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

[iacas]

I'll be off watching Eagle take a 3 on an 850' hole using a full bag of discs

Well, three discs at most…

 

[93EXCivic]

I disagree. I think the rules and sport would be better with a 10 to 15 disc limit. Or maybe even say it's 10 to 20 but the TD can set the number - courses with more water could choose to set it at 16 or 18. Open courses could say 10.

Why would it be better? I don't get how limiting the number of discs improves the quality of the sport at a grassroots level. Cause honestly I don't give a damn about the pros.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

This is just another solution in search of a problem, and another attempt to homogenize everything and mimic ball golf in every way to get some faux respect from an outside element that, outside the DGCR inferiority complex crowd's minds, largely doesn't exist.

:clap:

And as Scarp and others have pointed out; chance of disc loss >>> than chance club loss.
Someone mentioned possibility of TD's implementing a limit for the odd tourney here and there.... I can see that as a fun thing. But the PDGA implementing a rule wouldn't improve the game in any way shape or form, and has the potential to harm more players than it could possibly help.

I say allow for different skill sets; being able to use a few molds and adjusting shots to cover situations is one skill set, and having all sorts of discs to cover those same situations with somewhat similar shots is a bit of a different skill set. How to handle a given situation should be entirely up to the player.

 

[GripLock Jake]

I doubt manufacturers would like a limit being set

This is the biggest motivator to not limit discs.

But as far as the PGA limiting golf clubs that's great but why do we always compare our sport back to the PGA. Granted, there are quite a few similarities but at its core our sport was not founded like ball golf. It would be the same as trying to make the scores lower at big events. Some people would rather see scores like ball golf where you're -12 after 4 rounds. That's great an all for ball golf but I don't think that's what our sport is all about. We should embrace the differences and build our sport from where it is, not try to copycat PGA rules.

definitely a valid question though, but my answer in short, is no.

 

[93EXCivic]

It seems to me the argument for disc limit is that using more discs requires less skill (which I don't agree with as you still have to know the discs well enough to know how they will fly and when to use them). My biggest problem with argument though is that it seems to be at its base saying that the most skilled players don't win with the currents system because have more discs means that less skilled players can somehow win. I completely disagree with that thought. All I can see a disc limit rule doing is harming disc makers, backpack and cart makers and disc golf retailers without any benefits to the regular tournament player.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

 

[zenbot]

I was looking into the PDGA rules about balls (because discs are really a hybrid of club and ball in the sense of how the game is played.) I didn't think there would be a limit to how many you can carry but there are rules about switching the type of ball mid-round and mid-hole.

 

[armiller]

I said no, although I think it's reasonable. The PGA's limitation on clubs is fundamentally different, in my opinion, since a golfer cannot be expected to lose a club in the course of normal game play. Disc golf is different -- placing a limit on number of discs would be similar to limiting the number of balls as well as the number of clubs.

 

[BrotherDave]

I was looking into the PDGA rules about balls (because discs are really a hybrid of club and ball in the sense of how the game is played.) I didn't think there would be a limit to how many you can carry but there are rules about switching the type of ball mid-round and mid-hole.

Yeah I thought about that for a fun tourney. You can only play with one disc until you hole out and can choose a different one then. The courses around me, it would probably just be a bunch of guys throwing putters a lot though so not really too compelling.

 

[gdub58]

It seems to me the argument for disc limit is that using more discs requires less skill (which I don't agree with as you still have to know the discs well enough to know how they will fly and when to use them). My biggest problem with argument though is that it seems to be at its base saying that the most skilled players don't win with the currents system because have more discs means that less skilled players can somehow win. I completely disagree with that thought. All I can see a disc limit rule doing is harming disc makers, backpack and cart makers and disc golf retailers without any benefits to the regular tournament player. k

You've taken the argument much too far.

I think we can agree that any player will score better if they have all of their discs to choose from instead of having only a few of them. If a limit of 15-20 was imposed, I doubt there would be a difference in a player's score over the course of a single round.

Some of the discs in most players' bags are for specific situations that may or may not come up in a particular round, and even then the need is largely psychological. I mean, if you carry more than 15 discs, in how many rounds do you end up using every disc at least once? Not often I'll bet.

The starter pack challenge illustrated that the most skilled players will score better than any of us with a couple of basic discs, but they won't score as well as they would if they could add even three or four of their go-to discs to that starter bag.

