So I go to this place from monday to wednesday and they had a nice little course. The problem is that they don't have baskets they have little signs. This made it really hard on me and I couldn't aim at all. I need advice for next time I go back on aiming at these suckers. I can usually sink around 20 footers with a basket but I could hardly hit a ten footer here.

You're just having a mental block because it looks like a smaller target.

You may find more success using a straddle putt on object courses as straddle putting usually results in a more consistent line. (straight on putting is more consistent in controlling heigth)

no basket means nothing to catch. Tone poles (just poles with chains) are by far the best thing and what disc golf should use IMO. That would totally eliminate discussions about DROT's, sticking the disc in the side of the basket, cut throughs, bounce outs etc. You either hit the chains or you don't - that simple.

Yeah, but then you'd have a whole new set of (more serious) debates.

Mainly when you're playing a wooded course and because of the obstacles or topography the group can't see the target. A blind shot goes around a bend or over a hill and the thrower thinks he heard chains but the rest of the group doesn't agree. Or maybe they heard a chain sound but can't determine whether it came from their hole or an adjacent fairway.

I don't see any major issues with today's baskets. If you can't get 'em to stay in change your putter or putting style but don't blame it on the target.

I agree that posts are better. At some point the technology will be inexpensie enough to have an LED indicator on the post and even at the tee to indicate a hit with a reset button to prepare for the next shot. I would give up ever getting credit for a blind ace or fairway deuce if I could have every putt I missed bouncing back at me off the pole.

I would give up ever getting credit for a blind ace or fairway deuce if I could have every putt I missed bouncing back at me off the pole.



I've heard similar sentiment about all the times people have been"robbed". I can't help but think if you have a significant amount bouncing out it must have to do with your putting style.

I estimate that the percentage of good putts that bounce out for me is well less than 1%. I have a far greater percentage of bad putts that have stayed in. Even if the putt hits the pole, if the nose of the disc is pointed up it will fall back upside down into the basket more than 95% of the time. Yes I know I don't have proof for these percentages but they are my best estimations.
I've found that I have far fewer bounce outs and/or penetrate through "missed" putts than the vast majority of the players I've played with. I probably have one "total robbery" once every 30 rounds or so. That translates to 1 in 540 holes or .0018, less than one fifth of one percent.

I've seen others experience what appears to be a robbery once per round. Personally I look at it as another skill to develop and another way to set yourself apart from your competition. Going back to object targets would take away much of the risk reward factor as well. Today's basket are vastly improved over the baskets of the 80's. If you experience an average of one bounce out per tournament (on modern baskets) your putting technique is the primary culprit.

Not trying to step on toes here, but that's the way I see it.

It seems to me too many of us are anxious to blame the basket, the course, the TD, other players or President Bush for the weakness in our own game.

Sure, there are real concerns in this sport but most of the time they are vastly overstated and exaggerated.

Mainly when you're playing a wooded course and because of the obstacles or topography the group can't see the target.



Have you ever putted on a tone pole? They are loud as hell. If you hit from 300 feet out, trust me, you'd hear it.

I would give up ever getting credit for a blind ace or fairway deuce if I could have every putt I missed bouncing back at me off the pole.




Are me and Chuck agreeing on something.....holy crap!

Mainly when you're playing a wooded course and because of the obstacles or topography the group can't see the target.



Have you ever putted on a tone pole? They are loud as hell. If you hit from 300 feet out, trust me, you'd hear it.




Yeah, and there would be 17 other tone poles being played simultaneously during a tournament.

Your playing partner throws his shot around the dog leg from 300 feet away and 2 seconds later you hear the sound of a tone pole being struck. Well it might have been from the hole you're playing or from any of the other four or five tone poles within earshot. Theres a good chance it was from someone putting out on another hole
.
I've witnessed lots of debates on object courses whether a shot was good or not. I have NEVER in 18 yrs of playing seen or heard of such a debate with a polehole.

There's no such thing as a bounce-out on a soccer or hockey goal. When the ball or puck crosses the goal line, it's good. We should aspire for the same level of "catchability" in our baskets. A dead-on shot at a post target is 100% good, just like soccer or hockey.

There's no such thing as a bounce-out on a soccer or hockey goal. When the ball or puck crosses the goal line, it's good. We should aspire for the same level of "catchability" in our baskets. A dead-on shot at a post target is 100% good, just like soccer or hockey.





