Is it time for a change? Disc numbering and the flawed system.

[Halcón]

The only thing I'd change is that with an Innova style system, you have two sets of ratings, one for beginners, and one for "pros."

A Teebird could be;

A: 7/4/0/3 (Beginners)
B: 8/5/0/2 (Pros)

You don't want it to be too complicated.

But, as someone said, the dishonesty in the ratings helps sales.

If you used my example a Destoyer might have a beginner's rating as

8/4/0/4

A noob wouldn't want to buy it if he thought it would only get him as much distance as his Teebird.

 

[rocthecourse]

The problem is rim width does not equal speed. The shape of the nose and the wing has a lot to do with the speed. The Max has a fairly wide rim, yet is way slower than other discs of the same rim width. I also think that before long disc makers will try making wide rimmed/blunt nose discs that will fly like mids or fairway drivers only a lot more OAT friendly for casuals. Or who knows, maybe we will all like them.

It's not perfect but I think it would be better than the numbers being some manufactures, it's like they are making numbers up. I wouldn't even mind if they stopped using the word speed, but my guess is that the word SPEED is good for sales.

 

[throwfromthewoods]

I hate to say it, but "Screw You" is exactly what Innova would say if the PDGA did anything to affect their bottom line. Innova could break away from the PDGA, start their own organization, and probably have as many or more people playing in a couple years than the PDGA currently has. This is why the PDGA has never really gotten strong with Innova about anything. Innova is just way richer and more powerful.

One of my biggest contentions with the big name manufacturers is they seem to be too concerned with the bottom line. Growing the sport on an economic level, and not a player level. Steve Dodge just wrote a wonderful article on trying to grow the sport, and it touches on how greed and poor money-management is a big part of what is holding our sport back from the mainstream.

The problem is, we are not a big sport. We don't have ticket sales and huge retail sponsors like bigger sports do. DG companies sponsor players, not Nike and Coca-Cola. So with a limited area for profit, the big fish bite and claw and take as much of it as they can. And when they would rather do that that make sacrifices for the greater good, we all suffer.

I'd rather companies like Innova create another 50k payout tournament than drop it on R&D for a new driver. If we COULD grow the sport's exposure, then the fans and viewers would come, then actual sponsors might catch wind and be willing to get in. Then we get more money, and grow from there. At one point NASCAR was just a bunch of hicks going in a circle, now look at it. Shiny hicks going in a circle.

Here's the link to Steve Dodge's article if anyone hasn't read it:
http://www.vibramdiscgolf.com/grow-the-sport.html

 

[mubhcaeb78]

I was contemplating creating a thrower (RHBH first..) to put each disc in..
The hardest part I have with this is the spin control.. I can conceptualize the throw speed with the arm, and control the acceleration, but getting the "snap" that players will put on it.. i.e., being able to control the actual rotation of the disc as well as the velocity..

Having a mechanical hand is not ideal.. since it won't be high tech enough to sense pressure and adjust the "rip".. it would more release, which gives little spin.

If I build it.. I'd host the data for free...it's getting every disc, every plastic, and 3 weights (low - med - high) that will be the hardest.

The speed rating would be tested by the deceleration of the disc.. which can easily be calculated with an overhead cam. Speed doesn't equal distance.. just the drag imo.

 

[bholy08]

I honestly do not care about ratings at all at this point. They are different according to different plastics and stages of wear anyway. Do you rate the disc brand new, slightly beat in, or at its seasoned thrower state? It will be different for every player. Different at different altitudes. Different at different temperatures.

Rather than absolute ratings (like latitude/longitude for locations), we need to focus on relative ratings (comparing one thing to another thing). This is what we do in conversation already. We say it fades like ... and is a little faster than ...

All the ratings are for marketing.

 

[inbounds]

Just posted this in the other thread...should we get a mod to merge them?



Not trying to jack your thread, but we were more or less trying to do a better job of describing disc flight when we developed the Relative Stability Scale:

http://www.inboundsdiscgolf.com/content/?page_id=569

Instead of referring to HSS, we describe it as High Speed Turn, because that's what the disc is attempting to do. Instead of LSS, we describe it as Low Speed Fade, because the disc is fading in speed, elevation, and turn. Instead of an arbitrary integer-based numbering system, we display our flight characteristics as a percent.

