Ledgestone Insurance Open

[biscoe]

I love it. People that don't think USDGC is as "gimmicky" as Ledgestone. You are either ignorant or an Innova apologist.

Ledgestone has a hole that is 3 feet from water. vs. USDCG which has a hole that is 5 feet from a parking lot (peninsula on hole 13, 888). But for USDGC it is ok because they put up a small barrier so you wouldn't easily roll OB???

They are both gimmicky as all get out. They have the shared characteristic of holding high end competition on land not well suited to it and attempting to challenge the players through contrivance. This seems to be more and more the nature of the top events.

From what i watched of Lake Eureka it does not seem overly scenic, which is one thing Winthrop does have going for it.

That being said the people putting on both events put their hearts and souls into it and are doing the best they can with what they have regarding the courses. The other aspects of the events are top notch and before their time in some respects. The staff of both events deserve a ton of praise. It is easy to lose track of this when small singular episodes like McBeth's provisional get scrutinized so heavily.

 

[notroman]

They are both gimmicky as all get out. They have the shared characteristic of holding high end competition on land not well suited to it and attempting to challenge the players through contrivance. This seems to be more and more the nature of the top events.

From what i watched of Lake Eureka it does not seem overly scenic, which is one thing Winthrop does have going for it.

That being said the people putting on both events put their hearts and souls into it and are doing the best they can with what they have regarding the courses. The other aspects of the events are top notch and before their time in some respects. The staff of both events deserve a ton of praise. It is easy to lose track of this when small singular episodes like McBeth's provisional get scrutinized so heavily.

Having played at both locations, the land at Lake Eureka is leaps and bounds more scenic than that at Winthrop Gold. More trees, more water, more elevation, less buildings.

 

[DavidSauls]

That being said the people putting on both events put their hearts and souls into it and are doing the best they can with what they have regarding the courses. The other aspects of the events are top notch and before their time in some respects. The staff of both events deserve a ton of praise. It is easy to lose track of this when small singular episodes like McBeth's provisional get scrutinized so heavily.

This ought to be reposted every 40 or so posts, just for balance.

 

[DiscFifty]

Seems like a sign near the tee is all you need: "Notice! Proceed to drop zone immediately if your tee shot is ob."

 

[biscoe]

Having played at both locations, the land at Lake Eureka is leaps and bounds more scenic than that at Winthrop Gold. More trees, more water, more elevation, less buildings.

You would know much better than I then. From what I watched it did not appear to be the case.

 

[BionicRib]

Having played at both locations, the land at Lake Eureka is leaps and bounds more scenic than that at Winthrop Gold. More trees, more water, more elevation, less buildings.

I agree with this as well

And I also think its comical to say that the usdgc is not gimmicky. I'd be willing to bet there is more ob rope there than lake eureka. I like the usdgc course better, but only because the baskets are not sitting right on top of ob/water. Eureka has the potential to be a better course and I think after this year the tweaks will be made to achieve this...

 

[lyleoross]

They are both gimmicky as all get out. They have the shared characteristic of holding high end competition on land not well suited to it and attempting to challenge the players through contrivance. This seems to be more and more the nature of the top events.

From what i watched of Lake Eureka it does not seem overly scenic, which is one thing Winthrop does have going for it.

That being said the people putting on both events put their hearts and souls into it and are doing the best they can with what they have regarding the courses. The other aspects of the events are top notch and before their time in some respects. The staff of both events deserve a ton of praise. It is easy to lose track of this when small singular episodes like McBeth's provisional get scrutinized so heavily.

What David said. Nice post.

 

[lyleoross]

As a counter, I won't call either gimmicky. Both are attempts to redefine the sport and make it technically challenging. I call them ongoing experiments and for my tastes, ones I like.

 

[SD86]

They are both gimmicky as all get out. They have the shared characteristic of holding high end competition on land not well suited to it and attempting to challenge the players through contrivance. This seems to be more and more the nature of the top events.

From what i watched of Lake Eureka it does not seem overly scenic, which is one thing Winthrop does have going for it.

That being said the people putting on both events put their hearts and souls into it and are doing the best they can with what they have regarding the courses. The other aspects of the events are top notch and before their time in some respects. The staff of both events deserve a ton of praise. It is easy to lose track of this when small singular episodes like McBeth's provisional get scrutinized so heavily.