Those are the best analogies you can come up with?

In these two team sports you cited you have defenders of the goal and optimal speed is the faster the better.

In our indivdual sport there are no defenders. You must employ finesse and best utilize not only the correct line but also the correct speed, arc as well as the angle and attitude of the disc for the best results.

Using object targets changes the game significantly and nullifies many skills acquired to putt well into a polehole.

The obvious analogy is ball golf where a putt traveling too fast most likely won't drop. Even an analogy (which is a bad one) to basketball would be better as a basketball goal is friendlier to soft, high arcing type of shots than to the line drive type of shots.

And by the way, in soccer sometimes the shots do bounce out after crossing the goal line (off the goalie or inside post), it is up to the official to call the goal good or not.

I don't need particularly good analogies. The point is that posts have no rejections for dead center hits. We don't even have a basket that's uniform by manufacturer and consistent as you move around the basket. What if the basketball hoop could vary slightly in diameter and different materials be used for the hoop so the spring varied? What if the golf hole only had to be close to round and a particular diameter.

Pros might actually have bigger paydays today if posts had been sanctioned versus baskets. Could we have had 3-4 times as many courses if parks did not have the basket cost to deal with? More courses would have meant more players and a bigger overall sport in the roughly 30 years since baskets were invented.

Well, if you had to throw into an upright or inground barrel, it would eliminate bounce outs, though you might rim out like in basketball. It would be cheaper though... so in that sense Chuck it might lead to more courses and less basket theft. Aces would be much rarer but would be even more noteworthy :D

Instead of bar-b-que pits, those not in the know would use them as trash cans...

I got a great idea that would save money and eliminate bounce outs!

We could put two ribbons around a tree and make that the target! Yeah that would be even cheaper than posts.

Man, if only someone would've thought of this back in the 70's we'd probably have 10 times the amount of courses and have every A-tier broadcast on ESPN and playing for 1 million dollar purses!

Okay, I've heard two different arguments for the use of posts over baskets from the same person on this thread.

When I pointed out that object golf would result in disputes over whether or not a shot had struck the target, Chuck pointed out that we could have LED lights (I assume would require sensors also) in these posts to indicate when the target had been correctly struck.

Then on the same thread he speculates that the use of posts would have resulted in many more courses being installed, disc golf being more mainstream and therefore yielded bigger payouts due to drasticly reduced costs for parks to pay for courses.

I would imagine that a target employing some sort of impact sensing surface coupled with indicator lights would be far more expensive not only in purchase price but also in maintenance costs.

Does going back to object golf make sense to the rest of you?

I'm more than open to standardizing targets, but to speculate that hitting posts would've significantly furthered our sport more than pole holes?

Are there many others that subscribe to this theory?

Maybe I'm out to lunch here, but it sounds like a bunch of bullpucky to me.

Inexpensive and still suitable would be the goal. Trees aren't uniform and available everywhere. A uniform post is. They can currently be used for PDGA events as requested. Object targets are not prohibited and are identified in the rules (803.12C). A case could be made that Ultimate has flourished with the "spirit of the game" rules with no officials and calls being made by players. So, a culture of players making calls has been demonstrated to work.

A case could be made that Ultimate has flourished with the "spirit of the game" rules with no officials and calls being made by players. So, a culture of players making calls has been demonstrated to work.




There are many key differences between the sport of Ultimate and the sport of Disc Golf.


In regards to making calls, Ultimate is played on a flat open field with no trees or other obstacles hindering one's view of the endzone markers.

The enviornmental factors, specificly as it relates to being in a position to make an accurate call is much different on a disc golf, especially from far away on a wooded course.

My home course had big yellow metal posts for the first 3 yrs that I played disc golf. I am well aware of the limitations and weaknesses of playing object golf. From my experience of playing on these posts both in casual and PDGA sanctioned play, it's not something that I'd want to go back to.

the man has had an inordinate number of bounce outs and is thinking of the advantages of object golf more so than the disadvantages. cut him some slack. putting is a sensitive subject (all the more so for not-so-confident putters such as the writer of this post) -- so i think we should tread carefully around the subject of bounce outs :p let's at least steer the conversation to the best way to eliminate bounce outs. you seem to want to put the responsibility on the putter. imo, that's pretty d@mn insensitive, but it is a good point :D

I've never seen a tone pole or anything other than a traditional basket around here.
I'm new to the sport but I see no problems with the baskets that we use now.
If you have a bounce out then....well, you threw it too hard. If it falls out on a possible hole-in-one shot then it was never meant to be. If you're putting & it bounces out then you need to work on throwing a bit softer.

