AlmaWillie
Jul 20 2012, 04:07 PM
Our club is installing a new course in Fort Smith Arkansas. One of the holes is going to be a buried basket. I have searched and found some discussion on this that stopped in 2009... and it seemed, at that time, that this was not acceptable for higher level tournaments. We are wanting to hold an A-tier tournament, possibly as soon as next year... will this basket have to be changed for that tourney? Is this a legal basket to play on in Tournaments? we have a PDGA Sanctioned B-Tier coming next month.. can it be used for that tournament?

I have attached a picture of the installed basket.

jconnell
Jul 20 2012, 04:46 PM
Our club is installing a new course in Fort Smith Arkansas. One of the holes is going to be a buried basket. I have searched and found some discussion on this that stopped in 2009... and it seemed, at that time, that this was not acceptable for higher level tournaments. We are wanting to hold an A-tier tournament, possibly as soon as next year... will this basket have to be changed for that tourney? Is this a legal basket to play on in Tournaments? we have a PDGA Sanctioned B-Tier coming next month.. can it be used for that tournament?

I have attached a picture of the installed basket.

I don't think there's anything wrong with that basket installation. The argument you might get against it get is that there is a standard for height off the ground or whatever, but that's a manufacturer's requirement/standard, NOT a course design standard.

If a specific height off the ground was required, then we wouldn't see the elevated basket placements like we're seeing this week in Charlotte at Worlds or like they have at Winthrop for the USDGC. These are major events, none higher. If those baskets are okay (and I absolutely think they should be), then I don't see why a buried basket like yours wouldn't be.

Everyone's got to play it the same, so there's no unfairness involved. Go for it.

futurecollisions
Jul 20 2012, 05:24 PM
In my opinion this is not acceptable for any tournament or even normal play. Please don't do things like this, it makes a joke of the sport and we really need to put a stop to these 'gimmicks'.

jconnell
Jul 20 2012, 05:41 PM
In my opinion this is not acceptable for any tournament or even normal play. Please don't do things like this, it makes a joke of the sport and we really need to put a stop to these 'gimmicks'.

The whole sport is a "gimmick" when you come right down to it. We're throwing plastic discs at metal contraptions in the woods. Stuff like this isn't going to hold us back in the least. People that might make fun of the sport for a "gimmick" like that basket are going to be the types that will think the sport is a joke anyway. One target buried in the ground to give a new and unique challenge to a course isn't going to hold us back at all.

PhattD
Jul 20 2012, 10:40 PM
The whole sport is a "gimmick" when you come right down to it. We're throwing plastic discs at metal contraptions in the woods. Stuff like this isn't going to hold us back in the least. People that might make fun of the sport for a "gimmick" like that basket are going to be the types that will think the sport is a joke anyway. One target buried in the ground to give a new and unique challenge to a course isn't going to hold us back at all.

^^^^^^ Yup this. There is nothing wrong with trying something new and seeing if people like it. At least it completely avoids the whole did you see the wedgie go in argument.

Mashnut
Jul 21 2012, 05:12 PM
They hold the collegiate championships at Hippodrome, which includes a buried basket like that along with some elevated baskets.

davidsauls
Jul 22 2012, 08:58 AM
There'll be an A-tier in December at Trophy Lakes, which has a buried basket. Can't be sure they'll use it---there is another basket location on that hole---but I'd bet they will.

Martin_Bohn
Jul 26 2012, 10:53 AM
^^^^^^ Yup this. There is nothing wrong with trying something new and seeing if people like it. At least it completely avoids the whole did you see the wedgie go in argument.

its not new. perhaps i should get the pdga to approve hula hoops as an approved target...... :(

PhattD
Jul 27 2012, 12:45 AM
its not new. perhaps i should get the pdga to approve hula hoops as an approved target...... :(

Maybe I should have said "different"? "out of the ordinary"? The point is don't get stuck designing your courses only using features you are familiar with. I would rather see a designer try something like that and then change it if it doesn't suit the course than never try something outside the box. And the basket pictured already meet current PDGA specs so I don't know what your point with the hula hoop comment was.

futurecollisions
Jul 27 2012, 11:44 AM
Maybe I should have said "different"? "out of the ordinary"? The point is don't get stuck designing your courses only using features you are familiar with. I would rather see a designer try something like that and then change it if it doesn't suit the course than never try something outside the box. And the basket pictured already meet current PDGA specs so I don't know what your point with the hula hoop comment was.

The problem is, this is goofy and it doesn't elevate the sport. If you cant see that, Im probably wasting my time. This opens the door for other gimmicks and the PDGA really needs to address basket pan height from the ground as a standard to prevent this kind of ridiculousness. Whats next, clowns mouth? Spinning windmill? Try doing something 'different' or 'out of the ordinary' with the design, not by flipping a basket upside-down or making players putt into the ground.

jconnell
Jul 27 2012, 12:03 PM
The problem is, this is goofy and it doesn't elevate the sport. If you cant see that, Im probably wasting my time. This opens the door for other gimmicks and the PDGA really needs to address basket pan height from the ground as a standard to prevent this kind of ridiculousness. Whats next, clowns mouth? Spinning windmill? Try doing something 'different' or 'out of the ordinary' with the design, not by flipping a basket upside-down or making players putt into the ground.
Ah, the slippery slope argument. A fine crutch for those who just don't like change or "different" no matter what the case. Changing the height of a target is neither different or out of the ordinary. Putting the basket in the ground is perhaps an extreme as far as changing the height, but it in and of itself isn't a drastic change in course design. It's become fairly commonplace to elevate targets, even at the highest levels. As I mentioned upthread, there are elevated targets at USDGC, there were some at Worlds, I've even seen them at NTs (Memorial) and other A-tiers. Why not go the other way and lower some targets...change the eyeline of players, give them something new to think about.

What, exactly, is the harm? Image of the sport? The 3-point line was considered a gimmick in basketball. The forward pass was considered a gimmick in football for a long time. Neither of those things hurt the long term growth of the sport. In fact, they probably improved it in some respects. A basket or two set low to the ground or in the ground isn't going to a hindrance to the sport in the least.

Martin_Bohn
Jul 27 2012, 01:16 PM
Ah, the slippery slope argument. A fine crutch for those who just don't like change or "different" no matter what the case. Changing the height of a target is neither different or out of the ordinary. Putting the basket in the ground is perhaps an extreme as far as changing the height, but it in and of itself isn't a drastic change in course design. It's become fairly commonplace to elevate targets, even at the highest levels. As I mentioned upthread, there are elevated targets at USDGC, there were some at Worlds, I've even seen them at NTs (Memorial) and other A-tiers. Why not go the other way and lower some targets...change the eyeline of players, give them something new to think about.