I also think there is some validity to the notion that using more discs requires less skill. Really good players can do more with less, while the rest of us rely on different disc characteristics to do some of the work for us...

 

[93EXCivic]

You've taken the argument much too far.

I think we can agree that any player will score better if they have all of their discs to choose from instead of having only a few of them. If a limit of 15-20 was imposed, I doubt there would be a difference in a player's score over the course of a single round.

Some of the discs in most players' bags are for specific situations that may or may not come up in a particular round, and even then the need is largely psychological. I mean, if you carry more than 15 discs, in how many rounds do you end up using every disc at least once? Not often I'll bet.

So why make the rule? If as you say having more discs isn't helping less skilled players win over more skilled players and having a limit on the number of discs won't really effect the score, why add a rule that will have no effect? How does that improve the sport?

 

[cheese dog]

When I see folks carrying 25 disc at simple course I shake my head, When i see folks playing a two day tourney with 8 disc I shake my head. When I see those damn carts I kick them over or send them down the hill. The only reason there should be a limit is to keep it from getting out of hand, Remember that bag Rico use to have? that should be the limit.

 

[DanJon]

According to what who's logic? Ricky throws anything in his bag both backhand and forehand. He could crush a 3 disc round.

This guy said that limiting how many discs you can carry would be a bigger disadvantage for someone who can only throw one shot. I said that a guy who can throw a variety of shots would be LESS impeded by being limited to say 1 disc. Are you disagreeing with that?

If you need a certain disc to throw a particular shot, you are not versatile.

Your words.

I'm pretty sure everytime Ricky throws a FH it's either a Felon or a Harp.

 

[StevenSeagal]

Thank you for providing some common sense.

McBeth throws the the same Destroyers for FH and BH drives. If he needs to hit an overstable BH line, he throws the Monster. If he needs to hit an overstable FH line, he throws the Monster.

If he was forced to use one disc, he could throw a T3 every shot and get the job done. Joe Blow could not.

Nah bro you're simplifying the hell out of this. Mcbeth bags seven destroyers of varying levels of wear and stability. That fact alone destroys your argument about carrying less discs, pun intended. He also tends to forehand with his most understable destroyers, and there is an gigantic difference between what he does with a monster throwing backhand verse forehand.

 

[DanJon]

There is skill involved in both aspects.

Look at new players who cant throw and they have 1 disc that pretty much has 1 flight regardless of speed/stability. Goes out a little and fades lol.

You have to learn how to throw and understand discs well before having XYZ molds becomes even more valuable to a player. It is not a matter of leaning on a disc as a form crutch but getting a very unique line from the XYZ mold which is not possible from other plastic versions or wts etc. Im debating high level disc golf player bags who use stabilitu differences to score well. They can throw any damn shot of course that isnt the question having only 1 disc would limit the amount of shots those players can shape...

I mean mcbeth bags a goofy nova! You really think pros dont use unique molds bc it makes them better and enhances their skills? Crazy talk.

Thank you, and Novas are goofy, I still bag one though.

This whole discussion makes me think of a chef in their kitchen. Why does that chef need so many different kinds of knives? Aren't they relying too heavily on the equipment? I mean a butter knife should do the trick for everything if they were truly skilled.

 

[iacas]

Why would it be better? I don't get how limiting the number of discs improves the quality of the sport at a grassroots level. Cause honestly I don't give a damn about the pros.

As I've said a few times now, IMO fewer discs reward and require more skill. Rather than learning one or two throws and then just making the same throw with a bunch of discs, you have to learn a bunch of throws and make your discs do what you want instead of just choosing disc #29.

I'm not a fan of bifurcating rules, either.

And as Scarp and others have pointed out; chance of disc loss >>> than chance club loss.

The only people who seem to keep making this comparison like this are those against the idea. I have not said they're equivalent. You're arguing against a straw man.

But the PDGA implementing a rule wouldn't improve the game in any way shape or form, and has the potential to harm more players than it could possibly help.

I disagree.

I say allow for different skill sets

I'm not a fan of bifurcation.

This is the biggest motivator to not limit discs.

I agree it probably won't happen because the disc manufacturers would actively fight it.

But as far as the PGA limiting golf clubs that's great but why do we always compare our sport back to the PGA.

I'm not.

I was looking into the PDGA rules about balls (because discs are really a hybrid of club and ball in the sense of how the game is played.) I didn't think there would be a limit to how many you can carry but there are rules about switching the type of ball mid-round and mid-hole.