Agreed. I don't fault the organizers. Some of the players are just so frickin' good, and it's getting difficult to find hosts (as was discussed in the Worlds thread), and to make courses that truly challenge these participants.

Having said that, some of the contrived holes are indeed a bit gimmicky (the hole where the McBeth rules altercation happened is head-shakingly contrived). And other courses are in poor condition (as Paige Pierce discussed). So how to find a happy medium and happy balance....

 

[@iDiscGolf]

I love it. People that don't think USDGC is as "gimmicky" as Ledgestone. You are either ignorant or an Innova apologist.

Ledgestone has a hole that is 3 feet from water. vs. USDCG which has a hole that is 5 feet from a parking lot (peninsula on hole 13, 888). But for USDGC it is ok because they put up a small barrier so you wouldn't easily roll OB???

Ledgestone has a hole where you throw over a baseball diamond. USDGC has a hole where you throw over a parking lot.

Ledgestone has tight fairways for stroke and distance. USDGC has tight fairways where they played stroke and distance.

Ledgestone has an island greens. USDGC has an island greens.

Ledgestone has a bridge you throw off of. USDGC has a bamboo clowns mouth you have to throw through.

USDGC didn't like players going over the water, arguably one of the coolest shots on that course, so they made an arbitrary mando on hole 5 that players need to go around.

It was USDGC that set the standard for different rules on different holes. Stroke and Distance, hazzard, OB, elevated baskets, Island Greens, horseshoe shaped holes, triple mandos, and Drop Zones. Winthrop University has better aesthetics but frankly both courses are about the same "gimmicky".

The USDGC caddy guide has 1 page JUST to explain the "ground rules" and 2 pages of FAQ for the course. Explaining how to play things.

I enjoy watching USDGC and think it is a fine course (minus some dumb rules). But get off your high horse if you think that it is any sort of standard to set.

Trust me, I have spoken to enough players off the record to tell you that they mostly think USDGC is a joke of an event. A very prestigious and well paying joke.

Haha. Wtf, I agree with this...

 

[jvphobic]

I agree with this as well

And I also think its comical to say that the usdgc is not gimmicky. I'd be willing to bet there is more ob rope there than lake eureka. I like the usdgc course better, but only because the baskets are not sitting right on top of ob/water. Eureka has the potential to be a better course and I think after this year the tweaks will be made to achieve this...

USDGC...
Hole 5, 15 feet from Hazard
Hole 6, 10-15 feet from OB
Hole 7, 15-20 feet from OB behind it.
Hole 11, 30 feet from OB, hill sloping directly towards it.
Hole 13 (B position), 8 feet from OB on 2 sides maybe 15 on third side of peninsula
Hole 13 (A position), 20 feet from OB where the preferred method is SKIPPING OFF THE PARKING LOT.
Hole 15, trees within 8 feet of basket. No "true" green. Barely a true lane to get inside.
Hole 16 (both positions), 15 to 20 feet from Hazard.
Hole 17, 15 feet from OB past the basket
Hole 18, 20 feet from water behind basket drop off.

Care to refine that statement?

 

[jvphobic]

I am not arguing that one is better than the other. Or that having a basket near OB is a bad thing or a good thing. But, remember that you are usually watching the best in the world play these courses. And it may appear that OB isn't a factor. When in fact, it is a factor at both courses.

And I am NOT getting on your case BionicRib. I just want to make the facts clear as far as where baskets are compared to OB for the USDGC.

 

[lyleoross]

Seems like a sign near the tee is all you need: "Notice! Proceed to drop zone immediately if your tee shot is ob."

This may be one of the more simple, yet smartest things I've read this year. Wow, hole instructions at the hole! Better trade mark the idea, if it doesn't start showing up at tournaments soon I'm going to be really surprised.

 

[DanJon]

It's easy to critique from within our own little bubble.

Has anyone shown footage of the USDGC and/or Ledgestone to people outside our sport?

The responses I've gotten, especially for the USDGC, are that it reminds them of mini golf.

Not something to be taken seriously by the outside world.

If Ledgestone is following the USDGC's set-up, it doesn't bode well for mainstream interest in our little sport.

Especially if Ledgestone is turning into disc golf's biggest event with the highest payout.

These are our marquee events folks.

I realize not everyone wants the sport to grow on the pro side, just commenting on the matter at hand.