What, exactly, is the harm? Image of the sport? The 3-point line was considered a gimmick in basketball. The forward pass was considered a gimmick in football for a long time. Neither of those things hurt the long term growth of the sport. In fact, they probably improved it in some respects. A basket or two set low to the ground or in the ground isn't going to a hindrance to the sport in the least.

your point is well taken. let me counter-point, and please dont take anything i say personally..... i understand "change" and "different" can be discconcerting to some people. some people want the "purity" of the sport to be upheld to the highest degree with regards to the rules, course design, the type of bag you use to carry your pdga legal discs, others just want to play frolf....BUT.... common sense on both sides of the spectrum should be used.
a buried basket is a frolfer move. it might be different, but is it a good-different? i personally dont think shooting at a buried basket is funner, or better than shooting at a regularly placed basket. though skip-aces are fun, what you do with a buried basket is give a HUGE advantage to all those disc golfers out there who are under 4'-6" tall. ok, just kidding about that.
lets do the analogy thing like you did josh, in ball golf the size of the hole on the green is a consistent, regulated dimension that is the same on every golf course in the world, in the nba the circumference of the hoop is the same in every arena, the field goal posts in the nfl are the same everywhere. it would not cross anyones mind to change those dimensions because through time they have proven to be the best dimensions for the application in that sport. thats where the word "gimmick" comes from when you bury the basket in disc golf.
why even use a basket if you have a target at ground level? if you buy 18 baskets at $400 a piece thats $7200. if you buy 18 hula hoops at $3 a piece thats $54 and you accomplish the same results as a target that is at ground level, you just saved just about $7000.
ok, lastly let me beat you over the head with my experience. ive played courses with hanging baskets, buried baskets, elevated baskets, baskets surrounded by trees, baskets surrounded by water, baskets placed on edges of cliffs, baskets placed on cliffsides, baskets in caves, baskets in cracks in the ground twenty feet below the playing surface....and in the buried basket case....well it just isnt that fun, and i think anyone who tries that kind of thing will eventually come to that same conclusion.... i will give this though, the best "buried" basket ive played was a basket in the middle of a huge redwood tree stump cut about chest high and the basket bottom part was below the surface of the stump, the tree stump was about twenty feet in circumference. so yeah buried baskets can be fun and challenging in certain cases. ok nuff said....gotta go play a round. :)

jconnell
Jul 27 2012, 02:28 PM
lets do the analogy thing like you did josh, in ball golf the size of the hole on the green is a consistent, regulated dimension that is the same on every golf course in the world, in the nba the circumference of the hoop is the same in every arena, the field goal posts in the nfl are the same everywhere. it would not cross anyones mind to change those dimensions because through time they have proven to be the best dimensions for the application in that sport. thats where the word "gimmick" comes from when you bury the basket in disc golf.
Your analogy doesn't really hold because no one is proposing changing the dimensions of the target. The basket in the ground has all the same catching dimensions as the one set at "normal" height, it's just lower to the ground.

I think the better analogy, since you bring up the ball golf hole, is to compare lowering (or elevating) the basket to moving the hole around the green. Greens in ball golf are never perfectly flat. They undulate, they have ups and downs and dips and ridges all over. If you have a five-foot putt on each ball golf green over the course of a round, they're not all going to be the same, right? Some will be uphill, some will be downhill, some will be along a slope that runs away from the hole, some might have a ridge that leads right to the hole, etc. You have to be good at reading the breaks, hitting the ball at the right pace and on the right line in order to make all 18 of those putts.

We can't really replicate that too well on the disc golf course if all baskets are placed at the same "standard" height. If they're all the same, you can have a situation where eighteen different 10-foot putts are all the same shot...same line, same angle, same height. Gets kinda boring. Sure, you can place a target or two amongst trees to force a shot around them if you don't place your approach well, but isn't it just as reasonable to raise or lower the height of the target to offer a different look as well? Not every course has natural elevation changes to do that sort of thing.

All of those variations on a ball golf green are artificially created when the course is built. All the ups and downs are all calculated and intentionally placed by the designer. One might even say they're "gimmicks", only they don't stand out because they blend them into the "natural" look of the course. We're not at a stage where we can completely landscape a disc golf course to perfect specifications, where we can raise mounds to put baskets on for an uphill putt or dig hollows to place a basket that forces a downhill putt and it all looks "natural". So we're left with improvising in some circumstances. The result of which is an occasional buried basket or an occasional elevated basket. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with any basket location, personally. If everyone has to putt on it, it's fair.

If you personally don't enjoy playing certain types of basket locations, that's fine. Everyone's entitled to their opinions, but that doesn't mean that a less than preferable position is one that is wrong for the sport or holds the sport back in some way.

Martin_Bohn
Jul 27 2012, 04:21 PM
conceptually im with you. basket in the ground, change the angle of your drive/putt. been there, done that and its kind of cool....gotta tell ya though, depending on where you live in this wonderful country of ours people will find other uses for a buried basket, for example here in utah it will become a cattle feeder overnite. other places it might be the perfect bar-b-que pit. but mostly it will become a trash receptacle, especially from those player haters out there that dont like buried baskets. now on private property it would probably be alright...... reality aside, i would think an elevated buried basket would be cool and esthetically pleasing as well as challenging. you know anyone with a backhoe and a chunk of property we can shape to our liking?

pterodactyl
Jul 28 2012, 11:18 AM
How do you lock that underground basket without taking the basket apart?

PhattD
Jul 28 2012, 11:35 AM
conceptually im with you. basket in the ground, change the angle of your drive/putt. been there, done that and its kind of cool....gotta tell ya though, depending on where you live in this wonderful country of ours people will find other uses for a buried basket, for example here in utah it will become a cattle feeder overnite. other places it might be the perfect bar-b-que pit. but mostly it will become a trash receptacle, especially from those player haters out there that dont like buried baskets. now on private property it would probably be alright...... reality aside, i would think an elevated buried basket would be cool and esthetically pleasing as well as challenging. you know anyone with a backhoe and a chunk of property we can shape to our liking?

Yeah and if any of these bad things happen it's easy to say "that didn't work" and change the basket. What I don't understand is the immediate hate for trying something like this on one hole on a course you probably don't even play. I agree with JConnell on this that most of the hate for this basket is a knee jerk reaction to something unfamiliar by people not even willing to give it a try.

davidsauls
Jul 28 2012, 02:51 PM
Trophy Lakes, one of the best courses in South Carolina, has a buried basket. I know it's a matter of taste, but many players find it fun and a unique challenge. Seems like it would be easy to putt from 40' and just slide across the ground into the basket.....but it's not. Players, even good players, seem to like trying.

The worst thing, from an old fogey's perspective, is bending down to retrieve a made putt that's below ground level.

I wouldn't want to see a lot of these, but I'm fine with a few here and there.

eupher61
Jul 29 2012, 02:32 AM
Go for it! Depending on what the terrain is (I'd bet, flat, but I can't know for certain) this could be the only interesting aspect of the hole. I'm not saying the design is bad, merely that the land may not be full of character.

Do it. I just hope none of the bad stuff happens.

AlmaWillie
Jul 29 2012, 12:49 PM
It is a very flat course and the designer was looking for a way to change things up a bit. We have got 90% approval and the only negatives are safety (snakes / varmints) and difficulty for older golfers to retrieve discs. We are gonna let it stand for now and get feedback after our first tourney. Thank you all for your input.

Ellen
Sep 06 2012, 12:52 PM
An Innova Discatcher Pro basket is 24 cm deep. http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/PDGA_approved_targets_080212.pdf

PDGA requirements state that a disc-catching target must be at least 18 cm deep.
http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/PDGATechStandards_61510.pdf Section II (disc-catching devices)

If at any time more than 2 inches (6 cm) of dirt fill the bottom of the target, one could possibly argue that the dirt forms the bottom of the catching device and that the catching device does not meet PDGA requirements, being too shallow. Hanging baskets generally do not collect dirt and debris and therefore wouldn't have to be considered in this respect.

