Below find the specs for our Disc-Catching Targets [DCTs]. Other than descriptive wording there is no definition of how they should behave or the purpose of various parts. It's more of a physical description of what parts make up the DCTs.

For the purpose of these parts we need to look at the rules (See Below). Here they refer to them as Disc Entrapment Devices [DEDs] as opposed to Disc-Catching Target. Why? I'm not certain.

So what has been the result of these Specs and Rules through the years and where are our DCTs or DEDs headed in the future? Relatively speaking it doesn�t much matter to disc golfers, so long as they behave the same way for everyone. But what about for our sport as it is seen by the world that we hope to, at least in part, ensnare in the addiction known as disc golf? Is there anything that could be or is being planned to do to create targets that might help in that regard? Perhaps something that would result in a better perception of our sport and the skill necessary to play it?

From the DGA Website (�http://www.discgolfassoc.com/history.html�) here is an excerpt from �An Abbreviated History of Disc Golf 1 million B.C.E. to Present Day� � (DGA is the company founded by Ed Headrick the father of Disc Golf)

�Early targets
Since that time Disc Golf evolved from mans natural competitive nature. Early games used targets of trees, trash cans, light poles, chicken wire baskets, pipes, and coeds. The game was formalized when Headrick invented the first Disc Pole Hole, catching devise, consisting of 10 chains hanging in a parabolic shape over an upward opening basket, US Patent 4,039,189, issued 1975.�

Here it is described in the DGA�s own words as a �catching devise�.

It is clear from this, the DCT specs, and the DED rules that the purpose of a disc golf target is to catch a thrown disc. And it makes sense that the better and more consistently a DCT catches a disc the better the DCT. To this end we have seen ongoing attempts to improve on the earliest DCTs with manufactures such as INNOVA (�) and their DISCatcher and DISCRAFT (�) and their ChainStar and STROKESAVER (http://www.strokesaver.net/) trying to enhance the Model T so to speak, or CHING (http://www.chingpro.com/�) and its Skill-Shot and DR. FRED (http://www.dolf.com/) and his Disc Golf Targets that are stepping outside the box. Still in the end, the single job of a DCT is to catch the disc.

Another question, besides how consistently and well a DCT can catch a disc, is in what way can it catch it that would improve the attractiveness and intrigue of watching disc golf? This in our efforts to gain greater mainstream recognition and reach our goal of 20,000 active members by 2006. Putting in ball golf is one of the more exciting and interesting aspects of that sport, as the ball meanders this way and that, up and down, across a green towards the cup. Would it be possible to mimic, or even surpass, this with a disc flying throw the air? And how? To go beyond discs just making a �B� line towards the DCT?

Thus far Dr. Fred in my opinion has done the most to increase the intrigue and interest generated around the DCT (or on the green). His targets require far more strategy not only in putting at them, but in approaching and driving at them. I�m not a fan of all of his designs, but you have to give him credit for creating such thought provoking DCTs.

I am very optimistic about the development of future Disc-Catching Targets. The potential as far as increasing the level of fascination surrounding DCTs both in play and as a spectator is nearly without limit. Unlike soccer, basketball, or other target-oriented sports, the dynamic of scoring is far more complicated than just the size or dimensions of a target opening. DCTs �Catch� and hold discs suspended above the ground through the use of chains, cables, and a variety of deflection and catching devices. I look for new DCTs to come out in the near future to be significantly superior in both regards discussed here and quite possibly to be of simpler and less expensive design.

DISC-CATCHING TARGETS:_(II)

(A) General Configuration

All disc-catching targets shall be composed of a basket and may have a deflection or entrapment apparatus above the basket.

(B) Basket

The basket shall have a circular rim of no greater than 67 cm in diameter as measured on the outside edge of the rim, with a minimal basket depth of 15 cm. The basket rim shall have an average height of between 76 and 89 cm above the ground. Over slope, height compliance is determined by averaging the distance to the ground directly below the top edge of the rim at four equidistant points around the basket. Baskets may be placed at a lower height on courses designed primarily for junior play.

(C) Deflection or Entrapment Apparatus

(1) A disc-catching device may incorporate some sort of deflection device in its design. This apparatus may be flexible or solid.
(2) The maximum width of a deflection apparatus shall be 71 cm.
(D) Other Acceptable Targets

PDGA reserves the right to declare reasonable and prudent standards for certification of object and other target formats as it deems appropriate.

RULES:
RULE: 803.12 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 or within one of the entrapment sections. This includes a disc wedged into or hanging from the lower entrapment section but excludes a disc resting on top of, or hanging outside of, the upper entrapment section. The disc must also remain within the chains or entrapment sections until removed.

Nick,

A very interesting read and well thought out. For those of us that have been around a while, you may remember the original Mach 3's with the large lower ring. These would catch a disc very well, but delighted in pushing them back out just as much.

