USDGC 2023 - 25th edition

This I actually might watch. Im not in that place (anymore) where I feel the need to consume every and all dg content. And theres so much more out there these days anyway!
 
This I actually might watch. Im not in that place (anymore) where I feel the need to consume every and all dg content. And theres so much more out there these days anyway!
It was a lot of fun! In my mind i have a hard time putting Sexton in with that group. Surprisingly Climo and Schusterick still have some serious game.
 
One thing Holyn said in her interview highlights an area she needs to improve in her game, like many other players.

She didn't realize she was in the lead until she was on the 18th tee. That is when she learned this. Until then she was in the flow state, just throwing her plastic and nailing putts without a worry in the world.

She then proceeds to throw three bad shots in a row, before she cans the 27 footer on the 18th green. Good on her for putting everything that happened on hole 18 behind her and nailing the putt.

I hope she is able to work on playing in those situations when she has a lead, because I suspect she will be in the lead on final day many times in her career. If she had been able to stay in that flow state and make her shots, none of this would have happened and no one would have anything to say.
Interesting contrast to Isaac Robinson who is always keeping and checking scores.
 
Interesting contrast to Isaac Robinson who is always keeping and checking scores.

Yup. Kristin doesn't check scores mid round either. Next year this will change. Everyone on the card will need to keep score the way I understand it.

The most interesting thing I find about this entire discussion: Early on I gave my take and then said maybe some of the rules gurus could chime in.

Now there was a ton of discussion, and alot of people gave their opinions. Unless I missed it, no one on these boards who is with the PDGA rules committee gave their opinion, and I'm sure there is a reason. I guess what I am saying is that there where a lot of knowledgeable people posting, but most of the message got lost in the noise, as is likely to happen on a message board. And really what is said here doesn't much amount to a hill of beans. There is a process in place for event support to review situations like this, if the players or the TD wishes to recruit their help.
 
I'm not sure I would come anywhere near this debate if I was on the rules committee. They followed the rules as the committee wrote them, so what advantage would it be to add 'official' fuel to the fire?
 
Why would they want any debate at all? The rule is as they wrote it and it was enforced as the rules said to do. Stirring the pot would just make their position more difficult.

#OBConspiracy #RulesCommitteeBias


 
It was a lot of fun! In my mind i have a hard time putting Sexton in with that group. Surprisingly Climo and Schusterick still have some serious game.
Barry hasn't played all year due to a wrist injury. Some sort of tendon and bone break on his throwing wrist. Probably one of those cumulative trauma injuries.

He was playing 1030 golf well into his 50s, and I'm also pretty sure he's the only person 50+ in disc golf history to break 1030.
 
SMH. This is all nothing more than internet fodder. There are FOUR people responsible for making this call. There are specific rules that cover making this call. The spotter, the TD, Nate Heinold, tweeters nor anyone else get a vote. The rule is not broken, there was no violation. The call was made by the card, in accordance to the rules.
Yup, also nobody is taking into consideration that the card mates are all off to the side way back due to the nature of the teepad being off on the dock. Tough to see. I'm sure moving forward they'll have that spotter (or an extra one) much closer to that OB line, or just tighten that line up even more so (or just shift that part of the fairway) a couple more feet to the right
 
Doesn't matter where the spotter is if the players don't ask his input. This year he was maybe 100 feet away and looking straight down the line so in good position. IMO next year we will see a deputized official as spotter on that hole.
 
Doesn't matter where the spotter is if the players don't ask his input. This year he was maybe 100 feet away and looking straight down the line so in good position. IMO next year we will see a deputized official as spotter on that hole.
The replay had the disc only 6 or so inches from the OB line, you think he could see that from 100 feet away? Especially with how fast it happens.
 
The replay had the disc only 6 or so inches from the OB line, you think he could see that from 100 feet away? Especially with how fast it happens.
At least better than the players on the card, who were way further away and with a way worse angle. Maybe the spotter didn't see clearly, but I think he clearly should have been asked instead of only going on that her card mates thought it crossed, even though even the PDGA marshal who sat at the same spot said they couldn't see. If they had asked the spotter and and he said he didn't see, then they at least had done their best to determine if it crossed or not. Now I don't believe they did.

And once again, even if I don't believe they did all they could do to determine if it crossed or not, they still didn't break any rules.
 
But I think it does. You may certainly discuss, ad nauseam, any call. It is what makes this exclusively internet fodder, lol. Yet, the call becomes correct, the moment a decision is reached by the four people, exclusively in charge of making it. By all means....carry on. :)
"free from error; in accordance with fact or truth."

that is the first definition of "correct" that comes up in google. what definition of "correct" are you working off of?
 
Are we going to eventually be able to see the USDGC 2023 Distance Showcase? I assumed DGN or Jomez would have it available at some point.
 
"free from error; in accordance with fact or truth."

that is the first definition of "correct" that comes up in google. what definition of "correct" are you working off of?

"Correct, adjective : conforming to an approved or conventional standard"

That's the first definition of the adjective on Merriam-Webster.com. Furthermore, the Oxford English Dictionary cites the first printed usage of that definition to 1676, whereas the first printed usage of "in accordance with fact, truth, or reason; free from error; exact, true, accurate; right" dates to 1705. That means the definition "in accordance with fact, truth, or reason; free from error, etc." derivative and secondary to "conforming to an approved or conventional standard."

Last time I checked, the Official Rules of Disc Golf are an approved standard.
 
"Correct, adjective : conforming to an approved or conventional standard"

That's the first definition of the adjective on Merriam-Webster.com. Furthermore, the Oxford English Dictionary cites the first printed usage of that definition to 1676, whereas the first printed usage of "in accordance with fact, truth, or reason; free from error; exact, true, accurate; right" dates to 1705. That means the definition "in accordance with fact, truth, or reason; free from error, etc." derivative and secondary to "conforming to an approved or conventional standard."

Last time I checked, the Official Rules of Disc Golf are an approved standard.
OK.

Yet, the call becomes correct, the moment a decision is reached by the four people, exclusively in charge of making it. By all means....carry on. :)

if the players make the call in a way that doesn't conform to an approved standard, that would make the call incorrect right?
 
Did they follow the prescribed procedure? Yes. That makes the call correct, irrespective of whether or not the determination of whether or not the disc ever crossed back inbounds.
 
Did they follow the prescribed procedure? Yes. That makes the call correct, irrespective of whether or not the determination of whether or not the disc ever crossed back inbounds.
so by your definition, the liverpool VAR screw up of a couple weeks ago would be considered the correct call?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/03/sport/liverpool-tottenham-var-error-reaction-spt-intl/index.html (in case you don't know what I'm talking about)

we seem to just have a differing opinion of what makes a call "correct"
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top