[Other] Having few molds vs. having many

[F. Howl]

They're also top level pros who spend enough time playing to master that many molds. I feel like most players (especially beginner/intermediate) would benefit more from using a limited number of molds.

"...master that many molds...." ?

If you mean master their different flight characteristics, then cyclers have the same task. A beat to hell DX Roc doesn't follow the same flight line as a fresh Roc on this chart, does it? The seasoned Roc begins to drift till it overlaps the line of another disc....a disc that can hit that line out of the box:

If you mean "master" how they might feel a tiny bit different in the hand, don't you think that's a bit of a hyperbole? I have already posted some pairings of discs with similar shaped wings with big differences in stability, if that was a concern. But in my experience there's no special challenge in gripping a disc that has a bit of extra concavity or a slightly blunter nose than the discs it sits next to in the bag. No need to "master" that.

Whether we use stages of seasoning or specific molds, both attempt to have consistent form and change up discs to fit the intended lines. Now, to get one disc, not in different stages, just one disc, to cover multiple lines for its distance range on the above chart? That takes mastery. A proponent of that though, would neither be a cycler nor an anti-minimalist.

 

[Sonormcneal]

I've actually sat down and wrote what I would hope for to use minimal molds, but I've also figured out a minimal bag that would fill any slot but there's only 2 molds that I carry multiples of. Here's my current bag setup and why:
Putters:
putting putter: wizard
straight putter:Nova/Envy
OS/FH putter: Harp

Mids:
straight: Compass
OS: MD4
FH: Mortar

Fairway:
straight: Leo3/FD
OS: TeeBird/Spark

Control:
US: Heat
main: Champ and Star Thunderbirds
OS: FD3

Long Distance:
MaxD: shryke
main: 2 Destroyers
FH: DD

That's 16 discs and fills pretty much any slot i would need as long as I can manipulate angles, etc.

 

[ODRB]

"...master that many molds...." ?

If you mean master their different flight characteristics, then cyclers have the same task. A beat to hell DX Roc doesn't follow the same flight line as a fresh Roc on this chart, does it? The seasoned Roc begins to drift till it overlaps the line of another disc....a disc that can hit that line out of the box:

Whether we use stages of seasoning or specific molds, both attempt to have consistent form and change up discs to fit the intended lines.

You do not understand how "cycling" works. And what real familiarity with a mold is. At all. And I am tired of the connotations associated with the word "cycling".

"Cyclers" do not have the same task. They don't need to learn one disc to make one shot shape, just like someone buying new discs every time one gets scuffed up does. Discs evolve in repeatable and predictable ways as they wear. And familiarity with that evolution allows you to identify slight variations that can prove useful. See, e.g., Philo's most recent ITB when he talk about Destroyers. That familiarity is why lots of Roc throwers can pick one up and tell how it will fly from feel. And how it will season.

And that last part, specific discs for specific lines with the same "form"? You're talking about throwing everything flat (at least you have talked about that) and just changing discs. That's not good playing. And good players aren't doing that.

 

[ODRB]

The seasoned Roc begins to drift till it overlaps the line of another disc....a disc that can hit that line out of the box.

This effing nonsense. You can be forgiven for never having thrown a seasoned Roc you know like the back of your hand. But you can't be forgiven for thinking you know anything about that.

You're never going to be able to make an intelligent comment about this until you stop shelving your discs every time they start developing glide and grip, just for a shinier new one.

There are valid reasons to throw more molds. Stick to those. And stay away from making no sense on things you don't understand.

 

[JeCroisQue]

If you play often then cycling is certainly a great way to go. Familiarity of your molds can be helpful. How much so? I am not sure. I shoot the same or similar scores with brand new discs that I have only field tested a few times than I do with when I was cycling rocs, teebirds, firebirds, and wizards.

Not to mention that the tolerances discs are made with do not help with discs feeling the same in the hand. Some new champ teebirds feel completely different in the hand as my old 11x cals or my brinsters. My old 03 USDGC roc feels nothing like a new DX roc. Even my perfectly seasoned turnover 9x roc has a very different had feel to my flat 11x straight roc. If you want to use all current plastic then there is a better argument for it. However, because I play 30 rounds a year, it would take me a few years to perfectly season a set of brand new destroyers. By the time I do that, the mold will probably change from McBeths to someone else or from 4x's to 5x's and fly totally different and be impossible to replace anyway. But I digress.

The benefit of using more molds for me is purely one of ease of replacement. If you do not play often enough to absorb losing that perfectly seasoned roc, then cycling is just not viable. When it takes a year and a half to get a champ teebird to be seasoned enough to flip up flat and hold a turn to the ground, replacing that disc is basically impossible. Not to mention that losing one of my early 2000's champ rocs is very costly and may actually be irreplaceable.

There are great arguments for both sides, one is not better than the other, one just may work better for an individual.

 

[hugheshilton]

Not to mention that losing one of my early 2000's champ rocs is very costly and may actually be irreplaceable.

Send me all those early 2000's champ Rocs and I promise I will put them to work every round that I play, irreplaceable or not.

 

[JeCroisQue]

Send me all those early 2000's champ Rocs and I promise I will put them to work every round that I play, irreplaceable or not.

You mean these ones?

 

[GripEnemy]

You mean these ones?

So aside from the 10/10s (reselling purposes), why not throw one for a while, then once you notice change in its flight...switch it out for another? You just spoke about using freshies because you play so infrequently, why not break all of those in at the same rate?

Hell, each round switch one out and throw them all throughout your 30 rounds/year. Breaking them in evenly [cycling]. BOOM - lose one and you have four others just like it.


Or should you wait until you lose one and start over like the Destroyer comment you made? I'm confused.

 

[tu-f-o]

I'm not a fan of carrying multiples of one mold.

