Things need to change for the better of disc golf

[Smigles]

Wasn't the DG boom in the 80ies much bigger than anything we have today ? I gotta admit I dont know player numbers from those days, but we had TV airtime and sponsors and i think whamo who put lots of money into the sport ? How big was DG back then ?

 

[Dan Ensor]

People figured out that in casinos they can only play one table at a time, limiting the amount they can win. Internet poker is far more lucrative, from what I hear.

 

[JC17393]

Recent news article suggests that the party's over. Granted, government intervention had a little to do with it.

http://news.msn.com/pop-culture/poker-trend-is-waning-in-las-vegas

Even if poker enthusiasts are still heavily into the game, poker's presence on television has whittled down to practically nothing. At its peak, it seemed like you could find poker on TV on at least a half-dozen different networks any given day/night. Now, other than an occasional late night showing, televised poker is just the World Series. And even that has been greatly reduced in size and scope (the tv coverage, not the tournament itself) in recent years.

For many people, they got into poker when it was on TV but the fad has faded for them. Doesn't mean poker in general has declined, just public interest from the "casual" fan/player. Even so, poker's numbers dwarf those of disc golf in terms of participants. We've still got a long way to go to get to where they were 15 years ago, let alone now. We're getting there, slowly but surely.

 

[JC17393]

Wasn't the DG boom in the 80ies much bigger than anything we have today ? I gotta admit I dont know player numbers from those days, but we had TV airtime and sponsors and i think whamo who put lots of money into the sport ? How big was DG back then ?

Whamo put money in in the 70s when they were the only game in town ("disc golf" didn't exist, it was still Frisbee golf). But even then, it was teeny-tiny compared to the numbers now.

The TV spots in the 80s and early 90s were localized, not national. And we see how successful they were given that they didn't continue. The money wasn't there then and in some ways, it's still not here now.

Disc golf participation numbers are at an all time high, and they continue to climb every year. But even with that growth, we're not nearly at a level to compare to poker or skateboarding or any other seemingly "niche" sport you want to name.

 

[Aim For The Chains]

not to mention you could get lucky a few times and end up a millionaire-- not sure that will ever happen in DG.

 

[Dan Ensor]

You argue (rather emphatically) about the excitement of the game, yet you start a thread about extending the amount of time someone has to throw. So more inactivity (less action) to make people excited to watch? Sounds a little counterproductive to me.

I don't think the two are related. Especially if we're talking about putting it on tv, which seems to be where people think it's not interesting. Pretty easy to cut out 25 seconds of someone grabbing discs and looking at lines. Trad golf has players walking 100 yds to read the green on approaches, some times. Baseball sometimes has pitchers throwing to 1st several times. It's not as interesting as a home run, but the strategy of it can be entertaining even when it's just a stall tactic. Announcers can even talk about it, have a laugh, and then have an interesting derailed discussion.

Edit: Crap ... nice troll. You got me.

 

[Dan Ensor]

not to mention you could get lucky a few times and end up a millionaire-- not sure that will ever happen in DG.

If entry fees were the same in dg and poker it probably could. Isn't a buy in for a wsop event somewhere in the neighborhood of 25k?

 

[Aim For The Chains]

If entry fees were the same in dg and poker it probably could. Isn't a buy in for a wsop event somewhere in the neighborhood of 25k?

Missed the point there.. Yeah we could payout 100 millions if we were as big as the powerball too and only charged $2 entry but I live on planet earth.

 

[tbird888]

I don't think the two are related. Especially if we're talking about putting it on tv, which seems to be where people think it's not interesting. Pretty easy to cut out 25 seconds of someone grabbing discs and looking at lines. Trad golf has players walking 100 yds to read the green on approaches, some times. Baseball sometimes has pitchers throwing to 1st several times. It's not as interesting as a home run, but the strategy of it can be entertaining even when it's just a stall tactic. Announcers can even talk about it, have a laugh, and then have an interesting derailed discussion.

Edit: Crap ... nice troll. You got me.

It wasn't a troll. I think it's more related than you're giving it credit. Extending throw times extends rounds. Getting people to watch for three hours is a lot more feasible than watching for five. Even if there were enough cameras to follow every card and show every shot, rounds are already on the long side. If you want to see disc golf grow in terms of televised coverage, you have to think about round times.

For the record, I am on your side in that I want to see disc golf make its way onto television. I think showing that it's considered a sport and not an activity (a lot to overcome to change unaffiliated minds, one being in free to play in many public parks) would help give it some validity, as well as introducing to more people to the fact that there's a game/sport attached to those weird looking barbecue grill/deer feeder things in parks. In my opinion, we certainly need more big moments like Cale's big putt to tie Kenny for a playoff (video was posted in the Worlds thread) and less watching people pump their disc 100 times before putting before we can get on TV.

 

[Dan Ensor]

I'm just saying that poker's risk/reward setup is completely different from dg. Maybe I did miss the point. What's the point? People would rather win millions or lose thousands than win thousands or lose a hundred or so?

 

[Dan Ensor]

It wasn't a troll. I think it's more related than you're giving it credit. Extending throw times extends rounds. Getting people to watch for three hours is a lot more feasible than watching for five. Even if there were enough cameras to follow every card and show every shot, rounds are already on the long side. If you want to see disc golf grow in terms of televised coverage, you have to think about time.

For the record, I am on your side in that I want to see disc golf make its way onto television. I think showing that it's considered a sport and not an activity (a lot to overcome to change unaffiliated minds, one being in free to play in many public parks) would help give it some validity, as well as introducing to more people to the fact that there's a game/sport attached to those weird looking barbecue grill/deer feeder things in parks. In my opinion, we certainly need more big moments like Cale's big putt to tie Kenny for a playoff (video was posted in the Worlds thread) and less watching people pump their disc 100 times before putting.