I think that basket will require regular attention to keep it legal.

futurecollisions
Sep 06 2012, 01:00 PM
Yeah and if any of these bad things happen it's easy to say "that didn't work" and change the basket. What I don't understand is the immediate hate for trying something like this on one hole on a course you probably don't even play. I agree with JConnell on this that most of the hate for this basket is a knee jerk reaction to something unfamiliar by people not even willing to give it a try.

Do you really have to try this to see that its a bad idea?

Basket buried in the ground, basket hanging in a tree, basket upsidedown, basket sideways = pretty obviously stupid

Ellen
Sep 06 2012, 01:27 PM
It looks pretty gimmicky to me. It's a basket without a basket -- a halfsket. Why not install it extremely close to the ground but with the chains AND basket above grade?

Rollers probably shouldn't have the possibility of rolling into a basket -- it kind of changes the game.

cgkdisc
Sep 06 2012, 01:31 PM
Basic category targets only need to be 15cm deep so that allows a bit more dirt to fill in at least for C-tiers.

There's nothing wrong with a basket or two flush with the ground or suspended in a tree. It's allowed in the PDGA course guidelines. See section 6 on Page 3: http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/PDGA_Course_Design_Guides_March_2012.pdf

I do agree with no upside down or sideways targets being allowed. The most important target dimension is the height from the top of the basket to the bottom of the chain support. That height is our true target zone similar to a ball golf hole. It doesn't really matter how high or low that target zone is located within reason. Anyone playing on courses with any elevation know you'll be putting up or down at targets on a regular basis sometimes at a steeper angle (see Renaissance) than what you might have on flat ground with a basket in the ground or mounted higher than normal.

Ellen
Sep 06 2012, 01:53 PM
PDGA rulebook 803.13 Holing Out

B. Disc Entrapment Devices: In order to hole out, the thrower must release the disc
and it must come to rest supported by the chains and/or the inner cylinder (bottom and inside wall) of the tray. It may be additionally supported by the pole. ...

To hole out your disc must either be supported by the chains or the inner cylinder of the TRAY. If your disc is sitting in the tray but it is sitting on dirt, supported by the pole and not touching any part of the tray, did you hole out according to the rules? Doesn't sound like it.

cgkdisc
Sep 06 2012, 03:13 PM
Around here, baskets end up with leaves, small branches, snow or ice in them at various times of the year and even another player's disc before removing it. And yet, no one considers those preventing a disc from holing out regardless what the rules say. Some common sense rules.

My thought would be that baskets installed in the ground have a space below the basket bottom for drainage room at minimum.

Ellen
Sep 06 2012, 03:51 PM
Around here, baskets end up with leaves, small branches, snow or ice in them at various times of the year and even another player's disc before removing it. And yet, no one considers those preventing a disc from holing out regardless what the rules say. Some common sense rules.

My thought would be that baskets installed in the ground have a space below the basket bottom for drainage room at minimum.

I agree with you completely on the common sense rules, Chuck. But the poster's original concern was whether or not this basket would be acceptable for A tier play. I have a difficult time accepting that there is going to be an A tier where a small branch is allowed to sit the basket for the whole tournament. Either the TD or first player to see it would remove it. Leaves in a basket? Maybe a saucer basket, but you're not going to see those at an A tier.

What happens when a deluge of rain opens up on an A tier playing to this basket, and halfway through the round the tray becomes a puddle instead of hole? If the disc is floating on the water is it holed-out? After all rain falls on our baskets and common sense tells us that's OK, but in general a tray shouldn't become a puddle midway through a round.

Common sense rules are easiest to apply in common sense situations. When I look at that basket, common sense is not what first comes to mind.

cgkdisc
Sep 06 2012, 04:03 PM
FlyBoy, host of a few top events and one of the top rated courses in country has a ground basket as does Hippodrome where a Major, the National Collegiate Championships are held each year. If the baskets themselves otherwise meet the PDGA Standard or Championship category, there's just not an issue with a ground basket.

Weather factors have always been challenges to deal with when holes have gone underwater at A-tiers (one I played) from flooding after some groups had played it. Sometimes the hole is just not counted in the score. Championship level portable baskets have tipped over or bolts slipped during rounds requiring mid-round adjustments. Players and TDs just deal with it. There are much bigger problems that sometimes need to be dealt with at an A-tier than a flooded ground basket.

You didn't comment on the "problem" where the previous player has thrown and not yet removed their disc and the next player's disc lands on it in the basket. You going to call, "Not holed out?"

Ellen
Sep 06 2012, 04:15 PM
You didn't comment on the "problem" where the previous player has thrown and not yet removed their disc and the next player's disc lands on it in the basket. You going to call, "Not holed out?"

Only if I'm playing by the rules or does common sense trump the rules. If it's an A tier, you might want to have that first disc pulled.

jconnell
Sep 06 2012, 04:26 PM
An Innova Discatcher Pro basket is 24 cm deep. http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/PDGA_approved_targets_080212.pdf

PDGA requirements state that a disc-catching target must be at least 18 cm deep.
http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/PDGATechStandards_61510.pdf Section II (disc-catching devices)


It should be pointed out that these written requirements and standards are for the manufacturers, not for course installation. The basket buried in the ground is still built to correct standards, it's just installed in an unorthodox way. There is currently nothing in PDGA documentation that would disallow such an installation.

Ellen
Sep 06 2012, 04:47 PM
It should be pointed out that these written requirements and standards are for the manufacturers, not for course installation. The basket buried in the ground is still built to correct standards, it's just installed in an unorthodox way. There is currently nothing in PDGA documentation that would disallow such an installation.

JC, you are correct. A buried basket can be built to correct standards. However, the only part of the basket standards that can be changed is item P (per the document) "Basket - Rim Height above grade (as produced)" Notice that the PDGA has included the disclaimer "as produced". None of the other standards are limited to "as produced". One must then conclude that the other standards apply to "as installed" as well. The depth of a tray that is filling with dirt does not fall under the protection of "as produced".

If i installed an eighteen hole course with PDGA approved baskets and then decided to use bolt cutters to remove the majority of chains on half the baskets, leaving those baskets with only six chains per basket because I thought six chains made the baskets more interesting or challenging, would that course be suitable for an A tier?

PhattD
Sep 06 2012, 05:14 PM
Do you really have to try this to see that its a bad idea?

Basket buried in the ground, basket hanging in a tree, basket upsidedown, basket sideways = pretty obviously stupid

If it was that "obviously stupid" this thread would have ended long ago. It is very telling when people run out of arguments to support their point and resort to calling the opposing view stupid.

jconnell
Sep 06 2012, 05:30 PM
JC, you are correct. A buried basket is built to correct standards. However, the only part of the basket standards that can be changed is item P (per the document) "Basket - Rim Height above grade (as produced)" Notice that the PDGA has included the disclaimer "as produced". None of the other standards are limited to "as produced". One must then conclude that the other standards apply to "as installed" as well. The depth of a tray that is filling with dirt does not fall under the protection of "as produced".

If i installed an eighteen hole course with PDGA approved baskets and then decided to use bolt cutters to remove the majority of chains on half the baskets, leaving those baskets with only six chains per basket because I thought six chains made the baskets more interesting or challenging, would that course be suitable for an A tier?

