Should we lower the rim width/speed regulations for distance drivers?

[ilmcgee]

I don't believe the bolded is true. At least not in a way that signals some sort of seismic shift of the whole game.

You are probably right. And your facts support you. I still think it's the way pro level tournaments are trending. And I think we are witnessing a pivotal point in the growth of our sport. Look at how fast the high speed driver segment grew. It started slow, then exponentially grew. I think that's where pro tournaments are, starting slow. As the numbers grow, lower tiers will have to keep pace to provide the stepping stones to pro level. The only way lower tiers can be provided with big open courses is if more are put in.

I'm not against high speed drivers or ball golf style courses. I just hope this sport doesn't grow into the elitist sport ball golf is.

 

[atay87]

FWIW Dave Dunipace had pushed for a smaller limit to the rim width about 10 years ago. The PDGA opted for a wider limit.

From a post by Dave Dunipace on the PDGA forums back in 2008:

... I am not opposed to discs flying farther. That was not the point, and if I said that, I was in error. I am opposed to unrestricted wide rims, and undefined equipment for a sports contest. There was no definition at the time that prevented an otherwise solid discus with one thumb hole. Additionally, I was of the opinion that the wide rimmed discs further separate the haves from the have nots in terms of big hands with big power to generate, and sustain, initial velocity. And, this opinion was mostly aimed at over head shots, that are strictly done with velocity, and not with glide. I am all for big glide. No problem.

I was surprised by the popularity of the latest additions to our line. I did not think a large percentage of players would be able to throw the Destroyer, XCaliber, and Boss. Apparently, the PDGA picked a better limit than I did. I wanted a smaller limit. However, a limit was necessary.

 

[Flick Maniac]

It almost sounds like people are indicating here that wide rimmed drivers instantly provide 100' more distance over stuff like Teebirds and Eagles. I think that's only true for the hardest throwers. The great majority of DG'ers aren't going to see any benefit to throwing something like a Destroyer over a Valkyrie or Teebird.

Someone like Ricky Wysocki will throw a Boss 100' (or more) further than a Teebird. That's perfectly fine. The way I look at it, he has earned that distance. Only at the pro level are some courses being obsoleted. That said, most pro events are set up on temporary courses with made up holes to increase the difficulty.

I for one don't think that wide rimmed drivers detract from the overall game. They do provide more distance than Teebirds, but you need skill and good arm speed to harness that distance. I think DG would be kind of boring if if drivers capped out at speed 7.

Just for argument's sake, I think some company should produce a (non PDGA legal) driver with a 3 CM rim and see if it blows the current 2.5 CM standard out of the water.

I think 2.5 is wide enough for sanctioned discs.

Often you see the big arms throw 12-speed discs over the max rim ones. There are some in the mix too.

Gateway did make the Ninja with a 2.8cm rim but it tough to say "blow out of the water" when its not PDGA legal, i.e. you wont have enough people throw it to get reliable data.

 

[scarpfish]

Could we generalize that the alleged trend towards using ball golf courses is less a matter of increasing online viewership, and more a matter of that being the only available land space in that area that could accommodate a pro level course?

Because I think if everyone had a piece of property with woods, water, elevation and enough of it to carve out 18 holes at 10,000+ ft, they'd be doing that instead.

 

[Mike C]

I vote no.

I love ripping huge drives.

Doesn't have to be a wide open hole. I love wooded courses, technical holes and courses that incorporate nature well.

I've thrown 1000' golf course style holes. I've thrown 1000' heavily wooded holes. Both have their own charm.

I'd be a lot less interested in this sport if holes were more frequently designed with rec players in mind.

Obviously its healthy to cater to them. You need a balance of course designs. But 250-300' par 3's over and over are a lot less exciting to me than 450-800' par 4's and 5's.

Learning to throw 400, 500, 600' then playing a course where the longest hole is 350' takes some of the fun out of it IMO.