Certainly, the use of cables in some basket designs has added some novelty. I cannot remember the manufacturer, but I do remember one cable design that would only catch and hold a disc if it was thrown at a 90 degree angle.

I do believe your assessment of Dr. Fred's catchers are however flawed. Anyone who calls Disc Golf "DOLF" cannot have an understanding of the game!

Believe me, Dolftor Fred, is a dope in some ways in my opinion, but you got to give him his dues for innovative and intreguing DCT designs. My favorite designer and manufacturer is Ching though. I expect bigger and better things to come from them than from our State Department, Pentagon, and CIA (DGA, INNOVA, DISCRAFT). It's tough to be agile when your so big, it's not their fault, they just can't take any risks...

They see risk, not opportunity...

And Jerry, those fickle DCTs were called "Cable Catchers". They were pretty bad, and no satifying CHING!!!

All I gotta say is...

You want a disc to be counted that is resting on top of the basket more than spaghetti wants a meatball!

If the disc crosses 100% inside the distance variable a laser counter will be activated and you are holed out. No chaching!!!! But much more accurate. Think about it! And if necessary for those doubting thomases out there an audible sound can occur.

ROFLMMFAO Randy. I 'bout fell outta my freakin' chair. /msgboard/images/clipart/proud.gif

"...more than spaghetti wants a meatball!" Too dam funny. /msgboard/images/clipart/proud.gif

My Homemade from 1987 is still Awesome. It didnt seem to help much though. But really, A target, is a target! Hit it you win, miss it, you know. THIMK! "meister"

Hoser? Hoser? Anybody? "meister"

* All disc-catching targets shall be composed of a basket and may have a deflection or entrapment apparatus above the basket. *

This NK spec is nonsense. Nick clearly doesn't understand or accept the concept or purpose of a deflection device. The deflection devices purpose is to deflect the disc into the basket, not to catch the disc.

Nick's specs attempt to makes anything that might trap a disc above the bottom basket into a good shot, in other words, DROTs are good in NKs entrapped vision of the world. It's a rather weak attempt to kill Ed's legacy of having a trap on top of the chain rack...

Plus, in Nick's world, he finds it OK to have the bottom basket drop discs of any size right thru the bottom (no hole out) -- wedgies are OK and it would be an acceptable basket.

Let's all take a giant step backwards into Nick's world...

One thing should be noted with Nick's spec post, which I agree with.

Nick appears to have finally come to understand that the specs are the foundation of the sport, and the rules should emminate from the specs, not visa versa. The rules can't refer to an entrapment device that isn't defined in the specs without exhibiting a fair degree of illogic.

Those are the PDGA specs...not mine. Disc-Catching Targets [DCT] catch discs. Oooh that is such a strange and mysterious idea.

Deflection devices, which just happen to be part of the DCT, also catch discs that are counted as holed out. Whoa man! What a mind blower!

Some parts of the DCT are no good though man.

Why?

Because Ed said so man.

Oh.

Hauf,

I still have my personalized "prototype" Hoser. You got one?

I would like to see a class of 18 students in a welding 305 (not a beginner welding class) at someplace like RIT get an assignment to build a DCT. all 18 must fall within the limits of the PDGA rules, but all can use different materials. It would be a bonus if they were actually sculptors. Then get a scenic park and install this most unique of Disc Golf Courses. Disc Golf as Art, Art in Disc Golf.

Who cares that certain designs catch differently than others, the most important thing is to spawn creativity, and who knows, maybe a new best design.

I would love to see a disc golf course where all the baskets were incorporated into outdoor sculpture in some way. The Europeans have us beat in this respect. Sculpture seems to be in a lot of courses over there, I have even seen sculpture surrounding a target! Now that's a cool obstacle.

That certainly would be cool Matt.

In there truest sense they REALLY are public sculpture anyway.

Does anyone remember the "Web". With their 3 sets of chains and extra deep baskets. IMO those where the best DCTs (even with their closed lids). The last time I saw them was at that temporary course in Pittsburgh. (Hampton?)

I know that Asia has a few manufacturers of DCTs too. I don't know their relation to American manufacturers, but they looked most similar to DGA DCTs. Nothing to write home about though.

Does anyone have links to different DCT sites? If so could you post them here?

Portable Spider Web targets make appearances for temp holes in the Cincinnati area quite frequently. Also, I believe that they are the targets at Cabin Creek, the private course in Butler County, OH. Apparently there was a bit of a controversy over their use during the 1997 Pro Worlds (read patent controversy). Before my time so I am not 100% sure about that, but perhaps someone else has an eyewitness account.

Spider webs are the work of Allen Pier from Peru, IN. There are several courses around central Indiana that have a permanent set of spiderwebs. These are my absolute favorite basket. Spider webs were used for several of the temporary holes in this past weekend's Michiana Open. I am sure Allen's baskets have migrated all across the US.

i think there might still be spider baskets
at swinney park in ft wayne

ive played a couple of T s there in previous years but not recently

it was always a challage to go from regular
basket to the spider mid round

always had to remind myself to practice putt
at both baskets

my 2 cents

Iroquois Park in Louisville, KY has many Spider baskets.