Technically no because the standards for an A-tier require uniform targets. If you cut the chains on all the baskets, maybe you have an argument, but not on half. Besides, with dirt, you're talking about incidental objects in the target (like Chuck mentioned with leaves and sticks and trash that might wind up in the basket). Unless the target was installed specifically so that dirt would fill any part of the cylinder, and the dirt was left there intentionally, I don't think the act of burying the basket alone would render the target and thus the course below standard for PDGA play.

I would think that it would be incumbent on the course owner/designer or tournament director to address the issue of dirt in a buried basket rather than asking the PDGA to make a special rule (or ruling) to account for it. Whether they address it with a special amendment to the holing out rule on that basket which states dirt is part of the target if within the cylinder, or like Chuck suggested, they dig out underneath the cage for drainage purposes to ensure there is no dirt within the cylinder.

Case in point on the owner or TD addressing a design-created ruling question, there is an A-tier this weekend on a course with a handful of elevated baskets. The 2-meter rule is in effect for the whole course all weekend. Rather than face the argument over whether or not a DROT could be penalized for being over 2-meters on an elevated target, there will be an exception to the 2-meter rule for DROTs (no penalty assessed) written into the caddy guide/player handout. Problem or potential problem solved.


This sort of reminds me of the argument about two discs stacked on top of one another in the basket. The argument being that the disc on top isn't holed out because it's not physically touching the basket and therefore isn't "supported" by it. It's a bogus argument. The support provided to the first disc carries through to the one on top. Same idea with dirt in the basket...if you were to remove the dirt, the disc wouldn't fall out of the cylinder just like if you removed the bottom disc, the top one wouldn't fall out.

futurecollisions
Sep 06 2012, 05:35 PM
If it was that "obviously stupid" this thread would have ended long ago. It is very telling when people run out of arguments to support their point and resort to calling the opposing view stupid.

Yes, so there are 10 or so people who are jumping to defend this ridiculous 'gimmick', the same ones as usual. Why would we want gimmicks like this in our sport? What bugs me is this kind of thing opens the door for even more gimmicks that really just make us look like a joke. How about a clowns mouth and windmill too?

cgkdisc
Sep 06 2012, 05:41 PM
So for an interesting thread jack, how about the fact that the top of a target cannot be penalized for being above 2m no matter how high the target is installed on a pole above ground? The target is treated as a de facto playing surface per the Interference rule 803.07B. So a DROT is actually on the equivalent of a playing surface and is cannot be more than 2m above a playing surface by definition. Of course, this opens up just a small can of worms for the NorCal folks who like that 2m rule when they have to measure 2m above the top of the target for a disc suspended directly over it to be above 2m for a penalty...

cgkdisc
Sep 06 2012, 05:45 PM
Yes, so there are 10 or so people who are jumping to defend this ridiculous 'gimmick', the same ones as usual. Why would we want gimmicks like this in our sport? What bugs me is this kind of thing opens the door for even more gimmicks that really just make us look like a joke. How about a clowns mouth and windmill too?
You're worrying too much about "what our sport looks like" (when few outside it really care) rather than "is this gaming element a fair and appropriate challenge." Elevated and ground baskets have met that sniff test for quite a while.

futurecollisions
Sep 06 2012, 05:51 PM
You're worrying too much about "what our sport looks like" (when few outside it really care) rather than "is this gaming element a fair and appropriate challenge." Elevated and ground baskets have met that sniff test for quite a while.

Mainly I think its bad for the game from a playing perspective. The top players would not like this, which is why I said the idea is stupid, which I stand by.

jconnell
Sep 06 2012, 06:00 PM
Mainly I think its bad for the game from a playing perspective. The top players would not like this, which is why I said the idea is stupid, which I stand by.

Seriously, who gives a flying eff what the top players think? Why are they the end all? Because they don't like something, no course should ever do it? Bull.

Fine, you think the idea is stupid and you're entitled to your opinion. Doesn't make the idea bad for the game or bad for the "image" of the game (what exactly is the image we're protecting anyway?).

Personally, I think having all targets at the exact same height is bad for the game. And same with varying lengths of holes. Every hole should be exactly 264.21 feet from tee to basket. How's that for a "gimmick"?

"Gimmicks" are what help the game evolve. Heck, that's what all games are...gimmicks. The beveled edge disc was a gimmick when it was introduced. Where would this game be without that "gimmick"? Doubt it would be where it is now. Not to say a buried basket is going to revolutionize the game, but it's certainly not going to hurt it significantly either.

Ellen
Sep 06 2012, 06:17 PM
...

I would think that it would be incumbent on the course owner/designer or tournament director to address the issue of dirt in a buried basket rather than asking the PDGA to make a special rule (or ruling) to account for it...

...The support provided to the first disc carries through to the one on top. Same idea with dirt in the basket...if you were to remove the dirt, the disc wouldn't fall out of the cylinder just like if you removed the bottom disc, the top one wouldn't fall out.

I agree with you on point #1 above, JC. I think a quick check of the basket by the TD could cover almost all issues.

My main issue with the in the ground basket is that it blurs the line between what is Tray and what is not. Is the ground the tray or is the tray the tray?

In your example where one disc rests on another disc within the basket, common sense says the tray supports disc #1 and disc #1 supports disc #2 -- no problem. However, if there are two inches of dirt in the bottom of the basket and the disc is resting on the dirt, you'll have trouble convincing me that the tray is supporting the dirt. The Earth is most likely supporting the dirt and the tray is supporting nothing. This is different than leaves, discs, or sticks in an above grade basket, which no doubt would be supported by the tray.

The only common sense answer is that the dirt at the bottom of the hole (if it's left there by the TD) is considered the tray. But if the dirt is the tray we have a situation where the tray, no longer being made of stable metal but dirt instead, can change shape during a round. During a rain storm more dirt could wash into the tray making it shallower, even non-standard, or dirt could build up around the lip of the hole thereby making the tray deeper.

I'm just playing devil's advocate on this. The buried basket looks like fun. It also looks like a lightning rod for confusion as soon as the weather doesn't cooperate.

cgkdisc
Sep 06 2012, 06:19 PM
Most course owners or managers are going to avoid installing a ground basket simply due to the aforementioned maintenance issues. Personally, I'm more in favor of a basket sitting on flat ground so rollers and sliders can't enter the basket unless of course they hit the little ramps I install in front of the left and right side of the basket for those type of shots to have a chance. :)

futurecollisions
Sep 06 2012, 06:24 PM
Seriously, who gives a flying eff what the top players think? Why are they the end all? Because they don't like something, no course should ever do it? Bull.

Fine, you think the idea is stupid and you're entitled to your opinion. Doesn't make the idea bad for the game or bad for the "image" of the game (what exactly is the image we're protecting anyway?).

Personally, I think having all targets at the exact same height is bad for the game. And same with varying lengths of holes. Every hole should be exactly 264.21 feet from tee to basket. How's that for a "gimmick"?

"Gimmicks" are what help the game evolve. Heck, that's what all games are...gimmicks. The beveled edge disc was a gimmick when it was introduced. Where would this game be without that "gimmick"? Doubt it would be where it is now. Not to say a buried basket is going to revolutionize the game, but it's certainly not going to hurt it significantly either.