Hate to compare with ball golf, but if you putt too hard then it too will bounce out of the hole. You could be dead on center with the hole, but if it has too much speed then it's going to keep going.
Last I checked the PGA wasn't considering counting those that rolled through or putting LEDs on the bottom of the cup.

"OK Tiger, that rolled through, but the LED light is on. You can count it as in" :D

Just my opinion.

I really think the issue of perceived bounce outs really has to do with an imperfect putt.

I see many putts that are off the sweet spot, or at the wrong speed or angle and yet still fall into the basket. I think it is because we've become accustomed to seeing less than perfect putts staying in that when one doesn't stay in we are outraged and blame the basket or say we have terrible luck.

I think a decent analogy to our scenario is bowling.

Many times a ball looks like it hit the pocket and should result in a strike, but often times either the 7 or the 10 pin is left standing. This can be especially frustrating when an opponent just picked up a strike that was significantly off the mark, but because of some unplanned pin action got the big X.

If a competitive bowler starts to get into a rut of throwing balls that look good, but repeatedly leave a pin or two standing he's not going to petition the PBA to change target standards, he's going to adjust his style, velocity, angle, finger position, etc. to develop a delivery that will result in a better outcome.

I really believe blaming a bounce out on the basket is just about as absurd as blaming a bowling ball or pins on a missed strike.

The basket is not uniform around it's perimeter which leads to unpredictable results. With chains spaced at 12 positions around the basket, there's a 30 degree range that presents a different target to every player. I don't know of any players who take the rotational position of the chains into account when putting. It would be hard to see even if a player tried to adjust their putt accordingly. In ball golf, the hole is more uniform for 360 degrees than a basket can ever be. A post can be as uniform for 360 degrees as a hole.

The basket is not uniform around it's perimeter which leads to unpredictable results.

<font color="blue"> This is news to me. Are you saying the baskets are not round? </font>

With chains spaced at 12 positions around the basket, there's a 30 degree range that presents a different target to every player.

<font color="blue"> I honestly don't understand this. Are the 12 positions not reasonably spaced evenly? I don't understand where you get the figure 30 degree range. </font>





<font color="blue"> If I understand you correctly (and I doubt that I do), A player whose lie that is 15 degrees to the right of a given mark will be striking the chain assembly differently than a player who is 5 degrees to the left of a given mark.


Player A drawing a perfectly straight line from the LOP to the center of the pole hits chain strands 4,5,6 and 7 and Player B hits chain strand 6, 7, 8 and 9. This is the significant difference between the two lies that must be accounted for since the polehole as you pointed out is not uniform. I'm guessing at what you're trying to convey, but am I inferring anywhere close to your intended implication?</font>

To me it seems like throwing at a pole would be pretty boring. Hitting chains and going in a basket is exciting. Plus, baskets look cool. :D

I really am trying to understand your position even though on this matter there is really not much chance of agreeing with it.

It's possible I'm missing some kind of scientific data that would dispute the observations of my 18 yrs of figuring out how to put a piece of flying plastic into an entrapment device.

Like I alluded to earlier I played probably 400-500 rounds of golf playing poles and posts back in the 80s.

The dink of a disc hitting a pole is very similiar to the sound of an unsuccessful weenie putt on a polehole.

Conversely the Ka-Ching! of a pole hole is very similar to a cash register or slot machine.

Don't know about the rest of you but I find "Ka-Ching" much more rewarding and appropriate than "Dink".

Ka-Ching! = congratulations,applause

Dink! = aw, nice try, mockery

Unless you have an official or other observer close enough to a tone-pole or other object target to actually SEE the disc hit within the specified target area, you really can't for certain know that a long distance shot hit it. I've heard tone-poles hit low give off the "ring" and I've been near object targets when the disc hits the tape or just outside it, and you could, in no way, tell from 200-300 feet away where it hit.

That's why the disc entrapment target, even though it could be improved, is the only certain way to know that a shot is holed out. (with all due respect to Chuck's LED idea)

I like chains in baskets, and I like "ka-chings!"
Bounce-out's are a [I'm a potty-mouth!], but since it happens to everyone, those are the breaks.