Bill Burns: No ,but did you witness Hoser Williams Fart putt in the mixed doubles, Against the course pro and his girlfreind.At the new ball golf course in Athens Tx. called The Pinnacle ? It was HILLARIOUS! He shook it off, and said something like" its only natural" Then nailled the putt. Big gallery all chuckling, Priceless!!! By the way discers. The ball team only beat the disc team by 1 stroke, I think, We were rollin fools that weekend. Steve Valencia edged out Sammy Grizzafi. Sammys putt falls out the bottom after he looks away. Tragic. /clipart/proud.gif Valencias sponsor? UPTIME! "meister"

are there any pics of these baskets on the web?

Spiders were great targets, they will catch anything. And they don't spit!!!

I found a site that shows off many homemade targets as well as a spider web 3 basket.

http://www.geocities.com/colosseum/park/1134/HomeMadeBaskets.html

By Rocmon on Wednesday, May 07, 2003 - 08:14 am:
Portable Spider Web targets make appearances for temp holes in the Cincinnati area quite frequently. Also, I believe that they are the targets at Cabin Creek, the private course in Butler County, OH. Apparently there was a bit of a controversy over their use during the 1997 Pro Worlds (read patent controversy).


1998 worlds in cinci..97 was charlotte

baskets were in at cabin creek,they are great for catching any style of putt,the cabin creek course
was very nice and the climo flip into the lake and the stokely called skip to the basket on 18 were highlights of the finals...
not to mention my wearing out of john houck by setting up freestyling throws to him for over an hour....

there is one that always makes it to the memorial in phoenix every year but i don't know who's it is

I remember the Web catching anything thrown at it, whether from 250 feet to right next to it, it really was something special. Make that lid open and you'd have something. ;)

Keith,

Like I said, before my time, but I still shouldn't make a silly mistake like that.

Cabin Creek is still a pretty nice course, but now only available during the week. The weekends are now devoted to paintball and a couple of fairways are now dotted with paintball courses (i.e. those little structures that they hide behind and the like).

I heard something about a patent being up in 8 months. Does that have to do with the DGA DCTs or is that with the INNOVA bevel edged discs?

Anyone know?

CONES

are there any left ?

i played them north of chicago

and in MN

* I heard something about a patent being up in 8 months. *

The patent on the early DGA pole holes is about up, if not up.

However, this patent didn't cover the radial chain sliders and several other patented (and unpatented) 'improvements' to chain hole style targets that have come along in subsequent years.

IMHO, it's a step backwards to copy these older chain tops, complete with all of their various funky "good shot" rejecting behaviors, just for the sake of making a cheaper 'target' available.

Lightning is apparently doing it.

While some folks protect their patents like the family jewels, others may be open to low cost licensing of superior technology which, may in fact end up being more cost effective and provide for a better product than can be had copying an expired and outdated target design.

This also gets back to how, if the rules continue to 'protect' inferior designs that tend to trap discs above the basket, then the sport is going to continue to see it's market flooded with such designs.

By Rocmon on Thursday, May 08, 2003 - 07:37 am:
Keith,

Like I said, before my time, but I still shouldn't make a silly mistake like that.

i have only been playing since may 96 so alot of disc history to me is stuff i've heard from different players or read about in old mags.

i remember that year because 97 i played both am and pro worlds back to back and 98 was areal treat as i travelled and played with a lot of florida players where in 97 i was on my own....keith

Fred, do you or anyone else have more info on the lightning basket--notably how it is going to be priced. I had heard something about this a while back and rumors were that it was going to be substantially cheaper than existing baskets. I was hoping someone could confirm this.

I, for one, would love to see something heavy-duty enough to use for real courses that was priced more like a Mach-14. Even if it doesn't catch as well as a Mach-2, if it could shave $2000 off the cost of putting in an 18-hole course, it would probably inspire a whole new flood of public community courses and it would make personal private courses a lot more feasible. World class courses will always raise the money for the best possible baskets, but I am in favor of almost anything that will help put more courses in the ground and grow this great sport.

For anyone who is curious, the targeted release date is sometime next month (June 2003) and they do have a picture up on their website: http://www.lightninggolfdiscs.com/basket.html

Moir Park in Bloomington(?), MN still has metal saucers/cones and a KOA in Owatonna, MN has a nine hole saucer course.

I heard that Fly 18 is going to use Dr. Fred Open Lid Targets, can anyone confirm that?

<a href="http://www.pdga.com/discus/messages/42/8794.html?TuesdayApril0820031126am#POST153297 (http://www.pdga.com/discus/messages/42/8794.html?TuesdayApril0820031126am#POST153297)" target="_blank">http://www.pdga.com/discus/messages/42/8794.html?TuesdayApril0820031126am#POST153297</A></a>

Got it. The answer is yes.

