Disc rim images courtesy of InfiniteDiscs.com.

Early History

Our games began innocently enough, but as we were tossing our new Pluto Platters around in the backyard, we pretty quickly started to come up with games that were a lot like golf. And, when we moved into the local park to play it was no problem at all because these delightful toys were a great fit with a mixed-use environment. If a flight did go astray it was certainly much less of a disruption than a baseball or football flying into your picnic. We played very well with others.

Sports Objects

In the grand scale of sports missiles, we were a very friendly addition. And, just for fun, here's a list of a few sports objects roughly arranged by, "least friendly" to "most friendly." At the top of the list are missiles that you would least want to have fly into your picnic and at the bottom are those that you probably wouldn't even notice:

• Bullet
• Javelin
• Arrow
• Dart
• Shot Put shot
• Discus
• Bowling ball
• Horseshoe
• Paint ball
• Hockey puck
• Golf ball
• Baseball
• Softball
• Soccer ball
• Tennis ball
• Volleyball
• Basketball
• Shuttlecock
• Table Tennis ball
• Nerf ball

So, where did our 75 gram Pluto Platter fit in? Somewhere in the neighborhood of the tennis ball seems about right. It was a very friendly object, especially because it floated through the air and fell to the earth so much more slowly than most of the other objects. And, that friendly flight was definitely a big part of the Frisbee's appeal.

1958 Wham-O Frisbee, based off of Fred Morrison's Pluto Platter.

The Performance Race

Fast-forward about 25 years. Our little Pluto Platter had turned into a Pro Model and then to a World Class 119g. That said, how were we doing on the friendliness scale? Actually, not too badly. Even the 119g was still probably in that tennis ball level. It was still pretty light and flexible, and of course, now had an even taller rim that is almost square. Unless it landed in the potato salad, it probably wasn’t a big deal if it floated into a picnic.

But, disc sports had now emerged and had now begun the search for improved performance. We wanted to fly farther, driven mainly by our rapidly growing interest in disc golf and the overall field events.

The first key to that improved performance was the gradual increase of disc weights. It wasn't quite as obvious as we might now think, but it quickly became clear that heavier discs flew farther and handled the wind more effectively. Especially in disc golf, those benefits were immediately obvious. In fact, during the Night Flyer "weight race" period, it seemed like there were slightly heavier disc available for sale at every event. In fact, this created quite a controversy as the limited number of the latest and heaviest discs were not always available to everyone.

At about this same time we made another basic discovery; smaller discs flew farther than larger ones. Again, this may seem obvious now, but do remember that in earlier days we were under the impression that large discs like the top of the line Master Frisbee were the best performers. However, somewhat smaller discs like the 70 mold showed that they could outperform the larger 40 mold 119.

There was a good bit of talk that this push for heavier and heavier discs was harming the sport. This led to the first ever technical specification for golf discs; a limit on the number of grams per centimeter of disc diameter. Various attempts were made to set limits and, at one point, a vote was taken among active players. The average of the suggestions was to become the new limit.

The math may have been a bit shaky since at least one jokester submitted "infinity" as his vote. After a number of years, an 8.3g per centimeter of diameter limit was set for competitive play, as well as a 200g max weight. These limitations removed a number of very heavy existing discs from play, but that standard held and continues to this day.

And that brings us to the next and possibly most significant step with the development of the beveled-edge rim. Once again, this advancement in aerodynamics may seem obvious in retrospect, but it was a big performance breakthrough that has changed the configuration of performance discs for all time. And, even though the design of early discs like the original Eagle appeared very radically pointed at the time, they of course, were relatively blunt.

The original Innova Eagle, now called the Aero.

At about the same time, we began to see discs that were made of somewhat stiffer material as there was a growing belief that very rigid flight plates made for better performance. It was a common occurrence to see competitors at the distance throwing line with their discs being kept chilled in an ice chest.

