should be no greater than 27lb?

As these are all explicitly stated in the manufacturers guidelines, there must be some rational as to how or why these specific figures were chosen.

Also, while the guidelines have a written explanation as to how the testing is conducted, pictures or videos of the process may prove to be beneficial to those looking to enter as a new equipment manufacturer. What measurement devices are used, and are they calibrated?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-05-2015, 12:04 AM
Aim For The Chains's Avatar
Aim For The Chains Aim For The Chains is offline
FROLF OFF!
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: MINNESOTA
Years Playing: 11.5
Courses Played: 134
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 17,068
Niced 1,098 Times in 739 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
Several of the GDT members have been some of the most innovative in the sport over a long period. Take a look at their resumes on the Hall of Fame site. We are not decision makers but idea conduits, testers and evaluators to provide better information for the decision makers. It's the decision makers where one would hope any new thinking might be able to move forward when shown to be viable and appropriate with this new vetting process.
that's all I need to add.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-05-2015, 03:50 AM
TalbotTrojan's Avatar
TalbotTrojan TalbotTrojan is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Years Playing: 11.2
Courses Played: 112
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,432
Niced 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default

There has already been an x-tier event held this past year where the first round was played with current baskets and the second round was played with the smaller, inner chain only baskets. The scoring differential from your best players to your worst players actually shrunk because your best players were not making the longer putts and the not as good players were still just laying up. In my opinion we should be looking to do things that increase the scoring differential, not making it smaller.
Reply With Quote
 

  #40  
Old 11-05-2015, 08:48 AM
JC17393 JC17393 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Years Playing: 21.9
Courses Played: 150
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 7,827
Niced 3,726 Times in 1,545 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TalbotTrojan View Post
There has already been an x-tier event held this past year where the first round was played with current baskets and the second round was played with the smaller, inner chain only baskets. The scoring differential from your best players to your worst players actually shrunk because your best players were not making the longer putts and the not as good players were still just laying up. In my opinion we should be looking to do things that increase the scoring differential, not making it smaller.
I don't think a one round sample is large enough to conclude that shrinking the target (using Bullseye/Marksman style targets) would shrink scoring differentials. There is a learning/adjustment curve for putting on the smaller targets that applies to all players from rec to elite. Doing it for one round, when there was probably little to no practicing for those targets, probably does compress the skill spread as well as the scoring spread.

But if those players put in the practice time putting on smaller targets that they already do for our current targets, I have to think the skill spread would go back to what we might consider normal and the scoring spread would follow. The elite players would remain elite, the rec players would remain rec, and everyone in between would remain in between.

I've had a Marksman target for about two months now, and have been practicing with it almost exclusively. I've gotten to the point now where I feel as confident putting at it from 30-35 feet as I do putting at normal targets. To the point where I'd run longer putts on it just as often as I'd run putts on regular targets. Maybe I don't hit quite as many of those on the Marksman as I do on, say, a Discatcher, but that won't stop me from making the effort. And maybe the overall effect if I'm playing a course entirely comprised of Marksman-style targets is an extra throw or two on my score. I don't see why my experience couldn't be universal...enough practice and anyone can become as proficient on the smaller targets as they are on the larger ones.
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
PDGA Board Pres. Justin Menickelli is coming on PDGA Radio this week...Questions? onemilemore General Disc Golf Chat 38 03-28-2018 06:18 PM
New Disc Golf Board Game mfcastillo17 General Disc Golf Chat 15 03-29-2016 11:52 PM
Disc Golf Unchained - A Realistic Mobile Game In Development Local Route Labs DGCR Sponsors & Vendors 7 11-13-2013 11:06 PM
Project Announcement - Disc Golf Board Game hendersondayton General Disc Golf Chat 38 05-14-2013 02:33 PM
New to this board, New to game FatBoy General Disc Golf Chat 20 07-26-2010 07:11 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:06 AM.


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