What is the connection between disc golf and pot?
Nearly everybody who plays the game is aware of the stereotypical dude who hangs out at the disc golf course and tokes a couple of joints, though I have to say I’ve only seen a few of these dudes at Grand Forks’ Lincoln Drive Park and they were enjoying cigarettes.
But the stereotype is something some disc golf enthusiasts are pretty touchy about, probably not without good reason. Grand Forks has a great disc golf course at the park and part of that is because of the area disc golf community’s work in mainstreaming the sport. They’re the ones who persuaded the Park District to add the second 18-hole course.
They’re also the ones who called me this morning to tell me how bogus Hugo Gomez is. Hugo’s the guy who’s working on a major disc golf tournament that he’s calling "4-2-0 Frolf." See Page 17 of this PDF to see the literature he sent to the City Council.
I had to laugh when I heard the event name because of the connotation of the number 420; it’s slang for pot. It wasn’t until a few years ago that some friends clued me in what that meant. The joke among them was I thought they were talking about one of those fictional sexual positions made up by imaginative frat boys. Half the guys I hung out with in senior year in high school were potheads and I’d never heard any of them call it the 420, so that’s my excuse.
Anyway, Hugo doesn’t seem to see the awkward connotation of 4-2-0 Frolf. He maintains that he came up with it because he’s charging $4 per player, with two to a team and the "O" looks like a disc. I don’t think anyone on the City Council or the Park District is buying that, though some seem more concerned than others.
Steve Mullally, the Park District’s superintendent of parks, said that after he learned about the 420 — someone told him to Google "420" and he found a video like this one — he told Hugo the name wasn’t gonna fly. He was led to believe, he said, that Hugo thought it would attract a lot of people to the event.
Hugo didn’t put it quite that way when City Council members on the service committee challenged him today about the name. He said he doesn’t intend to attract pot smokers but, if they came, the cops could get them and the city would probably make some money from citations.
Steve said Hugo had said he would net a certain percentage of profit from vendors, so it made sense to Steve that Hugo would want to have as many people come to the event as possible. Hugo has since clarified that his profits would go to charity.
Council member Terry Bjerke, as can be imagined, was not thrilled with the whole 420 thing and thought it would attract a bunch of party animals like Springfest does. He apparently prowls the event every year, I’m thinking to look for political ammunition.
Council member Art Bakken, Eliot Glassheim and Curt Kreun seem to think the idea of a tournament has merit and the name was just a technicality. Change the name and the problem’s solved.
When I first wrote the story yesterday, I underplayed the 420 angle because I didn’t want to make an issue out of it all by myself. I thought it might be kind of controversial, but I have to let others decide that. As a result, some of my colleagues who glanced at the story didn’t realize the 420 angle was even there.
The second story covered that angle in more detail because, as I thought, there was some push back from city and Park District officials.
I personally feel pretty laissez-faire about pot smoking and its legalization — The people that I know who did it or still do it are a pretty mellow lot who are no threat to society. — so I hope my story doesn’t come off as some sort of scare story. I know well the news media’s reputation for fearmongering. There’s nothing sinister about it; every writer wants a big readership and scaring people makes them want to read more.
What I wanted with my story was just to point out something amusing, as in, hey, this dude just totally reinforced a stereotype.
I also wanted to point out the political reality of Grand Forks, but didn’t do so explicitly. If Hugo thinks he can make the similarity between 420 and 4-2-0 Frolf sound like a mere coincidence, he clearly doesn’t understand how conservative this city and state are. No elected official would feel comfortable approving an event with that kind of a connection to an illegal drug, even if they think it’s harmless.
I suspect that if pot were ever legalized, we’d be among the last in the country to do it. In my observation, trends elsewhere don’t necessarily get here until some time has passed.
“trends elsewhere don’t necessarily get here until some time has passed.”
You don’t suppose this means we’re behind the times,do you?
Does The Park Board and CVB really have this short of memories? About 13-14 years ago the city hosted a disc golf tournament and the CVB threw some bucks at the event. All players boycotted the post event banquet and awards ceremony. Why? Because the 2nd place team threw a big stink because they said the first place team cheated. How’d they “cheat”? The were smoking pot and the 2nd place team said that gave them an unfair advantage. Silly stuff! These are adults? Some people need to grow up.