It also reminds me that if we want this rule changed there is a process for doing so(beyond discussion). I'll check into it and post what I find here for your review.

Yes Nick I am using Dr Freds baskets.They are on 3 of my courses Dunedin FL,Portland OR,and Indiana.Thats all you will ever see on my courses they look and catch great.Like my courses if havent tried them dont knock em...I will start to manufacture Dr Freds basket in San Diego in 1 month.The basket will have some new improvements on the pole and locking system.The basket will come in different colors you can pick and also in Alloy.The top will stay open.Only the PDGA approved basket will I make Temp and Perm.Dr. Fred has been supporting the fly 18 concept on golf courses and will continue to do so with the lincesing of his baskets.Watch out here comes the kooook the quack and the queen/msgboard/images/clipart/happy.gif/msgboard/images/clipart/happy.gif

Wow! I've been wanting a chance to get to play on some of Dr. Fred's directional targets, and if you drop one of your courses in the Houston area, then it sounds as if I may finally get my chance to try 'em!!! /msgboard/images/clipart/proud.gif Yeeeee-haaaaaa! Bring it to Houston Reese!!

I have tried the Open Lid, I bought one 2 or 3 years ago and toted it around to a bunch of events for folks to try, then gave it away in a spectator raffle at the first MADCi.

Reviews were mixed, but most negative comments were because it was one of the PVC ones. It caught discs pretty well though. The plastic netting was very inconsistant in its performance, letting in low putts and occasionally letting ones that flew in the top shoot or drop through. Most of this I'm sure is resolved in the permanent models.

I'd like to see some courses around my way give them a try. I'm not a huge fan of the directional targets, but haven't experienced them yet.

I'm still wondering if disc golf target manufacturers are working on redesigning their targets to not allow "Disc Resting On Top" or "Wedgies"? And why not?

Or if any are actually thinking of embracing an open lid or not and why?

Seems like there has been plenty of time to correct these design flaws.

I'm still wondering if disc golf target manufacturers are working on redesigning their targets to not allow "Disc Resting On Top" or "Wedgies"?



Yes.

Care to share? :)

I know Jim Palmeri is working on something too.

My suspicion is that the entrenched manufactures are reluctant to redesign because it will make their inventory and past models obsolete, or at least less desirable.

I don't think that need be the case. Yes, there is better or worse, but even Mach Ones beat the tar out of posts in the ground. Long term it should increase sales to come out with a superior Disc Catching Device, right?

FTR: I greatly prefer Open Lid/No Wedgie disc catching devices. Open Lid acknowledges that discs fly in more diverse trajectories than horizontal.

The lid of a Dr. Fred's standard basket (Open Lid), the basket characteristics of the WEB, and the chains of the original portable Ching Basket.

If a wedgie is when a soft disc sticks into the rim, then I noticed some of the european targets have put advertisements on that part of the baskets, making companies apt to sponsor. Check it out in dgwn

That is a decent idea, but just as a way of modifying what are, in my estimation, flawed designs.

I'm interested in hearing if manufacturers are actually designing new targets that make DROTs and Wedgies impossible straight out of the box.

what is the best basket currently made ? also if you could take the best features from all baskets and combine them into the ultimate basket , what would that comprise? I am thinking of having a custom basket made!! :D

what is the best basket currently made ? also if you could take the best features from all baskets and combine them into the ultimate basket , what would that comprise? I am thinking of having a custom basket made!! :D



I don't think our targets have improved significantly since the Mach III. The best I ever played on were the WEB.

I described the features from the baskets I like the best above.

I dont agree on the basis that if you hyzer putt (which many of us do) than mach III's kick out anything not on the right side of the basket that has any hyzer. During the monkey paw classic this year during the first round, shanest and myself counted 11 putts that on any basket (even poleholes) would have stayed in.

what is the best basket currently made ? also if you could take the best features from all baskets and combine them into the ultimate basket , what would that comprise? I am thinking of having a custom basket made!! :D



I don't think our targets have improved significantly since the Mach III. The best I ever played on were the WEB.

I described the features from the baskets I like the best above.



Ever Putt ona Mach V. I have three different types.

DGA's baskets are awesome !!!!!

Yes, Mach Vs are good, but are they really significantly better than the Mach III? Not in my mind. Of the 2, I think the Mach IIIs are slightly better.

Holgate's and Fred's have made the largest leaps forward in my opinion. I am VERY interested to see this TruPutt Jim Palmeri has been talking about.

Dearly though I may love/hate our current selection of targets, I strongly suspect that improvements, vast ones, are possible.

If you're going to do an open top basket, you might as well just allow holes in the ground of a certain size. Perhaps there would be a metal rim around it to make the edge smooth, uniform and look like it was a sports target. Perhaps a flag or sturdy pipe would be in the middle so there was something visible to reduce the chances of ankle turns with people accidentally stepping in the holes. But imagine how much easier/cheaper it would be to get courses in the ground, and the connection with golf in people's minds would be stronger.