 

[bwgort]

This may be one of the more simple, yet smartest things I've read this year. Wow, hole instructions at the hole! Better trade mark the idea, if it doesn't start showing up at tournaments soon I'm going to be really surprised.

For what it's worth, I don't think this fixes the issue. The rules state:

A player whose disc is out-of-bounds shall receive one penalty throw. The player may elect to play the next throw from:
The previous lie; or,
A lie that is up to one meter away from and perpendicular to the point where the disc last crossed into out-of-bounds, even if the direction takes the lie closer to the target; or,
Within the designated drop zone, if provided.

Those options may be limited by the Director as a special condition only by prior approval of the PDGA Tour Manager.
​

The course rulebook should have said that the TD recieved an exemption to remove the option for players to play from the previous lie. Something to the effect of, "You must proceed to the drop zone, no retee is allowed," would take all ambiguity out of the hole 6 situation. The problem with the course book is that it did not tell you that you cannot re-tee.

 

[lyleoross]

One of the goals I thought HD wanted to accomplish was the elimination of the play around hole, where the designer had a goal in mind, and the player beat it by going spike hyzer, thumber/tomahawk, etc. I admit at some level I'm assuming that Ledgestone is accomplishing the same thing, but they may not be. I've watched too many tournaments where one or more players (cough, Brian Schweby, cough) went through the course and defeated any attempt at nuance by the designer by throwing a thumber or tomahawk over the top. A tunnel shot isn't a tunnel shot if that can be done. I personally like a course that forces the player to have a bag of throws and show proficiency across the sport.

I realize there will be some who will disagree, and appreciate a player that has the strength to "go over the top" and land on the basket. But then we are moving from a skill based sport to a strength based sport. When posting online first started, there were huge discussions about whether rollers should be allowed since they defeated the purpose of the sport. I don't claim to have all the answers, or any of them, but I do like a course that forces more nuanced play, and a wider skills set.

The five foot from H2O hole, is interesting to me. It is a risk/reward, nerves hole. Paul drove it beautifully, but clearly the hole got in Nate's head. He pulled his disc high into a tree, a throw I've seen him make on similar holes in the past. That hole, weak or not, adds a mental game element. It requires the player assess risk, decide on a strategy, and over come the mental stress of the layout. Now, I might be wrong in that assessment, but I like that kind of process.

 

[onemilemore]

Dodge chimes in on the provisional:

http://www.discgolfprotour.com/news/pauls-provisional

This might have been better served Saturday instead of Tuesday, but I commend him for addressing it nonetheless.

 

[lyleoross]

For what it's worth, I don't think this fixes the issue. The rules state:

A player whose disc is out-of-bounds shall receive one penalty throw. The player may elect to play the next throw from:
The previous lie; or,
A lie that is up to one meter away from and perpendicular to the point where the disc last crossed into out-of-bounds, even if the direction takes the lie closer to the target; or,
Within the designated drop zone, if provided.

Those options may be limited by the Director as a special condition only by prior approval of the PDGA Tour Manager.
​

The course rulebook should have said that the TD recieved an exemption to remove the option for players to play from the previous lie. Something to the effect of, "You must proceed to the drop zone, no retee is allowed," would take all ambiguity out of the hole 6 situation. The problem with the course book is that it did not tell you that you cannot re-tee.

I think it's a given that the TD should have asked for permission, the thing is, I have no idea whether he did or not. There is a base assumption here that he didn't. He may be reading this stuff chuckling about it. If I were he, I would never comment on whether I had or not, the argument over the issue is way more interesting than resolving it.

Regardless, the base idea of hole instructions on the tee will eliminate arguments, I did X because I thought it was okay, will be answered by a finger point.

 

[bwgort]

I think it's a given that the TD should have asked for permission, the thing is, I have no idea whether he did or not. There is a base assumption here that he didn't. He may be reading this stuff chuckling about it. If I were he, I would never comment on whether I had or not, the argument over the issue is way more interesting than resolving it.

Regardless, the base idea of hole instructions on the tee will eliminate arguments, I did X because I thought it was okay, will be answered by a finger point.

He said in this thread that he asked for permission. I just think he should have specified that he got the permission so that players knew their OB options were limited. A simple, "you cannot retee from this tee" would suffice. Lessons for next year.

 

[biscoe]

There was a caddy book. What is it for if not to cover this stuff (which imo it did)?