Now as far as improving baskets, I really like the Gateway Titan Pro 24 basket the best. I would say the TPro 24 is the best basket I have ever thrown into, with DGA and Discraft 2nd and Innova (modified with additional chains) 3rd. JMO, but it seems that there could be more improvements to baskets, after playing a round on a Titan Pro course (with RED baskets, sweet). And yes, it would make them more expensive, I'm sure.
I don't like the idea of ANY electronic devices being added to baskets, unless it's a light on top for night golf ... those are pretty cool. Wish we had them on our home course.
I would add, that if someone put in a pole course near me, I would probably play it. Since I don't have to make a living playing disc golf ... it's all about fun to me, and I don't care what I have to hit, as long as I'm the one having the most fun.

Let's just look at chain #3 and assume it's exactly on the LOP from your lie. As you move slowly to the right 30 degrees, which is 1/12 of the arc around the basket, the position of chain #3 and all other chains gradually move into different alignments until you have moved 30 degrees such that chain #4 is now in your LOP like #3 was when you started moving. This doesn't happen on golf holes (other than elevation changes) or a basketball hoop (excluding backboard position). If you could have a uniform "cylinder shaped" target to throw at, I suspect that all shots of a certain trajectory would either all bounce out or all stay. I suspect that the seeming randomness of bounce outs is related to the cyclical non-uniformity of the basket as you rotate around it. I suppose scientific minded players could study this and when presented with a certain chain angle, concentrate on putting right or left of center rather than at the middle if they were normally center putters.

Ouch ... that hurt my brain. TGIF! I'm outta here to play. :p

Baskets , Pole Holes............................These are what we should all be playing on.

Yes , I still at times , play natural obstacles , like trees , light poles and Statues. That's ONLY if I have to. :D

just to note....hockey goals due have kick outs. It happens when you sting a shot into the corner or top shelf where the net is stretched super tight. Happens in lax too.

Chuck,

I think I know what you're saying.

While I understand your point, I believe that your lie in relation to the various chainstrands have virtually nothing to do with whether or not your putt stays in.




To all of you who claimed to get robbed on a polehole:

On a modern basket, if your disc hits in the sweet spot (2-6 inches above the rim) with correct line, nose up in a descending fashion it will stay in 999 out of 1000 times (if not 1000 out of 1000).

Your personal putting style is to blame if you are having more than 1 out of 1000 popping out on a direct hit in a modern basket.

Sometimes I can get upset when one of my putts jump out. However I will admit everytime it was not a perfect putt that was rejected. The reason I get upset is when I get a decent putt (that's good enough 95% of the time) and it jumps out.
I think our baskets are really forgiving and accept a lot of offcenter putts. We base our expectations of catching performance on what we've been accustomed to. So when a putt appears to be good and jumps out we blame it on the basket.

Personal responsibility is something that can be hard for some to accept. It's much easier to blame the basket. Putting is a skill. If you putt excessively hard you run the risk of bounce outs. If you putt with a flat attitude you run the risk of bounce outs. If you putt with a hyzer angle, you run the risk of bounce outs.

Either adopt a putting style that works well with the existing targets or face the consequences, but your missed putt is no one's fault but your own.

While I understand your point, I believe that your lie in relation to the various chainstrands have virtually nothing to do with whether or not your putt stays in.




Assertions like this is why scientists do experiments to prove or disprove a theory. It's pretty obvious that the point the disc first strikes a chain will be different if one is directly in the LOP versus a position 15 degrees to the left or right.

You make assertions like 999 in a 1000 will be caught without any proof. With a target that is non-uniform around its 360 degress, the onus is on the manufacturer to prove that any variances as you move around their non-uniform target are acceptable. That's never been done to my knowledge or the data hasn't been publically available. I'm pretty sure that different materials or stiffer chain would magnify the differences. Who's to say the variances have been reduced to an acceptable level with the current designs?

Post targets for disc golf and holes in ball golf are uniform around 360 degrees and don't need any testing. Any "innovation" that introduces non-uniformity should be tested before it's confirmed as appropriate for a sport that is striving to become more professional and accepted.

Your view would resonate stronger if we were talking about mach 1's or the low end baskets of today.

