gcr_russell
* Ace Member *
Posted it on mobile, didnt realize it was coming in so small. It's posted to Stokely's facebook page in a comment I believe.
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)
In HS, I never played on a field with a fence further than 350'. The pin positions you play on aren't the same as Tour positions. How often do you hit a putt that stops inches from the hole, then rolls into a lake? 3-point line in basketball moves. Courts seem to grow in size from MS to HS to college to pro (maybe just money issues).
I've used a driver from the fairway. It takes a good lie. I also know a lot of people that use tees when using an iron off the tee box. Just like, in DG, it takes a good lie for me to use a full run-up. The fairways often don't give me that good lie, and I have to adjust my run-up.
I see finesse golf being played a lot on the NT. Open fields and run-ups aren't related.
Finesse is equally even to power. They're both skill sets. Paul McBeth has both, so he's the best.
Sure, you can still use a driver if the situation is decent enough on the fairway, but you don't get to tee it up again. Some of its the quality of the lie, the other half is skill, to pull of an actually full on drive from the fairway.
My point is ball golf has a definite advantage embedded in the game from the tee, that does not exist elsewhere on the course.
In disc golf, we've integrated that advantage everywhere, and the result is crazy extra length.
If you could use a tee on every shot outside the green in ball golf, we'd probably have 1000yrd holes there too (i.e the equivalent of 1000 ft holes in dg). Imagine how boring that would be?
Its the difficulty of having to work your clubs to craft a shot that makes it great. Chi Chi Rodriguez, baby.
And, the difference of adding a foot or two to a three point shot (that can then be standardized and laid out on a court anywhere with zero cost or affect on the amateur game) or a few extra yards in a ballpark is not the same, by a long shot, to adding hundreds of feet to holes in NTs that you are not going to ever see on a regular basis anywhere else.
Its a symptom of a problem and mismanagement of the game by the PDGA.
I thought they weren't in the business of helping professional players make a living?
If thats the case then why are they setting up championships to cater to a few dozen folks that can bomb 600ft?
Finesse is always part of the game... my point is it should be the most critical over power.
Allowing a full x step on every shot does not equate to a fitness game.
I think after the drive a one step into plant is the most that ought to be allowed after tee off.
It'll change the game a little, sure, but maybe for the better.
Should definitely make foot faults a much more obvious and easy call.
The REAR EDGE of a circle is a single point, the second you deviate right or left you are no longer at the rear edge of the circle. The bottom of the clock face is at 6, not at just past 5 or right before 7, it is directly below the 6.
6. Peoples brains are hurting
^3 - Why do the people who are obsessed with S&D ALWAYS say "well if it wasn't for S&D this wouldn't happen." SCOTT CHOSE TO RUN UP. Nothing says he was required to.
You want to take on McBeth on a pitch and putt? I'll bet on that match.
It's going to be as much about power with or without a run-up. Just like golf is about power whether you're hitting a wedge or driver. You want to throw bombs with Lizotte standstill? Be my guest.
Soooooo I think we are argreeing... But I would say that assuming that everyone has good moral fiber is not a way to govern the game and is also a little naive. People make references to ball golf but players do not always call there own penalties. I remember Dustin Johnson grounded his club in a bunker IN A MAJOR. he didn't call it. In fact a Marshall (after the round was over) penalized him. ... Michelle wie (spelling) was dq'd after the round again after taking an incorrect lie.
A change in the rules IS needed. But not whether to run up or not, but just who calls it. You are right that even with the growth of the sport there are not enough eyes for every card...... But there are for every 1st and 2nd card in NT's and majors. We already have rules in the rule book specific to A tiers and majors so let's not say we can't do this.
I believe in the integrity of the game. And I believe rules should be followed. I also believe that the rules should reflect integrity. Having my competition call my fouls (or perceived fouls) just does not make sense to me. I think we have our head in the sand if we believe players won't do every little thing they can to gain an advantage.
Btw. Don't know what you consider old but I am 38 years old. Starting playing when I was 5.
^
This. People seem to forget that if stand and deliver is so wonderful, they have the option of doing it right now. I do so inside of 100' almost religiously because I feel taking the moving feet variable out of my throwing mechanics increases my accuracy. Avoiding foot faults is just a bonus benefit.
They also have the option to enforce the foot fault rule for those who choose not to.
Actually, let me correct that, as the rules state that they have an obligation to. Maybe if we just enforced the existing rules, and that enforcement got people to correct their actions, there would be no perceived need to change the rules.
^
This. People seem to forget that if stand and deliver is so wonderful, they have the option of doing it right now. I do so inside of 100' almost religiously because I feel taking the moving feet variable out of my throwing mechanics increases my accuracy. Avoiding foot faults is just a bonus benefit.
They also have the option to enforce the foot fault rule for those who choose not to.
Actually, let me correct that, as the rules state that they have an obligation to. Maybe if we just enforced the existing rules, and that enforcement got people to correct their actions, there would be no perceived need to change the rules.
a foot fault on an open hole is kinda ridiculous... someone said earlier that it is odd that we have these "patio-sized" teepads but a tiny area to land on for throws in the fairway especially when these are obstacle free and there is no advantage either way... I'd think a distinction should be made for run-ups and S&D shots...
basically, if you have an open and obstacle free shot... you essentially are looking at another teepad... why not make a rule that allows for a larger zone to throw from when it has no advantage either way... who cares if you are two feet behind your marker in this scenario...
if you are stuck behind a tree and really can't run up then sure... keep the rule as is for that b/c allowing a wider zone would be an unfair advantage to the thrower... just define the rule better... the idea is to not give an unfair advantage to the thrower...
we play a game similar to ball golf but it isn't exactly the same... the rules should reflect that better
Who determines whether there is "no advantage either way" with any given lie? How close is close enough to a tree to make it fall under the rule "as is"?
How is that a simpler, easier thing to do than the current rule? I mean, how much simpler and straight-forward can you get than this is the foot-sized spot your foot has to be on when you throw a shot in the fairway no matter where in the fairway you are and no matter what obstacles you have to navigate?
I think it's because you and cd are missing the argument being made. I think a run up is fine, if every player on every card, calls foot faults. If Scott is being called for a foot fault, and no one else in the division is being called for foot faults, the rule becomes a farce, and he is playing a different and unfair game. Kenny foot faults, I've never seen one called, Mr. Brown foot faults, I've never seen one called. Scott got three in a span of an hour. Did Scott foot fault? don't know, but lets assume he did. Yep, he can S&D, now he has a disadvantage to Ken and Mr. Brown. Can he call them equally, yes he can, but he can't call the guys on card two and if no one down there is calling the foul, then he is playing at a disadvantage.
There is a cultural problem when it comes to open field run ups. The PDGA, nod nod, wink wink, thinks they should be tolerated to make the game interesting. Many players don't call them period. That creates a problem. Furthermore, I suspect Ken calls them when it's convenient or provides an advantage that Ken wants. That is a big suspicion, and should be treated with a huge grain of salt. But if you have one player that calls foot faults only when its to their advantage, you have a credibility problem that has to be addressed.
You have a reasonable question here... though almost all of the rules had reasonable questions and they were worked out.
I think this is a situation that could be worked out as well. The rule as is causes a lot of trouble as others have stated... so many are technically foot faulting and not being called on it... my opinion is that they shouldn't be called on it and that there is something wrong with the rule as well.