• 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)

The 5 Most Important Discs of the Decade

Timko

* Ace Member *
Joined
Aug 3, 2006
Messages
8,154
Location
Kansas City
According to the PDGA's website, Disc Golfer (along with the article myself, Discspeed, and Leopard worked on) should be shipping soon. As promised, here's what we wrote for those who don't get the mag.

Discs underwent some serious technological changes in the 1990s. After moving from a small diameter to a larger diameter in the 1980s for distance, we saw a return to smaller diameter discs, starting with the Cyclone. During that decade, discs such as the Teebird and the XL ruled for golf distance. Rim diameter was getting wider, and longer distances, once achievable by only the biggest arms, were now becoming commonplace for average disc golfers. The PDGA's list of approved discs doubled in the decade, going from 92 to 201, and the number of manufacturers increased to nine. In the past decade, the trend of moving toward larger-rimmed discs continued until 2008, when the PDGA limited the maximum size at 2.6 cm. Approved discs more than doubled to 448 made by an astounding 24 manufacturers. Some of the newer companies have attempted to reinvent the wheel by improving on existing putters and large-diameter midranges. These innovations have made a significant impact on controllable distance. The PDGA also issued revised technical guidelines to manufacturers. The revisions, which came in 2008, were not the first from the PDGA. The hard baseline plastic developed in the late 1980s and early 1990s led to the flex standards. These revisions were issued in the hopes that serious injury to players and spectators could be avoided with discs that had more give to them. We've come a long way in the past ten years in terms of disc technology. Here's my list of the five most important discs released in the last decade.

Innova Valkyrie - Approved August, 2000
ValkLines.jpg

I first picked up the game of disc golf in 2003 while in college at the University of Arkansas. After four months of playing, I decided to buy a distance driver. After talking with some local players, I went to the store in search of a Valkyrie. I, like many of those who picked up that disc for the first time in the early part of the decade, saw an instant increase in my distance. When it was approved in 2000, the Valkyrie's 1.9 cm rim boasted a 0.2 cm advantage over every other disc on the market. Putting more weight on the rim of the disc increases its gyroscopic effect, allowing it to spin longer, which gives the disc more potential distance. However, the true testament to its greatness lies in its flight pattern. Innova's previous distance drivers, the Teebird and the Eagle, needed to be thrown hard. Those not able to throw hard enough found they would fade off to the left (for right-hand backhand throws).
The Valkyrie changed that. Today, discs such as the Nuke and Boss may be the flavor of the day for distance drivers, but there was a time when the Valkyrie was the preferred go-to driver for open-field distance. Power players had a disc they could flip over from hyzer, or hold an anhyzer to the ground (figure 1 right). Finesse players had a fast disc that would track right before fading (figure 1 left). Aside from being conducive to golf play, the Valkyrie was also able to set the distance record when Christian Sandström crushed a 164-gram DX Valkyrie on the salt flats of Primm, Nevada. Even as golf discs got faster, manufacturers strove for a disc that could be thrown by people with varying power. The Valkyrie's combination of speed and glide will be the gold standard for comparison leading us into the next decade.

Gateway Wizard - Approved January 2002
WizAVR_comp.jpg

Gateway entered the golf scene in the 1990s, but their true breakthrough occurred in 2002 when the Wizard first flew. While it is often compared to the big-bead Aviar (the same mold as the KC and JK Aviar), there are some unique technological differences. First, the wing has a more convex shape. Looking at figure 2, the classical putter shape can be seen on the right side of the diagram. Note the flat bottom side of the rim. Now compare that to the left image in the diagram. The wing has a more convex shape, which allows it to act like a bullet traveling through the air. This is a more aerodynamic shape, which increases its potential ability to gain distance. Another interesting trait is the Wizard's variable thickness in the flight plate. Most putters have a uniform thickness in the flight plate from the center of the disc to the edge. The Wizard actually starts out thinner in the center, and gets thicker as you move toward the rim. This puts more mass toward the outer edge, which helps the disc stay very straight for both putts and short drives alike. I've been a Wizard thrower since 2004, and I've described them as a short midrange you can putt with.
Perhaps the Wizard is best known for its availability in a large range of plastics. Most players know when they pick up a putter if it feels right in their hands. During the 1990s, there were few options if you wanted a harder or softer putter. But when the Wizard started gaining notoriety, people found them ranging from porcelain-plate hard to eraser soft. You could opt for a softer putter that grabbed the chains for spin putts, or a harder putter that dropped for loft putts. Personally, I prefer a stiffer Wizard but know many who prefer a Super Soft or even the melts-in-your-hand Stupid Super Soft.
In addition to its technological impact, Gateway was the first genuine new player in tournament-level disc golf design in 15 years. Since then other companies developing new molds, such as Latitude 64, have found success among professional and amateur players alike. These smaller companies have found a niche in the overall disc golf market, proving there are more than enough consumers who want to buy discs. While Gateway has continued to create new putters, their success can be traced from the Wizard.