And roller aces would be a little easier too.

---would a disc that is hanging partially over the hole be in or out?
---no more skip up and in shots.
---rain would be a factor in at least a couple new ways.
---snow could make courses unplayable.
---so could leaves.
---and we have trouble with beer cans now :)

The Mach III and Mach V are dramatically different in the styles of higher speed putts they will catch.

For lofting or pitch putts they are very similar.

The Mach V is much better at catching high speed flat line and hyzer putts.

Of course, then the clueless would think that these were fire pit circles and not barbecues!

what is the best basket currently made ? also if you could take the best features from all baskets and combine them into the ultimate basket , what would that comprise? I am thinking of having a custom basket made!! :D



anyone else have any opinions here? ultimately i want the best features out there in my custom basket!! suggestions??

I really like the DFAs. (Dr. Fred Abomination)

I'm serious. It is my favorite target type. It is easily visible because not only is the top colored, but the pole and basket are too. I am eagerly waiting for all target manufacturers to copy this innovation.

The open top is great. The super deep basket it great. It catches just as well as any other basket for my lofty pitch-putt style.

I have a Mach 2 new with the extra chains, and instead of leaving them hanging, I connected them to the ring that the outer set of chains use. The impact on the outer chains slightly reduces the tension on the innermost chains. This combination made one of the best all around catching baskets I've used. Almost impossible to blow through.

Why not just take a metal trash can, cut the sides open and put some chain all around the inside in a good pattern. Permits drop in's from the normal opening, Side shoots except where the supports are still at, and a big basket with no openings.

I think part of what makes putting easier in Disc Golf then ball golf is that we want a Catcher to cath everything. More directional, smaller or harder to get in targets would then change how putting would be perceived. Also if you used different types of targets on the same course, you would have to understand and read the putt more.

My cent and a half.

Thanks for the responses gary and rhett!! should help me come up with something.I am not really sure about the open top.Can you describe that in a bit more detail or link me to a pic of such!! thanx!!

I've found some models (post-mach III) with inner-chain variations to be superior with respect to catching. Those with staggered inner-chains don't have the giant "blow through" gaps present on the mach III. The staggering essentially creates a third chain ring and putts which stand up and slip out the back just don't happen with the same frequency.

All in all, though, I consider the IIIs to be the gold-standard, although there a few platinums planted out there.

No basket can match the *sound* of a mach III, which can't be underestimated.

I'm not arguing that there haven't been improvements, just that the improvements have not been "significant".

Innovations have been few and far between and very much less than significant. Dr Fred's Open Lid and Directional are perhaps the most significant. Second would be the portability and behavior of Holgate's targets. The others are just slight variations on Steady's original Mach I.

I hope that designers and manufacturers open up their imaginations and test out some more radical concepts before we settle on a design that (dearly though I love them) have some significant and glaring flaws (most relating to a "disc catching device" actually "catching a disc" but it not being considered "holed out", others to a throws relation to being a true or pure shot having results that are not related to their truness or purity).

Thanks for the responses gary and rhett!! should help me come up with something.I am not really sure about the open top.Can you describe that in a bit more detail or link me to a pic of such!! thanx!!


http://dolf.com/catching/images/park_series/ch18_wheels1.jpg DFA Target

Dr. Fred's website is http://dolf.com

Don't let the cheap PVC versions fool you. The "park series" without the "designer" directional stuff on them are nice baskets. I think they are aluminum tubing and pretty strong. The Emerald Isle targets have the entire pole painted/anodized/whatever white.

I'd probably have to agree that DFA's are the best targets available that are PDGA approved and widely available.

If I ever get to the point of getting new ones for a course I'll likely try for them.

That being said, I hope that far greater advancements are made in disc golf target design in the meantime. Certainly there would seem to be room to grow.

Man! I give an in here for manufacturers to discuss their products and philosophies moving forward and only one has taken the bait and that is in private PMs. As monitor here I can assure you that this is your chance to post detailed information about your approach to target making without being asked to not "sell" here on the DISCussion board.

What exactly is so great about the original Mach I that we don't want to try other designs?!?

Why hasn't the more efficient Dvorak layout been adopted for keyboards yet?

Why hasn't the more efficient Dvorak layout been adopted for keyboards yet?



Yes, I understand our reluctance to consider any change regardless of immediate benefit. I had no idea that the pole hole was as widely used as asdfjkl; keyboards.

In some ways I am surprized that Ed himself didn't introduce some major and innovative disc catching device. Obviously he didn't lack inventiveness or imagination...

Where are the innovators? It seems so obvious to me that our current targets don't represent a mid or final evolution in design, function or application. Does it for you, Chuck?

I suspect that those who delve into the details of any sport might have reasons why certain equipment, field dimensions or rules could be better but haven't been changed because of tradition or installed investment.

