How much can we know about our throw using only TechDisc?

[dmoore1998]

I've had my TechDisc for a week, and because I'm a numbers nerd, I thought this would be interesting (even if only for me). I've got a good number of throws, I've played with the simulator, and like nearly everyone else I'm trying to add distance. With large amounts of data comes the common problem of "what does the data mean?".

One thing I've been trying to research but having very little luck is what a good speed/spin ratio actually is.

Here are my findings after a week. For reference, I'm 43, 6'6", and max out around 400-425 on flat ground with a Shryke (this will come up later).

Everything is backhand. My forehand is much more of a work in progress. Plan is to incorporate some videos plus TechDisc data when I can (which may end up moving to the Form section).

Average speed: 54-58 (closer to 58 when I'm really trying to rip it into the net, closer to 54 when it's more slow form-focused throws)
Average spin: 850-950, I have virtually no control over this at the moment. I also have no idea whether this is good or bad for my speed.
Average hyzer angle: 12-16 degrees of hyzer angle
Average nose angle:0-4 degrees up
Average launch angle: 0-6 degrees up
Average wobble: 6-8%

I've heard everyone say "the distance calculator isn't that good, don't put stock in it". And I don't, but it's kind of fun to play with. One thing I found super interesting though in playing around with it is that if i put my average metrics into the simulator, and turn the disc used into a Shryke (which is my main thrower), my metrics line up super well with it throwing it essentially the max the simulator will let you throw a Shryke. I move speed up and it burns over, I throw it more nose down and it burns over, etc. 1 of 3 things seems to be at play here. 1. Random luck. 2. I really picked the exact right disc for my throwing style. 3. My body has learned to throw in a specific way for the specific disc I prefer...which seems fairly likely given that I was throwing Shrykes before I could throw it 400 feet...and it seems unlikely I just lucked my way into the exact disc for what my form WOULD be today when i started throwing it a few years back.

I seem to have a decent ability to manipulate launch and nose angle when I want to, the numbers above are more of the "if I don't even consider those things, how does my throw come out". I feel like my hyzer angle is somewhat less controllable, and pretty well uncontrollable doing net work given my height and the height of the net, and my fear of bringing the disc more upright to throw anny and damaging something when I miss the net.

One note on forehand, I was surprised just how fast my "grip and rip" forehand actually is. I figured it was lagging my backhand speed by 15-20mph. It's maybe 5mph slower. Spin rate is way down, and I definitely can't throw it as far in real life. I mostly throw much more controlled forehands, but was surprised just how fast I could zing one into the net when I really wanted to.

As I work towards adding distance, hoping to hit 450 this year more consistently, probably with a Nuke or Big Z Zeus...if I have a little fun with the throw simulator it seems the path there MIGHT be 65mph and more of a flat nose angle. Changing the spin rate in the simulator seems to have little/no impact which was interesting.

Comments welcome, or just questions about the Tech Disc if people are considering getting one. My biggest takeaway was really just the point about "wow have I just been unconsciously tailoring my form to get the biggest flight out of the disc I'd already picked out"? I definitely noticed more overstable discs going further and further as my form improved, but it was always kind of weird to me that I could throw a Shryke 400 feet and a Nuke 300 feet. Then I could throw a Shryke 400 feet and a Nuke 375 feet. Being a nerd I'm kind of interested in playing with TechDisc with friends and taking their metrics to see what kind of disc the system things they'd throw the furthest.

 

[Sheep]

I don't think the simulator can really calculate spin rate vs stability in flight. It's a bit of a "guess" variable for anyone looking into disc flight.

Lots of spin really helps control the flip and push.
Not enough spin can cause a disc to fly undesirably.
So what... is the right spin? Duno.

Nose angle and spin have a lot to do with the finish of a disc. A nose up disc will never finish forwards, but a disc that doesn't have enough spin will not have enough spin at apex to help it finish forwards.

So, its a combination of making the disc push flight dynamics to reach distance. Which. I don't think a calculator can really accurately measure.

A disc pushing on turn but not burning and continuing to push forward and into the turn will fly really really really far. because its fighting to push forwards.

When a disc pushes to far or flies to large of an S curve, its burning energy in the turns.

Watch Simons latest video where he's throwing conrads new disc. He specifically says "watch it push" while the disc is trying to turn but not fully turning. Thats the flight you want for big D.

And the distance line for the bombers like him and eagle and a few others is basically hyzer flip to push. You want that disc to fight right without burning as long as possible, because if its fighting right, its pushing forwards, cause it cant dump or apex yet.

