garublador1
* Ace Member *
It depends on your goals. If your goal is to be rated higher then you're correct. If your goal is to throw farther then putting probably won't help.roadkill said:
-
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)
Opinions on distance
- Thread starter Apathy
- Start date
roadkill1
Double Eagle Member
garublador said:
I just made the assumption since this is a disc golf site and not a distance competitor site that the users here would be interested in becoming better at golf. Being better at golf means lower scores. Lower scores versus the field is reflected in higher player rating.
I also assumed since the poster was asking if he should continue focusing on distance or move focus to other areas his goal was to score better not just throw farther.
I do totally understand the basketball analogy as I was really obsessed with jumping higher in high school with hopes of dunking during games even though there were other skills (like my turn around jay from the baseline) that may have helped me better serve my team. I managed to be able to dunk by my senior year but never pulled one off during a game. I needed a running start to throw one down which meant being on the front end of a fast break and since I was the one hauling down the defensive rebounds it was always the cherry picking guards that got the fast break layups off my howitzer like outlet passes.
jeremy2
Eagle Member
I practice everything except driving (now) and they keep going farther and farther. Everyone asks me what I'm doing and I say I just practice putting in the backyard, and trying to control the mids. In the past 2 weeks I have parked a 480ft hole 3 times. I'm throwing different lines and still hitting the D, but the 30ft putts are killing me.
garublador1
* Ace Member *
For some reason I read it as general advice rather than OP specific. That makes more sense.roadkill said:
I always find that basketball analogy kind of funny. I played club volleyball in the 16 and under age bracket. We went to some tournaments where there were teams of 18 and under guys where every single guy, 5'8" and above could dunk a volleyball. Most of the 5'6" guys came close. Granted most of them were high jumpers in track for the sole reason of being able to jump higher in volleyball. I've also heard someone say that he thought jumping high in basketball wasn't horribly useful (which is probably why they don't focus on it like they do for volleyball) but is super useful in Ultamate. He was a basketball player.
black udder
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 4,859
All the distance discussion depends on the length of the holes on the courses you play. If all the holes you play on are 300' or less, then if you can hit a 300' drive regularly, you should be okay - just focus on putting and upshots for when you don't hit 300'.
However, if you play longer holes or would like the "safest" drives, then increasing your distance will help your whole game.
I've been throwing 240'260' for years, being able to get to 300' a lot of the time. With the last year's efforts, I can now get over 300' regularly and sometimes out to 350' with my longest this year being around 390'.
Tonight I went out to my local course and threw a midrange or putter on 17 of 18 holes. I discovered I can park all 17 of them without picking up a driver. A hole where I had been throwing a midrange, I discovered I can't even throw a full stroke with a putter now - I have to choke it down. To me, that's increased accuracy, fewer big skip aways and should result in lower scores.
Now, even though I say this, I have to admit that I'm not a bad putter. I have my share of stupid misses, but 30' and in I'm pretty confident. I've been playing for years, so I've had lots of practice with upshots and putting, but never really focused on driving until the last couple years.
I've played recently with a couple guys who would get within 30' with their drive and then miss the putts - but these guys were using drivers, not midranges. Their max distance is <300' AND they're missing putts. To me, they need to develop both areas to really improve.
We have another course that is almost the opposite. One hole is >700', so if your max D is 250', then you're still looking at 2 max power and accurate drives plus a good upshot and a solid putt. Meanwhile, if your distance is 350', you're talking about two pretty good drives and a long putt opportunity. If you can crank out 1 accurate max D, then a good chance for a 3. All it means is that you find yourself more in a controlled distance more often than your max distance. Sometimes, that's the difference between 2 over and 2 under
I don't think the basketball analogy holds true for disc golf. You don't have to dunk to make a basket, it's all show and spectacle. You actually do have to drive a hole and there are benefits to your score if you can park a longer hole that somebody else can't. I know distance doesn't breed low scores, but practice does help with accuracy. Nothing comes without work.
However, if you play longer holes or would like the "safest" drives, then increasing your distance will help your whole game.
