United States Disc Golf Championship 2022

[Cgkdisc]

Note that the high-level goals for this event are to generate viewership, directly and indirectly promoting Innova's brand and partnerships (Throw Pink, EDGE, Collegiates) and generate social media discussion regarding various facets of the event, the annual course tweaks in particular. Good or bad, various USDGC course tweaks have made their way into temporary and permanent course designs over the years, several which were roundly criticized before viewers got to see them in action.

 

[TheOtherBill]

Someone posted the view from the actual fairway to 13's basket. Looks like Jerm went around back for his pic -

 

[seedlings]

I'm one of the newer players, and I do need help understanding the prestige of long-time Winthrop who's holes and layouts change every year now. I would certainly understand if the holes were the classic, traditional holes. Changing the holes and layouts makes it seem like the people who run the sport are the ones complaining, not the new players.

=BUT= I'm in for traditional or new or insane, or whatever, as long as there is risk-reward for score separation. :thmbup:

 

[davetherocketguy]

Seriously?

 

[TheOtherBill]

Seriously?

They can do just about anything to this course and it seriously would be an improvement over all the ridiculous things that have been tried and failed.

Didn't the players used to refer one hole as "the clown's mouth" in the 1990s/early 2000s? Even Billy Crump would use the term during commentary.

For you newer players, the 'iconic' 888 used to be a tee shot out over the crowd standing in the parking lot and hoping it didn't hit a tree on the way back in bounds to a narrow, sloped landing strip that ran between the curb and the walking path. That 'fairway' area has been OB for many years now IIRC. From that lucky tee shot, a player would play an anny dump putter about 100 feet to the opening for a shot across to the parking lot island.
It was gimmicky as hell, but somehow was famous for being this great design. I need to find an old map, it would have pros storming Innova HQ if they did that today.

Or what about the year the best tee shot was off the back of the baseball scoreboard and hope you didn't get snookered behind a pole?
Then again, we couldn't actuall see the shots - just dots moving on a hole graphic. Ahh the crappy ol days!

 

[Rastnav]

I don't have a long time history of watching the sport, but it seems to me that complaints about Winthrop aren't really coming from or limited to newer fans of the sport. There is a contingent of disc golfers across the spectrum that view disc golf as something that should, at its core, sit harmoniously on top of the natural scenery. A disc golf course should be in the woods and feel like it's a walk in the woods. Or it should feel like a walk in a wooded park. Or a walk around a lake. I think this plenty prevalent in the experienced crowd.

In this view, things like OB/hazard lines that do not follow some natural topological feature are regarded as anathema to the fundamental aesthetic. (Also, anyone who use phrases like "anathema to the fundamental aesthetic" might be a little too high-falutin' for the sport.) If someone suggested that you could have a ball golf course where you just painted a blue "lake" on top of some grass, no one would take the suggestion seriously for a top level course at all, no matter how "appropriately difficult" it made the course. (Not trying to compare the sports, just pointing out the aesthetic expectation.)

Now, the history of the sport is certainly about throwing frisbees around college campuses and parks at random objects and making something interesting out of what you have. Winthrop is part of the history, and that shouldn't be forgotten. Certainly new fans are more likely to not understand the importance of its history. But, sometimes historical courses don't necessarily stay relevant and that shouldn't be discounted either.

 

[Shadrach3]

I like the new hole 3, but I'm also sad to see old 3 and 4 go. I thought both of them were iconic and appropriately difficult.

 

[TheOtherBill]

Now, the history of the sport is certainly about throwing frisbees around college campuses and parks at random objects and making something interesting out of what you have. Winthrop is part of the history, and that shouldn't be forgotten. Certainly new fans are more likely to not understand the importance of its history. But, sometimes historical courses don't necessarily stay relevant and that shouldn't be discounted either.

This is an excellent point and well put too.

 

[NOStheBOSS]

I'm one of the newer players, and I do need help understanding the prestige of long-time Winthrop who's holes and layouts change every year now. I would certainly understand if the holes were the classic, traditional holes. Changing the holes and layouts makes it seem like the people who run the sport are the ones complaining, not the new players.

=BUT= I'm in for traditional or new or insane, or whatever, as long as there is risk-reward for score separation. :thmbup:

The ropes have always added "prestige" because it made the boring, open course infinitely harder. Also, most courses (even today) just use painted lines in the grass. Having visible ropes that take ungodly amounts of time and resources to set up added some legitimacy.