Disagree

Bad gimmicks don't help us. You have to ask yourself, does this make the game any better? Is this needed? Does this elevate the sport to a higher level? The answer is clearly NO when it comes to baskets buried in the ground, clowns mouths, windmills, baskets floating upside down or hanging from trees, we don't need it.

Ball golf has a specific width of the hole and placement, but their fairways vary in length, so i don't know what your point is. I never said all holes need to be the same distance.

If there is nothing to protect, then why care at all? Why even play in an organized manner? We have a lot to protect in my opinion

cgkdisc
Sep 06 2012, 06:43 PM
Buried and elevated baskets are exactly the kinds of features needed to technically improve the game to make putting more difficult and interesting. That's the weakest part of our game if you ever wish to attract spectators.

jconnell
Sep 06 2012, 06:48 PM
Disagree

Bad gimmicks don't help us. You have to ask yourself, does this make the game any better? Is this needed? Does this elevate the sport to a higher level? The answer is clearly NO when it comes to baskets buried in the ground, clowns mouths, windmills, baskets floating upside down or hanging from trees, we don't need it.

Ball golf has a specific width of the hole and placement, but their fairways vary in length, so i don't know what your point is. I never said all holes need to be the same distance.

If there is nothing to protect, then why care at all? Why even play in an organized manner? We have a lot to protect in my opinion

First, the thing about holes being the same length is a joke. My point was that just because I think something about the sport is "wrong" or "bad" doesn't mean I'm right. Frankly, I try not to judge anything in this sport, especially design elements, by its appearance. Like Chuck alludes to, I judge it on the merits of whether it provides a fair and reasonable challenge to all players. This game is still too close to its infancy to be worried too much about aesthetics at this point, and I think it's naive and short-sighted to determine unequivocally what this sport needs or doesn't need right now.

Putting a basket in the ground as described by the OP doesn't change the dimensions of the target, so your ball golf analogy falls short. If you want to make an analogy to ball golf, putting the target in the ground is like cutting the hole in a depressed area of the green as opposed to at the top of a ridge or in the center of a flat area or on a side hill. The hole size is exactly the same no matter what, but the angle/approach/speed one must take to get the ball in the hole varies. Same with a ground basket. The target area is exactly the same, it's just lower than a "normal" target and requires a lower trajectory throw to get the disc in. Every putt on it is essentially a downhill putt in the same way that every putt on an elevated basket is an uphill one.

And please, stop with the slippery slope argument. Buried targets aren't going to open the door to upside-down targets and windmills and clown's mouthes, so it's silly to even bring them into the conversation.

And I'm not trying to imply there's nothing to protect. I'm genuinely curious what exactly the image of the sport is that you are so concerned about sullying. Do we really have an image outside of the realm of people who actually play the sport?

cgkdisc
Sep 06 2012, 06:59 PM
Interestingly, ground baskets are more like what ball golfers unfamiliar with disc golf might expect. I'm thinking they would wonder why you even need the chains with a ground basket. Just play it like golf with an open bucket where you toss your discs.

Ellen
Sep 06 2012, 07:28 PM
I can't remember where I read it, perhaps the PDGA magazine, but I remember one of the reasons Steady Ed invented the basket was because he believed a disc needed to FLY, like a Frisbee, into a target, not be pitched like a horseshoe or rolled like a ball into a hole or circle in or on the ground.

High baskets and low baskets all preserve that concept. The buried basket, not so much.

jconnell
Sep 06 2012, 07:39 PM
I can't remember where I read it, perhaps the PDGA magazine, but I remember one of the reasons Steady Ed invented the basket was because he believed a disc needed to FLY, like a Frisbee, into a target, not be pitched like a horseshoe or rolled like a ball into a hole or circle in or on the ground.

High baskets and low baskets all preserve that concept. The buried basket, not so much.

I think if you remove the chain assembly and it's just a hole in the ground, then yeah, it doesn't preserve the concept. But I think a pole-hole sunk in the ground does nothing to dishonor Ed's original concept. You can still throw the disc into the chains per his original design. You've got to throw it low, but throwing it is still the ideal means to get the disc in the target.

cgkdisc
Sep 06 2012, 07:52 PM
For example, the ground basket rim at Hippodrome is mostly but not quite completely flush with the ground. I saw players trying to slide shots in that got stopped or pushed back by the lip if they weren't thrown hard enough.

futurecollisions
Sep 06 2012, 08:05 PM
I can't remember where I read it, perhaps the PDGA magazine, but I remember one of the reasons Steady Ed invented the basket was because he believed a disc needed to FLY, like a Frisbee, into a target, not be pitched like a horseshoe or rolled like a ball into a hole or circle in or on the ground.

High baskets and low baskets all preserve that concept. The buried basket, not so much.

Agreed

cgkdisc
Sep 06 2012, 08:50 PM
When Ed told me that, I pointed out that Roc(k)s rolled before Rocs flew. Part of his distaste for rollers was Ralph Williamson occasionally beating him with the roller when he had the chance.

PhattD
Sep 07 2012, 12:23 AM
Yes, so there are 10 or so people who are jumping to defend this ridiculous 'gimmick', the same ones as usual. Why would we want gimmicks like this in our sport? What bugs me is this kind of thing opens the door for even more gimmicks that really just make us look like a joke. How about a clowns mouth and windmill too?

And once again we bounce back to the other tactic used by people that have no valid argument the slippery slope argument. I tell you what why don't you wait and not post on this thread again until you can find a course with a with clowns mouth or a windmill. When that happens I'll apologize and admit I was wrong.

Ellen
Sep 07 2012, 04:11 PM
"Gimmicks" are what help the game evolve. Heck, that's what all games are...gimmicks. The beveled edge disc was a gimmick when it was introduced. Where would this game be without that "gimmick"? Doubt it would be where it is now. Not to say a buried basket is going to revolutionize the game, but it's certainly not going to hurt it significantly either.

The Turbo Putter and the Wheel were also gimmicks. Feel free to throw them into buried baskets at your leisure. Just make sure it's a rec round.

futurecollisions
Sep 07 2012, 05:14 PM
And once again we bounce back to the other tactic used by people that have no valid argument the slippery slope argument. I tell you what why don't you wait and not post on this thread again until you can find a course with a with clowns mouth or a windmill. When that happens I'll apologize and admit I was wrong.

I am not using any tactics.

Here are some reasons I believe the buried basket is a dumb idea:

1. It does not improve the game
2. It does not elevate our sport to a higher level
3. It isn't needed
4. This goes against the design of the basket, as Ellen points out
5. This goes against the intent of Steady Ed which was the have discs fly into the chains

cgkdisc
Sep 07 2012, 05:43 PM
1. It does not improve the game
2. It does not elevate our sport to a higher level
3. It isn't needed

These statements could be made about any new disc or bag model. And yet a certain amount of variety is one of the more appealing aspects of disc golf versus rigid standardization.

PhattD
Sep 08 2012, 09:21 AM
I am not using any tactics.