I've been throwing 240'260' for years, being able to get to 300' a lot of the time. With the last year's efforts, I can now get over 300' regularly and sometimes out to 350' with my longest this year being around 390'.
Tonight I went out to my local course and threw a midrange or putter on 17 of 18 holes. I discovered I can park all 17 of them without picking up a driver. A hole where I had been throwing a midrange, I discovered I can't even throw a full stroke with a putter now - I have to choke it down. To me, that's increased accuracy, fewer big skip aways and should result in lower scores.
Now, even though I say this, I have to admit that I'm not a bad putter. I have my share of stupid misses, but 30' and in I'm pretty confident. I've been playing for years, so I've had lots of practice with upshots and putting, but never really focused on driving until the last couple years.
I've played recently with a couple guys who would get within 30' with their drive and then miss the putts - but these guys were using drivers, not midranges. Their max distance is <300' AND they're missing putts. To me, they need to develop both areas to really improve.
We have another course that is almost the opposite. One hole is >700', so if your max D is 250', then you're still looking at 2 max power and accurate drives plus a good upshot and a solid putt. Meanwhile, if your distance is 350', you're talking about two pretty good drives and a long putt opportunity. If you can crank out 1 accurate max D, then a good chance for a 3. All it means is that you find yourself more in a controlled distance more often than your max distance. Sometimes, that's the difference between 2 over and 2 under
I don't think the basketball analogy holds true for disc golf. You don't have to dunk to make a basket, it's all show and spectacle. You actually do have to drive a hole and there are benefits to your score if you can park a longer hole that somebody else can't. I know distance doesn't breed low scores, but practice does help with accuracy. Nothing comes without work.
Blake_T1
* Ace Member *
one thing that rarely gets mentioned when it comes to the distance debate is the psychological factors involved.
at the am level, big d is a psychological weapon.
i've witnessed players get demoralized by playing on the same card with a cannon arm. often it takes a few holes to get to a spot where the big arm can really shine, but the first time that guy steps up and parks a 470' hole when everyone else is 80'+ away, often the other ams (especially seasoned veterans in the adv division) will just shut off and stop playing to win because they feel there's no way they can compete with the bigger thrower (even if it's a short course).
that being said, this phenomenon doesn't work to your advantage at the pro level, but it can work to your disadvantage. if a course has 11 available deuces if you can throw 350-400', but 16 available deuces if you can throw 450', the longer thrower automatically has 5 additional birdie opportunities. the shorter thrower knows that the longer thrower basically has 5 freebies to give away and still throw the same score as the shorter thrower on a perfect throw.
while some players aren't bothered by this at all, a good number are. the net result is that many feel a much greater level of pressure to perform at their peak ability knowing that it still won't be enough if they longer thrower performs at their peak ability.
if you can throw far, there is less desire to buy a sports car
at the am level, big d is a psychological weapon.
i've witnessed players get demoralized by playing on the same card with a cannon arm. often it takes a few holes to get to a spot where the big arm can really shine, but the first time that guy steps up and parks a 470' hole when everyone else is 80'+ away, often the other ams (especially seasoned veterans in the adv division) will just shut off and stop playing to win because they feel there's no way they can compete with the bigger thrower (even if it's a short course).
that being said, this phenomenon doesn't work to your advantage at the pro level, but it can work to your disadvantage. if a course has 11 available deuces if you can throw 350-400', but 16 available deuces if you can throw 450', the longer thrower automatically has 5 additional birdie opportunities. the shorter thrower knows that the longer thrower basically has 5 freebies to give away and still throw the same score as the shorter thrower on a perfect throw.
while some players aren't bothered by this at all, a good number are. the net result is that many feel a much greater level of pressure to perform at their peak ability knowing that it still won't be enough if they longer thrower performs at their peak ability.
if you can throw far, there is less desire to buy a sports car
jeremy2
Eagle Member
Happened to me in Bowling Green on the last day in the morning 1st round. Me and another guy on the card can throw 500+ ft regurarly and when the rest of the card saw it they tried and failed miserably, errant shots all over the place. Most people I play with can regurarly beat me due to they know that course management, approaches, putting and wooded holes really hurt me. But it was fun to really bomb with someone.
black udder
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 4,859
I would add that discing down is also obvious. I'm not a long thrower at all, but when you throw a midrange and they're throwing drivers, that's noticed too.