 

[Nick Carroll]

As near as I can tell, with the backhand, there's almost nothing you can do to generate more spin, once your form is good. I've tried over-curling the wrist, and it slows the spin rate and speed. I extend farther back (greater than 90 degree shoulder angle) and extreme reachback - that only increases speed in my limited experience with Tech Disc, but not the spin, so the advance ratio is lower.

The launch angle and distance metrics can be next to useless if you're throwing down into a net. But if you can replicate the correct heights when you throw, those can have some meaning.

The 6-8 wobble angle is decent. 4-5 is good. 3 and under is great. 10 and higher is pretty bad, though.

I'm backhand dominant, with a novice forehand, and I can throw almost as fast (with much less effort) than my backhand, but the spin is low and the wobble is high, so the real world distance is like 66% of my backhand. That actually correlates with the lower spin rate of my forehand, which is about 66% of my backhand spin rate.

Lastly, from what I've read online, the distance metric - since it's a simulated prediction - is the least accurate output. I ignore it completely at this time. Maybe that'll change when I elevate my net tomorrow.

 

[BenjiHeywood]

Another tech disc user here - also 6'6" and with pretty similar metrics.

I've found the simulator to be pretty good. For those who haven't played with it, it seems to be an iterative process, and takes much longer to calculate than the other metrics. Basically, at every moment in the simulated flight, it takes the details of pitch, yaw, spin, speed etc and moves the disc a little accordingly, then updates those details to become the input of the next calculation. And keeps going until it hits the 'ground'. The physics is reasonably well understood, so apart from the real-world effects like wind gusts etc it does a decent job. I wouldn't want to claim it's always accurate to within five feet or anything, but it generally does a very good job of simulating the interplay between launch angle, nose angle, spin and speed.

As near as I can tell, with the backhand, there's almost nothing you can do to generate more spin, once your form is good. I've tried over-curling the wrist, and it slows the spin rate and speed. I extend farther back (greater than 90 degree shoulder angle) and extreme reachback - that only increases speed in my limited experience with Tech Disc, but not the spin, so the advance ratio is lower.

Have a play with grip, I added over a hundred rpm by moving my thumb nearer to the edge. I haven't previously thrown many fairways for field work (the course here is VERY open and fairly long), but bought the fairway TechDisc so that people with smaller hands than me could play with it, and my thumb position was more where it would be on a driver. Much better when I got it above my index finger and could grip tight. I also found that getting my other fingers off the rim helped spin, so that it's snapping out off the index finger properly, but I've got VERY long and thin fingers so I dunno if that's just me.

Spin (IMO) is all about how late the disc rotates. It's always going to do roughly the same amount of rotation from maximum-cocked to release - probably about half a rotation, 180ish degrees - and so the only way to get it to rotate faster is to have that same amount of rotation happen in a shorter time, about a smaller lever. Rotation from the elbow is obviously slow, from the wrist is faster, but pivoting off the fingertips is fastest.

I will say, for anyone doubting the value of the metrics, that I think I'm finding things that would have taken AGES to work out in the field. That grip change, moving my finger nearer the rim, lowered my nose angle by about 4 degrees. I knew that after about three throws (and it's continued to be true for the next hundred throws) but it would have taken forever to be sure in the field, with different wind, different discs, and inevitable variations in speed and launch angle, all of which would make the flight path different each time. Being able to see the metrics individually is an incredible time saver, as is throwing an identical disc into a net and not having to fetch it. Obviously it doesn't replace field work, but it's an incredible tool.

 

[dmoore1998]

I will say, for anyone doubting the value of the metrics, that I think I'm finding things that would have taken AGES to work out in the field. That grip change, moving my finger nearer the rim, lowered my nose angle by about 4 degrees. I knew that after about three throws (and it's continued to be true for the next hundred throws) but it would have taken forever to be sure in the field, with different wind, different discs, and inevitable variations in speed and launch angle, all of which would make the flight path different each time. Being able to see the metrics individually is an incredible time saver, as is throwing an identical disc into a net and not having to fetch it. Obviously it doesn't replace field work, but it's an incredible tool.

The takeaway I've had so far is that it's very similar to videotaping your form. Without the video you think "Yeah, that change I made really has my lower body timing down now"...then you watch a video and you realize "Nope, feels like it's good timing but it's definitely not". In the same way I might find myself thinking "That grip change definitely has me spinning the disc more, I can feel it". Then you look and you're like "Nope, spinning way slower actually".

