With your Ideas you require a player to either shoot from one knee or take a penalty shot: Where is the choice for the player with bad knees or the one legged golfer. Where is the Choice in requiring a player to straddle putt.



I didn't forget. I didn't get to these yet. I think it's incredibly short sighted for someone in terrain variety rich areas like Maine or Minnesota to declare that forced shot areas are poor design for places that might want to have a disc golf course and there are few trees, like say a dunes course. Just like yellow ropes are used at Winthrop to add challenge to holes lacking natural design elements, alternative options should be tested and recommended for designers with those challenges. Straddle putts and knee putts are more common choices when there are trees. When having trees isn't possible, why shouldn't designers have the accepted option for marking areas where a particular throw is required IF YOU LAND THERE. These places are intended to be avoided so it's not like every player has to deal with these unusual hazards. BTW, all of these design concepts are OK within the current rules so it's not like permission is needed to do these.

Now, in thinking about it, perhaps it would be better to deny certain types of throws in an area rather than require a specific throw in a marked area. So maybe specifying that a player cannot throw a backhand in a fairway trap or cannot throw a straddle putt in a marked area near the green would be better than specifying a player has to throw that specific shot. That would be a little more like the typical choices a player is faced with. Either way, we would like to have design options for all types of terrain so disc golf can be fun and challenging even for courses on recently converted corn fields were the trees haven't been planted yet or troops throwing up a course in the desert.

You must be old you talk in circles and forget what you say




I simply don't understand this need to slam anyone we don't agree with. Isn't it enough to say I disagree with you? Even if in jest, these kinds of comments kill the exchange of important ideas. This venue is a great resource that provides a lot of input for the BOD and executive staff. The harsher the commentary, the less influence it will have on their decision making process.



Ooof, gotta hate it when someone quotes you before you go back and edit your original post. :D

Thank you,

BTW - I agree with you. The notion of forcing a player to use a throw the TD has designated seems to go against the idea of playing your best game. I also think Chuck et. al. are having some fun. On the other hand, the notion of feild rules that limit how you throw (the bunkers etc.) seems interesting. On a side note, there is an annual tournamnet here that many refer to as the "screw your cardmate tourney" where each player on the card is given 5 stroke cards. On any given hole you can give any given player on your card a card that requires them to utilize a certain throw; forehand, thumber etc. As you might guess the cards are usually handed to the player who is in the lead when they get into situations where the throw chosen is the least optimal. However, the tourney is a fund raiser and all in good fun.

You must be old you talk in circles and forget what you say




I simply don't understand this need to slam anyone we don't agree with. Isn't it enough to say I disagree with you? Even if in jest, these kinds of comments kill the exchange of important ideas. This venue is a great resource that provides a lot of input for the BOD and executive staff. The harsher the commentary, the less influence it will have on their decision making process.



Ooof, gotta hate it when someone quotes you before you go back and edit your original post. :D



I knew I should have counted to 10. :)

I think it's incredibly short sighted for someone in terrain variety rich areas like Maine



I would hold to the same philosophy if I lived in a desert

On second thought, maybe I agree completely with you. I think the same things can be accomplished, for the most part, by using proper course construction. I've often thought that with unlimited funds, you could build sand traps and shallow lakes on the course. Sandtraps would be deep, thus preventing both a throw at most angles and a proper run up. Lakes would be concrete lined and 6 to 10 inches deep but playable. If you land in the lake, again your run up is prohibited simply because it is impossible to run in water. You could accomplish the same thing on a T-pad by surrounding it with sand and limiting it's size. The player is allowed to throw their shot but they have to accomidate for the surface and limited size of the pad.

You could accomplish the same thing on a T-pad by surrounding it with sand and limiting its size. The player is allowed to throw their shot but they have to accommodate for the surface and limited size of the pad.



New pads going in this year at my Red Dragon Course will do just that. They will vary in size according to the length of the hole. Also some things similar to what you suggest are in the works for course 3 at Dragan Field. I don't have unlimited funds but I do have time, although I am getting to the point where I forget things and go in circles /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Chuck,

I tend to agree with Bob and Kris here, contrived restrictions that are not a part of natural play are super annoying. They can really ruin my opinion of an otherwise nice course. Take mandatories for example, now I am fine with some safety issue mandatories, but having played my share of clowns mouth mandatories, I can say truthfully that they are just about the worst thing a designer could do to a course. They are so rinky dink is a shame that they could not find some other way to get from one hole to the next. Same for mandatories stuck in the middle of a feild for no reason.

I have no such challenge in using OB to the TDs delight, that is a straight up and managable challenge.

And neither of these are as bad as what you are proposing. I for one avoid flicks not because I am bad at them, but because they destroy my shoulder. I think you should consider this "P. I. G." ification (you know, the bball game) of a PDGA Major event very carefully.

Again, if we have a standard area that is usually OB, let's say an unused parking lot (like Codorus), then offer the option to throw a forehand from your lie in the parking lot without penalty if you so choose, isn't that better than the forced penalty? I take it that you consider Harold's triple mando at Winthrop poor design which may be duplicated at Wolfe Woods? I find these 'worse' than forced shot options in otherwise OB areas.

Again, if we have a standard area that is usually OB, let's say an unused parking lot (like Codorus), then offer the option to throw a forehand from your lie in the parking lot without penalty if you so choose, isn't that better than the forced penalty? I take it that you consider Harold's triple mando at Winthrop poor design which may be duplicated at Wolfe Woods? I find these 'worse' than forced shot options in otherwise OB areas.