"man, you throw a roc?"
Although many of us know that a midrange isn't a huge drop in distance, many people equate it to that, so it's akin to the bomb drive if you come up the same distance with a midrange as their driver shot.
500' regularly? how nice. Although around here there's only like 3 holes out of 3 courses to actually use that. I think that kind of distance would just make my life harder... "how can I possible not throw past the pin!"
"man, you throw a roc?"
Although many of us know that a midrange isn't a huge drop in distance, many people equate it to that, so it's akin to the bomb drive if you come up the same distance with a midrange as their driver shot.
500' regularly? how nice. Although around here there's only like 3 holes out of 3 courses to actually use that. I think that kind of distance would just make my life harder... "how can I possible not throw past the pin!"
dflaschiii
Par Member
A big D throw can raise eyebrows, but I find it more demoralizing to play with a guy who is so consistent that it gives you no margin for error. I played a doubles round with a guy in Tennessee last year at a short, technical course that runs through the woods, and he hit every single fairway and every 30ft putt. He didn't have more than 325ft of power, but when those shots are riding the center of a narrow fairway they sure look longer than that.
It's the same consistency that makes Tiger so intimidating -- you watch golf it's obvious that all the other elite players can make the same shots he does, but he's more consistent than them, more mentally tough and disciplined. The rest of the players think they have to play perfect golf to beat him, and that's a huge psychological weapon.
It's the same consistency that makes Tiger so intimidating -- you watch golf it's obvious that all the other elite players can make the same shots he does, but he's more consistent than them, more mentally tough and disciplined. The rest of the players think they have to play perfect golf to beat him, and that's a huge psychological weapon.
jamsisjams
Double Eagle Member
I don't sweat big D drives because I've had those before. What gets to me is to see people step up and nail their long approaches during a tournament. I played with a guy who I was beating the first day but on the second day he stepped it up and nailed half a dozen 90'+ approaches. I wasn't particularly demoralized but I did notice what he was doing and felt forced to reevaluate my course tactics. Still wound up taking third.
Bradley Walker
* Ace Member *
scoot_er said:
Not 565? Five sixty FOUR!!!
How did you measure so accurately?
roadkill1
Double Eagle Member
black udder said:
I think the dunk in basketball analogy makes good sense. In both basketball and golf there are different ways of scoring and depending on your strengths you succeed at scoring more consistently one way versus another.
In disc golf there are those that have cannon arms and on open holes in the 380-450 range they'll rack up lots of birdies or at least have putts at them. Take that same player and put him on a stretch of holes that require him to thread his drive through very tight alleys and exhibit precise control and he maybe struggling to save par on 230' holes. A less powerful player with better control and bigger shot selection can annihilate many of the big arms on tight wooded holes but have to settle for pars on the longer open ones.*
Same in b-ball. The 6'9" 260lb player may do well close to the basket by muscling past or over players in the paint and even dunk over defenders. Whereas the 5'4" player knows he'll get eaten alive in there and instead excells at three pointers.
The manly macho side of us respects power. Therefore a powerfull dunk will usually garner more excitement in front of a crowd than the jumpshot from the top of the key. Both skills help teams win. Same with birdieing a 430' hole versus pinning a well protected 300 footer. We tend to be impressed by displays of power and that's precisely why many here chase more distance like it's the holy grail. In the end less strokes than the field wins tournaments no matter how you got there.