 

[Sheep]

I will say, for anyone doubting the value of the metrics, that I think I'm finding things that would have taken AGES to work out in the field. That grip change, moving my finger nearer the rim, lowered my nose angle by about 4 degrees. I knew that after about three throws (and it's continued to be true for the next hundred throws) but it would have taken forever to be sure in the field, with different wind, different discs, and inevitable variations in speed and launch angle, all of which would make the flight path different each time. Being able to see the metrics individually is an incredible time saver, as is throwing an identical disc into a net and not having to fetch it. Obviously it doesn't replace field work, but it's an incredible tool.

The big deal here is that all the people I TELL "hey you're doing this" and they want to argue with me about how they are not.

They now have Physical Tangleable Proof that says "hey, you idiot you're throwing nose up just like that guy told you every time you complained about your distance"

I apparently never finished this. so hopefully this was what I wanted to say. ..
But I think it had something to do with now people have data, now they might listen.

 

[Nick Carroll]

Have a play with grip, I added over a hundred rpm by moving my thumb nearer to the edge.

I'm seeing this after completing my final day of throwing, and while that didn't make it in this time, when my Tech Disc comes in, I'll test that for sure - thank you!

Regarding the rest of the commentary since my last post in this thread, I agree with a lot said regarding the usefulness of the data, even the simulated throws. I did raise my net a foot and it finally made launch angle relevant.

Many of my throws had negative numbers because I was essentially throwing down into the net - if slightly. I had launch angles of (down to) -8.29 which practically never happens on a course. Even if I'm dropping a roller line or throwing downhill - that's lower than anything I would experience playing a round. Not only that, but the distances I was getting was like 18-30 feet in the simulator.

Lastly, I started developing a sense of when I was throwing nose up, or producing more wobble. I've been playing for 5 years, and never been able to tell by feeling until this week. I can see a disc wobbling, or with high nose angle. But to have that ability to feel it in the swing itself is a novel experience.

 

[Cashley56]

TechDisc has a Metrics page, which explains what the metrics mean and what you should aspire to. See TechDisc Metrics

Re speed - According to the simulator, speed is king for adding distance. At 56mph with a distance driver, each additional mph adds about 10 feet of distance. So to go from 400 to 450 (without changing anything else), you would need to add about 5 mph.

Re spin - TechDisc says that a 50% advance ratio is good. To have a 50% advance ratio with 54-58 mph, you would need about 1100 rpm spin. I was able to add about 75 rpm to my spin rate by working on a deep(er) pocket release. However, according to the simulator, each additional 100 rpm of spin adds only about 3 additional feet of distance. So going from 900 rpm to 1200 rpm would only add about 9 feet of distance.

Re nose angle - 0-4 is good, but according to TechDisc, -2 to -3 is optimal. According to the simulator, changing from a nose angle of 2 and a launch angle of 2 to a nose angle of -2 and a launch angle of 7, would give you an additional 11 feet.

TechDisc collected data from dozens of the pros at USGDC 2023, which is useful as a benchmark. See Throw Explorer

 

[Sheep]

TechDisc has a Metrics page, which explains what the metrics mean and what you should aspire to. See TechDisc Metrics

Re speed - According to the simulator, speed is king for adding distance. At 56mph with a distance driver, each additional mph adds about 10 feet of distance. So to go from 400 to 450 (without changing anything else), you would need to add about 5 mph.

Re spin - TechDisc says that a 50% advance ratio is good. To have a 50% advance ratio with 54-58 mph, you would need about 1100 rpm spin. I was able to add about 75 rpm to my spin rate by working on a deep(er) pocket release. However, according to the simulator, each additional 100 rpm of spin adds only about 3 additional feet of distance. So going from 900 rpm to 1200 rpm would only add about 9 feet of distance.

Re nose angle - 0-4 is good, but according to TechDisc, -2 to -3 is optimal. According to the simulator, changing from a nose angle of 2 and a launch angle of 2 to a nose angle of -2 and a launch angle of 7, would give you an additional 11 feet.

TechDisc collected data from dozens of the pros at USGDC 2023, which is useful as a benchmark. See Throw Explorer

It's data, but its data being calculated with a simulator.
And... I don't think the simulator is really capable of simulating the actual pressure dynamics on the disc that cause distance in flight. Especially based on the info I've seen posted on it.

This is where the weird stuff I complained about comes into play.
Were gonna have form experts from tech disc that have no idea what they are talking about. cause a simulator told them so.
They gonna get out into the real world with real players and their tech disc isn't going to save the on the course.

 

[Nick Carroll]

I might as well as this here, per a IG DM with the Tech Disc account, they explained the "wobble angle" when I asked them for more details (not found on their about page or anywhere on their site).

"Wobble is off axis torque, measured as the half angle of the cone that is traced out by the center axis of the disc. A disc that spins perfectly on its axis will have 0 wobble, the central axis will stay perfectly steady. If the disc wobbles then the central axis will trace out a cone as it wobbles. Larger wobble equals a larger cone angle."