This tournament had $10k+ payouts WAYYYY before any other tournament. Worlds still paid $5k to the winner as recently as 2014 (and $6k in 2015). These days, the lowest rung on the DGPT ladder pays $8-9k and Worlds and DGPT Champ pay $20-30k.

This tournament is known for its historic battles captured on film long before Marty McFlySoHigh, Jomez, CCDG, GK, Gatekeeper, etc. 2003 featured the "One Heroic Battle," a playoff between Kenny and Barry, which I believe lasted 7+ holes and finished at dusk. 2009 featured a crazy back and forth between Nikko Locastro and Dave Feldberg, with 2 stroke swings on multiple holes due to OB strokes. Nikko came out on top, only to have basically the same thing happen to him in 2010 with Will Schusterick winning his first of 4 majors. All of these moments were captured either by post-produced DVD coverage or live internet streams via Disc Golf Planet. (Which is always funny to think about, if people have complaints about DGN as it operates today, just imagine watching 240p shaky camera footage with Crazy John Brooks and Dave Greenwell trying to fill time as best they could, with wayyyyy worse cell tower technology and MAYBE 2 cameras, if not just 1)

I joined this site in Oct 2009 just to talk about this tournament. I was a big Avery Jenkins fan (LOL) and had just started playing circa 2008 so this was like crack for me.

Thanks for joining my TED talk on my extremely limited historian knowledge of this event and what makes it prestigious.

 

[biscoe]

While USDGC is and has always been a fantastic event the course has never been the reason. My personal feeling is that what is quite possibly the premiere event in the sport is an inappropriate venue for design/rules experimentation but that horse left the barn 20+ years ago.

 

[Ryan P.]

Lots of greens require proper placement to have a look. 18 at MVP, you don't get to go 30' long or else you are OB and you get an extra stroke.

Rather than using OB to require placement they are using trees.

I agree that OB and trees are two different ways to require approach shot placement. However, they provide differences on subsequent shots.

The difference between requiring placement with OB vs. trees is that OB forces +1 stroke. Trees allow the player to try and throw the hard shot if they want to. Taking your medicine and laying up has the same result as the OB stroke. Trying to make the tough shot through the trees can result in saving the stroke, but it can also result in flying past the basket and taking even more strokes.

What I'm saying is that I like the trees much more than OB because it requires more strategy, is more enjoyable to play, and is more enjoyable to watch.

The benefit of OB is that it maintains the a good pace of play. It takes 0.001 seconds to say "I went OB so +1 stroke". It takes a minute or two to walk up to a putt, go through your routine, and throw throw the additional shot (or 4 minutes if you're some people, or 20 seconds if you're McBeth, go to 28:25 in the clip: )

 

[BrotherDave]

I agree that OB and trees are two different ways to require approach shot placement. However, they provide differences on subsequent shots.

The difference between requiring placement with OB vs. trees is that OB forces +1 stroke. Trees allow the player to try and throw the hard shot if they want to. Taking your medicine and laying up has the same result as the OB stroke. Trying to make the tough shot through the trees can result in saving the stroke, but it can also result in flying past the basket and taking even more strokes.

What I'm saying is that I like the trees much more than OB because it requires more strategy, is more enjoyable to play, and is more enjoyable to watch.

The benefit of OB is that it maintains the a good pace of play. It takes 0.001 seconds to say "I went OB so +1 stroke". It takes a minute or two to walk up to a putt, go through your routine, and throw throw the additional shot (or 4 minutes if you're some people, or 20 seconds if you're McBeth, go to 28:25 in the clip: )

Yeah it all boils down to testing a player's skill to me. A green where a poor approach leads to an uncomfortable/ unconventional putt is great. A green where a poor approach leads to a pitch out is not.

If you designed a fairway where large(ly unavoidable) sections of the fairway are so blocked off that a pitch out is the only real play to make, we generally see this as bad design. For some reason we don't apply this logic to greens as much.

 

[Rastnav]

Yeah it all boils down to testing a player's skill to me. A green where a poor approach leads to an uncomfortable/ unconventional putt is great. A green where a poor approach leads to a pitch out is not.

If you designed a fairway where large(ly unavoidable) sections of the fairway are so blocked off that a pitch out is the only real play to make, we generally see this as bad design. For some reason we don't apply this logic to greens as much.