The performance formula was clearly starting to emerge. To fly farther, discs needed to be heavier, smaller, stiffer, lower, and sharper. But, at this point we were still exploring the possibilities and the only two factors that were controlled for competition were weight and minimum diameter.

The Flazer

In 1989, we were gifted by a vision from the future. Into a few hands came the "Flazer", the prototype of a disc that was much sharper and stiffer than any of the current production. It was, of course, simply the logical extension of the performance formula that was being discovered.

In fact, it did seem to have some performance potential, but the bad news was that in some test throwing, when it struck the trunk of a palm tree… it stuck! This gave pause for thought and concern. Our playful little toy had now indisputably moved up into the less friendly third of sports objects. However, the general perception of flying discs, still typically dubbed with the congenial "Frisbee" name, was that they continued to be harmless fun, welcome to fly through any family picnic without concern.

The design of the Flazer was breakthrough.

Simple Measures

In the early 90s, it seemed that the time was right to put in place a comprehensive set of standards for discs that would be used in play.

However, the flying disc industry was already beginning to take off with four major manufacturers and a number of others coming on as well. It obviously was going to be a challenge to overlay these comprehensive standards when no standards other than weight and size had been previously controlled. The additional factors that seemed important to include were: rigidity, rim depth, rim configuration and edge sharpness.

The last two components may sound redundant, but the general shape of the rim and the size of the actual edge of the disc were obviously different factors. An additional challenge to setting up the standards was a commitment to keeping the measurement procedures very simple so that every manufacturer would be able to evaluate their own discs without the need for purchasing extremely expensive equipment.

In several cases, this required the invention of simple procedures to replace more sophisticated engineering techniques that were also quite complicated. After much experimentation, a set of standards was established along with simple procedures to determine compliance. However, an even more significant issue was how to best fit with current production and convince the various companies to cooperate with the new standards.

It was not that difficult to set standards for most of the components without affecting current production. The most difficult of the standards turned out to be the edge sharpness, which had been our main concern about the prototype Flazer. A hot new driver on the market that had just come out was the Eclipse, which was significantly less sharp than the Flazer, but it was still the sharpest of the existing discs.

Because it had already achieved broad popularity it seemed essential to have that disc be within the standards if we were to achieve overall acceptance of the standards. That made the standard 1/16 of an inch. To pass the test, the edge of the disc had to fit into the gauge without the tip touching the bottom.

A High Level of Compliance

Reaction to the new standards was widely mixed, as expected. Most players were supportive because it didn't really affect them too dramatically. Some manufacturing companies were immediately supportive, recognizing that it would make production more predictable. Others, of course, resented any restrictions and preferred that the "market determine what was most desirable. " However, most observers realized that unbridled development toward more and more ballistic discs would soon take us away from the basic concept of Flying Saucers. Ultimately, there was almost complete compliance by the beginning of the next competitive season and the implementation of the standards was a success.

Do remember that all this was over 25 years ago. As disc sports grew in popularity and more and more manufacturers joined the industry, they all of course built their products right up to the limits of the existing standards. At that point, our discs were firmly positioned in the less-friendly third of sports objects. However, in many ways we all continued to imagine that we were still throwing Pluto Platters.

Current specs for disc design can be seen in the PDGA Technical Standards document.

Modification Efforts

Some of us worried that there might be an unfortunate incident that would be very negative for all involved and create a significant backlash against the sport. To address the risk of that possibility, a couple of efforts were mounted to modify the nature of the discs in play.

In 1989, there was an effort to dial back one of the critical design components and an effort was begun to change the rim sharpness rating from 1/16" to 3/32". For various reasons, that effort never got traction, although there was significant sentiment in its favor.