This makes me think that it's possible that excessive wrist movement due to "pour the coffee" or "turn the key" cues could also create wobble if the disc is tilted off plane from these corrective measures.

 

[TheHawg]

I got my TechDisk earlier this month. I'm old, 72, so my speed isn't what I would like for it to be. I'm topping out at 42 mph. My TechDisc weighs in at 177g. I throw 150g discs while playing . I calculated with the simulator, that my speed with the lighter discs is about 5 mph faster than with the very slippery 177g TD. Any thoughts?

 

[Sheep]

I might as well as this here, per a IG DM with the Tech Disc account, they explained the "wobble angle" when I asked them for more details (not found on their about page or anywhere on their site).

"Wobble is off axis torque, measured as the half angle of the cone that is traced out by the center axis of the disc. A disc that spins perfectly on its axis will have 0 wobble, the central axis will stay perfectly steady. If the disc wobbles then the central axis will trace out a cone as it wobbles. Larger wobble equals a larger cone angle."

This makes me think that it's possible that excessive wrist movement due to "pour the coffee" or "turn the key" cues could also create wobble if the disc is tilted off plane from these corrective measures.

This is part of what i've learned with the high speed and I'm working on still.

When we try to excessively "pour the coffee" or some other things to get the nose down, it forces our arm and wrist to not move right and suddenly we get these really "dirty" throws.

 

[Cashley56]

I got my TechDisk earlier this month. I'm old, 72, so my speed isn't what I would like for it to be. I'm topping out at 42 mph. My TechDisc weighs in at 177g. I throw 150g discs while playing . I calculated with the simulator, that my speed with the lighter discs is about 5 mph faster than with the very slippery 177g TD. Any thoughts?

The increased speed with a lighter disc is consistent with everything I have heard/read (although never heard/read exact mph numbers).

I agree the plastic on the TechDisc is unusually slippery. Since we don't care about the actual flight, it might make sense to rough it up a little with sandpaper.

 

[Sheep]

The increased speed with a lighter disc is consistent with everything I have heard/read (although never heard/read exact mph numbers).

I agree the plastic on the TechDisc is unusually slippery. Since we don't care about the actual flight, it might make sense to rough it up a little with sandpaper.

Clean it with acetone.

 

[dmoore1998]

TechDisc has a Metrics page, which explains what the metrics mean and what you should aspire to. See TechDisc Metrics

Re speed - According to the simulator, speed is king for adding distance. At 56mph with a distance driver, each additional mph adds about 10 feet of distance. So to go from 400 to 450 (without changing anything else), you would need to add about 5 mph.

Re spin - TechDisc says that a 50% advance ratio is good. To have a 50% advance ratio with 54-58 mph, you would need about 1100 rpm spin. I was able to add about 75 rpm to my spin rate by working on a deep(er) pocket release. However, according to the simulator, each additional 100 rpm of spin adds only about 3 additional feet of distance. So going from 900 rpm to 1200 rpm would only add about 9 feet of distance.

Re nose angle - 0-4 is good, but according to TechDisc, -2 to -3 is optimal. According to the simulator, changing from a nose angle of 2 and a launch angle of 2 to a nose angle of -2 and a launch angle of 7, would give you an additional 11 feet.

TechDisc collected data from dozens of the pros at USGDC 2023, which is useful as a benchmark. See Throw Explorer

This was really helpful, thanks! Their website seems pretty clunky to navigate...or I'm just new enough that I don't know where to look yet. I had a heck of a time finding the simulator or any of this other stuff without just googling "Tech Disc" and then the thing I wanted.

Most helpful was the 1mph=10 feet estimate. It's nice to be able to have some sort of goal in mind as the speed increases. I tried playing around with it in the simulator piece, but it so often ended with just adding MPH to a sim meant burning the disc into the ground...so then you have to play around with what type of disc it wants you to sim (because getting full flight out of a flippy driver and then shooting on 5MPH just turns it into a roller in the sim, which might be accurate but doesn't help estimate what adding 5 mph does to a throw).

 

[Sheep]

I'm just over here giggling reading every tech disc thread/chat everywhere.

Because all the things I predicted would happen, which everyone was like "no, it wont work that way, you're wrong."

And.. now everyone is focusing on this simulator thing as gospel and some really odd ball information that is like 1/20th of the equation.

 

[Cashley56]

Their website seems pretty clunky to navigate

True. To get to the Help page (which has lots of useful link info, like the metrics info), you need to first go to the Shop page.