I think your stories on the situation were well-written. Personally, as a disc golfer, I have a bigger problem with calling it Frolf than I do with the 420 aspect. Honestly, I think that this guy (Hugo) was trying to be cute with his explanation but think it would have carried more water had he called it 42O rather than 420. A disc doesn’t look like a 0 but like a O. Maybe he is so high that he thinks his discs are oblong?
At any rate, I appreciate the local club stepping in and clarifying that this is one individual’s bad idea and not something that disc golfers openly support. Sure, many of us do partake but we certainly do not make it the focal point of our rounds nor the focal point of a tournament. We had those and they were fun but as the sport grows, we need to recognize that the 420 element is holding back that growth and should downplay it whenever and wherever possible.
Thank you for the story on disc golf, though. Unfortunate that this one clown is trying to sully the waters for all of us.
Haha, Anon. That’s a good story. It’s a different crew these days so I’m sure that won’t happen. However, you’ve gotta remember that not all disc golfers are adults.
Sam: The disc golf vs. frolf thing is a little like football vs. soccer, I think. A lot of people say the latter even though, I think, technically the former is correct. The discs aren’t built like Frisbees nor are they thrown like them.
I also think part of the association goes back to pot’s association with simple Frisbees. I’m old so I remember when everyone was talking the rise of the disc sport “Extreme” on college campuses and then it had a distinct pot-friendly crowd. Add to this the fact that in my experience most disc golf communities are in more liberal locations, often college tows (both also pot friendly.) I love Lincoln and we bought downtown specifically to be short walking distance.
As for partaking while playing… you know how many beer and 1/4 booze bottles can be found along the golf courses?
Yup Sauer, that is right, you can find lots of booze at a golf course…but booze is LEGAL…
Whether something is legal or not doesn’t necessarily imply that it’s wrong. There are many laws that people rebel against that we later learn were actually stupid and wrong to begin with. Prohibition is the most obvious example in this case. Jim Crow laws, including segregation, are also examples.
I’m not equating pot with any of those; the point is that we ought not to rely on the law as the only measure of what’s right and wrong or what’s good for society.
A pothead who cleans up after himself on the disc golf course is much better to be around than a drunk who litters the grass with glass bottles.
Ben: Actually, on the golf course, especially the public ones, it is NOT legal; anyone who has ever received a fine for having a open intoxicant in public will tell you that.
Whether the idea of a frisbee golf tourney is good or not (it probably could be a winner), this “dude” tried to pull one over on the GF council. No doubt he figured them to be hicks who wouldn’t catch on to his obvious pot reference and he could go back to his pothead buddies and laugh about how stupid the Grand Forks rubes are.
His explanation for his reefer reference is insulting.
The GF Herald should have made the obvious drug reference clear so the public (and council) could be well informed on how they were about to be made fools of…or perhaps the too-cool GFH elite were looking forward to laughing along with this “dude.”
Meet a lot of meth addicts, do you?
I should point out that the council and parks people knew about this before I did. I quoted Council member Curt Kreun in my first story and it was he who mentioned that the event has a funny name. At the time, city documents I saw referred to it as Frolf-a-palooza. The original letters from Hugo, though, said 4-2-0 Frolf and Curt knew what that meant. Steve Mullally, who I quoted in my second story, also knew what it meant earlier. Hugo approached him weeks ago before it hit the council agenda and I noticed it.
So I doubt anyone was going to be made a fool of even if I hadn’t written the first story.
“I’m not equating pot with any of those; the point is that we ought not to rely on the law as the only measure of what’s right and wrong or what’s good for society.”
That statement is out there. I’m serious, this is way out there. This is a society based on law. I won’t go into a big thing here, but law is what keeps us in check. Whether we agree or disagree that is the bottom line. Can I go shoot a child molester since everyone knows molesting is wrong. No, we have laws that have to be obeyed.
Second, Hugo Gomez is a scam artist. Ask anyone who knows him what they think of Mr. Gomez. Ask Mr. Gomez if he has struck anyone in the face? Has he ever tried to scam young girls? Just ask him, you might be interested in his answer.
Third, we are not a conservative town. Why does this town vote for Earl Pomeroy over and over again? This is Seattle by the River. Grand Forks is a liberal town.
Hugo Gomez is being pushed/funded by a pro dope group. He’s not just poor ol’ innocent Hugo, he’s a scam artist who is a known liar. It’s not a pot thing, yeah, right. Don’t try to debate like you see both sides of this. There is right and there is wrong. I don’t care if Gomez smokes his last brain cell out, but I don’t want this city or the taxpayers to put the stamp of approval on his lie.