Aerobie Epic - Approved April, 2003
EpicUnderside.jpg

I can think of three or four players who can make this unusual disc do things like nothing else on the market. For those who aren't familiar with this disc, let me give you a quick breakdown. The Epic is the only approved disc with an offset elliptical rim. Diagram 3 shows what the underside of the disc looks like. While it can be thrown like any other golf disc, the Epic truly shines for overhands. Instead of simply flying up and down, like most overhand shots, the Epic's rim causes the disc to barrel roll and fly straight like a backhand or forehand before fading to the left or right. The disc can be bent (or flexed), which allows it to fade to the left or the right. People making the transition to disc golf from a sport with an overhand motion, such as baseball, football, or tennis, could use their natural throwing motion, and without developing their mechanics for a classical golf throw, achieve with an Epic similar distances to those already playing the game.
The unusual design of the Epic caused quite a stir among disc golfers. Its asymmetrical rim caused a lot of debate about the "spirit of the game" when it came to approved discs and their shape. In fact, while Quest's Turbo Putt is often cited as the disc that forced the PDGA to issue its most recent technical standards revisions, the Epic was really the one that got the ball rolling. In fact, the current technical guidelines state that for a disc to be approved, it must have a uniform rim diameter, which is a rule that can be traced to the offset rim of the Epic. While only a few players may carry the Epic in their bag, its impact on the rules of the game can't be dismissed.

Discraft Buzzz - Approved September, 2003 (Written by Discspeed)
I was interested in the Buzzz as soon as it came out. I had just gotten serious about disc golf and I was often playing several rounds a day. I already had a decent rip and I couldn't stand the idea of busting up baseline plastic discs on all the trees I regularly hit with considerable force. I had tried the Z Wasp and not only was it too overstable, but it also felt bulky in my hand. The first-run Buzzz felt perfect the moment I picked it up. Prior to its release, there was not a single midrange on the market that flew straight and held any line out of the box, let alone stayed that way for years. Discs took damage from each tree they hit, so they were designed with added overstability to extend their wear period. This meant they required considerable use to reach a state
where they flew straight and held their angle of release. If this broken-in disc was then lost, the golfer's game suffered for the time it took to wear in a new one. When midrange molds started being released in premium plastics they were nearly impossible to break in, remaining overstable and of limited use on the course.
When the Buzzz was released, it solved each of these problems in a single stroke. Brand new, the Buzzz is already in a perfect state to fly straight and hold any angle of release. In Z plastic it is nearly indestructible and can take hundreds of tree hits before showing any change in flight. If lost, a new replacement can go directly in the bag and fly just the same. I have never
been, and will probably never be, a standout golfer in the open division, but I have seen some beautiful shots come out of my hand thanks to the Buzzz. I feel its influence and popularity will surely continue well into the future.

Quest Advanced Technology Odyssey Line - Approved April, 2007
Overmolded.jpg

Steve Pearson's company, QuestAT, may have helped innovate the discs we're going to see over the next 10 years. Quest is a plastic molding company that had experimented with creating LED-lit catch discs. During this time, Steve saw local kids playing disc golf, so he began looking into finding a partner to help him design some discs. After seeing an ad in the PDGA brochure, Dave McCormack, the owner of Gateway discs, got in touch with Steve. Dave suggested they use an overmolded design that Quest was already producing and turn it into a golf disc. For an example of a molded disc, see figure 4. Note that there are two different plastics used to create the disc; one on the flight plate and one on the rim. Since the material in the center of the disc was lighter than the material on the outside of the disc, the disc would have an increased gyroscopic effect. This allows the disc to keep spinning longer, which keeps a disc holding its line. The Odyssey line was geared toward recreational players, but the technology used to produce those discs is already being used by other companies. The upstart manufacturer Cam Reality has designed a putter (the Ion) with a more conventional shape out of high-end urethane plastics.
Drivers could also be improved. McCormack said that he and Pearson tried to develop distance drivers with a baseline plastic in the flight plate and a premium plastic in the rim. While the discs didn't come to fruition, the impact of such a disc would
be great. By using a high density premium plastic in the rim, discs could get more gyroscopic without increasing rim size. The Odyssey's total impact on the game may not be felt for years to come, but it's evident that out-of-the-box thinking will be needed in the coming decade.

