United States Disc Golf Championship 2022

[txmxer]

In theory I tend to like the higher grass in the hazards as it will allow for less ground action which will produce fewer random outcomes. I also like the aesthetic juxtaposition of tightly mowed fairway with shaggier hazards/rough. In practice we will have to wait and see.

I'm with you on that unless it's a briar patch like Cat got in to for OB at Worlds. Tall grass = good. Razor wire like = bad.

 

[pmay5]

In theory I tend to like the higher grass in the hazards as it will allow for less ground action which will produce fewer random outcomes. I also like the aesthetic juxtaposition of tightly mowed fairway with shaggier hazards/rough. In practice we will have to wait and see.

Definitely agree with this.
Remember the complaints about every year on #9? Which side of the ropes is IN vs OUT? Too hard to follow on the video. The longer grass in the hazards/OB will make that obvious.

 

[pmay5]

I would imagine Winthrop U. and quite possibly the Corps of Engineers would have some things to say about that.

Thanks, didn't realize the COE may have a say in it, but I'm staying on my "Actual Island" soapbox!!

 

[Harold Duvall]

Sometimes the wish list of the course is in tension with the "event" wish list. We've had several island designs on the drawing boards, and each island idea had a significant monetary capital and relational capital associated with it. The growth this year necessitated the event wish list take priority over the course desire list. Most people will never see the two biggest capital projects for 2022 - a back road leading in and out of the property for players (and emergencies) and a fiber optic cable from the neighborhood to the center of the "village." These two projects exceed all of the course prep. The competitor experience and the internet experience should be better, but some course dreams had to wait.

 

[biscoe]

Looks like a 4 way playoff for the last 2 spots in Monday qualifying. Go Fish!

 

[Steve West]

Would you say the 50% hole 11 penalties will be due to inability by the thrower (rewarding the more skilled players) OR blind luck (rewarding random throwers)?

Well, there aren't really any lower skilled players involved, right?

The model shows virtually no difference in penalties across this whole field. (Though the highest rated players get more penalties from the farther Whammy patches and fewer from the nearer.)

Also, the model found no strategy that could significantly mitigate the penalties without hurting the score.

I guess that's blind luck.

I will take the under on that one.

That's certainly possible. They could, if they wanted to really avoid a penalty, simply toss a disc just in front of the tee.

If it's below 50%, I'll need to figure out a way to see whether the players decided to sacrifice their average scores in order to avoid penalties.

What I had my model do was maximize the effective length of the first throw. I figured any throw that got a penalty got there in two throws, so its effective length was half. Given this function as the measure of how good a throw was, there was only a slight improvement possible through strategy alone (vs. trying to drive closest to the target).

The best strategy the model found was basically to just throw as far as possible but a couple of degrees right of the target. Trying to throw shorter just resulted in landing farther from the target by more than the reduction in penalties was worth.

Anyway, I am rooting for you. Fewer penalties that cannot be avoided would be better.

(Also, I would get evidence that my model can be improved.)

I'm loath to bet against Steve Andrew designed the landing areas to be ample (even in the wind), and they seemed to play that way in testing. And yet the hole design puts a far greater premium on "too far" and "end-of-flight" compared with most par-4 holes. The results may meet or even exceed 50% penalties, and yet it seems like each player choice and result will be different than a mere coin flip. I am interested to see if the field can adapt throwing behavior to the situation.

The important thing is that we will actually see the results of an experiment, rather than discussing it forever.

 

[Shallows]

Looks like a 4 way playoff for the last 2 spots in Monday qualifying. Go Fish!

Ooof Raven Newsom on the last card of the day goes into 18 at -1, secured in his spot,, and takes a triple bogey, dropping him out of the playoff completely.

 

[Brychanus]

At the risk of sounding like an old man shouting "get off my lawn!", I definitely feel like a large number of newer fans have a lot to learn. It seems like a big part of it is they see and learn what's new and hot before they learn about the old school, grassroots, and traditional aspects (if they ever learn about those at all). It results in a lot of perfectionism and griping about minor things or things that are intentionally old school.

FWIW I am one of those newfangled players who appreciates what the modern era has to offer, but love learning about the old school, grassroots, and traditional aspects perhaps even more.

There's also this big culture war ongoing about paywalls, live vs post, and so on. I think USDGC falls on the wrong side of that for a significant number of players, including a lot of the new wave. Having been interested in the history, I can appreciate Winthrop for many reasons, including the modern mozzarella sticks.

If it stays there, part of me hopes that it continues to be gradually more and more "bizarre." It's only bizarre compared to the rest of the professionalizing tour. Its delight is that it has the scrappiness and deep connection to public play that is slowly diminishing across the rest of the tour.

I don't know that disc golf will ever grow to be large enough to fully shed those roots, but even if it nearly does, I kind of want Winthrop to be the last holdout. A beacon of a bygone era adapting to the skill level of the modern player and meanwhile chafing entitled people who think that it isn't good enough for them.

If it isn't good enough for you, then go show that you can win it.

What are everyone's picks?

 

[frasnow]

I've been a naysayer about Winthrop, but holy cow the new way of defining the fairway is visually appealing. Out of bounds clearly shows up in those drone shots. Even the hole 11 doesn't look half bad, despite the Dalmatian pattern.

 

[Flick Maniac]

To wit:



Stoked. 2 looks good. 3 looks sooo good. Never thought that tee and that pin mesh so well. Pin on 5 is awesome. That bubble right on prime landing spot on 12 is quite evil. 13 look really odd. Can the players see any of the flight of the disc on the drive? Drone makes it look very blind. Pin is just fine IMO (you have dozens of less generous wooded hole pin locations on tour).

