The Magical Disappearing Worlds

[Phlick]

People are confusing the World Championships with their vacation excursions. They are not the same thing.

 

[JC17393]

People are confusing the World Championships with their vacation excursions. They are not the same thing.

For at least 90% of the competitors, Worlds IS their vacation. They take vacation time from work in order to go. They pay for a hotel room for a week. They have air fare and rental car expenses (or gas/tolls/time driving to the location). None of these people are going to this tournament with the expectation that they're going to break even on the trip, let alone that they are going to win the tournament. It's not a business trip. They're there for pleasure.

There are maybe 30-40 people at any given Pro Worlds who are there because they can actually win the whole thing. And that's across all divisions. There's probably 5-10 guys in Open who are realistic contenders. Another 5 or so in Women. Probably 5 or so in Masters and Grandmasters. Maybe 2-3 in the other age divisions. The rest are there for the experience and to maybe get into the cash and put a small dent in the expense of being there.

Until we have such depth of talent that Worlds is as winnable for the #100 player in the world as it is for the #1, there's no reason to treat it as anything more than an annual disc golf convention with a big tournament attached.

 

[scarpfish]

Until we have such depth of talent that Worlds is as winnable for the #100 player in the world as it is for the #1, there's no reason to treat it as anything more than an annual disc golf convention with a big tournament attached.

True. And until we come to a time when disc golf can build true dedicated spectators willing to travel to watch, and buy stuff while they do, I don't see the age restricted divisions being jettisoned.

 

[The Hammer]

People are confusing the World Championships with their vacation excursions. They are not the same thing.

They are the same for most of us. As was the case for me last year in Portland. I like the abbreviated schedule. I still felt like I was burnt out on DG when it was over.

 

[KGroff25]

As a spectator last year I was actually a little disappointed by the days with one round instead of two. If I'm out there to watch I want to see as much golf as possible. Much like going to the NCAA tournament and watching as many games as possible will pretty much always be better than watching one good game.

That being said, I can see the practical aspect of playing less rounds. At a certain point they've competed at every course, some several times. What difference is one or two more rounds on the same courses going to make in determining a champion?

It's interesting to hear the perspective of some players in this thread. I never considered the percentage of players that go to worlds just for the experience.

 

[JC17393]

As a spectator last year I was actually a little disappointed by the days with one round instead of two. If I'm out there to watch I want to see as much golf as possible.

From a spectator perspective, I would think it is really only a downer if you are intent to only watch one division (or one pool within the division). Pretty sure that at any point during any given day at Worlds, some pool of players is on at least one of the courses competing. Just because the Open guys are off doesn't mean the Women or the Masters aren't playing. So if it's a matter of seeing as much golf as possible, it's out there to be seen.

 

[KGroff25]

It is odd that this sport really isn't planned around spectators like the major sports.

I do get it though. It's obvious that in disc golf the money is coming from the players not the spectators and advertisers that want to reach the spectators. So as of now to expand the pot you aim to appease the players in order to get the number of entries and price of entries up.

If it was planned around spectators I would have a bigger problem with limiting rounds. The gauntlet of two rounds a day taking up most of the day is much more worth watching than one round per day. If you had the women and men playing on the same course back to back each day it might come close to the same level of enjoyment.

Either way it's much more feasible to take a day off work, a day away from the family, or rationalize the travel expenses for a full day of disc golf action than just to watch one round.

 

[KGroff25]

From a spectator perspective, I would think it is really only a downer if you are intent to only watch one division (or one pool within the division). Pretty sure that at any point during any given day at Worlds, some pool of players is on at least one of the courses competing. Just because the Open guys are off doesn't mean the Women or the Masters aren't playing. So if it's a matter of seeing as much golf as possible, it's out there to be seen.

At least in Portland it really wasn't reasonable to get to another course to watch a round. When they finished I wasn't about to fight traffic 45 minutes to 1.5 hours across town (depending on which courses) to watch the women or masters play.

I did get a chance to watch the finish of the Master's championship because all of the rounds were at Blue Lake that day. I actually really enjoyed that and thought it was well planned.

 

[Matt B.]

People are confusing the World Championships with their vacation excursions. They are not the same thing.

Of course they are, for many, many players.

 

[jeffmonty]

I did get a chance to watch the finish of the Master's championship because all of the rounds were at Blue Lake that day. I actually really enjoyed that and thought it was well planned.

I was there that day, too. We probably stood right next to each other. That was one epic day of DG spectating!

 

[filobedo]

Each time I went to worlds I was sick and tired of playing disc golf by the time the darn thing was over. The chance to check out a new city full of new restaurants was far more attractive than 2 rounds of disc golf a day for 4 days.