 

[JeCroisQue]

So aside from the 10/10s (reselling purposes), why not throw one for a while, then once you notice change in its flight...switch it out for another? You just spoke about using freshies because you play so infrequently, why not break all of those in at the same rate?

Hell, each round switch one out and throw them all throughout your 30 rounds/year. Breaking them in evenly [cycling]. BOOM - lose one and you have four others just like it.


Or should you wait until you lose one and start over like the Destroyer comment you made? I'm confused.

Not sure what you're confused about. You want me to rotate each one for each round I play? Nobody cycles like that. That does not develop familiarity with each disc. All of those rocs already fly and feel differently. Also, I'm pretty much over the idea of throwing OOP plastic at $50+ a pop that can take a tree kick and be gone forever.

If you want to cycle destroyers from scratch, I would suggest buying a stack of 5-10 all the exact same weight and plastic. Then start with bagging 2 and thowing only one until it starts to break in and then add another to the bag as both of those discs develop. Rinse and repeat. If you want you could also bag a disc like a shryke to play the role of an understable destroyer until one is ready. However, if you lose a destroyer that is seasoned there is really no replacing it. That's my point.

 

[rocthecourse]

I feel sorry for any new players who are reading this thread to figure out if they should minimize or maximize...

 

[Meillo]

I feel sorry for any new players who are reading this thread to figure out if they should minimize or maximize...

They shouldn't do this or that, but rather find out what is their style of play and stick to that one.


Well described I do find this view in the thoughts of sonny in
https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/group.php?do=discuss&group=&discussionid=2704

I've been trying to determine if using a bag with a wider variety of discs offers me any competitive advantage over using just four discs. For casual rounds, and even for local monthlies, I'm sticking with the handful of discs but I've got a PDGA tourney coming up. Since I'm the defending Grand Master champion, I want to give myself my best chance to win.

But I can't really tell. I've tried back to back bag vs four-disc rounds. Tried using a bag one day and not using one the next. I'm not finding any real difference either way. It seems the biggest variable is not how many discs I'm using but how well I'm playing and while I enjoy just carrying my handful of discs more than carrying around a bag, my performance seems basically the same either way.

Philosophically you'd think there's an advantage to having access to more options and sometimes it's really great to have access to a completely thrashed Roc. Sometimes you're faced with a line where it's nice to have a Firebird. But I'm not finding that advantage in my scores. I believe the mental component in disc golf is huge, so maybe the mental clarity you get using just four discs is enough to overcome any advantage from having a more optimal disc for the shot in front of you? Maybe the fun factor is enough to overcome any equipment advantage?

(emphasis is mine)

 

[VictorB]

"...master that many molds...." ?

If you mean master their different flight characteristics, then cyclers have the same task. A beat to hell DX Roc doesn't follow the same flight line as a fresh Roc on this chart, does it?

Sure doesn't, but it's a good thing that you have to throw it for 2 years to get it really beat up...and in that time you intimately learn how that disc will act in many situations. Even if I bought one that was beat up, I'd have a really good idea of how it should fly, and after short time in the field with it should know what its tendencies are.

 

[wims]

It doesn't really matter if you carry a minimalist bag or if you're bagging 20 different molds. It's not the arrow, its the archer

 

[mentos]

It doesn't really matter if you carry a minimalist bag or if you're bagging 20 different molds. It's not the arrow, its the archer

truth

 

[hugheshilton]

You mean these ones?

Yes exactly! *drool* I have amassed a fair number of Rocs now, but I wasn't playing back in the early 2000s, and those were already expensive when I first started playing in 2010 (not that I had any idea at that point). The few CE and 11x discs I've been lucky enough to get (through trades) were Teebirds and a Valk. I've thrown USDGC Rocs from 2012 onwards but nothing earlier than that.

 

[F. Howl]

This effing nonsense. You can be forgiven for never having thrown a seasoned Roc you know like the back of your hand. But you can't be forgiven for thinking you know anything about that.

You're never going to be able to make an intelligent comment about this until you stop shelving your discs every time they start developing glide and grip, just for a shinier new one.

There are valid reasons to throw more molds. Stick to those. And stay away from making no sense on things you don't understand.

It's not nonsense. The back seat, next to me in the front (66' with bench seats, so it's door to door, then door to my ass), and nearly every inch of floorboard, is occupied by seasoned discs. I use these for form practice, so I do know what a beat to hell disc flies like.

I'm glad you have a spiritual connection with your Rocs...but that isn't an argument against my comment. There's a brand new disc out there that can cover the lines of a seasoned Roc. If grip isn't an issue and if one was satisfied with the glide when fresh, an increase in those aren't necessary positives.

I enjoy a blustery tirade as much as the next unintelligent, misinformed, guy who crossed your path on the internet, but you're kinda sounding one note.

 

[roggenb3]

Even if I bought one that was beat up, I'd have a really good idea of how it should fly, and after short time in the field with it should know what its tendencies are.

Then by this logic, you can learn a brand new disc in a few field throws as well, and there is no advantage in terms of "learning time" for cycling vs not cycling.

Any half way decent player should be able to throw any disc for 1 round (i.e. ~18 throws) and have a good enough feel for how it flies that it doesn't really affect their scores.

 

[F. Howl]

Sure doesn't, but it's a good thing that you have to throw it for 2 years to get it really beat up...and in that time you intimately learn how that disc will act in many situations. Even if I bought one that was beat up, I'd have a really good idea of how it should fly, and after short time in the field with it should know what its tendencies are.

I intimately know how a flat top Zone behaves. Not the ones in my possession. The mold, as a whole. No field time required.

 

[Golden Tuna]

This conversation is still going on, huh?
I just stopped by to see if you guys got it figured out yet.
No, ok, carry on walking in circles... One side is bound to break sooner or later...