Actually I consider the option you propose as even more contrived than the triple mandos. I don't see any reason for a mando of any kind at either the hole at Warwick or Rock Hill. They'd be fun holes regardless. But forcing the choice between a certain kind of throw or penalty throw is really weak IMO. In golf players don't head into sandtraps and face a choice of hitting a slice or taking a penalty stroke, do they? But beyond that it is just too corny. Seriously. It might be a lot of fun playing with rules like that in a mini around your house, but not at a PDGA Mid-Major event...

We agree mandatories suck the only good mandatory is one nobody misses

In golf players don't head into sandtraps and face a choice of hitting a slice or taking a penalty stroke, do they?



But they do face decisions that. I pointed out where they can hit out of the water with a high loft club or take the penalty. Or, play from a tricky lie by or in a tree/bush, maybe even play opposite handed, or take an unplayable penalty. These types of options naturally occur in ball and disc golf. The so called contrived situation is where courses cannot afford or do not have sufficient obstacles to create those occasional challenges. The contrived situation is all natural and fits within the rules.


But beyond that it is just too corny.



You mean like not taking a 2m penalty for a disc you can't reach in a tree above your head? :)

BTW, Major events is where new concepts are tested. USDGC removed the 2m rule as a special exception. Several new options were introduced at 1999 Roch Worlds. A drop zone for missing a mando (Gennessee #18) was introduced. The speed of play, if your group agrees, started there, along with using your disc instead of a marker. We also had the menagerie of artificial objects and hazards all over Chili. In addition, the woods boundaries on the fairways of many holes was lined with string identifying OB which completely eliminated any chance for demonstrating recovery shot skills.

In golf players don't head into sandtraps and face a choice of hitting a slice or taking a penalty stroke, do they?



But they do face decisions that. I pointed out where they can hit out of the water with a high loft club or take the penalty. Or, play from a tricky lie by or in a tree/bush, maybe even play opposite handed, or take an unplayable penalty. These types of options naturally occur in ball and disc golf. The so called contrived situation is where courses cannot afford or do not have sufficient obstacles to create those occasional challenges. The contrived situation is all natural and fits within the rules.

<font color="blue"> If they wanted to they could still use their 1 wood. They �choose� to use a high loft club, they are not mandated by rule to use it. That, I am quite sure, would raise a raucous if it were required at a PGA event. </font>


But beyond that it is just too corny.



You mean like not taking a 2m penalty for a disc you can't reach in a tree above your head? :)
<font color="blue"> Cute, but I have sworn off the topic for 5 days to let 2MR supports make their points of support unhindered by me. Besides it�s the �reach� logic that is corny not the normal marking of a disc above the playing surface that is� </font>
BTW, Major events is where new concepts are tested. USDGC removed the 2m rule as a special exception. Several new options were introduced at 1999 Roch Worlds. A drop zone for missing a mando (Gennessee #18) was introduced. The speed of play, if your group agrees, started there, along with using your disc instead of a marker. We also had the menagerie of artificial objects and hazards all over Chili. In addition, the woods boundaries on the fairways of many holes was lined with string identifying OB which completely eliminated any chance for demonstrating recovery shot skills.


<font color="blue"> You want to force a high loft shot? Then make that area a casual area with a drop zone directly behind a 9 foot fence 10 feet wide. Otherwise you are going to have folks cheating your situation anyway they can. �Hey man! That wasn�t a baseball throw?� �Sure it was? I just don�t think you�ll be able to force folks to throw a certain shot, particularly folks that simply don�t know how to throw it or can judge if others are doing it right.

I am almost with Bob in saying that for a new event like this at a new unproven course like this with TDs that have never run even an A Tier that it is enough to keep me away.</font>

I am almost with Bob in saying that for a new event like this at a new unproven course like this with TDs that have never run even an A Tier that it is enough to keep me away.



The three courses Blue division is playing already have SSAs, two from two events. We have several directors who have run Worlds and several A-tiers. Perhaps we just say nothing except the non-controversial stuff. I'm sure everyone coming will find criticism with some items. But like most Majors, the positives usually outweigh the negatives. Lower expectations and over deliver.

I am almost with Bob in saying that for a new event like this at a new unproven course like this with TDs that have never run even an A Tier that it is enough to keep me away.



The three courses Blue division is playing already have SSAs, two from two events. We have several directors who have run Worlds and several A-tiers. Perhaps we just say nothing except the non-controversial stuff. I'm sure everyone coming will find criticism with some items. But like most Majors, the positives usually outweigh the negatives. Lower expectations and over deliver.



Maybe you shouldn't say any more controversial stuff then. Just spring it on us when the nearest major airport is 800 miles away and round about to start, or maybe you should choose other ghini pigs... ;)

There are several events there before summer so the guinea pigs will be tested by then, if they get tested at all. I'm not the TD in any of these so I still have to persuade a tougher, more conservative group than here to do anything controversial. But if I don't take a strong stance here, I don't flush out the strong resistance if any, for some of these concepts.

It's funny this should come up. I showed my folks the 2003 USDGC dvd last night, neither of them having any real clue, beyond my descriptions, what discgolf was about.
They thought the triple mando was marvelous, and after about 6 holes of the playoff suggested that the 3 holes should have included the clown's mouth. :eek:
Just a thought, as regards spectators etc, personally, I don't like mandos either.

Not to be mean, but "neither of them having any real clue" seems to be the telling phrase in your post.

I just prefer actual physical obstacles that require a certain approach, rather than an artificial mando that does or certainly a special rule that does. One is golf, the others border on Windmill and Buffalo Putt Putt.

IMO, of course...