It's been an amazing ten years for our sport: PDGA membership is up, tournament totals are up, total courses are up. Disc companies have provided their customers with a plethora of options. As companies continue to find their next great disc, we have to ask ourselves, what's in store for us in the next ten years? Are discs going to continue to get faster? Since the Cyclone was approved in the early 1990s, the quest for the fastest driver has been fought by increasing the rim size. Because of the 2008 revision to the PDGA technical standard, we now know there will be a limit to how wide a rim can be. Every manufacturer I talked to told me that they felt discs would continue to get faster. Will overmolded discs be the trend over the next ten years, or will there be a new technological breakthrough? Only time will tell.
Discraft and Gateway both took designs from more classic, slow speed discs, and made advancements on those designs. Anyone who plays the game seriously, knows that the game is won and lost inside of 200 feet. So it would make sense that companies use the advancement in driver technology to make more accurate fairway, midrange, approach, and putting discs. One thing is for certain—established and new manufacturers alike will be finding new ways to conquer the controllable distance plateaus well into the future.

Chris Timko (#8525) has been playing as an amateur for seven years and is currently a member of the Kansas City Flying Disc Club.
Mike Phillips (#23433), who helped with this article, has been competing in the advanced and pro divisions for seven years and has been a member of the Kalamazoo Basket K'Aces, the Tampa Bay Disc Sports Club, and the Tocobaga Disc Golf Club.
Zachary Mallard (#32589) is an Austin disc artist and staffer at Disc Nation. See more of his work at ZAMdesign.com and DiscGolfTeeSigns.com.
All 3 are contributing members to the discgolfreview.com/forums discussion community.

So, what are your 5 Most Important Discs of the Decade? As you can tell by the wording, it's a pretty open ended question.
 
Thanks. I really appreciate the what Mike did with the Buzzz part. He could write that with a lot more passion that I could. Zach's diagrams really helped me explain some of the technical parts of the article without using too many words. This article was actually trimmed down from 3500 words. :shock:
 
Great article. I really appreciate what you guys did here. I hope I don't seem like a dick for bringing this up, but Discspeed wrote: "Prior to its release, there was not a single midrange on the market that flew straight and held any line out of the box, let alone stayed that way for years." I would assert the QMS fits that description, and pre-dates the Buzzzz by a few years.
 
Jerry R said:
I would assert the QMS fits that description, and pre-dates the Buzzzz by a few years.

Never heard of it and neither has 95% of the disc golf community.
 
"I, like many of those who picked up that disc for the first time in the early part of the decade, saw an instant increase in my When it was approved in 2000, the Valkyrie's 1.9 cm rim boasted a 0.2 cm advantage over every other disc on the market."

Some mis-editing has happened here.
 
Parks said:
"I, like many of those who picked up that disc for the first time in the early part of the decade, saw an instant increase in my When it was approved in 2000, the Valkyrie's 1.9 cm rim boasted a 0.2 cm advantage over every other disc on the market."

Some mis-editing has happened here.
I tried not to mention that. It IS a great article and hopefully one little mistake won't turn this into a grammar flame thread. :lol:
 
Not a flame, just hoping that what was copy/pasted here isn't what is going to be published :D
 
Parks said:
Not a flame, just hoping that what was copy/pasted here isn't what is going to be published :D

The version I have is a copy that was sent to me for proofing. I'm not a grammar guy, so I hope the editors caught that kind of stuff. I may have miscopied it too; I had to copy it out of a pdf and remove all the formatting.
 
Because of the 2008 revision to the PDGA technical standard, we now know there will be a limit to how wide a rim can be. Every manufacturer I talked to told me that they felt discs would continue to get faster. Will overmolded discs be the trend over the next ten years, or will there be a new technological breakthrough? Only time will tell.
As a member of both the PDGA Tech Standards and Course Committees, I will be biased toward blocking any advances in speed that can be prevented, via modification of tech standards, as detrimental to the game. Faster discs have already undermined the quality of the game balance in relation to what designers are able to do with updating course designs.

