30th Annual Kansas City Wide Open

[Cgkdisc]

Yet you agree that putting in both sports is significantly different? That's your hang up right there. For gold level, it's more like 1 shot in DG. So having 2-shots to the green where the second shot is easy enough (half shot) for the almost automatic 1-putt is the nature of DG, not BG. Call it a 1.5 shot par 3 if it makes you feel better.

 

[justactnormal]

blue valley

I worked the course at Blue Valley during the tournament, so it was pretty amazing to see some of the crazy stuff that the really skilled pros were able to do. A lot of the advanced and masters players also put down some great stuff, so it was really cool to see. I'll post a funny story about Climo when I get the chance later, b/c I'm at work today. :\

I don't want to take anything away from Will's 44, b/c he was simply amazing. No doubt about it. That being said, I think the short course was the wrong set up. I understand running the rec and intermediates around that track. It's just to much to have those guys play 2 courses in one day w/ Blue Valley long being one of them. I know I couldn't handle it. That's why I think they should have their rounds be at 3 of the other 4 courses being used (or one of the other 5 or 6 that weren't) and leave Blue Valley set up long.

That course was designed to be a beast and the pros should have had the chance to play it as it was designed to be. BV short is meant for rec players to get in a shorter round, but it's just not the same experience. BV is the only course in play that offers legit par 5's, 1000' bombs and technical challenges as well. Having to shorten it for the lower tier players wasn't really fair to the higher tiers or spectators. Coulda been a great "moving day" course. I would like to think that the pro player would appreciate the challenges that BV long provides, with true par 5's.

The short set up is a course within a course that's great for a Sunday afternoon, but not really the right call for an A-tier event, IMO.

 

[pineappletrees]

Check the scoring AVG for Pro/ADV and get back to us with this one....

As a 920 rated golfer, I routinely get a 3 on that hole. Only time I see 4's are if someone throws a bad upshot.

 

[kcplease]

I don't understand what the argument is over the course par and what not at Blue Valley. A 44 is an amazing score regardless of the par.

 

[_MTL_]

Yet you agree that putting in both sports is significantly different? That's your hang up right there. For gold level, it's more like 1 shot in DG. So having 2-shots to the green where the second shot is easy enough (half shot) for the almost automatic 1-putt is the nature of DG, not BG. Call it a 1.5 shot par 3 if it makes you feel better.

The problem the two of us in this discussion is you are clearly a numbers and stats guy, where I'm much more of a player / what do I expect to get on this hole type guy. In my head, any hole I don't attempt to reach is a par 4. There are many holes where I can reach them, but choose not to due to certain factors and throw a midrange or a low speed driver. However, I understand that this is my choice and in reality, this is a par 3.

I also look at it from 2 other angles. The angle of the rules where you need to correctly give a par on a hole b/c of the penalty for missing the hole being based off par and the angle of growing the sport.

Regardless of how rediculous it might seem that Dave was -40 for the weekend or when he was -100 for the worlds, the representation of the score compared to par is VERY important for the general population because the general population understands that concept way more than anything else in our sport b/c golf is mainstream.

Lets say you have one of these two shot par 3's as you call it and you are a spectator and don't know much about disc golf. And you see a guy like Dave Feldberg throw a drove, then throw an approach and make a 20 footer and you hear that it was a par. Hmmm, must not have been a good drive then if he took two throws to get there. But that same hole as a par 4, then the spectator says "wow, that was impressive."

 

[Cgkdisc]

Sorry but currently the games and par structures can't be compared because putting is too easy in disc golf in comparison with ball golf where their par concept was developed and works. If we make putting tougher at the gold level by about 0.5 shot, we would closely match BG par parameters. Then we would have little need to discuss the existence of par 2s and 2-shot par 3s. But our manufacturers and org don't seem to think this is necessary yet. So we have the reality of par 2s labeled par 3s and 2-shot par 3s continuing indefinitely.

 

[denny ritner]

the problem isn't stats or putting being too easy. the problem is having players of significantly different skill levels throwing from the same set of tees.

 

[_MTL_]

the problem isn't stats or putting being too easy. the problem is having players of significantly different skill levels throwing from the same set of tees.

now that I agree with.

 

[cmcolomb]

man - seeing some footage of this open.... looking like it was SLOW going for the players.. that musta been aggravating

 

[jcrab66]

it was a bit slow going, which benefited those of us who were watching live because we got to see quite a bit of the lead womens card plus even some of the other mens cards

 

[Cgkdisc]

denny ritner - the problem isn't stats or putting being too easy. the problem is having players of significantly different skill levels throwing from the same set of tees.

Same issue though - what you would like versus dealing with what you have.