“Meet a lot of meth addicts, do you?”
Yes, I work with them every day.
While I’m not going to compare how harmful pot is vs. booze, I will never be for legalizing pot because of what I see every day. I have yet to meet a meth addict who didn’t start out by smoking pot. Many also drank to begin with along with toking, but many meth heads I’ve met didn’t drink much or at all. Every single one smoked pot first.
People can dismiss the “gateway” drug theory as much as they want, I only know what I see and I don’t see any meth heads that didn’t start with pot.
I really think the potential fraud aspect of this story should be a bigger part of the story instead of all the marijuana and frolf nonsense. The fact is Mr. Gomez claims he ran an 800 person event last year. One can only assume he used this claim to secure his current sponsorship money. A real good story would be to find one or more persons that played in his event last year to find out the true number. Then I would interview some of his sponsors and compare his actual attendance with what sponsors were told during his presentation. The only problem with this potential story is you would have a real hard time finding anyone that actually played in his tournament last year.
RJR: Did you consider my examples? Was it OK to discriminate against blacks before the Supreme Court forbade it? No? Then laws aren’t the same as morality. I always thought that blind obedience to authority is unamerican.
Never-saw-a-meth-head: If every methhead started as a pothead, it doesn’t mean that every pothead will become a methhead. That’s a logical fallacy called converse fallacy of accident. Why? You haven’t met every pothead. Therefore your conclusion is unproven.
Also, this is a conservative town compared to many others in the country. Your example of Earl Pomeroy is irrelevant. The whole state votes for him and other Dems for Congress and then turn around and give Republicans control of the Legislature. It’s because of federal earmarks.
Nope, not every pothead will become a methhead. I never said that. I did not make a logical fallacy because I didn’t say that every pothead will become a methead. I said that every methead I’ve had to treat had started out with pot. There is quite a difference in what I said and what you imply that I said. You, on the other hand, have committed a common journalistic violation. It’s called “putting words in people’s mouths.”
I didn’t say anything about (that hypocritical fool) Pomeroy. More words put in my mouth by you. Geez, no wonder so many people you’ve reported on complain that you misquoted them.
Dealing with trying to help methheads every day, however, it becomes quite clear that because every one of them started with pot, that if pot becomes even more available and more people are smoking it, the number of people that go from smoking pot to doing meth will increase as well. Logical enough for ya, Spock?
It’s all very well to sit in your ivory press tower and think pot’s just swell. Spend a day in my shoes and you might open your mind, as well as change it.
Meth Head: Every loose woman I’ve ever met lived in Fargo so I have deduced that to become a loose woman you must first live in Fargo.
>>>>>>>>>personally feel pretty laissez-faire about pot smoking and its legalization — The people that I know who did it or still do it are a pretty mellow lot who are no threat to society. — so I hope my story doesn’t come off as some sort of scare story. I know well the news media’s reputation for fearmongering. There’s nothing sinister about it; every writer wants a big readership and scaring people makes them want to read more.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Smoking pot is a illegal and your friends that smoke pot right now are losers. I am sick and tired of this mind set that pot doesn’t hurt anyone, that bull crap analogy.
What an incredibly persuasive and thoughtful argument. We have a winner! (Actually, no, there are pot smokers who argue better than you. We can logically deduce that you are less than a loser.)
Never-saw: No. Your logic still sucks. You think the type of risk takers who might be willing to try meth in the future are actually worried about pot laws now? They’re not buying pot now because it’s illegal, but after they’ve tried pot, they’ll suddenly not care if meth is illegal? That’s ludicrous.
By the way, cigarettes are also considered a gateway drug now (http://www.jhsph.edu/PublicHealthNews/Press_Releases/PR_2000/smoking_drugs.html). Holy smokes! Why isn’t this country full of meth heads who started with cigarettes, went to pot and ended up on meth? Maybe breathing is a gateway drug, too?
I sneer at the ludicrous logic of your profession.
Yeah, look at all these meth-heads
http://www.veryimportantpotheads.com/site/NOTES.htm
The fact remains Tu-Uyen is that the Smoking pot is illegal and people that smoke pot are losers and your friend that smoke pot are losers and if I saw them smoking pot I would turn them in to the police. You can say oh it hurt no one but you’re a dead wrong, just like you’re are on most other issues. Face it you’re your a reporter at a second rate newspaper and an unapologetic cheer leader for the City of Grand Forks, ND.