My thoughts exactly. There is a big world out there with lots to do and see when traveling for those whose entire life is not dg focused. It always has amazed me when people only visit Charleston, SC or coastal SC to only play dg. Why not try a new restaurant, see a band, visit historical sites or museums and get to see the world from a perspective outside of dg. Not to mention if you are young and single and do not hit the nightlife in Charleston, you are doing yourself a disservice.

 

[ru4por]

People are confusing the World Championships with their vacation excursions. They are not the same thing.

I would suggest if you are not treating them as the same thing, you are doing something wrong.

 

[KGroff25]

I was there that day, too. We probably stood right next to each other. That was one epic day of DG spectating!

It was pretty magical being there live. I've really enjoyed watching all the different worlds videos and picking myself out in the crowd. The different camera crews all did a great job! I've also been trying to re-watch the videos to see what lines the pros took and get out to the courses and practice hitting them the best I can.

 

[shive]

It seems that most respondents like the kinder, gentler format. And this is a self-corrective issue. Those who like it will be more likely to attend in the future, and those who don't will seek other opportunities. In time, everybody who goes will appreciate its appeal.

The reasons for wanting more free time are interesting. Here is a sampling: socialize, check out local National Parks, caddy for my son, avoid obsessive disc golfers, check out new restaurants, watch and buy stuff, see a band, visit historical sites and museums.

The event has cut out 40% of the competition it had ten years ago so that people who enter it can do such things. Undeniably, it is much kinder and gentler. But does it still deserve to be called a "Professional World Championship"?

 

[JC17393]

The event has cut out 40% of the competition it had ten years ago so that people who enter it can do such things. Undeniably, it is much kinder and gentler. But does it still deserve to be called a "Professional World Championship"?

The event cut out less than 40% of the competitive rounds (Eliminating 2/8 rounds or 36 of 144 holes ≠ 40%). Circumstances have eliminated one round/18 holes from this year's Worlds, that doesn't mean it's a trend going forward.

But I think you are taking a simplistic view to just look at less holes as "less competition". The reduction in the number of holes played and the freer schedule it creates has also allowed for increasingly more challenging holes to be incorporated into the competition. The question then becomes is 144 holes of typical par 3 golf more or less "competitive" than 90 or 108 holes with the number of true par 4 or even par 5 holes significantly increased? The classic question of quantity versus quality.

My viewpoint is that the reduction in total holes played has allowed for an increase in the quality of holes played. Higher quality holes, to me, makes for better competition, not less.

 

[Steve West]

Do you think there is a minimum level of toughness, below which we no longer really have a Pro World Championship?

 

[1978]

Each time I went to worlds I was sick and tired of playing disc golf by the time the darn thing was over. The chance to check out a new city full of new restaurants was far more attractive than 2 rounds of disc golf a day for 4 days.

Me personally, I get to a Worlds, walk the courses, play, and ice in my hotel room. I want nothing to do with the local city, night life, or players stuff. Im there to play well, if I wanted to sight see, I'd leave my discs alone. Maybe Im just too boring. Give me as many rounds that week as possible. A few less courses is ok, though.

 

[1978]

Do you think there is a minimum level of toughness, below which we no longer really have a Pro World Championship?

Nevin Short, 2012 Pro worlds. Too easy.

 

[Steve West]

...The question then becomes is 144 holes of typical par 3 golf more or less "competitive" than 90 or 108 holes with the number of true par 4 or even par 5 holes significantly increased? The classic question of quantity versus quality.

We can answer that question. I don't have data from any Pro Worlds, so I looked at the 262 Advanced players that played all 90 holes on 5 courses at Am Worlds.

I split the holes into 38 hard holes and 52 easy holes, so the total number of throws was (as close as possible to) the same for both sets of holes.

The 38 hard holes outperformed the 52 easy holes.

Specifically, the hard holes generated a scoring spread width of total scores of 35.17 vs. just 29.77 for the 52 easy holes.

(This means the typical player was tied with 7.4 players vs. 8.8 players. Fewer ties are better.)

Also, the 38 hard holes produced a correlation with ratings of (negative) 78.0% vs just 71.6% for the 52 easy holes.

For comparison, all 90 holes together produced scoring spread width of 56.82 (tied with 4.6 players) and 81.7% correlation.

 

[Cgkdisc]

From a competition standpoint, the smaller divisions have always played more rounds than necessary at Worlds to "fairly" determine a winner in comparison to the largest men's division whether Am or Pro. In theory, if your division of 288 or 144 plays 7-8 rounds, divisions less than 24 may need just 3-4 for equivalent scoring separation at the top. However, many players in those smaller divisions complain that their entry fee is paying for the same number of rounds of disc golf versus simply a competition that provides the number of rounds really needed to determine a winner. So the PDGA continues to bow to round equivalency wishes (which also resolves gender and age equity concerns) versus the actual competition requirements.