Here are some reasons I believe the buried basket is a dumb idea:

1. It does not improve the game
2. It does not elevate our sport to a higher level
3. It isn't needed
4. This goes against the design of the basket, as Ellen points out
5. This goes against the intent of Steady Ed which was the have discs fly into the chains

Yes actually you were using a tactic you just don't understand what the word means. For instance in this post you are using a much more valid tatic of listing specific reasons to support your point. Unfortunately the first three are your opinion with nothing to back them up. The last two are the same point. The basket was designed the way it was because Steady Ed wanted discs to fly and not roll. This is the only valid point of the bunch. However I don't beleive we should treat Eds opinions as gospel and should be allowed to think for ourselves. On a course with limited terrain (few trees no elevation change no obstacles) sometimes we have to get creative to make it so all the holes aren't the same. This basket placement does that. It breaks no rule that anyone can quote. It does create maintenance issues but that's the designers' problem. So to your "four" points:
on a course that is desperate for variation this basket placement does
1. does improve the game
2. does elevate our sport to a higher level
3. is needed
As to Steady Ed's opinion are you advocating making rollers illegal? Or sliding it upside down on the flight plate? What about thumbers and tomahawks Ed was an advocate of flat flight not vertical.

So basically keep your nose out of other peoples design. If you don't like it don't go play it.

futurecollisions
Sep 08 2012, 11:25 AM
Yes actually you were using a tactic you just don't understand what the word means. For instance in this post you are using a much more valid tatic of listing specific reasons to support your point. Unfortunately the first three are your opinion with nothing to back them up. The last two are the same point. The basket was designed the way it was because Steady Ed wanted discs to fly and not roll. This is the only valid point of the bunch. However I don't beleive we should treat Eds opinions as gospel and should be allowed to think for ourselves. On a course with limited terrain (few trees no elevation change no obstacles) sometimes we have to get creative to make it so all the holes aren't the same. This basket placement does that. It breaks no rule that anyone can quote. It does create maintenance issues but that's the designers' problem. So to your "four" points:
on a course that is desperate for variation this basket placement does
1. does improve the game
2. does elevate our sport to a higher level
3. is needed
As to Steady Ed's opinion are you advocating making rollers illegal? Or sliding it upside down on the flight plate? What about thumbers and tomahawks Ed was an advocate of flat flight not vertical.

So basically keep your nose out of other peoples design. If you don't like it don't go play it.

You like this concept so much that you would say anyone who opposes it should keep their mouth shut and just ignore it?

Ok, the guy posted it on a forum, to get different views I imagine.

I still dont understand why you like this idea, in fact i dont even think you really do, its just a group of people who dont like opposition to gimmicks.

PhattD
Sep 08 2012, 10:27 PM
You like this concept so much that you would say anyone who opposes it should keep their mouth shut and just ignore it?

Ok, the guy posted it on a forum, to get different views I imagine.

I still dont understand why you like this idea, in fact i dont even think you really do, its just a group of people who dont like opposition to gimmicks.

What I am arguing against is you trying to say he shouldn't use an innovation just because you don't like it. This was posted in a rules forum. I am not arguing the we should change to buried baskets or that they are better in any way. What I am arguing is that as long as they are within the rules let the designer do what he wants and people can vote with their feet which innovations they like and which ones they don't.

What I especially don't like is someone coming in and arguing against something and can't come up with any better reasons than "it's obviously stupid" or "it's a gimmick" or even if it's not a gimmick now it will lead to gimmicks later or my favorite the one about having one course with one buried basket is going to somehow ruin our sport by making it look gimmicky.
Speaking of gimmick here are the actual definitions:
1.
a. A device employed to cheat, deceive, or trick, especially a mechanism for the
secret and dishonest control of gambling apparatus.
b. An innovative or unusual mechanical contrivance; a gadget.
2.
a. An innovative stratagem or scheme employed especially to promote a project: an
advertising gimmick.
b. A significant feature that is obscured, misrepresented, or not readily evident; a
catch.
Which of these applies to the basket in the ground? And why is it bad for the sport again?

futurecollisions
Sep 10 2012, 11:47 AM
Speaking of gimmick here are the actual definitions:
1.
a. A device employed to cheat, deceive, or trick, especially a mechanism for the
secret and dishonest control of gambling apparatus.
b. An innovative or unusual mechanical contrivance; a gadget.
2.
a. An innovative stratagem or scheme employed especially to promote a project: an
advertising gimmick.
b. A significant feature that is obscured, misrepresented, or not readily evident; a
catch.
Which of these applies to the basket in the ground? And why is it bad for the sport again?

the buried basket fits the definition of a gimmick quite well

cgkdisc
Sep 10 2012, 12:23 PM
Ed could very easily have decided to install the first baskets he created in the ground. It's a logical location considering ball golf has a hole in the ground. The early targets used for competition in our sport were garden wickets connected in a circle on the ground. If that was how our sport developed, then later mounting a basket above ground might seem strange. It's simply a matter of what you're used to, not that there's any thing technically wrong with a basket above, really above or below ground.

chainmeister
Sep 10 2012, 03:37 PM
In the 1970's when I was in college the Evans Scholars (caddies who won scholarships to go to school) held a disc golf tournament on campus. They used laundry baskets. This was a not a great target. That being said, it was just as lousy for every player. This was at a time when there were very few disc golf courses in existence. The advent of the pole hole revolutionized the game. That being said, lots of courses have gimmicks. We have all played elevated baskets. This past week I played the great new Round Barn course in Manhatten, IL. There is a hole with stacked baskets. I was playing the Reds and my putt for deuce fell into the Silver basket. I am not thrilled with a buried basket but have no problem with it other than being fat and old I will have to get on my belly to reach in and pull my disc out of the ground. As mentioned above its just a matter of personal taste.

Ellen
Sep 11 2012, 10:45 AM
Q: When is it advantageous to try to skip a disc into the hole from within thirty feet?

A: When the basket has no lip and it's buried. At that time it's a very rational move. Any other time, that 30 foot skip shot would be seen as completely irrational -- a rookie move at best.

Q: If your installation of a basket makes an irrational shot a rational shot, is the basket installed irrationally? Does it conflict with the spirit of the game? Is it, as some have suggested, merely a gimmick?

A: The atmosphere is too charged for me to weigh in on this one. You make the call.

We don't replace divots in our sport. We don't repair disc marks. The air is the playing surface for disc golf. The buried basket, basically creates a "Green" where the disc will interact with the ground before entering the basket. Will you maintain this area around the basket like a "Green"? Will you clear it of small rocks and grass clumps that might deflect a disc sliding in from one particular side? Will you apply herbicide and maintain a rigorous mowing schedule to ensure uniformity on the green? Or will randomness and chaos reign, to then be dismissed with a, "well we don't worry about that in disc golf". We don't worry about it because it is not part of the game.

I'll believe disc golf is ready for "Greens" when I see one.

The more I think about it, the more I agree that the buried basket is a bit like an upside down basket. Maybe a Halloween tournament where all the baskets are either buried or hung upside down from trees. It being Halloween we could all paint clown mouths on our faces. FutureCollisions, you better be there.

wsfaplau
Sep 11 2012, 11:09 AM
Actually the playing surface isn't the air.

It is a surface, generally the ground, which is capable of supporting the player and from which a stance may reasonably taken. In cases where it is unclear whether a surface is a playing surface, the decision shall be made by the TD or an official.

So it can be several things but it is NEVER the air.