We'll see how the holes play out, but visually, oh boy. I guess Maple Hill is a "better" bucket list course to play, but this is a course Ive spent tens of hours staring at, and one I will always want to experience first hand.

Cant wait!

Edit.

Rougher rough is awesome. Viewer friendly, and adds a notch of difficulty. Now its way easier to land IB and skip out, vs vice versa.

 

[Ryan P.]

The model shows virtually no difference in penalties across this whole field. (Though the highest rated players get more penalties from the farther Whammy patches and fewer from the nearer.)

Also, the model found no strategy that could significantly mitigate the penalties without hurting the score.

What I had my model do was maximize the effective length of the first throw. I figured any throw that got a penalty got there in two throws, so its effective length was half. Given this function as the measure of how good a throw was, there was only a slight improvement possible through strategy alone (vs. trying to drive closest to the target).

The best strategy the model found was basically to just throw as far as possible but a couple of degrees right of the target. Trying to throw shorter just resulted in landing farther from the target by more than the reduction in penalties was worth.

Do you have a GitHub with the model, or somewhere I can see it?

 

[biscoe]

Looks like a 4 way playoff for the last 2 spots in Monday qualifying. Go Fish!

I wonder who got in...

 

[Luckj]

I wonder who got in...

If I'm reading this right:
https://udisc.com/events/usdgc-tpwdgc-monday-qualifying-nDYj?division=USDGC&tab=scores

Spoiler

Ian Burchett, Joseph Anderson, Aaron Doyle, Alex Ziros, and Andrew Fish were the top 5 to continue to the next round. Notable players that missed include Raven Newsom, Silver Latt, Colten Montgomery, JohnE McCray, Zach Melton, and David Wiggins.

 

[Nick Pacific]

I do not visually focus on a specific link. The exaggerated visual focus distracts me from the feel of the disc. It can also make me try to extend the disc into the basket. The problem for me with this is that spin putts by their nature have a pull and the excessive extension only leaves the pull one place to go which is to the right. I still "aim small to miss small" but the aim is with the feel of the moving disc, not what I see.

.

To your point on aiming, or lack thereof. Did you know that many high level archers don't entirely rely on sights alone and also go by feel too?

 

[Steve West]

Do you have a GitHub with the model, or somewhere I can see it?

Hold on while I Google what a GitHub is...


Nope.


But, you can get the basic version here. ThrowModelEZ just shows where throws land on an open hole with everyone trying to get to the target.

What I can show is the spray pattern for the optimal strategy for 1000-rated players.

Spoiler

The white circles are the model's approximation of the actual Whammy-lands. The X is where the player is aiming. Shifting the aim point around moves the blob and changes its extent.

 

[Shallows]

If I'm reading this right:
https://udisc.com/events/usdgc-tpwdgc-monday-qualifying-nDYj?division=USDGC&tab=scores

Spoiler

Ian Burchett, Joseph Anderson, Aaron Doyle, Alex Ziros, and Andrew Fish were the top 5 to continue to the next round. Notable players that missed include Raven Newsom, Silver Latt, Colten Montgomery, JohnE McCray, Zach Melton, and David Wiggins.

Max Regitnig and Alex Ziros won the playoff. Fish was just listed in that position alphabetically.

 

[Harold Duvall]

Nick, I think that makes a lot of sense for archers to use a combination of visual and kinesthetic and haptic. I think most athletes do. I do when I'm playing. The aim of my comment was to highlight that a hyper visual focus on a specific spot or link detracts from the hyper focus that I want, namely the feel of the disc shooting out on line. I still use my eyes but they are in service to the feel. It's also important to know oneself. If there are a bunch of voices or different thoughts in one's head or if one is tying to "make" the future happen, then a keen visual focus on a link can serve to quiet the internal dialog. That's not how visual focus works for me and my hyper-focus, ADHD, but I can see how it could be helpful to others.

 

[Shallows]

Impromptu Live Coverage of the Monday Qualifying Playoff is on DGN. Starts at around the 49th minute.

 

[Nick Pacific]

Nick, I think that makes a lot of sense for archers to use a combination of visual and kinesthetic and haptic. I think most athletes do. I do when I'm playing. The aim of my comment was to highlight that a hyper visual focus on a specific spot or link detracts from the hyper focus that I want, namely the feel of the disc shooting out on line. I still use my eyes but they are in service to the feel. It's also important to know oneself. If there are a bunch of voices or different thoughts in one's head or if one is tying to "make" the future happen, then a keen visual focus on a link can serve to quiet the internal dialog. That's not how visual focus works for me and my hyper-focus, ADHD, but I can see how it could be helpful to others.

Thanks for the reply. I'm really curious about your thoughts on putting being "performing". I think you're definitely onto something there. I have had some ideas in my head recently about putting being almost like a "performance art", like a dance, and less like a robotic, static movement. I think in an effort to make everything repeatable, we often try and have the exact same movements and lose that "feel" that you're talking about.

 

[ChrisWoj]

Thanks for the reply. I'm really curious about your thoughts on putting being "performing". I think you're definitely onto something there. I have had some ideas in my head recently about putting being almost like a "performance art", like a dance, and less like a robotic, static movement. I think in an effort to make everything repeatable, we often try and have the exact same movements and lose that "feel" that you're talking about.

If you want a more general perspective the name to look for is Daniel Kahneman. "Thinking Fast, and Slow" is the best piece. Really engaging book, great read, focuses on exactly what you're asking about.