The green and the circle are not the same thing. There are plenty of holes where a putt is nearly impossible or extremely difficult from C1 or C2 if you place your approach shot in the wrong place. A lake/other OB, a dense cedar tree with limbs all the way to ground, a redwood tree, etc. we see all of these things 15 feet from some baskets.

What you don't typically see are obstacles directly at the basket, even if the angle of the area eliminated is roughly the same. I don't know that "roughly the same" means that they actually play the same, but I also have to think that some of the effect is simply psychological.

 

[Nale72]

I don't have a problem with objects (trees, OB, hazards etc.) making putts difficult inside the circles so that you have to avoid a certain part of the green to have a good line to the basket. But I don't think there should be any obstacle inside the bulls eye. If you park the hole, inside the bulls eye, I believe you should have an easy tap-in.

 

[Shallows]

Yeah honestly not sure why I even put the "probably". As far as events it's 100% the historical event of the sport. Worlds has a rich history but due to the changing location (I'm guessing that's what it is?) it just never had quite the same same prestige back in the 2000's.

When I started playing in 2007 I think it was pretty much the golden age of the USDGC. Kenny signed everything 12x, 5x and Barry signed everything 2x, 3x. Those USDGC titles meant every bit as much as their worlds at that time.

It's normal for people to be critical of the course for a major if it's not absolute state-of-the-art, but the historical nature of the event shouldn't be completely disregarded as a rationale for why certain things work and/or are a good choice. The history of the event is 100% a good enough justification to continue using the Winthrop location and trying to innovate on it. Considering a new venue would be fine, but to say that the course is terrible or the event is garbage because they try to spruce up the venue artificially feels wrong and very short sighted. Every year they try something new and some sticks and some doesn't.

Obviously it's all just a matter of opinion.

If Paul had won 6x USDGC and only 3 Worlds I think his marketing power would have kept USDGC more prestigious than worlds.

 

[biscoe]

If Paul had won 6x USDGC and only 3 Worlds I think his marketing power would have kept USDGC more prestigious than worlds.

If Paul had won 6 USDGC and only 3 Worlds his marketing power would be a fraction of what it is. Winning Worlds is and always has been the most marketable thing in dg by a mile.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

If Paul had won 6 USDGC and only 3 Worlds his marketing power would be a fraction of what it is. Winning Worlds is and always has been the most marketable thing in dg by a mile.

Valid point. What I'll say about his 6th World's is
that IMO, at this point, it doesn't really make him any more marketable than he already was. But I do think it extends the time frame of his already huge marketability. It keeps him relevant in the "here and now."

 

[Rastnav]

Valid point. What I'll say about his 6th World's is
that IMO, at this point, it doesn't really make him any more marketable than he already was. But I do think it extends the time frame of his already huge marketability. It keeps him relevant in the "here and now."

Perversely, PP probably loses some currency if she wins #6 (in many scenarios.) So long as she is a legitimate possibilty to win #6 (even if not one of the favorites), topping the other 5Xs, it's going to be an easy focal point. Once (if) she wins it, she'll only be as relevant if she is in the top tier of players.

 

[Harold Duvall]

The obstacles very close to the basket are an attempt to elevate disc golf putting beyond mere execution. While the importance of execution can never be diminished, disc golf putting is generally not as creative as golf's especially in speed sensitivity. The Championship team strives for the event to be more than execution; it's about performing under pressure in front of gallery with an opportunity to be both athlete and artist. There is greater creativity with the combinations of the disc's speed and pitch and roll when the obstacles are close-in than simply outside the bullseye. Andrew has tried to place the targets on 13, 15, and 16 so there are no stymies (which for us means the putts can be made with 45 degrees of angle or less under wind conditions with a stagger or straddle stance.)

 

[BogeyNoMore]

The obstacles very close to the basket are an attempt to elevate disc golf putting beyond mere execution. While the importance of execution can never be diminished, disc golf putting is generally not as creative as golf's especially in speed sensitivity. The Championship team strives for the event to be more than execution; it's about performing under pressure in front of gallery with an opportunity to be both athlete and artist. There is greater creativity with the combinations of the disc's speed and pitch and roll when the obstacles are close-in than simply outside the bullseye. Andrew has tried to place the targets on 13, 15, and 16 so there are no stymies (which for us means the putts can be made with 45 degrees of angle or less under wind conditions with a stagger or straddle stance.)

One thing golf has that I don't think disc golf can ever duplicate, is how slope and "grain" affect the path of the ball after the putt.