 

[denny ritner]

Same issue though - what you would like versus dealing with what you have.

in many cases, i would make the trade-off to have gold level players throwing from alternate tees, ideally rubber or carpet.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Still not feasible in a high percentage of courses that are land locked. Also, few players would be happy with multiple types of teeing surfaces on a tournament course.

 

[denny ritner]

Still not feasible in a high percentage of courses that are land locked. Also, few players would be happy with multiple types of teeing surfaces on a tournament course.

may be right on the landlocked part, but i'd argue that those courses shouldn't be used for gold level tournaments.

i'm not suggesting that the tee surface varies from hole to hole within any particular skill level. i don't have a problem with all natural temporary tees, although it's important to consider the decrease in distance potential. (players throw off natural surfaces for 2nd and 3rd shots on par 4's and 5's.) the problem with permanent natural tees (as you well know) is rutting.

 

[rj29274]

anyone have a link to the archived footage? pdga.com stalls out. . .

 

[Pwingles]

First off, what do we define par as? I generally say that on an open or slightly wooded course (like Blue Valley), par is the number of drives it takes to get inside 100' + 2 to get up and down.

The par 4's on the "Little" Blue Valley configuration are #6, #10, and #18. Course designer Jack Lowe and I had a long conversation about #18 (#16 in the Big Blue Valley configuration); when the tree to the right of the tee finally dies you're going to watch pros through big hyzers to the green. At that point, we may have to re-evaluate the par (or move the basket). For now though, it's a par 4.

#1 is 520' downhill. I saw some advanced players put it within 50' warming up.
#4 on the standard course is for sure a par 4. On the short course, it's a 350' tunnel shot or anhyzer flex over the top. Easy to get within 100' off the tee.
#6 is a par 4.
#7 is one of the tweeners on the course It's tough to mark as par 4 though since it's so downhill. But this is one of the bigger points on convention.
#10 is a par 4.
#16 is a pro par 3. It takes a big anhyzer to get to the basket (Jordan in advanced put it 12' from the bucket). Generally though, an anhyzer that's decent and in bounds will leave you 100'-150' short onto a green that isn't too tricky.
#18 is a par 4.

He throws pretty far

 

[Dana]

Slight change of topic, lets talk about the wording of Swope Gold #5. Matty 0 and McBeth both get stroked for playing the hole wrong. The way I understood the rule was that they played it correctly.

Road to the right OR left is OB. Service Road is OB. Marked OB to the right is OB. Gravel Lake is OB. The green is an island. If, after your first throw, you go OB after crossing the service road, go to the drop zone. You must continue to throw from the drop zone until you finish on the island

From what I heard, Matty and Paul threw their 2nd shots OB. Their discs crossed the service road and then went OB. They then played their next shot from where it was last in bounds. Later in the round, they were informed that they played the hole wrong and that they should have went to the Drop Zone.

To me, the way it is written, makes it sound like you only go to the drop zone after you throw from across the service road. This makes sense to me. Why would you get to advance to the drop zone if you throw your 2nd shot OB from BEFORE the service road. You could throw your 2nd shot and not even come near the basket (200+ ft away) and land OB and then get to move up to the Drop Zone????? Am I totally misreading this? I would bet that half of the groups played the OB incorrectly.

 

[Cgkdisc]

It might have been more clear if the word "beyond" replaced the words "after crossing." But I'm not sure it was unclear as stated. If there was any uncertainty, the players could have asked Graham as a marshal or even played a provisional.

 

[Dana]

What is confusing to me is that it doesn't state whether your lie needs to be beyond the service road or simply your disc crossing the service road. Having it just as your disc crossing the service road does not make sense to me, the way the hole is laid out.

 

[Timko]

That would honestly be my fault for not being clear enough as I'm the one that wrote it. Like Chuck said, the word "beyond" could have replaced "after crossing" and it could have been clearer.

The spirit of the rule was that if you're past the service road OB then you're going for the green. I didn't want people who threw it OB into the road to the left to move 200' down the fairway to throw from the drop zone. Perhaps wording it to say that if your disc comes to rest OB past the service road after your first drive throw from OB sounds clearer?

I did talk with a couple of guys who caddied during that final round for pros and they were shocked at the amount of people that 1.) Didn't attend the players meeting to get any rules update (a drop zone on #6 was added after the caddy book was printed) and 2.) Didn't have a copy of the caddy book during the round. Swope Gold is a course with complicated rules, and after watching the archived live broadcast, I didn't see anyone in that last group pull out a caddy book.

If Swope Gold is in next year's rotation, I could see myself using different color paint like they do in Ball Golf to mark hazards to hopefully help direct players with what to do. However, there's nothing that any TD or course designer can do about someone that doesn't carry the rules of the course with them during a tournament round.