• Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
    It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)

Is Ricky Wysocki Already Becoming the Next Disc Golf Legend?

They still won't be the champ. Maybe in twenty years or so. But the first generation will always view KC as the champ. You young guys will probably see it differently.

And I want the name of the champ on all my favorite discs, and no flight numbers.
 
As said before though the fields are bigger and the talent level is insane. All it takes is an overdrive of 5 feet or a chain out and the next guy is right past you. Exciting to watch, I would say if someone could get 9-10 wdgc I'd put them up with KC.
 
I agree, the talent is too thick now. If someone does what KC has done, they will be a different kind of player. Paul and Ricky essentially took what KC did and did it a little better (although that's hard to measure since they ain't going head to head with KC).
 
As said before though the fields are bigger and the talent level is insane. All it takes is an overdrive of 5 feet or a chain out and the next guy is right past you. Exciting to watch, I would say if someone could get 9-10 wdgc I'd put them up with KC.

How about the difficulty of courses? Has that been static since Climo times? I didn't keep up with the pro scene that much when I first started playing but I know that disc technology leapfrogged course difficulty (especially length) so I wonder how much that played a part in KC's dominance. If he was the best player of his day and his day coincided with proper distance drivers that would seem to give him a tremendous advantage if the courses he played were still of the pitch and putt, everything's a par 3 city park variety.

The pros today are playing more and more legitimate par 4 and par 5 holes and we're slowly getting appropriate pars (like less par 2's) so scoring separation is more a factor in today's game.
 
How about the difficulty of courses? Has that been static since Climo times? I didn't keep up with the pro scene that much when I first started playing but I know that disc technology leapfrogged course difficulty (especially length) so I wonder how much that played a part in KC's dominance. If he was the best player of his day and his day coincided with proper distance drivers that would seem to give him a tremendous advantage if the courses he played were still of the pitch and putt, everything's a par 3 city park variety.

The pros today are playing more and more legitimate par 4 and par 5 holes and we're slowly getting appropriate pars (like less par 2's) so scoring separation is more a factor in today's game.

What I'm saying is KCs day courses were built for their abilities and he dominates. Today they also build the courses to the talent level and technology of the day. And yes there are a lot more legitimate par 4s, and scoring has become a huge factor, obviously. But with the ability to now force players to make great shots, and be penalized harder for it. A birdie on a legit par 4 (700-800 for pro at least now) can still be beat if someone risks the 600 ft drive. Bogeys can be 3 stroke swings, add more players and you get higher turnover on the leaderboard.
 
What I'm saying is KCs day courses were built for their abilities and he dominates. Today they also build the courses to the talent level and technology of the day. And yes there are a lot more legitimate par 4s, and scoring has become a huge factor, obviously. But with the ability to now force players to make great shots, and be penalized harder for it. A birdie on a legit par 4 (700-800 for pro at least now) can still be beat if someone risks the 600 ft drive. Bogeys can be 3 stroke swings, add more players and you get higher turnover on the leaderboard.

Yeah, I agree with you. I guess what I'm getting at is how much was KC's dominance attributable to the difficulty or types of courses during his tenure? It's pretty well known that KC didn't (still doesn't to my knowledge) have much of a FH. Being very backhand dominant can really hold you back on a lot of the courses today, I want to say that McBeth didn't really start dominating until he stepped his FH game up and to get on topic, Wysocki has basically always been known for his FH prowess. I just wonder if you could somehow time warp prime KC to this era, if he would be as dominant simply because the courses would have challenged him more.

Or that if part of the reason he was so dominant then is that his skill set was tailor made for utilizing the improving disc technology against the early, old school courses. Was the field KC dominated against back then also seeing a benefit of lower scores due to newer discs vs older courses? Or was KC better at throwing faster discs farther and more accurately than the field was throwing their Aviars, Rocs, and Cyclones? I really don't know. :confused:
 
What was OB like in KC's day? Did the course play more as is, or was there tons of artificial stuff like today to "Tiger proof" the long thrower.
 
There was certainly a different set of courses, but some were exactly the same. DeLa, LaMir, USDGC - albeit with less ob. And a technical wooded course is what it is. Remember also, Ken didn't tour like they do today.

This is like the baseball argument. Anyone that wants to say Babe Ruth wasn't great is nuts. That still leaves him #2 behind Aaron. I'll believe someone is greater than KC when they've done what he's done. Comparing Ken to modern players has no value. He played a different game. He still dominated.
 
With McBeth it has changed somewhat over the years, but when he goes for distance he still tends to heel pivot.

If you pivot on your toes, your whole body has to spin around the toes which A. makes it hard to brace in the first place, B. if you do brace more likely to torque the ankle or knee while trying to get your whole body going around the brace point.

If you pivot on the heel, the toes spin around instead of the body so everything pivots nice and centered through the brace point.
I'm going to be honest - I've kind of silently just said "meh" when considering the heel-toe argument. Kinda blatantly stupid when you consider how much time I spend with my running athletes on their foot strike. But I digress.... In light of what you've said in this thread about injury prevention, and my own ankle soreness over the past few years I may actually try to pay attention to whether I spin on my heel or toes. I've literally never cared enough to pay attention to it. If I am on my toes, I am now contemplating what you're saying and I may transition... It makes sense to do so in light of this.

Does anybody have any sort of counter-point to his comments re: toe-pivot/injury?
 
He doesn't always pivot on the heel, but when he does:
I remember when those got posted... He looks so young. I mean he still looks pretty young, but I mean he looks like someone that could be 25-35 (which, yeah duh, makes sense I know). He looks like an adult now that is young. But man he looks young with that hair.
 
I'm thinking they cancelled the distance finals on the field that year due to weather, and gave it to the Showcase "winner". Seems Big Jerm can only win USDGC events when weather happens. :\
If I remember right - that WAS the distance championship for a number of years. Not just one year.
 
Ricky goes off on an arcade basketball game... Skip ahead to the last couple minutes.

Welcome to growing up with pop-a-shot in your basement. I've seen this show in person. He's been breaking pop-a-shot records since he was a kid.
 
Top