I suspect that those who delve into the details of any sport might have reasons why certain equipment, field dimensions or rules could be better but haven't been changed because of tradition or installed investment.



It's not like entirely new courses and people aren't coming into our sport...

Similar to the horse and buggy many a future disc golfer might never have experience with a Mach I.

The problem isn't whether targets can be changed or made "better." The challenge is to present a way that the existing environment can continue while a new environment develops. I don't see it but that's what's necessary for any idea to come forth.

For example, the one idea I had to make putting tougher is to slide the small ring on the Mach III up the pipe and secure it with twist ties at the top just for tournaments. The same basket can be used for day-to-day and for events. I had this idea before the Chainstar came out. So now my idea isn't universal enough since there's only one ring on the Chainstar.

If you're going to do an open top basket, you might as well just allow holes in the ground of a certain size. Perhaps there would be a metal rim around it to make the edge smooth, uniform and look like it was a sports target. Perhaps a flag or sturdy pipe would be in the middle so there was something visible to reduce the chances of ankle turns with people accidentally stepping in the holes. But imagine how much easier/cheaper it would be to get courses in the ground, and the connection with golf in people's minds would be stronger.



I tried to sell this idea to my friends about a year ago. They laughed at me as usual :p, but I seriously think this would be better than tone poles and I think it would be a great and very cheap way to first set up a course. I had the whole thing designed with a two part 'hole' - the inside piece has small holes for draining and can be unlocked and removed for easy cleaning. True - it won't work well in snowy areas, but it would be a cheap way to add a second set of permanent pins on a course. Anyway, I think it would be fun to try these sometimes. :D

I'm very anxious to see some new designs for targets. I completely agree with Nick on this one - we are due for some real innovation with our targets. I know people (especially my own buddies) want to throw me in a lake when I say things like this as our current designs seem to be sacred, but I think there is a world of possibility when it comes to designing a new and improved target - specifically a cheaper alternative to permanent holes. The cost of pole holes has to be the number one reason our sport doesn't grow by leaps and bounds (I do admit that our sport is growing at a decent pace - just not as fast as it could with cheaper targets).

I feel this statement regarding the price of baskets impedeing the growth of our sport to ring very true. Also the incosistency of our current holes to catch putts is very frustrating. It would be very nice to see improvements in this area. I would also like to see an open top design incorporated, as I believe it would be very easy to do. Just have to fight the powers that be that are happy with the status quo. I have never seen a spider web design, or the DFA directional baskets. Does anyone have any pictures of these they can share?

I believe it's the "Stoner" image that holds back the sport, not the basket. One of my baskets is a Mach I, it's holding up better than me.

Kind of like the "steroid" image of baseball? Really holding the sport back, eh? /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Girlie, there is no comparison between baseball and disc golf.

Baseball was fully established before the steroid issue hit.

1. Our game is played from start to finish "in the air." Traditional (ball) golf hits the ball from the ground with the expectation that it will end up on the ground to hit again. We throw it and then pick it up and throw it again. The ground is merely a temporary resting place, dictated by gravity. A hole is the ground is not the proper target for flying discs. That's for rolling a little white ball into. (Yeah, yeah, I know all about rollers, but what percentage of throws, overall, are done that way?) The initial design of the chained basket and all the subsequent variations really do suit our game better than anything else I can imagine.

2. The target itself, in my opinion, should be approachable from 360 degrees. Let the course designers use trees, bushes, rocks, OB, etc. to limit the various approaches. If you use directional targets you limit the designer's options to utilize the natural features of the property.

3. I'm neither here not there in regards to top-entry. If players really used that feature to get into the basket on purpose, I'd say it's a good thing, but I'd be willing to bet that 99% of discs that enter that way are doing it as a fluke. You missed, but made it anyway.

4. For those who say that Basket A "catches better than" Basket B, I'd be willing to wager that a straight-on or 'sweet spot' putt of equal force would be caught equally by any basket that meets the PDGA Technical Standards. It's when a basket is more forgiving of off target putts that it becomes highly praised by those that make such putts.

Just my opinion(s).

Idahojon has generated a very basic question that I'm sure has been discussed, but I'm not sure I know the answer :confused:.

Do we use a <font color="blue"> vertical </font> plane or <font color="green"> horizontal </font> plane goal?

<font color="blue"> Examples of Vertical Plane Goals: Soccer, Lacrosse, Hockey</font>
<font color="green"> Examples of Horizontal Plane Goals: Basketball, Ball Golf</font>

Discussion on why DROTs should not count always seems to imply that our goal is to break a <font color="blue"> vertical </font> plane (ie - throw through a tire swing or hit a defined section of a tree trunk) and the DROT shot missed that goal (but could have landed in the basket if the top was open). Our rules suggest that our goal is to break a <font color="green"> horizontal </font> plane by landing and coming to rest in the basket. If hitting a <font color="blue"> vertical </font> plane target is our goal, then why do we penalize a shot that hits dead center in the chains, but happens to miss breaking the <font color="green"> horizontal </font> plane boundaries of the basket as it falls? If breaking the <font color="green"> horizontal </font> plane of the basket is the goal, then why do discs hanging in the chains (never breaking the <font color="green"> horizontal </font> plane of the basket) count as good and why don't we open the top of the baskets?