However with the newer baskets that have inner and outer chains, I think the differences of striking from one side versus striking from any other direction is not significant enough to measurably change the outcome with a good putt.

I have never had a nose up, descending, on line, on angle putt rejected in a modern basket.Neither have I ever witnessed any "perfect" putt jump out of a modern basket.

The bounce outs that occur from striking the pole are due to the disc attitude being too flat or not entering on a descending flight.

Descending, nose up putts do not bounce out on modern baskets. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

I have practiced putting in a salmon fishing net !!!!!!

Everything stays , no bounce outs or blow throughs !!!!!!!

Make sure your net is clean though. If your lady , smells any of your putters , she will ask you tough questions !!!!! :eek:

To me it seems like throwing at a pole would be pretty boring. Hitting chains and going in a basket is exciting. Plus, baskets look cool. :D



I agree. I've been lucky enough to score a couple of ace's in the last month on a nice line drive at my home course and there's nothing like the pleasure of smashing into those chains and watching the disc roll all the way around the basket due to it's high velocity. It's awsome.

I think baskets are the only way to go. You're in or your not and that's the breaks. :cool:

You guys are nuts. Nothing beats a Mach 3. If it falls out, so be it. At least everyone is playing on the same target. Sure I probably have more putts fall out than anyone, but it's not the baskets fault. This is a stupid thread. Tone poles have just as many disadvantages, and its pretty stupid to make a shot and have your disc sitting on the ground when you are done.

"It dont mean a thing if it aint got that ching"

Chuck,

Without subjecting the board users to another poll, I'd venture to say that this post is very represntative of the general consensus of an overwhelming majority of disc golfers.



You guys are nuts. Nothing beats a Mach 3. If it falls out, so be it. At least everyone is playing on the same target. Sure I probably have more putts fall out than anyone, but it's not the baskets fault. This is a stupid thread. Tone poles have just as many disadvantages, and its pretty stupid to make a shot and have your disc sitting on the ground when you are done.

"It dont mean a thing if it aint got that ching"




Conclusions:

1. Today's modern baskets catch well enough that the basket should not be blamed for a player's missed putt.

2. Object targets present a whole new lot of problems that aren't present with todays baskets.

3. "It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that CHING! ."

I'm not on the bandwagon to change to posts, but am willing to argue the point that current baskets are inadequate compared to the targets in other professional sports that are uniform at the interface between a shot being "good" versus "not good." There's no reason that can't be improved.

It's so rare that Chuck is wrong that I just can't resist. Chuck, you're stating a personal preference as if there is a fault with baskets. While I can appreciate your personal preference, I don't agree with it.

The reality is that every putt that bounces out or slices through was a flawed putt. If we invented a perfect player who has perfect touch, he could drop a putt into the basket from any distance every time. As a bad player progresses he/she learns that a soft touch and the right inclination results in fewer bounce outs and slices.

Putters who have discs slice through are treating the basket like it's a backboard. It's not... in my opinion. For me, part of being good at putting is being able to lay that putter in like it's an egg. The harder I throw it the more risk I take on. I view those chains as a helper. A properly putted disc should drop into that basket and the chains, if used correctly, help in that. Yes, I see the guys who putt full speed from 15 to 20 feet out and I smile as they skip through and my egg from the same distance stays in.

The fact is that if we want to modify the sport so that it's easier to keep the disc in the basket it is easy enough, fill it with glue and everything will stick. For myself, I appreciate the challenge of keeping the disc in the basket (even the crudy old Mach Is) and realize the key point is that everyone is using the same basket and has the same risk and rewards. From there, it is personal preference.

As for tone poles, for me, as already stated here, they are boring. I like having my disc end up in the basket. However, I'm not going to confuse my personal preference with what is necessary.

Not sure of what bandwagon you're referring to.

From this thread I'd say it's more like a two seat roadster. I'm not sure who's driving but you're in one seat and MTL is in the other.
If MTL is driving, I'd advise you to be ready to take the wheel because MTL is......uh.....MTL and you never know what bus he'll jump on if the wind blows.

BTW - while I'm not an engineer, I can with good confidence say that the kind of variations that Chuck is concerned about are inconsequetial in most instances. The weight of the basket and chains vs. the weight of a putter is too great for there to be a huge effect overall. But of course this is still unimportant, the reality is that even on a hugely flawed basket, as long as Chuck and I are playing the same basket, we have the same chances of making and missing our putts.

as long as Chuck and I are playing the same basket, we have the same chances of making and missing our putts.



