Would you like to see the PDGA limit number of disc carried in tournaments?

[tallpaul]

Slow motion putting cameras would be the biggest viewing boon. You know, so today's "drill it" style putting looks all slow and spinny; like a golf ball seeking the cup...

 

[Cgkdisc]

Slow motion putting cameras would be the biggest viewing boon. You know, so today's "drill it" style putting looks all slow and spinny; like a golf ball seeking the cup...

I've suggested that before, but upon reflection, they would still mostly be straight shots versus the contour putting required in ball golf where you're trying to guess if it will curve enough or too much.

 

[StevenSeagal]

This is a classic solution in search of a problem situation. Golf ≠disc golf.

 

[BrotherDave]

No, I think it is more fun for people to try to find the right balance of discs to throw. Having a disc for every shot is part of being a better player, but there are diminishing returns with that, and psychological factors, so let the player sort out what works best for them.

Having a Pro level 1-5 disc challenge would be fun to see as well. Watching pros make a Putter/Mid fly 400 feet, and take crazy lines is super fun. Also fun to guess what one disc would a Pro use?

MJ would probably use a Comet
Jonathan Baldwin and Shata Criss would use an Aftershock (only know this because they play some 1 disc rounds locally at Dela Bag Tags)
Paul McBeth would use ??? Probably some form of Aviar.
Simon L. would use a P2?
Ricky would use a ... Bard?

In a similar vein, here's Paul playing with a handful of 90's discs:

TDs can do it now under X-tier options. Depending on the restrictions, the rounds would likely still be rated.

That's what I was wondering. They should do this for one of those boring, open courses in Arizona they start the season with.

 

[StevenSeagal]

A rule like this would give an unfair advantage to players who exclusively throw one way. A lot of people who have put in the work to develop a different throwing style have discs specific for that form and no matter how you slice it such a rule would naturally impede their ability to utilize those skills. I don't see an advantage to the players or the sport by limiting the versatility of the game.

 

[DirtyMeathook]

A rule like this would give an unfair advantage to players who exclusively throw one way. A lot of people who have put in the work to develop a different throwing style have discs specific for that form and no matter how you slice it such a rule would naturally impede their ability to utilize those skills. I don't see an advantage to the players or the sport by limiting the versatility of the game.

That doesn't make any sense. Restricting amount of discs gives an advantage to people who throw only 1 way? Quite the opposite is true. If you can only use 1 disc, the guy who can only throw flat backhand shots will be limited to 1 shot shape. The guy who has both FH and BH, and is proficient at anny/hyzer shots, will be able to shape the disc in a variety of ways.

 

[scarpfish]

Combine courses with lots of water hazards, and a shotgun start event, and you have a textbook reason why a disc limit should never come to be. Groups who get the high risk of disc loss holes early in their round shouldn't potentially be deprived of tools that people getting the water holes late had access to prior.

 

[DirtyMeathook]

Without a doubt the, better you are at disc golf, the less disc restrictions would affect you.

 

[zenbot]

According to the internet, which is ALWAYS true, the club limit in golf was created to give caddies a break and not for players. Clubs are lighter now so there's probably not a reason to enforce it but here we are.

 

[DG_Before_Breakfast]

In a similar vein, here's Paul playing with a handful of 90's discs:




That's what I was wondering. They should do this for one of those boring, open courses in Arizona they start the season with.

Ya, love that one, and this one, althoug I forget if they used discs from their Era or just clothes and personality:

 

[Old Dog]

I agree with that.

But I also think a compelling argument can be made for limiting the number of discs.



That's the way I'd argue it.

Consider a player with an infinite number of discs, each of which can be thrown almost exactly the same way and result in the infinite number of flights.

Does that disc golfer require more skill in the skills that matter over the golfer limited to (I'm just making an example) five discs?

That first guy certainly has more skill at picking the right disc, but does he have more "throwing" skill? I'd argue he does not.

Some think 14 clubs in golf is too many, but even at 14 golfers have to choose whether they want a 5-wood, a hybrid, or a fourth wedge in the bag.

Yes, disc golfers lose discs more than golfers lose clubs… but if you're afraid of losing one, then that will play into the strategy of the hole a little bit.

I would support a limit of 15-20 discs. I'm sure some of that is because of my much deeper background in golf, but also because I like the strategic elements of thinking about a course, planning the discs you want to carry, and then making the selection you have work for you rather than just pulling disc #47 out of the bag to make the shot.

YES, exactly! I'm glad somebody gets where I'm coming from. :hfive:

 

[ilmcgee]

Also small other rant, every time one of these threads about some rule change comes up it seems to be partly about making it more interesting to watch. Who gives a rat's ass? Shouldn't it be about making the game better to play? I am sure there are more people playing then watching disc golf.

Although sometimes I come on this forum and wonder if that is true...