The trickiest aspect is the characteristic related to disc speed. Like has been noted, speed is difficult to quantify. Steven Dodge and the crew at Vibram have a unique approach to determining this, but as noted by jrawk, to be able to correlate a specific part of the disc (e.g rim depth) is dicey at best. So for players looking at our flight charts, we use distance as a relative measure. If you can throw a max drive as far as the distance associated with that disc, then you could probably see the same flight characteristics. If not, then you'd need to check up on the factors affecting disc flight to determine how the flight path will change:

http://www.inboundsdiscgolf.com/content/?page_id=573

We expect to incorporate most of these factors into our online model in the very near future.

 

[craftsman]

One of my biggest contentions with the big name manufacturers is they seem to be too concerned with the bottom line. Growing the sport on an economic level, and not a player level. Steve Dodge just wrote a wonderful article on trying to grow the sport, and it touches on how greed and poor money-management is a big part of what is holding our sport back from the mainstream.

The problem is, we are not a big sport. We don't have ticket sales and huge retail sponsors like bigger sports do. DG companies sponsor players, not Nike and Coca-Cola. So with a limited area for profit, the big fish bite and claw and take as much of it as they can. And when they would rather do that that make sacrifices for the greater good, we all suffer.

I'd rather companies like Innova create another 50k payout tournament than drop it on R&D for a new driver. If we COULD grow the sport's exposure, then the fans and viewers would come, then actual sponsors might catch wind and be willing to get in. Then we get more money, and grow from there. At one point NASCAR was just a bunch of hicks going in a circle, now look at it. Shiny hicks going in a circle.

Here's the link to Steve Dodge's article if anyone hasn't read it:
http://www.vibramdiscgolf.com/grow-the-sport.html

Im sorry, not to b rude or pick on you, but your post really dosnt sit well with me...

Jim and dave have done more for the sport than steve could if he wanted to.
While dgcr's posters talk about btter sponsorship and flight charts, jim has sponsored great local figures as "course pros" and had hands in plenty of courses going in the ground.

Flight charts are over hyped and only usefull to a small minority of golfers that have been bitten by the bug but choose to study charts instead of bttering their game.

 

[bradharris]

I've said this before in another thread and I'll repeat it here.

All flight ratings are relative guidelines that give you a basis to compare one disc to another. To use them as anything more than that is way over thinking it.

 

[inbounds]

Flight charts are over hyped and only usefull to a small minority of golfers that have been bitten by the bug but choose to study charts instead of bttering their game.

Given the volume of new molds that are released on a yearly (monthly???) basis, the disc selection process for a new player is overwhelming. Taking into consideration all the new players to the sport, comprehensive, universal flight charts/rating systems are growing in usefulness. In all honesty, we don't expect players with extensive experience to make much use of our resources. But for those players that just started playing and want to try something new, products such as ours give them the tools they need to make actionable, informed disc selection decisions.

 

[Jukeshoe]

Flight charts are over hyped and only usefull to a small minority of golfers that have been bitten by the bug but choose to study charts instead of bttering their game.

^This.

All flight ratings are relative guidelines that give you a basis to compare one disc to another. To use them as anything more than that is way over thinking it.

And especially ^this.

 

[craftsman]

Given the volume of new molds that are released on a yearly (monthly???) basis, the disc selection process for a new player is overwhelming. Taking into consideration all the new players to the sport, comprehensive, universal flight charts/rating systems are growing in usefulness. In all honesty, we don't expect players with extensive experience to make much use of our resources. But for those players that just started playing and want to try something new, products such as ours give them the tools they need to make actionable, informed disc selection decisions.

Imho, i dont belive getting wrapped up in flight charts is going to help new players.
Lets be honest; new players either could care less about charts or pull the wrong info anyways. To keep pretending that we are doing thjs for new players is a joke... if folks were really out to help noobs youd see more fans of discrafts system.

Promoting the flat release, straight shot, each disc flys a certain way mentality is imho, not one bit benificial to new players...and thats what flight charts do.