*(I'm not saying more power makes you less accurate there are a few that excell at both. However in my observation there are far more players whose achilles heel is poor putting or course management than those whose lack of distance is the deciding factor)
roadkill1
Double Eagle Member
garublador said:
There is a huge difference between dunking a volleyball and dunking a basketball. I was dunking volleyballs in eighth grade but couldn't dunk a basketball until 12th grade. Because a volleyball is very easy to palm you only need to get your wrist above the rim. While some can palm a basketball while standing still very few (usually players with gigantic hands) can palm while running and jumping. If you can't palm it you need to get your elbow close to rim height.
The ability to jump high is of negligible importance for the guards and ball handlers/perimeter players. But is of the utmost importance for the power players such as power forwards and centers. I imagine strikers in volleyball place a much higher priority on leaping ability than the setter.
Okay I'm going to stop now as I could talk basketball for days and this is a disc thread.
Blake_T1
* Ace Member *
a high and/or quick vertical in basketball can make up for height disadvantages.
strength can also do that as well (think charles barkley).
however, vertical and strength are more physical attributes.
obsessing about a vertical in basketball is probably more similar in disc golf to building up hand strength until you can crush a sandstone in your hand so you can get a ton of rip force from your hand. working fast twitch leg muscles so that you can explode and 1-step a disc near max D would be another example.
those aren't really parts of your game that you are working on, but parts of your body that affect how you can approach the game.
back before my ankle injury i was a 4 sport player with aspirations of going D1 college in baseball and football. @15 i was 5'7" 235 lbs with a 40" vertical and could bench 300'+. i was obsessed with dunking a basketball mainly because i wanted to dunk a basketball (i could dunk a mini-ball but was pulling up about 2-3" away from being able to dunk an official ball). at 5'7" i was a starting PF in basketball on one team and a 6th man on another team. my 2 positions were PF (primary) and PG (secondary). our starting center was 6'5". on the team where i was 6th man the starting PF was 6'4". on the team where i was starting PF i was almost always matched up against someone 6'0"-6'5". my final season averages on that team were 4ppg, 9rpg, 7apg, 4spg, 4bpg (my only triple double that year was 10 points, 15 reb, 11 blocks, but i had a few games where i had 10+ steals, etc.). without my vertical i would not have gotten the minutes i got.
that being said, i earned additional minutes because i always boxed out hard, played great post D (due to strength), drew tons of fouls in the low post, threw precision passes... but i fully admit that it was due to my man/man lock-down D that i got a good chunk of my minutes. if the other team had someone lighting us up there was usually a defensive rotation where i would end up guarding the other team's best scorer. if their best scorer was a center i would move him off the block before he caught the ball so the entry pass would reach him 5-10' farther away from the basket and his post moves were useless.
however, one of my coaches told me halfway through the season that it was because i played like someone who was 6'3" that i got playing time at all but it was playing smart with solid D and good passing that got me playing over half of every game.
so yah, if big D is having a monster vertical, defense and passing is short game and putting. however, if you're 5'7" instead of 6'4" you have a distinct disadvantage in DG due to lever length, etc. if the guy who is 6'4" and a guy who is 5'7" and have identical technique, the guy who is 6'4" will likely have at least 30' more D. that being said, you have to be able to putt & approach to win, but the guy who is 5'7" has to have better technique on drives in order to beat the 6'4" guy if their putting and approaching are equal.
strength can also do that as well (think charles barkley).
however, vertical and strength are more physical attributes.
obsessing about a vertical in basketball is probably more similar in disc golf to building up hand strength until you can crush a sandstone in your hand so you can get a ton of rip force from your hand. working fast twitch leg muscles so that you can explode and 1-step a disc near max D would be another example.
those aren't really parts of your game that you are working on, but parts of your body that affect how you can approach the game.
back before my ankle injury i was a 4 sport player with aspirations of going D1 college in baseball and football. @15 i was 5'7" 235 lbs with a 40" vertical and could bench 300'+. i was obsessed with dunking a basketball mainly because i wanted to dunk a basketball (i could dunk a mini-ball but was pulling up about 2-3" away from being able to dunk an official ball). at 5'7" i was a starting PF in basketball on one team and a 6th man on another team. my 2 positions were PF (primary) and PG (secondary). our starting center was 6'5". on the team where i was 6th man the starting PF was 6'4". on the team where i was starting PF i was almost always matched up against someone 6'0"-6'5". my final season averages on that team were 4ppg, 9rpg, 7apg, 4spg, 4bpg (my only triple double that year was 10 points, 15 reb, 11 blocks, but i had a few games where i had 10+ steals, etc.). without my vertical i would not have gotten the minutes i got.