Ellen
Sep 11 2012, 11:47 AM
Hypothetical -- Mischievous ten year olds park their bikes in the woods between round one and round two and place a large limb in hole 3's basket. First group on hole 3 sees limb. Should they remove it?

Hypothetical -- Mischievous ten year olds park their bikes in the woods between round one and round two and place five or six large rocks within 12 inches of the west side of the buried basket #3. First group on hole 3 sees rocks. Should they remove (move) them? What if a tournament player (accidentally?) kicks a three inch rock ten inches closer to the lip of the basket. Are they gaining an advantage? Should the rock be moved back?

What does common sense say? No one knows; it's an uncommon situation. A lightning rod for controversy.

Ellen
Sep 11 2012, 12:04 PM
Actually the playing surface isn't the air.

It is a surface, generally the ground, which is capable of supporting the player and from which a stance may reasonably taken. In cases where it is unclear whether a surface is a playing surface, the decision shall be made by the TD or an official.

So it can be several things but it is NEVER the air.

Playing surface was a bad choice of words on my part. How about, the putting surface (meaning the disc travels through the air and into the basket 100% of the time, unless the basket is buried)? Maybe I was little lazy in calling it the playing surface to save a few keystrokes.

bruceuk
Sep 11 2012, 12:29 PM
What nonsense! There are many occasions where skipping, sliding or rolling a disc is advantageous, whether or not the outcome is disc in basket is irrelevant. The scenarios you pose are equally relevant to using those tactics to get the disc under the basket, disc around, under or over an obstacle or whatever. Your straw man fails because throwing a disc intentionally into the ground can be a rational shot in many scenarios, the installation of a buried basket does not suddenly invalidate or validate it.

Your rocks example is adequately covered by the obstacles and relief rules, the branch issue is due to be covered in the next update.

chainmeister
Sep 12 2012, 11:56 AM
Lots of courses have a novelty of one kind or another. A buried basket is just one option. Not every shot is made by spinning the disc with either a forehand or backhand motion at a basket at waist height. I played this great new course (Round Barn in Manhatten, IL) last week. I saw a former world Am Champ putting at this basket with a version of a thumber as the trees were in his way. I had my deuce putt at the red basket go into the silver. That course was also going to have a hanging basket but the park district vetoed it because of potential safety issues. Its ok to think outside the basket every once in a while. Nobody would want to see an entire course of buried baskets but one could be interesting. We have all played island greens, baskets situated on a precipice, severe angles, tunnel shots, wooded, open etc. If you face a unique hole, play it and get to the next hole, er, ah, basket.

futurecollisions
Sep 12 2012, 12:29 PM
Q: When is it advantageous to try to skip a disc into the hole from within thirty feet?

A: When the basket has no lip and it's buried. At that time it's a very rational move. Any other time, that 30 foot skip shot would be seen as completely irrational -- a rookie move at best.

Q: If your installation of a basket makes an irrational shot a rational shot, is the basket installed irrationally? Does it conflict with the spirit of the game? Is it, as some have suggested, merely a gimmick?

A: The atmosphere is too charged for me to weigh in on this one. You make the call.

We don't replace divots in our sport. We don't repair disc marks. The air is the playing surface for disc golf. The buried basket, basically creates a "Green" where the disc will interact with the ground before entering the basket. Will you maintain this area around the basket like a "Green"? Will you clear it of small rocks and grass clumps that might deflect a disc sliding in from one particular side? Will you apply herbicide and maintain a rigorous mowing schedule to ensure uniformity on the green? Or will randomness and chaos reign, to then be dismissed with a, "well we don't worry about that in disc golf". We don't worry about it because it is not part of the game.

I'll believe disc golf is ready for "Greens" when I see one.

The more I think about it, the more I agree that the buried basket is a bit like an upside down basket. Maybe a Halloween tournament where all the baskets are either buried or hung upside down from trees. It being Halloween we could all paint clown mouths on our faces. FutureCollisions, you better be there.

Yes, ill be there with a turbo putter and aerobie and all kinds of other gimmick junk that should be tossed out with the trash just like the idea of buried baskets :)

Patrick P
Sep 12 2012, 06:45 PM
I saw in another forum where they had a slightly raised wooden patio structure with a buried basket, looked fairly interesting. Players had the opportunity to slide their disc along to get in the basket, it looked fun. In my opinion do I think a buried basket looks gimmicky, yes, but that's just my opinion. I would elect to have a raised basket on a wooden pyramid over a buried basket any day of the week. I would be concerned about maintenance, vandalism (people disposing of objects in the hole), and disc retrieval issues. I do look forward to coming across a hanging basket!

billmh
Sep 12 2012, 09:25 PM
Personally, I'm more in favor of a basket sitting on flat ground so rollers and sliders can't enter the basket unless of course they hit the little ramps I install in front of the left and right side of the basket for those type of shots to have a chance. :)

Sounds like an old Oak Grover after all...

Ellen
Sep 13 2012, 10:42 AM
Balderdash! There is no straw man in my argument but there is a sweeping generalization in yours. You say...

There are many occasions where skipping, sliding or rolling a disc is advantageous, whether or not the outcome is disc in basket is irrelevant.

I say bologny! If the outcome is the disc in the basket, then skipping, sliding, or rolling are NOT advantageous because, unless the basket is buried, the disc must be travelling through the air to enter the basket. There is no advantage during a 30 foot, unobstructed putt in having your disc contact the ground before entering the basket. It is completely irrational. When the basket is buried, then skipping, sliding, or rolling that same 30 foot, unobstructed putt becomes a rational maneuver. This only happens if the basket is buried.

The scenarios you pose are equally relevant to using those tactics to get the disc under the basket, disc around, under or over an obstacle or whatever. Your straw man fails because throwing a disc intentionally into the ground can be a rational shot in many scenarios, the installation of a buried basket does not suddenly invalidate or validate it.

The scenario I'm looking for is the one where the 30 foot, unobstructed putt involves "throwing a disc intentionally into the ground". Find two players at a tournament whose putting style is to skip every putt into the basket. Good luck with that one. You're claiming up shots and putts are intended to accomplish the same thing. They're not. The goal of a putt is to get the disc into the basket. The goal of a putt is not to get the disc under the basket or around a tree. If the goal is to land under the basket or get around a tree but the goal is not to land in the basket, then that's an up shot. Shooting into an unobstructed basket, do you care if your upshot is two feet behind the basket, or two feet to the left or the right of the basket? No. It's two feet from the basket. Do you care if your putt is two feet to the left or right or behind the basket?

The logic works like this
Given: It is NOT rational to skip or slide a 30 foot, unobstructed putt into the basket.
Given: It IS rational to skip or slide a 30 foot, unobstructed putt into a buried basket.
Therefore: The buried basket is installed irrationally.

There may be a fallacy in there, but it's not a straw man.

bruceuk
Sep 13 2012, 11:18 AM
Straw Man:
Person 1 has position X.
Person 2 disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the superficially similar position Y
Person 2 attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.

Position X is that there is nothing fundamentally irrational about putting into a basket at ground level.

Position Y is that putting into the floor when a basket is at normal height is irrational.

Looks very much like one to me.

futurecollisions
Sep 13 2012, 11:53 AM
Bruce, nice try at a diversion, but the fact is you have no argument or case FOR the buried basket, while a few of us have given many valid reasons why its a bad idea.