That is not true. What if ball golf holes had 12 bumps evenly spaced around the edge of the hole? Let's say they were the size of M&Ms split in half longways and secured to the ground sort of like upholstery tacks. Are you saying the position of the ball relative to the array of tacks wouldn't somewhat impact the chances of making the putt? How big would the bumps have to be until they made a visible impact? The bigger question is why should their be any non-uniformity at all when the chance for variance starts to occur incrementally as soon as you deviate from uniform, however small the initial effect.

As I pointed out before, we have no data that confirms our current basket NOT being uniform 360 degrees is acceptable whatever that would be. It's all speculation by any of us until tested. But the onus should be on the sport's leaders and manufacturers to prove that any target that's not uniform 360 is OK on the assumption that uniform 360 is statistically "perfect" by definition and any deviation should be validated for the long term integrity of the sport.

Let's all buy Dr Fred's directional targets and call it quits.

LOL

:D

as long as Chuck and I are playing the same basket, we have the same chances of making and missing our putts.



That is not true. What if ball golf holes had 12 bumps evenly spaced around the edge of the hole? Let's say they were the size of M&Ms split in half longways and secured to the ground sort of like upholstery tacks. Are you saying the position of the ball relative to the array of tacks wouldn't somewhat impact the chances of making the putt? How big would the bumps have to be until they made a visible impact? The bigger question is why should their be any non-uniformity at all when the chance for variance starts to occur incrementally as soon as you deviate from uniform, however small the initial effect.

As I pointed out before, we have no data that confirms our current basket NOT being uniform 360 degrees is acceptable whatever that would be. It's all speculation by any of us until tested. But the onus should be on the sport's leaders and manufacturers to prove that any target that's not uniform 360 is OK on the assumption that uniform 360 is statistically "perfect" by definition and any deviation should be validated for the long term integrity of the sport.



Let me present two items for you to think about. Item one: in the middle of the fairway there is a stick, 2 feet long 2 inches in diameter. I make my 320 foot long drive and hit that stick dead on with my disc straddling it. One inch of the stick extends beyond my disc so I can't move it, the rest completely impedes my foot placement for my second drive. Tough luck. The reality is that there is variation and we have to live with it.

Taking your scenario into account, if my ball lands exactly where yours lands then we each have to deal with the M&Ms in the same fashion, i.e. we have the same conditions. Whether on not we putt from the same postion is determined by skill and luck. Is it unfair that my disc lands on a stick and yours doesn't? On any given putt there are differences, sun angle, wind, basket conditions (that is, those young punks didn't equally smash both sides of the basket, only the side that affects my putt) etc. It is part of the game and will effect any drive/putt at any time.

Only Nick (sorry Nick) expects the playing field to perfectly equal at all times for all people.

Itme 2: Tone Pole Incorp. makes me 18 tone poles that I put in my course. Billy Bob laborer was asleep at the wheel when he made the tone pole for hole 16. Turns out if you hit one side of it you get a nice clear ring. If you hit the other side you get a lower harder to hear ring. You and I are driving on hole 16 and we make nearly identical drives with one exception, yours touches the tone pole on the side that has a nice clear ring (good ace on ya man) and I touch the other side (did you hear that? Nope, but boy was it close). There is no such thing as a perfect world and only politicians believe that life is fair.

Are golf greens not composed of blades of grass?

These blades of grass while short are growing in a certain direction. There is a certain grain of this grass. If you're putting from 12 o'clock you have to run over different grass than from 3 o'clock.

Following your same minute detail philosophy, one putt is hitting one lot of grass blades on the cup's edge that is entirely different than the group of grass blades encountered by a golfer putting from another direction.

Maybe to improve this inequity in golf they should insert a styrofoam cup into the hole that is coated with blue chalk.

As you say we shouldn't have to putt into a target that's not 100% uniform unless there's documented proof that it is an acceptable abnormality.
Can you please direct me to the study published that prooves that this nonconformity is within acceptable limits?

no basket means nothing to catch. Tone poles (just poles with chains) are by far the best thing and what disc golf should use IMO. That would totally eliminate discussions about DROT's, sticking the disc in the side of the basket, cut throughs, bounce outs etc. You either hit the chains or you don't - that simple.