 

[inbounds]

Imho, i dont belive getting wrapped up in flight charts is going to help new players.
Lets be honest; new players either could care less about charts or pull the wrong info anyways. To keep pretending that we are doing thjs for new players is a joke... if folks were really out to help noobs youd see more fans of discrafts system.

Promoting the flat release, straight shot, each disc flys a certain way mentality is imho, not one bit benificial to new players...and thats what flight charts do.

You seem pretty set in your opinion for the first paragraph, so I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise (but you also don't seem to be the target audience for a resource such as this, so it would be even more futile).

For your second point, we try to educate new players and explain that the flight charts make certain assumptions. We then go onto indicate what will happen to the disc flight if there are changes to the assumptions. One thing that we're working on is providing flight charts to demonstrate these changes to flight paths.

Without some means of determining the minimal/base flight characteristics, players could spend countless dollars trying to figure out which discs are good fits (and don't overlap other discs). So while flight charts may not be your cup of tea or you don't believe in them as being useful, they do serve a minimal purpose and starting point. What the user/reader chooses to do with the flight charts or how much weight to put into them is up to them.

 

[Brokensaint]

I've postulated before that the speed rating would be better served as a skill rating, or possibly power. A number that, while arbitrary as any other, would indicate approximate power needed to achieve the disc's other attributes.
Otherwise, I have no problem with Innova's number system. Turn/Fade to indicate propensity to turn one direction and the other throughout flight when throw to the power rating.

 

[ZAMson]

I think demystifying the disc is a baseline need for this sport that has never been met. I've got things in store at DN and MVP that reach pretty far beyond the standard flight references being discussed in here.

 

[throwfromthewoods]

Im sorry, not to b rude or pick on you, but your post really dosnt sit well with me...

Jim and dave have done more for the sport than steve could if he wanted to.
While dgcr's posters talk about btter sponsorship and flight charts, jim has sponsored great local figures as "course pros" and had hands in plenty of courses going in the ground.

Flight charts are over hyped and only usefull to a small minority of golfers that have been bitten by the bug but choose to study charts instead of bttering their game.

Hey, I'm not denying their dedication to the sport. Innova is, and seemingly always will be, the top name in disc golf. They got that way for a reason. What I worry is, their altruistic reasoning to get started in the business hasn't mantained the same fire...or has changed direction completely.

Innova sponsors pros, so does Discraft, and every other manufacturer and DG-centric company out there. Man, I make shirts and sell them out of my house and I'll be looking to get some sponsorship money out there in 2013. But the reality is, there are only a little over a dozen players that could be considered full-time pros and not "journeymen."

And the "Jim and dave have done more for the sport than steve could if he wanted to." comment is exactly what I'm talking about. Steve seems to understand his limitations, and is appealing to the rest of the DG community to help create what he lays out in the article. Vibram now represents 2 of the top 5 cashing tournaments for pros. Not too shabby for a company that doesn't rank close to Innova or Discraft in sales or profit.

The thread kind of changed direction, which is more my fault than anyone else. Let me see if I can tie it together, even if it's a bit of a stretch.

There are equipment-centric sports, and player-centric sports. Football, Baseball, Basketball, etc. are focused on the player. The equipment is minimal and mostly universal. Basketball built a huge market for shoes...I'll give them that. Sports like ball golf, tennis, hockey, etc. have a bigger focus on the equipment. Casual and new players who want to get better spend more time concerned with what clubs the pros use, what racquets, what skates, and so on. We play an equipment-centric sport. That shouldn't come to any great surprise.

I'm not talking about players who sit around and study charts. Somehow the thread turned towards charts instead of a new rating system. From the first post it's been about a stamp on a disc, or a notation on the manufacturer's website that simply states, "this is where disc A falls into the universal rating system." So when a new player picks up a disc at Play it Again or wherever, he has a fairly decent idea what to expect.

If you look at tennis racquets, manufacturers will create various marketing tweaks or "technology" that they will use to push their product as better than the others out there. Kind of like Blizzard technology, or Titanium plastic. But other than those, the calculated components (string tension, balance, etc.) are presented fairly universally to the consumer.