A few late years later, in the mid-90s, came the creation of 150g class competition. This effort did have some success including various championships and a nation-wide adoption by the Japanese Flying Disc Association. However, the idea of 150 g competitions outside of Japan didn't continue. The significant side benefit of the effort was that, despite widespread pessimism about the performance of these lighter discs, most companies began to experiment with the less-weighty versions. These models soon found a significant clientele and typically remain as popular parts of most companies' offerings. Ironically, one of the initial concerns about 150 class was that the discs would not fly nearly as far as the heavier versions, but of course, it turns out the lighter discs have come to dominate distance competition. And, these days, it's not unusual to find a few of the lighter discs as part of many golf bags.

Part of what has been an underlying factor in all of these considerations has been the amazingly good safety record of disc sports in general. This record is especially impressive when one considers the wide range of activity that is taking place every single day. This includes everything from physical education classes to pick up Ultimate games, recreational disc golf and random picnic tossing. These days, there are undoubtedly many millions of disc throws every day around the world and most of them are made by people who are far from experts. Only a very small percentage are members of clubs and participate in formal competitions.

A New Factor

One later and unanticipated design component which was not initially controlled by the tech standards was that of rim width. That development was a surprise and it had a dramatic effect on disc performance. Not only did it affect how the discs flew, but also how they skipped and rolled. Beyond that, the wider rims also changed the overall structure of the discs, making them generally more rigid. In 2008, the PDGA established a maximum rim width of 2.6 cm, again having to take into account the existing models that had already been approved. In retrospect, that move was probably a bit late in terms of the most desirable structure for the discs and their ease of handling.

The Sustainability Initiative

In 2013, the PDGA board undertook a general evaluation of the long-term sustainability of disc golf. Many times when things are going very well for an endeavor it's difficult to look ahead. In a period of rapid growth, it's often challenging just to keep up with the pace of expansion. Because of that, the PDGA Board of Directors decided to put a special emphasis on this attempt to consider the potential challenges that lay ahead. The result of that evaluation was an identification of three main areas of effort that specifically related to the game itself. They are as follows:

• Education
• Courses
• Equipment

Of these three, education is undoubtedly the most effective. Of course, it is always difficult to change well-established behaviors, but it is absolutely something that must be done. We need to fully address the current implications of our play, rather than pretending that we are still a completely harmless activity. When we look at sports that use extremely dangerous equipment, such as archery, we see that all participants are fully versed in the risks and their obligations. Clearly, our equipment is significantly less risky than arrows, but especially since we often play in the neighborhood of other park users, we would be wise to emulate the care which has been a hallmark of archery and other similar sports.

Of course, this education also includes the informing of the public and venues as to the nature of our activity. This is the reason for a much more robust effort to post informational signs in the areas that we use. That is only reasonable and fair. These informational signs are now being made available through the PDGA and other sources. It is critical that they are put into place where they are needed.

To further minimize risks, we also need to do a much better job of assuring that our courses and tournaments are using best design practice. We all know particular holes, courses, and even tournaments that are great fun to play, but simply are not adequately safe. As painful as it may be, those cases must be addressed. We will look to the course designer group to lead us in this effort, but it will require our collective resolve at all levels to make these necessary adjustments.

Ultimately, we should recognize that the development of disc golf-only areas is a large part of our future. Ball golfers don't share their fairways with picnickers. If our sport is going to grow we need our own space. It is in our best interest to make that development a priority.

Changes to equipment are especially challenging because, although we are still a young sport, we have made many, many discs to the existing standards. And, there are only certain practical changes that can be made. Obviously, there would be greatly reduced risk if we played with 150 gram rubber Night Flyers, but that's not possible or desirable.

Because of the technical issues involved in these considerations, the PDGA will draw upon the experience of the Equipment Manufacturing Consortium to determine what, if any, modifications might be considered to the specifications for disc golf equipment in the future.

All of these efforts combine as we assume the responsibility of taking our place as an established sport rather than just an idle pastime.

This article was a collaboration between Dan "Stork" Roddick, Director of Special Projects for the PDGA Board of Directors & Brian Graham, PDGA Executive Director.