The battle here is whether the game is intended to simply be 18 holes of various varieties of reachable par 3 holes (basically disc darts) or evolving more toward a golf model with a healthy mix of bona fide par 4s & 5s. I would hope we could strive for the latter but technology, the need for speed/something new, and what seems to be more popular with rec players may force the sport to remain mostly in the par 3 world. The majority of existing courses can't be extended since they are landlocked either physically or by dictate from the parks department for the amount of land available.

Ball golf has been locked in this technological battle for many years to retain their balance in the game. Our sport wasn't smart enough to do the same thing as fast. Our "technology horse" is already too far out of the barn but maybe can be kept in the corral if you also believe our game should include par 4s & 5s.
 
Chuck Kennedy said:
Because of the 2008 revision to the PDGA technical standard, we now know there will be a limit to how wide a rim can be. Every manufacturer I talked to told me that they felt discs would continue to get faster. Will overmolded discs be the trend over the next ten years, or will there be a new technological breakthrough? Only time will tell.
As a member of both the PDGA Tech Standards and Course Committees, I will be biased toward blocking any advances in speed that can be prevented, via modification of tech standards, as detrimental to the game. Faster discs have already undermined the quality of the game balance in relation to what designers are able to do with updating course designs.

The battle here is whether the game is intended to simply be 18 holes of various varieties of reachable par 3 holes (basically disc darts) or evolving more toward a golf model with a healthy mix of bona fide par 4s & 5s. I would hope we could strive for the latter but technology, the need for speed/something new, and what seems to be more popular with rec players may force the sport to remain mostly in the par 3 world. The majority of existing courses can't be extended since they are landlocked either physically or by dictate from the parks department for the amount of land available.

Ball golf has been locked in this technological battle for many years to retain their balance in the game. Our sport wasn't smart enough to do the same thing as fast. Our "technology horse" is already too far out of the barn but maybe can be kept in the corral if you also believe our game should include par 4s & 5s.

I sort of see what you are saying. If we had stopped with the 1.9cm rim, pros wouldnt be able to as easily to throw far. But lets face it. A LOT of dg courses where already way to short when they where built back in the day. (Most courses with an SSA of under 48 have always been too short.) Hell I can find plenty of courses where my Cyclone makes all holes par threes. Is this a problem with disc technology, or has there just not been enough focus on how much land you actually really need to make a good course. Thankfully there are courses today that even with the very fast discs are plenty long with par 4's and 5's.

Im just hoping that course design of 2010 focusses more on making sure that championship level course have the land and terrain needed to not have them be par 3 courses.
 
Jerry R said:
Great article. I really appreciate what you guys did here. I hope I don't seem like a dick for bringing this up, but Discspeed wrote: "Prior to its release, there was not a single midrange on the market that flew straight and held any line out of the box, let alone stayed that way for years." I would assert the QMS fits that description, and pre-dates the Buzzzz by a few years.

The mallet stamped hammer circa 1987 was widely believed to hold any line right out of the box.
 
Chuck Kennedy said:
Ball golf has been locked in this technological battle for many years to retain their balance in the game. Our sport wasn't smart enough to do the same thing as fast. Our "technology horse" is already too far out of the barn but maybe can be kept in the corral if you also believe our game should include par 4s & 5s.

Yes, but ball golf had it's 'club set' fairly well established. The nature of disc golf is still evolving. I think the speed has been capped at the right limit. The real question is whether it's going to happen that the courses will evolve into a more par 4/par 5 mentality. This can be problematic because it requires more land and may not be as friendly to the rec player. Especially in areas where land is expensive, I believe the trend will be to continue with par 3 courses which is sad.

One trend that the higher speed discs has caused which is detrimental to the game we discuss here quite frequently. The trend of new players to get the fastest disc out there because it will go the farthest. This is true if you throw well. It's a major difference from ball golf, where all you have to learn is a basic swing and you can hit every club out there. The faster a disc gets the more speed and technique are required to throw it and most places don't tell them that <if anything>. Beginning players generally shouldn't throw anything faster than a teebird, but I know guys who started with monsters and destroyers because the name sounded good.
 