Part of my exercise towards examining a universally mandated system was in looking towards "mainstream acceptance." Right now, if disc golf were being played on ESPN2, it would have less viewers than one of those trick-shot billiard specials. Why? I feel our sport has more appeal than professional bowling, or billiards, or any number of obscure events that get true television time.

But we are still a "niche" sport. Short of a few blips in mainstream media (like a blurb on Yahoo Sports, or Feldberg on Conan), we fall well under the radar for the general TV-watching public. I'd like to see that change. We have the tools to be a great marketing sport. Colorful, interesting, and wide-ranging equipment. Youth-appeal as well as Masters-level appeal. A growing female demographic. Mostly free course-play.

But, if we did come into mainstream attention...If we started attracting new players in droves instead of guys who know guys who play disc golf...I fear the lack of organization and and wildly varying references on discs will lose a great deal of players before they have a chance to get hooked.

Again, this is not for you or me. We're already here. We understand, "stop reading charts and go better your game on the course." But that's not the reality of the mainstream. The majority want "charts," want direction. They want to be able to easily find where the disc in their hand falls next to every other one out there. How can we expect a new player to hold a Proline Rogue and be told it's rated 11/4/-1/1 and then give him a SurgeSS and tell him it's rated 1.6leftarrow, then tell them it's the same disc and not have them be frustrated?

Remember, I'm not on some soapbox advocating change or the end is near. It's just a thread meant to discuss what people think about the lack of a universal system and if they feel the sport would benefit from one. No one is suggesting we as established players suddenly do things differently. We'll still find the discs we like and throw them.

 

[Halcón]

We have...Colorful, interesting, and wide-ranging equipment.

Um...we throw Frisbees. And we carry purses. That's about it.

 

[McFer]

If you look at tennis racquets, manufacturers will create various marketing tweaks or "technology" that they will use to push their product as better than the others out there. Kind of like Blizzard technology, or Titanium plastic. But other than those, the calculated components (string tension, balance, etc.) are presented fairly universally to the consumer.

See, this is where getting started in DG is frustrating when compared to other sports. In tennis, the equipment that is best suited for beginners makes sense for them - new players with shorter swings need more powerful rackets with larger head sizes and lower string tensions. More experienced players prefer mushy rackets with higher string tension and lower head sizes. Even though I use Pro Staff Classics like I have since I was 17, my wife knew when I was introducing her to tennis that she needed something lighter with a larger string bed and more power.

New disc golf players think that a disc with more "speed" is going to help compensate with the power they don't have, when the opposite is true. Likewise, a beginner might believe that 7 speed fairway drivers have simply got to be for pros, not for newbs.

 

[EL-KABONG]

I think that all the disc golfers and disc manufacturers will never agree on anything for many reasons. And if the disc golf Utopians do come up with some sort of system it will be flawed and anger people. Get over it. There are enough opinions and sources now for people to get a pretty good idea what a disc can and cannot do.

Agree with sloppy.

And perfecting "disc standardization" and nomenclature should be near the bottom of any list of issues that affect the sport's "legitimacy" (or lack thereof).

 

[throwfromthewoods]

I think that all the disc golfers and disc manufacturers will never agree on anything for many reasons. And if the disc golf Utopians do come up with some sort of system it will be flawed and anger people. Get over it. There are enough opinions and sources now for people to get a pretty good idea what a disc can and cannot do.

Yes. And there are enough sources out there for people to be political experts, but they aren't. There are enough resources for everyone to be a tax expert, but enough people still pay someone else to do their taxes.

What people CAN do and what people DO are drastically different concepts. And unforunately, the world (consumer or otherwise) does not revolve around what people CAN do. For every one person who will do their own research and make their own informed opinion, there are ten who won't. That may seem pessimistic, but there it is.

If everyone took your suggestion, THAT would be disc golf utopia. What I'm talking about is market reality.

 

[throwfromthewoods]

And perfecting "disc standardization" and nomenclature should be near the bottom of any list of issues that affect the sport's "legitimacy" (or lack thereof).

Fair enough. What do you think is most holding the sport back from mainstream attention?