I think the answer to this question will help me decide which current target design I like the best and also which way target design should progress.

If our goal is the <font color="green"> horizontal </font> plane of the basket, then I say we should do away with the chains and top assembly (do I hear a mob knocking at my door already :eek:) with a slightly deeper basket. This would certainly make putting more difficult, immediately raise par on all courses, and make frequency of hole-in-ones comparable to ball golf. If our goal is indeed the <font color="blue"> vertical </font> plane, then I would favor a slightly smaller target design, but one that catches very well - no spit outs ... try to end the penalization of hitting the desired target dead center.

Dr Freds baskets look best catch great and have open top ;)

I agree with most of what you say Jon, but it does not seem to answer at least 2 of the things on my mind here:

1) Should our specs and standards provide "an out" for targets that malfunction and actually "catch" a disc but have our rules consider the hole not completed?
2) Considering the uniquely dynamic manner in which our projectiles, the disc, fly, skip, roll, and curve (nearly unnaturally), shouldn't our targets continue to evolve to catch those more dynamically thrown projectiles? You mentioned rollers, while I agree that they do not represent a majority of the throws in disc golf, they represent far greater than 1% of all throws. And baseball throws also greater than 1%. These throws deserve no consideration when designing the perfect disc golf target?

I don't know what the perfect disc golf target will look like or how it will function, I just know that there are big issues, specifically with design, with our current ones and my question is; Why don't target manufacturers be more proactive in solving some of these deficiencies?

2) Considering the uniquely dynamic manner in which our projectiles, the disc, fly, skip, roll, and curve (nearly unnaturally), shouldn't our targets continue to evolve to catch those more dynamically thrown projectiles? You mentioned rollers, while I agree that they do not represent a majority of the throws in disc golf, they represent far greater than 1% of all throws. And baseball throws also greater than 1%. These throws deserve no consideration when designing the perfect disc golf target?




I guess I would say that the answer to the last question in that paragraph is, "no." I think the limitations of the targets (in that they may not catch rollers or baseball shots) force flexibility and skill on the part of the players. I think that a static target, one that doesn't evolve in large ways (i.e. changing shape or significant design change) has the benefit of providing some consistency to the game.

Nick, here's a question for you: If you, Jon and I got together over a weekend, designed the perfect (and I mean perfect) disc golf target, how long would it take to get these new targets manufactured and installed at the majority of courses around the good ol' US of A? Would this lag (and resulting disparity between courses with our "new" targets and the courses that don't or can't afford to switch) be worth the improvement?

I seem to think that efforts toward improvement (more chains, better sliders, theft proofing, and perhaps deeper cages) is more practical that a more radical design change. It may be difficult for manufacturers to take the leap toward a shift in design that may not be adopted, and may be panned by the community at large. (Even thought it's not the same thing, the Epic comes to mind) The preceeding question is meant in the spirit of good discussion, plus I am actually curious to hear what you think.

Nick, here's a question for you: If you, Jon and I got together over a weekend, designed the perfect (and I mean perfect) disc golf target, how long would it take to get these new targets manufactured and installed at the majority of courses around the good ol' US of A? Would this lag (and resulting disparity between courses with our "new" targets and the courses that don't or can't afford to switch) be worth the improvement?

My goal is not to get them manufactured and installed at a majority of courses around the good ol� US of A, so the lag time between old courses catching up to ones that install these perfect targets or completely new courses installing these perfect targets is of no consequence. To say that it has some significance is like saying that we should not create better modes of transportation because it will make all the cars currently on the roads obsolete (admittedly that sort of thinking could be a part of imperial America, but it is the part that is making it more and more mediocre and less and less the America of innovation and discovery).

The idea is not to replace all existing targets, but to take a somewhat more significant step towards improving new disc golf catching devices that will be installed tomorrow. There is little I can say to someone who just figures that everything is just fine and there is no reason to keep your mind active on how to improve our sport. I�m not saying that is you, just that there are folks who just wax nostalgic and resist change for no logical reason other than it is less work and change creates agitation.

Well, change is not a matter of choice. It is mandatory. And agitation and a little discomfort is usually a part of any change, particularly ones that have a big pay off.

Target makers would do well to do a little homework on how to generate sales from the auto and electronics industries. If they followed our philosophy we�d still be riding around in model T�s and washing our cloths on rocks in the river. �Hey! Whoa there! If we try designing and marketing the telephone it is going to make the telegraph obsolete!!!�

(Yes, I am trying to be a little funny.)