Chuck, you say that putting in this sport is too easy and its the part that needs most improvement. Well, here we have the buried basket which would do nothing but make putting easier. When the basket is on the ground, you pretty much take away the risk of long come-back putts because if you run at the basket and miss, the disc isn't going far. Not to mention, putting at the ground is just plain ridiculous.

These types of gimmicks always come under the false pretense of 'fun'. "oh, this is going to be more 'fun'", it cant be bad can it? If you want to talk about 'straw men', this is one of them. Its always the same type of players that come up with these things and the same type of players that support it; the ones who need to gain competitive advantage with gimmicks or novelties instead of improving their game on the already established playing field.

Ellen
Sep 13 2012, 12:05 PM
Straw Man:
Person 1 has position X.
Person 2 disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the superficially similar position Y
Person 2 attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.

Position X is that there is nothing fundamentally irrational about putting into a basket at ground level.

Position Y is that putting into the floor when a basket is at normal height is irrational.

Looks very much like one to me.

You misrepresent my point as being an attack on position X.

I've supported position Y quite well. And I'm not attacking position X. I support it. I said, "when a basket is installed at ground level sliding or skipping the disc into the basket becomes a rational shot." Position X must be true for the conclusion to work. Try it this way. You can use your own words "normal height" or my words "installed rationally".

Position Y is that putting into the floor when a basket is at normal height [installed rationally] is irrational.


Position X is that there is nothing fundamentally irrational about putting [into the floor] into a basket at ground level [installed irrationally -- not at normal height].

If Y and X then the basket in the ground is not at normal height [not installed rationally].

The only position I can see to counter is "whose to say a basket should be installed normally". Hang them upside down too. No rule against it.

There is indeed, nothing fundamentally irrational about putting into a basket at ground level, by the same token, there is nothing fundamentally irrational about putting into a basket hanging upside down. But there is something very irrational in installing a basket at ground level because you make a shot that is 99.9% ridiculous, suddenly become part of the game -- the sliding putt. Knowing how to play around a tree, out of casual water, down a tight tunnel, are all common parts of the game. Knowing how to slide in from 50 feet, is only going to help the very few who choose to embrace this gimmick.

cgkdisc
Sep 13 2012, 12:34 PM
The height of the basket does not affect putting difficulty enough to make any dent in what's needed if the goal would be to more closely match the putting difficulty in ball golf. I would still not have a problem with a smaller, more challenging target buried in the ground.

krupicka
Sep 13 2012, 12:38 PM
Knowing how to slide a shot is a good skill to have. Sometimes it is the best shot depending on what is in your way and the terrain.

There may be other reasons that putting a basket in the ground is a bad idea, but because someone needs to learn a shot for this that they should learn for other reasons is not it.

Ellen
Sep 13 2012, 01:10 PM
There may be other reasons that putting a basket in the ground is a bad idea, but because someone needs to learn a shot for this that they should learn for other reasons is not it.

[Warning the following point contains straw man and slippery slope fallacies].
The slide putt? The low upshot, the skipping upshot, the roller, all good things to know. The slide putt? How about the chain hanger putt [straw man]? That way when I encounter an upside down basket I'll know how to hang the putter in chains [slippery slope].

There is a tendency to assume that a sliding putt is equivalent to a sliding upshot. They are two different shots, requiring two entirely different outcomes.

Bruce would be quick to point out to you that your point contains a sweeping generalization fallacy.

Given: sliding shots are a part of our game.
Given: a sliding putt is a sliding shot.
Therefore: sliding putts are part of our game.

cgkdisc
Sep 13 2012, 01:31 PM
Our game is throwing the disc from tee to target in as few throws as possible. A throw is defined as: "The propulsion of a disc by a player that results in a new lie." Thus, propelling the disc in any way would be part of our game.

Ellen
Sep 13 2012, 01:50 PM
Our game is throwing the disc from tee to target in as few throws as possible. A throw is defined as: "The propulsion of a disc by a player that results in a new lie." Thus, propelling the disc in any way would be part of our game.

Chuck, sensing one sweeping generalization wasn't enough, gives us another excellent example.

Given: A throw is the propulsion of a disc by a player that results in a new lie.
Given: Throws are part of our game.
Given: A sliding putt is a throw.
Therefore: Sliding putts are part of our game.

Sliding Putts are throws, yes. And throws are part of the game, yes. But sliding putts are not part of the game. I could spend all day and drive to the twenty or thirty courses near my home. I could throw two thousand putts in the next 24 hours. Do you know how many sliding putts I'm going to make? You do -- 0. ZERO! Because there are ZERO baskets around here that will accept them. They are not part of the game. They are a gimmick!

If the installation of one of your baskets is going to force me make a throw that none of the 200 or 300 hundred baskets near my home even allow me to make. I'm calling your installation gimmicky. Admit it you guys. It really is a gimmick.

cgkdisc
Sep 13 2012, 01:57 PM
Sorry. But if you play Becker, a sliding putt off the rim of the pit containing the basket on hole 3 or 4 and even for the basket in the pit at BRP can work. We also have ricochet putts off a tree on baskets like #1 at both Kaposia and Alimagnet. All of these are legit throws.

Ellen
Sep 13 2012, 02:13 PM
Sorry. But if you play Becker, a sliding putt off the rim of the pit containing the basket on hole 3 or 4 and even for the basket in the pit at BRP can work. We also have ricochet putts off a tree on baskets like #1 at both Kaposia and Alimagnet. All of these are legit throws.

I'm talking about SLIDING putts not skip putts. Putts where the disc is, at same time, partially in the cylinder and also touching the ground. Seemingly a very common way to enter a buried basket. Yet an impossible way to enter a basket in any other configuration than buried. That's the whole point. The buried basket introduces a type of putting, the slide putt, that is not encountered in most standard course installations. And because of that, the buried basket should only be considered for non standard play.

NAGS -- Not A Golf Shot

Ellen
Sep 13 2012, 02:24 PM
I'm between projects and have nothing better to do than complain about a basket in Arkansas.

LOL

:p

cgkdisc
Sep 13 2012, 02:53 PM
Not sure why a shot who's only utility is for a buried basket is still not a legit throw? It might be a new throw for those who haven't seen it yet. Nonetheless, as I pointed out before, there could easily have been buried baskets from the early days and in fact there were ground baskets at that time. There are a variety of throws that are only used in rare situations. I like the reverse dunk when your lie is underneath a high hanging basket. ;)

futurecollisions
Sep 13 2012, 03:17 PM
Not sure why a shot who's only utility is for a buried basket is still not a legit throw? It might be a new throw for those who haven't seen it yet. Nonetheless, as I pointed out before, there could easily have been buried baskets from the early days and in fact there were ground baskets at that time. There are a variety of throws that are only used in rare situations. I like the reverse dunk when your lie is underneath a high hanging basket. ;)

There are other examples of 'throws' that can be defined as such but turned out not to be good ideas. The aerobie for example, its more of a ballistic trajectory and its a path the pdga probably did not want to go down, and i see the buried basket in the same category. why even entertain something this silly? I think we have a bunch of devils advocates who know better but would rather defend this garbage

cgkdisc
Sep 13 2012, 03:55 PM
I'm thinking you're taking the Luddite perspective and locking down the game in your preferred view without allowing the game to flower into its full potential.