I agree that posts are better. At some point the technology will be inexpensie enough to have an LED indicator on the post and even at the tee to indicate a hit with a reset button to prepare for the next shot. I would give up ever getting credit for a blind ace or fairway deuce if I could have every putt I missed bouncing back at me off the pole.



I guess this goes to show how different people's opinions can be. Me, I'd rather play on baskets without chain assemblies than on chain assemblies without baskets.

The grass grain is irrelevant for this argument. It would be like controlling the air space around the basket which we know is nonuniform even with no wind (heat differentials).

Golf does have a standard for inserting the cup liner. Recently, there was a complaint by a pro that the liner was not inserted the full one inch below ground level which lead to his dead center putt bouncing back up and out from the bottom.

I don't know of a formal putting study. That's my contention that we've blindly accepted a radially nonuniform target with no data to confirm that the variance is acceptable.

The grass grain is irrelevant for this argument. It would be like controlling the air space around the basket which we know is nonuniform even with no wind (heat differentials).

Golf does have a standard for inserting the cup liner. Recently, there was a complaint by a pro that the liner was not inserted the full one inch below ground level which lead to his dead center putt bouncing back up and out from the bottom.

I don't know of a formal putting study. That's my contention that we've blindly accepted a radially nonuniform target with no data to confirm that the variance is acceptable.



Hmmmmm............you would think our sport would have Uniformity on it's catching targets at sanctioned events.

I can't believe this stupid thread has gone on for so long. What fool would rather throw their disc at a pole and have it plop the ground rather than hear the amazing sound a disc makes when it nails the chains just right. All this talk about nonuniformity in the basket is stupid. Every player is using the same basket on any given hole and has an equal chance of throwing at it from any angle. There is nothing unfair about the current baskets. The only thing unfair is that I was subjected to idiotic rantings about some guy's facination about poles. Go to a [I'm a potty-mouth!] porn site if you wanna talk about poles and leave the sport as it is, the best **** sport out there.

actually i haven't really had more than one or two replies that actually relate to my original post

Sorry Sam,

I know this thread was hijacked. My first post on the first page dealt with your question. (straddle putts work better on posts)
However there were two posters who made some ludicrous side remarks that were hard to ignore.

Sounds like you just want to attack everyone who doesn't share the same opinion as you do.

I see the argument in using an object vs. a basket since there is the possibility that the target won't catch a fairly good putt because of the way the disc is spinning, wind is blowing, chains are hitting, etc. Yeah, there are argumnts about whether a DROT should be a finished putt and whether a disc stuck in the bottom/side of a basket should NOT be a finished putt, but the difference in the hole types is that a polehole CLEARLY shows whether you're done, where an object does leave room for ambiguity. Even with the sensor and LED (which were good thoughts) don't make the argument for an object better (IMO).

Although baskets obviously cost more than whatever standardized object that could be accepted, they're a unique symbol of the sport. So what if some uninformed people have tried to grill with them?!? Baskets clearly indicate (in an agreeably fair manner) which putts are good and which are bad. I putt somewhere in the middle of soft and fast, and I see the benefit to doing so. I had a bounce out this last weekend that probably cost me a win. But I could have thrown it more center and it would have probably stuck.

I'd rather have the basket, as cruel as it might be 1 in 100 times, than a board/sign/etc.

Sounds like you just want to attack everyone who doesn't share the same opinion as you do.



The original poster didn't start this debate. He asked for advise on how to best make an adjustment to putt better on posts. I offered the best advise I know given my years of experience putting on posts.

MTL was the first to redirect the point of this thread to a debate on tone poles vs baskets. Shortly after that Chuck speculated how much better off the sport would be if we had used posts (or some other "uniform" target) instead of "non-uniform" baskets.

Since I have experienced first hand many of the debates that arise from playing on posts that are not an issue with baskets, I couldn't let the remarks go without providing an informed response.

If anyone wants to put in a new course and they obtain permission and the funds to do so, they have every right to install whatever target they deem appropriate. However, to propose that we should replace today's modern baskets on existing courses in favor of posts based upon one's inability to putt proficiently on baskets strikes me as incredibly foolish.

the topic line seems to have thrown everyone off......"changing for posts instead of baskets"

advice: hit the pole......no really, use a straddle putt....you don't have to worry about the height as much as you do with a basket but baskets are more forgiving side-to-side than poles.