On the subject of limiting rim width.....I've got 450'+ throws with putters. Even if you cut the limit in half from speed 14 to speed 7, I can still hit 500', and the top level pros will be able to embarrass me!

 

[Urmomsbf]

Indy Car and NASCAR both regulated the innovation to the point fans lost interest from their hey days. Indy Car has slowly recovered by loosing up some specs and giving teams options to play with on attachments (wings, shocks, etc.).

Now, I'm not a fan of wide rim drivers. But taking that history in mind, I'm against anymore restrictions.

 

[nrihan]

Let em make speed 16 I say. I'll feel even better outdriving the other ams on my card with an old Teebird.

 

[Twmccoy]

I vote no.

I love ripping huge drives.

Doesn't have to be a wide open hole. I love wooded courses, technical holes and courses that incorporate nature well.

I've thrown 1000' golf course style holes. I've thrown 1000' heavily wooded holes. Both have their own charm.

I'd be a lot less interested in this sport if holes were more frequently designed with rec players in mind.

Obviously its healthy to cater to them. You need a balance of course designs. But 250-300' par 3's over and over are a lot less exciting to me than 450-800' par 4's and 5's.

Learning to throw 400, 500, 600' then playing a course where the longest hole is 350' takes some of the fun out of it IMO.

On the subject of limiting rim width.....I've got 450'+ throws with putters. Even if you cut the limit in half from speed 14 to speed 7, I can still hit 500', and the top level pros will be able to embarrass me!

I agree with this. I think DG should have as much variation as possible. I don't mind a 300' hole, but I definitely like the 500'+ bomber holes. As a good DGer, you need to learn a wide range of shots to play long and short holes. You need a good variety of discs to play all those holes. I like using wide rimmed drivers, when applicable.

That said, I don't think the PDGA should change the driver rule they have now. 2.5 CM is wide enough for rims.

 

[knivvves]

More tournaments are going to ball golf style courses. That's where viewership is at, and money.

Is it true that there's more viewership for ball golf style courses? And if so, why?

 

[DiscFifty]

"Should we lower the rim width/speed regulations for distance drivers?"

It's almost like we're asking to limit the athleticism of the player as well. It's inevitable as better athletes enter our sport, they're going to do things we can't. With that said, there's nothing wrong with long courses, but I think most players including pros would rather have a mix of short/technical holes and a few bomber holes. Like others have said, when Simon bombs putters 450, there's not much you can do at that point regarding the plastic.

 

[armiller]

From a post by Dave Dunipace on the PDGA forums back in 2008:

Very nice. Thanks for posting!

I keep forgetting that there is a rim limit at all, since it seems like discs are just getting faster. In fact, there is a limit, and as Dave so graciously states, the PDGA's chosen restriction was more suitable than a smaller limit that he (and likely others) preferred: "Apparently, the PDGA picked a better limit than I did." Good thing Dave ran with it. Just imagine a world without the Destroyer! Financially, maybe he should have had the insight to recommend high speed drivers from the get-go.

In the same breath: "I was surprised by the popularity of the latest additions to our line. I did not think a large percentage of players would be able to throw the Destroyer, XCaliber, and Boss." It's funny how he could be so right about the utility, and yet so wrong about the popularity.

 

[OldSchoolDad]

Most of the people I see throwing Destroyers have no business doing so.

 

[Muddyboots]

Is it true that there's more viewership for ball golf style courses? And if so, why?

Two thoughts-
1.) I suspect that that style course is easier to film than a heavily wooded course, and I think the point to point kind of shots translate to the average viewer. How many times have you heard a commentator say "the video doesn't do it justice" in reference to a line or elevation change on a wooded course?
2.) People like a dog and pony show. I include myself when I say that we enjoy watching these guys throw 500+ feet out in the open. If you haven't played the course being filmed, you likely won't grasp the challenge of a wooded course.