 

[dmoore1998]

I'm just over here giggling reading every tech disc thread/chat everywhere.

Because all the things I predicted would happen, which everyone was like "no, it wont work that way, you're wrong."

And.. now everyone is focusing on this simulator thing as gospel and some really odd ball information that is like 1/20th of the equation.

Interesting. I've seen a lot of Tech Disc convos and all I've ever seen about the simulator is that it does an ok stuff with some things but that it's pretty wonky.

 

[Sheep]

Interesting. I've seen a lot of Tech Disc convos and all I've ever seen about the simulator is that it does an ok stuff with some things but that it's pretty wonky.

Crap, I hit the back button on the mouse when I moved the cursor, gotta type again.

Basically what I'm seeing is a little to much trust in what the simulator says to get distance vs the reality of how things go. Yeah, 1mph might equal 10 feet in some situations, but its paying attention to far more important things than speed.

Nose angle and Wobble are going to net you far more distance than just throwing the disc fast. Those particular controls on a swing matched with a proper disc to your exit speed will get you more control, distance and such than just throwing the disc faster. It doesn't matter how fast you can throw if you cannot keep the nose down, or if you dont use the right disc. The simulator is working with a lot of fixed variables that it cannot really function with how discs fly. Which, the flight of a disc is so incredibly unique that even with a decent understanding of how the forces apply to the disc, that some things I have 0 explanation for.

For instance the under stability of the disc and how it comes into play in the flight. There are discs out there that will fly 200 feet THEN turn over, and there are discs out there that are similiar with the same flight numbers that want to start turning immediately out of the hand.

I've seen people throw hyzer flip stall turn overs. That shit blew my mind. How you throw a disc out on hyzer, see it get ready to apex then dump over. The flight of the disc is so unique to anything in the world and how stuff works that its just something that cannot be simulated to an extent.

We can try and get some of that data and make good educated guesses. And I'm sure someone with insane amounts of education could probably spend some time and get a proper diagnosis on what is occurring to change the pressures and cause the changes.

But I predicted that people would be using it more as a "look at this data, and try and push the data" vs "push the form, see the data."

If your focusing on your form and using the disc to tell you if you're making a difference, then you're on the right track. Because it's telling you if your changes are working.

If you're referencing a simulator and chasing numbers from the throws, then you're going to wreck your form and the real world results are going to hurt your game entirely.
And most of what I'm seeing is chasing numbers, not "I made this form change, and this was the results."

I want to say Nick is the one I've seen trying to gather results from form changes the most.

It's a neat tool, but used in bad ways can be a hinderance, doesn't matter what those numbers are if the road to get those numbers is rocky and bad.

 

[dmoore1998]

I actually think "pushing the data" is perfectly fine. The data isn't the simulator, the data is your nose angle, launch angle, disc speed, etc. It's so incredibly difficult to push the data without fixing form that frankly I don't see the issue.

If people were chasing simulator distance, I'd see the issue. As I mentioned here (or another thread) my data aligned with the approximate disc flight numbers of my main driver would show that if I change up basically ANYTHING, my disc won't go as far. That would lead me to tell people "throw slightly nose up on a lot of hyzer and only throw at this speed". But that's not chasing data, that's chasing the simulator IMO. Likewise if I looked at the simulator and said "I'm throwing more nose down now and my disc is going shorter, better stop doing that"...then that's a problem.

I don't think it matters much at all if people chase the data. Throw 70 mph with 2 degrees nose down, slightly positive launch angle, high spin rate, and low wobble. I just don't see a lot of practical examples of "you got to those numbers, but man your form is terrible and you can't really throw a disc in real life". Those numbers are hard to do. There just aren't a lot of paths there besides "throw with better form".

To your point of throwing more nose down with less wobble...great...but those are 2 data points. You can't just pick one data point and chase only that. You can't throw 70 MPH with the nose straight up, you have to chase all of the data points eventually. BUT, it's also very difficult to make 19 form adjustments at the same time, so you have to work on something, make it part of your throw, then move on. I do think there's certainly questionable decisions with both TechDisc and in regular throwing of a disc about what people should work on FIRST. The classic example would be people saying "I gotta fix my runup" while clearly needing to stop throwing it 30 degrees nose up instead.

Maybe I'm wrong. I just can't see a viable way to push all of those data points in combination without also pushing form pretty extensively (other than MAYBE forehands by someone just throwing the disc like a psycho in a way that's clearly going to destroy their elbow/shoulder...but that person probably also throws far in real life, just in a dangerous way). But I think there's a pretty big difference between chasing the data and chasing the flight simulator. The flight simulator will definitely give you reason to make terrible changes in the name of hypothetical distance.