Lulz

I am guilty of this sometimes. Can't always get out for a round, but it is easy to log on here or watch vids on Youtube.

 

[ilmcgee]

Oh, and as with most things, the less rules the better. That said, and someone else said it to, you can bring it, if you can carry it.

 

[DanJon]

Combine courses with lots of water hazards, and a shotgun start event, and you have a textbook reason why a disc limit should never come to be. Groups who get the high risk of disc loss holes early in their round shouldn't potentially be deprived of tools that people getting the water holes late had access to prior.

This is an excellent point and one that I think kind of shuts down the entire argument.

 

[Old Dog]

:hfive:

Biggest problem would be enforcement. A player could easily "hide" a disc in some of these huge bags of they reallllllllly wanted to plus who the hell is going to take the time to check? It would be another police yourself spirit of the game rule which really doesnt matter 1 way or the other.

So who's checking bags now to make sure all disc are PDGA approved or that approved disc have not been modified in some way? Of course it would have to be a police yourself, spirit of the game rule? Is that a problem for you?

 

[AndyJB]

Keep disc golf weird!

 

[StevenSeagal]

That doesn't make any sense. Restricting amount of discs gives an advantage to people who throw only 1 way? Quite the opposite is true. If you can only use 1 disc, the guy who can only throw flat backhand shots will be limited to 1 shot shape. The guy who has both FH and BH, and is proficient at anny/hyzer shots, will be able to shape the disc in a variety of ways.

I can't for the life of me understand why people ask questions back to someone instead of actually arguing why the original answer doesn't answer the question in the first place. Yes it benefits people who only throw one way BECAUSE I and most people have different discs for the same line with different throwing styles. As an example the disc I choose for a 350 ft back hand rifle shot is not the same disc I would use for a 350 ft forehand rifle shot.

Like I said before this is a solution in search of a problem. This rule would penalize a player because mechanically different throwing styles NATURALLY result in different arm speeds and disc to spin ratios, which calls for different discs.

Generally speaking all my sidearm discs are more stable than my backhand equivalent line shaping wise. They're also flatter on the flight plate, have less glide and are in some cases a touch faster. I can relatively easily turn over a disc throwing forehand that I wouldn't have the same amount of issue with backhand. Nothing I'm saying is even remotely controversial. That's just how disc golf is. The same could be said for throwing tomahawks or thumbers.

As a back of the envelope calculation you could easily prove that any given player that throws BH and FH that was forced to use only his BH discs for FH would as a result have a more understable bag. Therefor for each FH equivalent stability disc they want to bag they have to remove or exclude one bh or other throwing style disc they normally would bag.

 

[DirtyMeathook]

I can't for the life of me understand why people ask questions back to someone instead of actually arguing why the original answer doesn't answer the question in the first place. Yes it benefits people who only throw one way BECAUSE I and most people have different discs for the same line with different throwing styles. As an example the disc I choose for a 350 ft back hand rifle shot is not the same disc I would use for a 350 ft forehand rifle shot.

Like I said before this is a solution in search of a problem. This rule would penalize a player because mechanically different throwing styles NATURALLY result in different arm speeds and disc to spin ratios, which calls for different discs.

Generally speaking all my sidearm discs are more stable than my backhand equivalent line shaping wise. They're also flatter on the flight plate, have less glide and are in some cases a touch faster. I can relatively easily turn over a disc throwing forehand that I wouldn't have the same amount of issue with backhand. Nothing I'm saying is even remotely controversial. That's just how disc golf is. The same could be said for throwing tomahawks or thumbers.

As a back of the envelope calculation you could easily prove that any given player that throws BH and FH that was forced to use only his BH discs for FH would as a result have a more understable bag. Therefor for each FH equivalent stability disc they want to bag they have to remove or exclude one bh or other throwing style disc they normally would bag.

Not even sure what your first paragraph is trying to convey, it is so convoluted. Maybe you missed my argument because it wasn't 4 paragraphs of nonsense . A person that can throw different styles will have more shots at their disposal with a single disc than those who throw one way. This is not very difficult to comprehend.

If you need a certain disc to throw a particular shot, you're not versatile, you're just relying on the varying stability of your plastic. So, for a guy like you, that needs OS plastic to overcome your poor FH form, it would be a disadvantage, but we are talking about how GOOD players with a wide array of shots would adapt to limited disc selections. Good luck finding even a single person that would argue a versatile thrower would be MORE impeded by only being able to use a couple discs, than a guy who throws one way, as it's about as backwards as it gets.

 

[Keller]

I voted yes, just in case it comes to pass I can feel partly responsible for pissing off Feldberg!

In reality, I don't think there should be a limit, if someone wants to lug them around, knock yourself out.

 

[DanJon]

So according to your logic, Ricky Wysocki isn't a versatile player?

Edit: sorry, question directed to DirtyMeathook