 

[JC17393]

Two thoughts-
1.) I suspect that that style course is easier to film than a heavily wooded course, and I think the point to point kind of shots translate to the average viewer. How many times have you heard a commentator say "the video doesn't do it justice" in reference to a line or elevation change on a wooded course?
2.) People like a dog and pony show. I include myself when I say that we enjoy watching these guys throw 500+ feet out in the open. If you haven't played the course being filmed, you likely won't grasp the challenge of a wooded course.

Many of the media folks dispute your first point. They prefer to film in the woods. Sure the sight lines aren't as great, but given the limited options on a given hole, camera operators can more easily chose where to stand to have the best views to film from. In the open, the players can go in so many different directions, it's harder to a) choose a spot to get the best angle and b) track the disc out of the player's hand (speaking primarily from the perspective of catch cam).

While I'm not one who enjoys watching 500+ drives, at least not over and over again, I do agree with the idea that if you haven't played the course being filmed, you can sometimes struggle to grasp the challenge of it. But that applies to all courses, not just wooded ones. I enjoy watching USDGC more than I do the Memorial (two events that are described as open and "boring" by a lot of people) in part because I've played a couple dozen rounds at Winthrop and I've never been to Fountain Hills. I get more out of watching Idlewild or Maple Hill more than BSF or Masters Cup because I've played those wooded courses but never been to Milo or Dela, though I enjoy watching all of them more than I do something like the San Francisco or Utah Open.

 

[ballgolfconvert]

Keep the speed and the baskets but limit each player to 14 discs.

 

[SonicGuy]

Keep the speed and the baskets but limit each player to 14 discs.

But why? More discs = more sales = healthier sport

The way I describe a disc golf bag is by telling my ball golfing buddies to imagine you could bag each iron to draw, fade, or go straight. So for each single iron they would bag, I bag 3 discs. That is why I need 22 discs in my bag. I don't see how limiting that would make the game any better.

 

[SD86]

Keep the speed and the baskets but limit each player to 14 discs.

I like your idea conceptually, but the problem is that it would be like telling ball golfers they can only bring 14 golf balls to the course as opposed to 14 golf clubs (the ball golf limit as it currently stands). Discs gets thrown and discs get lost, so a limit on the number of discs would do more harm than good.

 

[ballgolfconvert]

I like your idea conceptually, but the problem is that it would be like telling ball golfers they can only bring 14 golf balls to the course as opposed to 14 golf clubs (the ball golf limit as it currently stands). Discs gets thrown and discs get lost, so a limit on the number of discs would do more harm than good.

If a golfer has a club break or it becomes unplayable they are allowed to replace that club during a round. Same thing would be in effect for lost discs.

As a skilled ball golfer the idea of having a different club for every type of shot would take away most of the fun of ball golf. I think it does the same for disc golf.

 

[SonicGuy]

As a skilled ball golfer the idea of having a different club for every type of shot would take away most of the fun of ball golf. I think it does the same for disc golf.

I completely disagree. One of the main differences between ball and disc golf is that ball golf focuses on where the ball lands, where disc golf focuses on where the disc flies. We rely on discs to navigate a fully 3 dimensional fairway, where we need to turn the disc left, right, up, down, and sometimes more than one way over the course of a single fairway. We need the varying disc stabilities because we have a more diverse array of shots.

The point of golf is to hit the ball the exact same way every time with the club that goes the correct distance. The point of disc golf is to throw in the specific way with the specific disc needed to navigate a fairway.

 

[lyleoross]

I like your idea conceptually, but the problem is that it would be like telling ball golfers they can only bring 14 golf balls to the course as opposed to 14 golf clubs (the ball golf limit as it currently stands). Discs gets thrown and discs get lost, so a limit on the number of discs would do more harm than good.

Yes, but then you place a different kind of strategizing on the player. If I throw over that lake I might lose a disc, meh; becomes, if I throw over that lake I might lose a disc, yikes!