that being said, i earned additional minutes because i always boxed out hard, played great post D (due to strength), drew tons of fouls in the low post, threw precision passes... but i fully admit that it was due to my man/man lock-down D that i got a good chunk of my minutes. if the other team had someone lighting us up there was usually a defensive rotation where i would end up guarding the other team's best scorer. if their best scorer was a center i would move him off the block before he caught the ball so the entry pass would reach him 5-10' farther away from the basket and his post moves were useless.
however, one of my coaches told me halfway through the season that it was because i played like someone who was 6'3" that i got playing time at all but it was playing smart with solid D and good passing that got me playing over half of every game.
so yah, if big D is having a monster vertical, defense and passing is short game and putting. however, if you're 5'7" instead of 6'4" you have a distinct disadvantage in DG due to lever length, etc. if the guy who is 6'4" and a guy who is 5'7" and have identical technique, the guy who is 6'4" will likely have at least 30' more D. that being said, you have to be able to putt & approach to win, but the guy who is 5'7" has to have better technique on drives in order to beat the 6'4" guy if their putting and approaching are equal.
Bradley Walker
* Ace Member *
What about a guy 6'4" with a 40" vertical?
What do you do then?
What do you do then?
Bradley Walker said:
Ask for his autograph?
Blake_T1
* Ace Member *
if you are 5'7" then you need a 49" vertical.
a guy who's 6'9" only needs a 35" vertical.
black udder
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 4,859
dflaschiii said:
The problem here is when you take those short D guys and dump them on a long course. A tournament last year played 2 rounds (1 long, 1 short) on a course and the final 9 for the championship was a mix of the longest holes on the course. The guys who had won strokes and held their lead based on short distance, but accurate play were all beat because the guys with distance were all getting more birdie opportunities than them. The competition was fairly even and the bigger D players won.
And Tiger isn't just consistent, he's consistently the best player in driving, chipping and putting. Tiger intimidates players by out driving them (accurately), then chipping up to a 30' putt, then draining a 30' putt for birdie or eagle. That'll put a dent in your confidence any day.
black udder
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 4,859
roadkill said:
I believe this is simplest to see in beginners. You get a guy who is naturally athletic and can dunk a ball. Doesn't mean he's a great player, just athletic.
As Blake has said, throwing 350' doesn't mean you're a great player, just that you're not doing anything horribly wrong. Thus, many people who are athletic, could come into the sport and be able to throw long distance without having the time spent on approaches and putting.
I really do believe that anybody who has been playing awhile and has worked to get their distance up has also put the time into putting and approaches as well. I know players with a great game - putting, approach but their drives are only around 300'. They can hold their own on technical courses, but routinely lose out on courses with longer distance. Distance is an advantage no matter how you slice it.
If we're of essentially equal skill, but I can drive 450' and you can drive 300' and we come up on a 300' hole, you're going to have to drive your max D to get to the hole. I'm going to pick up a midrange or a putter. I'll have a more relaxed and controlled drive with a disc that is less sensitive to nose up variance and less chance of a big skip. You're going to have to either choke up and plan for a par, or throw your max distance with accuracy. I think my chances for birdie are better.
If you're going to draw an analogy to basketball, it should be the 3 pointer, not the dunk. A dunk is 2 points and the shot behind the arc is 3. The guy who can shoot from further away is the guy who will get the most points.
Bradley Walker
* Ace Member *
black udder said:
Tiger is not disproportionately longer than most of the newer players and most of the other tops players.
In fact, up until recently, Tiger dominated DESPITE of his poor driving.
Similar threads