The PGA, nor the PGA Tour, make the rules for golf. That's the USGA and the R&A. And again, the only people that seem to want to compare the two are those who want to vote "no."

If golf didn't exist I'd support the idea of limiting discs because of the reason(s) stated.

I said no, although I think it's reasonable. The PGA's limitation on clubs is fundamentally different, in my opinion, since a golfer cannot be expected to lose a club in the course of normal game play. Disc golf is different -- placing a limit on number of discs would be similar to limiting the number of balls as well as the number of clubs.

:|

Let's all just stop talking about golf at all.

My position and arguments for it remain exactly the same. They have nothing to do with what golf does or doesn't do, or what piece of equipment relates to what other piece of equipment.

 

[iacas]

I think we can agree that any player will score better if they have all of their discs to choose from instead of having only a few of them. If a limit of 15-20 was imposed, I doubt there would be a difference in a player's score over the course of a single round.

Over one round, yeah. Over a few, you'd start to see more separation between the more skilled players and the less skilled.

Some of the discs in most players' bags are for specific situations that may or may not come up in a particular round, and even then the need is largely psychological. I mean, if you carry more than 15 discs, in how many rounds do you end up using every disc at least once? Not often I'll bet.

Right.

I'm making this up, but suppose there's a particular roller shot or something that you almost never need to do, but when you do, you use disc #28 in your bag to do it. You have this shot one out of every five to ten rounds.

I think if you're limited and thus choose not to take that disc, and then you face the shot that it requires, asking you to make another disc do your bidding is a display of more skill than just taking out disc #28 and making the same old roller throw you always make and letting the disc do the work.

That phrase illustrates what I mean: "letting the disc do the work." With too many discs, the balance shifts too much toward just having the right disc and shifts away from the player's own skill level.

The starter pack challenge illustrated that the most skilled players will score better than any of us with a couple of basic discs, but they won't score as well as they would if they could add even three or four of their go-to discs to that starter bag.

Indeed. An extreme example, of course.

It's about increasing the separation between players, and increasing the role of "skill" over "has a variety of discs."

I also think there is some validity to the notion that using more discs requires less skill. Really good players can do more with less, while the rest of us rely on different disc characteristics to do some of the work for us...

You're missing the point… they can do even MORE with MORE.

Us? We too can do less with less, and more with more, but at the same disc count we'll always be able to do less than a pro.

So why make the rule? If as you say having more discs isn't helping less skilled players win over more skilled players and having a limit on the number of discs won't really effect the score, why add a rule that will have no effect? How does that improve the sport?

He didn't say that over the long haul it wouldn't lead to separating players more by skill level.

Two players who are almost equal level have a shot in a round where they don't have the disc they would normally need to pull off the rare shot. The better player finds a way to make one of his 12 discs work… the slightly worse player pitches out. The slightly better player wins by a stroke, where before they'd tie.

This whole discussion makes me think of a chef in their kitchen. Why does that chef need so many different kinds of knives? Aren't they relying too heavily on the equipment? I mean a butter knife should do the trick for everything if they were truly skilled.

That's not a good analogy.

Besides, most chef's knive sets come with six to ten knives, not 30.

 

[93EXCivic]

As I've said a few times now, IMO fewer discs reward and require more skill. Rather than learning one or two throws and then just making the same throw with a bunch of discs, you have to learn a bunch of throws and make your discs do what you want instead of just choosing disc #29.

So would you say with the rules the way they are now that less skilled players win over more skilled ones because of the discs?

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

 

[bradharris]

We play a simple game. Navigate a course in as few throws as possible using approved equipment. When you step up to a lie, the only relevance any prior throws has had on this one is that the throw immediately before established your position (unless it's a tee shot).

Whether you've used 20 discs to get to this point on the course or just 5 doesn't mean anything. The objective remains the same: Use equipment that meets a certain set of technical standards in an effort to complete the hole in as few throws as possible.

 

[zenbot]

The question we should be asking is should there be a limit to how many posts you quote at one time. Looking at you, iacas!


I kid. I kid.

 

[zenbot]

The PGA, nor the PGA Tour, make the rules for golf. That's the USGA and the R&A. And again, the only people that seem to want to compare the two are those who want to vote "no."

If golf didn't exist I'd support the idea of limiting discs because of the reason(s) stated.

I came from a place of curiosity and wondered if there was a logical reason for those limits or lack thereof. I don't see any reason why that's a bad thing.

I vote no limit because I don't want to force anybody to play a certain way.