In short, I do not think that all courses would have to instantaneously or even ever convert to the new significantly better targets, that is not the point. The point is to evolve, to get better. To have equipment that functions and perhaps even looks better. Existing state of the art courses will likely make the switch more regularly to state of the art targets, and courses going in anew will never have to transition, they can just jump right to the best.

The only change I�d like to see happen with defective targets is that our rules not be forced to make up for their deficiencies (catching discs that are not considered holed out). If it catches the disc, hole over, mark you score and move on. If the disc is on the playing surface, mark it and hole out�. Nothing could be simpler or more intuitive. This will put them in line with the better targets to come that only catch good shots. (It might also spur on a market for after production modification kits (domes, open lid chain holders, wedge-proof baskets, etc.).

And I agree that all targets used for tournament play, within a single event, should be identical and approved by the PDGA, but the design and manufacturing specs should be unshackled so that all of these manufacturers can take off the gloves and get busy designing better targets and not just adjusting the same old mouse trap.

There is little I can say to someone who just figures that everything is just fine and there is no reason to keep your mind active on how to improve our sport. I�m not saying that is you, just that there are folks who just wax nostalgic and resist change for no logical reason other than it is less work and change creates agitation.



Nick - I wish you would have told me that a long time ago. Maybe I wouldn't have so many scars from beating my head against the wall while trying to talk to my disc golfing buddies.


... but the design and manufacturing specs should be unshackled so that all of these manufacturers can take off the gloves and get busy designing better targets and not just adjusting the same old mouse trap.



I couldn't agree with you more.

There used to be these guys from a company call Future Sports Network , out of UTAH I think.

They had a Basket , that was mathamatically correct.

The chain configuration was Offset 5 -19% off dead center.
The second set of chains were Reversed offset in the opposite direction. I never seen a more dynamic chain configuration on a Pole Hole / Catching Device EVER !!!!!!

This Basket also...........had Steel Wind Chimes in the chain configuration as well !!!!!! Amazing !!!!!

I have pictures of this basket and putted on this device when they were in Las Vegas one year !!!!!!!

Your putt, when thrown at the Center of the Pole, would " S " turn through the chains and would stay there. It would not bounce back or Left or Right turn out , even when thrown hard.

As it was settling in the basket , the Wind Chimes would be singing against the chains and pole, making a melody I never heard before !!!!!! Oh My God !!!!!!!!!! No Way !!!!!! :eek:

I wanted one !!!!!!

They said they would make me one for about $ 500.00.
:(
A little out of my price range at the time.

The Shape though , was like a kids playground Rocket ship !!!! :eek:

I know someone out there had also seen this Very Unique Rocket Basket. It was Dark Metalic Purple !!!!!! :cool:

The Wind Chimes though , were a Killer touch to a Awesome Basket !!!!!! Way to Trippy for the general public !!!!! :cool:

There is little I can say to someone who just figures that everything is just fine and there is no reason to keep your mind active on how to improve our sport. I�m not saying that is you, just that there are folks who just wax nostalgic and resist change for no logical reason other than it is less work and change creates agitation.



Nick - I wish you would have told me that a long time ago. Maybe I wouldn't have so many scars from beating my head against the wall while trying to talk to my disc golfing buddies.


... but the design and manufacturing specs should be unshackled so that all of these manufacturers can take off the gloves and get busy designing better targets and not just adjusting the same old mouse trap.



I couldn't agree with you more.



Thankfully there are two designer manufacturers out there who I KNOW are working on innovative new designs. So we are not alone Danny!

I saw that basket also here in Vegas in '95. It was as wild as the guys hair that was selling it. I bought that Mach III from Ed at that tournament.

There was a practice basket at the original Papago course in Scottsdale AZ that had a large cone shape top turned upside down, with a basket below it. You'd hit the cone and the disc would turn into the basket. Didn't work as well as chains. Not sure what happened when they moved the course. Would like to find one for my collection though.

There was a practice basket at the original Papago course in Scottsdale AZ that had a large cone shape top turned upside down, with a basket below it. You'd hit the cone and the disc would turn into the basket. Didn't work as well as chains. Not sure what happened when they moved the course. Would like to find one for my collection though.



Did it look like the baskets on this course?

http://www.playdg.com/moir/

If so, you may want to talk to someone from the Minnesota Frisbee Association to see if they know where to get them or if they're planning on replacing them eventually and what they might do with the old ones. My experience is that there's a pretty small area you have to hit to get the disc to fall in the basket.

The basket under the cones was designed to catch lids, so putters can fall through. It is frustrating to actually make a putt and then have it drop out on the ground.

That's the one. If you've got a contact in the club I can contact please send it to me.

That's the one. If you've got a contact in the club I can contact please send it to me.



http://www.mfaonline.org/contact.htm

You can try that. I don't have any affiliation with them so I probably can't help much more than giving URLs. You can probably ask around in the Minnesota club forum on here as well.

Anyone have a photo of "the Web"?