We could take a page from trad golf's book and show action mostly, and not follow the lead card for every boring tap in. Live coverage is overrated, editted footage is underrated. I suppose it's up to the video people to make the two related or unrelated.

 

[JC17393]

We could take a page from trad golf's book and show action mostly, and not follow the lead card for every boring tap in. Live coverage is overrated, editted footage is underrated. I suppose it's up to the video people to make the two related or unrelated.

Even pre-taped edited video requires multiple cameras if you are going to show action beyond one or two cards. Take the PGA Championships this weekend. CBS probably has 50-60 cameras all around that course covering the action. How many cameras do the best online content providers have to film their videos?

I recall the early days of the MSDGC (now the Vibram Open)...they were begging for not only volunteers to film action, but for cameras as well. I think they maxed out at something like a dozen cameras, enabling them to "cover" the top 4-5 cards for the DVD. I don't know that many events have been able to match that (including the VO itself in later years).

 

[Dan Ensor]

I know I'm a dreamer. But I'm not the only one. I hope some day you will join us. And we can all get a hole in one.

 

[tbird888]

We could take a page from trad golf's book and show action mostly, and not follow the lead card for every boring tap in. Live coverage is overrated, editted footage is underrated. I suppose it's up to the video people to make the two related or unrelated.

I think you're missing my point. It doesn't matter if you show tap ins or not. By extending time, rounds last longer. You can't show a five hour round in three hours if you're showing it live. Watching it after the fact is what we have now, and it's obvious, by the online streaming efforts up to this point, that's the best we can do (in terms of TV).

If you want more people than those with personal interest to get excited and watch, you're going to have to work towards live coverage (with internet coverage, this is a requirement more than a luxury). With that comes a lot of headaches no other sport has had to solve. Wooded courses being the biggest headache.

With the wonderful improvements in coverage we've seen from our youtube posters, I think we're getting closer every day.

 

[turbosteve]

I think you're missing my point. It doesn't matter if you show tap ins or not. By extending time, rounds last longer. You can't show a five hour round in three hours if you're showing it live. Watching it after the fact is what we have now, and it's obvious, by the online streaming efforts up to this point, that's the best we can do (in terms of TV).

If you want more people than those with personal interest to get excited and watch, you're going to have to work towards live coverage (with internet coverage, this is a requirement more than a luxury). With that comes a lot of headaches no other sport has had to solve. Wooded courses being the biggest headache.

With the wonderful improvements in coverage we've seen from our youtube posters, I think we're getting closer every day.

The coverage was pretty good when the European Open was broadcast on Finnish TV. Hasn't Mountain Biking had to figure out how to cover races in the woods?

 

[solomon.trenton]

Even pre-taped edited video requires multiple cameras if you are going to show action beyond one or two cards. Take the PGA Championships this weekend. CBS probably has 50-60 cameras all around that course covering the action. How many cameras do the best online content providers have to film their videos?

I recall the early days of the MSDGC (now the Vibram Open)...they were begging for not only volunteers to film action, but for cameras as well. I think they maxed out at something like a dozen cameras, enabling them to "cover" the top 4-5 cards for the DVD. I don't know that many events have been able to match that (including the VO itself in later years).

The Vibram has 20+ and sends people out with notebooks to mark down any cool shots or w/e (at least they did a few years ago)

 

[tbird888]

The coverage was pretty good when the European Open was broadcast on Finnish TV. Hasn't Mountain Biking had to figure out how to cover races in the woods?

I haven't seen any of the EO broadcast. Any videos out for perusal by chance?

That's a good point, but I don't think it's entirely apples to apples. Mountain biking has the luxury of being able to mount cameras on competitors' equipment, and they're following open lanes with no possibility of having to track a rider hitting a tree and kicking into dense woods. While I think the cameras do their best, being able to follow more than just the good shots is something we need.

 

[Dan Ensor]

If you want more people than those with personal interest to get excited and watch, you're going to have to work towards live coverage (with internet coverage, this is a requirement more than a luxury). With that comes a lot of headaches no other sport has had to solve. Wooded courses being the biggest headache.

With the wonderful improvements in coverage we've seen from our youtube posters, I think we're getting closer every day.

Bold is all I'm really responding to. I don't see why that's the case. I don't watch anything live except maybe disc golf. Being live is more of a requirement for people that do play and pay attention. People that don't play [I would think] don't know or care when an event was played. The problem with not having live coverage is that when you pay attention to the sport, you often find out the result before you see the footage.

I don't think I missed your point. "Live coverage is overrated, editted coverage is underrated" was my response to your point.

 

[JC17393]

Bold is all I'm really responding to. I don't see why that's the case. I don't watch anything live except maybe disc golf. Being live is more of a requirement for people that do play and pay attention. People that don't play [I would think] don't know or care when an event was played. The problem with not having live coverage is that when you pay attention to the sport, you often find out the result before you see the footage.

I don't think I missed your point. "Live coverage is overrated, editted coverage is underrated" was my response to your point.

I think the folly of your argument is that you seem to think folks who don't play or don't pay attention care to watch disc golf at all. The people who watch videos online, whether live or edited, are disc golf enthusiasts.

People that watch poker on TV probably play poker or have played poker in their lives. People that watch baseball on TV probably play or have played baseball in their lives. People that are going to watch disc golf on TV (live or not) either play or have played the game in their lives.

 

[tbird888]

I don't think I missed your point. "Live coverage is overrated, edited coverage is underrated" was my response to your point.

We have four of those chances this year to see how much visibility we get. I hope you're right.