fixed.
-
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)
overloaded terms: more stable
- Thread starter tmahan
- Start date
fixed.
great white buffalo
Eagle Member
Well in your neck of the woods they are just wrong. The discs you just listed are stable.
great white buffalo
Eagle Member
Between -3 and +3 is 0. That is where stable is.
I swear to god we have a massive thread about this but I can't find it. Omega Super Sloth really got his panties in a bunch over this subject.
great white buffalo
Eagle Member
Only zero is stable. If the number is higher than zero it is not more stable it is overstable. If the number is less than zero it is not less stable it is understable. It is very easy to understand this concept if you just think of a number line. Zero is Zero. One is not more Zero it is over Zero. Negative one is not less Zero it is under Zero.
While I'll admit my areas verbage was confusing at first as a new player, I see it now as much simpler and useful in real life situations- on this board, more defined definitions work better IMO. Even to the point of squirrley vs flippy, and stable vs true stable.
I can get strict on you defining the buzz and valk as stable as I find the buzzz slightly overstable and the valk hs understable.
When someone locally has a great shot or has a disc for sale, flippy and stable are great ways of describing flight.
What discs should you consider stable?
champ gazelle.:thmbup:
agent_peebody
* Ace Member *
gazelles are pretty stable. i'd also say stalkers are stable-ish
drickanderson
Double Eagle Member
I love when people argue stuff like this. If I say that my avenger is far more stable than my stalker, every disc-golfer out there knows exactly what I mean. Anybody that wants to become a terminology nazi can have at it, but it doesn't change what I meant, nor does it change the fact that everybody knows what I meant.
great white buffalo
Eagle Member
To answer your question Craftsman I would have to say on a technical standpoint stable discs are the ones that are listed as a Zero. Imo A light weight Classic Roc, not a regular Roc, But a Classic Roc is what I would consider to be the best example of stable that I have ever thrown. I do not know what the rating of it is, but I can make one go absolutely straight for 150 feet and drop with only about five feet worth of lateral fade at the end of the flight.
Last edited:
Stetz1010
Eagle Member
So, if I'm comparing 2 (Over)stable(ish) discs such as a Buzzz, and a Comet, I should, or should not say the Buzzz is more stable than the Comet thrown with faster arm swing, but the Comet will act more stable than the Buzzz thrown with less arm speed?
great white buffalo
Eagle Member
You would say that one is more overstable or understable than the other. To say that one was more stable would be like saying one was stabeler than the other and spellcheck would get upset about that.
by your definition, I can name a couple, but there are so many discs, to have a term that only defines a few doesn't make much sense.
People take disc numbers so literal it's funny. The scale of stability is not from the gods, we use real terms like stable to fit into our made up scale of stability. Dave, Jim, or Blake only have to change the intended speed to change all stability numbers as we know them.
Look at all the problems we face with trying to get technical on made up numbers: we have people that basically understand our reference of stability but make mistakes typing more/less stable, those that are confused by stability in general, those that throw "wrong" and have a skewed scale, and those that refer to disc's flight in two or three sections.
drickanderson
Double Eagle Member
To state that 'stable' is right in the middle, with everything else falling off to either side just doesn't lend itself well to flight description, or discussion. By that logic, then stating that a disc is 'more stable' seems clear enough, but to declare that a disc is 'less stable' then becomes unclear, and ambiguous. What if, when comparing a disc that is EXACTLY stable, I say that it's less stable? To which end of the scale?
If you make stability a quantifiable, linear amount, running from understable, through stable and into overstable, then discussion becomes simplified, and flight characteristics become more clear. Thinking of it as a linear scale, as opposed to a curve, with stable being TDC, makes discussion and terminology much easier to deal with.
This also lends itself to the disc manufacturers 'numbering' systems. It doesn't matter if it's discraft or innova, the concept is the same. The higher the number, the higher the low speed fade. Innova may have a high speed turn number, but that, in effect, can be mathematically added to the low speed fade, to come up with a number on a linear scale (they are negative numbers, even further supporting the idea of a linear scale).
Taking these two scales (known collectively as the 'stability rating'), if a disc has MORE of this value, then people tend to call it 'more stable'. If the 'stability rating' is less, the it's logically 'less stable'.
If you make stability a quantifiable, linear amount, running from understable, through stable and into overstable, then discussion becomes simplified, and flight characteristics become more clear. Thinking of it as a linear scale, as opposed to a curve, with stable being TDC, makes discussion and terminology much easier to deal with.
This also lends itself to the disc manufacturers 'numbering' systems. It doesn't matter if it's discraft or innova, the concept is the same. The higher the number, the higher the low speed fade. Innova may have a high speed turn number, but that, in effect, can be mathematically added to the low speed fade, to come up with a number on a linear scale (they are negative numbers, even further supporting the idea of a linear scale).
Taking these two scales (known collectively as the 'stability rating'), if a disc has MORE of this value, then people tend to call it 'more stable'. If the 'stability rating' is less, the it's logically 'less stable'.
jtencer
Eagle Member
Good lord, it's not that difficult. You aren't calling your monster "a stable disc" which is a specific category of disc. You are saying that your monster is "more stable" than your sidewinder because it is.
jt doesn't quite get it.
WoW! Touchy subject.
So, if someone asked me if my Xcal is stable, I would correct them and say, "no, its overstable".
but;
if someone asked me which is more stable, my Wraith or my Xcal I would say, "my Xcal"
if something is "Over"stable, does this not mean it has more stability? If something is understable it has less stability. IMO, there are the three main categories in which a disc can be classified, OVER-Stable-UNDER. But when discussing stability it makes no sense to say that my Wraith is more stable than my Xcal. Yes, my Wraith is close to the Stable category, but if my Xcal is Overstable it means there is MORE STABILITY by definition. Like others have pointed out, how are you gonna say that a Buzzz is more stable than a Banshee? Let me hear how wrong I am. You all are arguing two different points and two different usages of the word. Believe it or not, most of you are correct, but just don't realize the person you are arguing with is also correct
So, if someone asked me if my Xcal is stable, I would correct them and say, "no, its overstable".
but;
if someone asked me which is more stable, my Wraith or my Xcal I would say, "my Xcal"
if something is "Over"stable, does this not mean it has more stability? If something is understable it has less stability. IMO, there are the three main categories in which a disc can be classified, OVER-Stable-UNDER. But when discussing stability it makes no sense to say that my Wraith is more stable than my Xcal. Yes, my Wraith is close to the Stable category, but if my Xcal is Overstable it means there is MORE STABILITY by definition. Like others have pointed out, how are you gonna say that a Buzzz is more stable than a Banshee? Let me hear how wrong I am. You all are arguing two different points and two different usages of the word. Believe it or not, most of you are correct, but just don't realize the person you are arguing with is also correct
Similar threads
[Prodigy]
Reverb distance driver