Chuck Kennedy said:
Because of the 2008 revision to the PDGA technical standard, we now know there will be a limit to how wide a rim can be. Every manufacturer I talked to told me that they felt discs would continue to get faster. Will overmolded discs be the trend over the next ten years, or will there be a new technological breakthrough? Only time will tell.
As a member of both the PDGA Tech Standards and Course Committees, I will be biased toward blocking any advances in speed that can be prevented, via modification of tech standards, as detrimental to the game. Faster discs have already undermined the quality of the game balance in relation to what designers are able to do with updating course designs.

The battle here is whether the game is intended to simply be 18 holes of various varieties of reachable par 3 holes (basically disc darts) or evolving more toward a golf model with a healthy mix of bona fide par 4s & 5s. I would hope we could strive for the latter but technology, the need for speed/something new, and what seems to be more popular with rec players may force the sport to remain mostly in the par 3 world. The majority of existing courses can't be extended since they are landlocked either physically or by dictate from the parks department for the amount of land available.

Ball golf has been locked in this technological battle for many years to retain their balance in the game. Our sport wasn't smart enough to do the same thing as fast. Our "technology horse" is already too far out of the barn but maybe can be kept in the corral if you also believe our game should include par 4s & 5s.

Chuck, I think you make a very valid point. However, could disc companies turn down the chance for a large profit margin of making a "faster" disc if it stayed within the current PDGA specs? I talked with all 3 major disc designers, and all 3 said they're working on technology to make their discs go faster within the specs, so I think it's going to happen.
 
There's nothing wrong with them doing it and I would be doing it, too, if I were a manufacturer. However, that doesn't mean the specs potentially wouldn't be changed to offset the technology. It wouldn't be the first time that specs have changed based on a new advance. Just depends on what the changes are, what difference it makes and how the Board sees it affecting the game.
 
Animix said:
The real question is whether it's going to happen that the courses will evolve into a more par 4/par 5 mentality. This can be problematic because it requires more land and may not be as friendly to the rec player. Especially in areas where land is expensive, I believe the trend will be to continue with par 3 courses which is sad.

In my area of the country (PA/MD/DE) about half to two thirds of the new courses put in have very high SSA's and utilize a number of par 4s and par 5s. Just check out Moraine and Deer lakes in the Pittsburgh area, Quaker's Challenge near Harrisburg, PA, Lake Nockamixon in Quakertown, PA and Iron Hill and Carousel in DE as examples of courses that are designed with plenty of par 4s and 5s and force you to be disciplined in your choices and shot making.

And these high SSA courses don't have to be killjoys for the am and rec players. Installing am and rec tees is an affordable option that make it manageable for less experienced players.
 
roadkill said:
And these high SSA courses don't have to be killjoys for the am and rec players. Installing am and rec tees is an affordable option that make it manageable for less experienced players.

This. I think the future of GOOD course design will be making courses that are both challenging and fun for pros, ams, and recs. Well designed and placed multiple tee pads and/or baskets, but still easy to navigate and find the right pad/basket, will hopefully be what we see more of.

I think the future of discs will be control, not speed. The superdiscs of the future will probably require more skill though, to get the control out of these discs, so the noobs buying the new best thing would regulate itself. But I could be wrong. I think with the current specs, that even with a new breakthrough we are almost at the limit of speed design. Maybe speed 14 or 15 would be the max, but I doubt we'd see a true 15.
 
ForeverBlue232 said:
roadkill said:
And these high SSA courses don't have to be killjoys for the am and rec players. Installing am and rec tees is an affordable option that make it manageable for less experienced players.

This. I think the future of GOOD course design will be making courses that are both challenging and fun for pros, ams, and recs. Well designed and placed multiple tee pads and/or baskets, but still easy to navigate and find the right pad/basket, will hopefully be what we see more of.

I think the future of discs will be control, not speed. The superdiscs of the future will probably require more skill though, to get the control out of these discs, so the noobs buying the new best thing would regulate itself. But I could be wrong. I think with the current specs, that even with a new breakthrough we are almost at the limit of speed design. Maybe speed 14 or 15 would be the max, but I doubt we'd see a true 15.

I think using current technology, drivers have hit a speed barrier (mainly the rim size requirement). However, as I said in the article, all 3 major designers in the US think discs are going to get faster over the next 10 years.

I do understand where Chuck is coming from. I played a tournament last weekend and had a max D disc in my bag in competition for the first time in over a year, and it allowed me to shoot really well because I can throw it a really long way. What would be interesting is if there were "rim classes" of competition: You can't throw anything with a bigger rim than a standard midrange, etc.
 

Latest posts

Top