Ask Chuck Kennedy

[cgkdisc]

I would agree that the first two are not explicit. But then when there are multiple examples that could be explained in the rules, the wording can get unwieldy and not all examples may be covered. I think in a future rewrite, adding that when Optional Rethrow is used, it's the only penalty applied would be helpful. The problem with the current rule regarding TDs restricting OB options is that it should probably be in the Competition manual and not the rulebook. The Competition rules supersede the rulebook so the hierarchy would be clearer.

The third one is definitely a problem since it is not clear whether the Optional Relief rule can be used anytime, including before the disc above 2m penalty is applied, or only when taking extended relief from a casual area. I already addressed this with the RC when the rules came out.

[keithjohnson]

Didn't know if it got missed in the Brakel barrage.

[cgkdisc]

Casual relief rule allows the TD to specify objects other than those listed for casual relief such as cactus or poison ivy without a PDGA waiver. The amount of free relief can be extended beyond 5m by the TD. Usually this is done when the casual area is either larger than 5m or a decent width waterway runs parallel to the fairway such that the line of play can sometimes remain in the water for longer than 5m due to the LOP angles. Extended relief doesn't mean the player can go indefinitely back with no penalty, but just to the edge of the casual area. The player needs to take the Optional Relief penalty 803.05C to go back farther if desired.

[bruce_brakel]

Originally Posted by cgkdisc

I would agree that the first two are not explicit. * * *
The third one is definitely a problem since it is not clear * * *.

Well, at least I'm glad for the reality check.

[krupicka]

Originally Posted by bruce_brakel

The rule that a TD cannot limit the players to only using the drop zone for o.b. is not in rule book. Unfortunately, the rule book still says that the TD can limit the players' options.

The way I read the rules is that the normal options for OB are previous lie, drop zone, or last inbounds and that the TD can limit these options to a subset. The optional rethrow always gives the player the option of the previous lie which would imply that the TD can effectively only remove the option for using a DZ or the last place in bounds for OB.

But even so, the TD can put on the course routing sheet that the only relief for a certain OB under 803.09.B is a drop zone and still be in agreement with the rules. The devious TD would put the DZ in a penalty box and only those players who really know the rules would figure out that they can still throw from the previous lie.

[cgkdisc]

The problem with preventing TDs from overriding the Optional Rethrow rule is speed of play situations. On big downhill holes with a significant OB area far down the hill, I can see where TDs would want to have a required drop zone for the OB area for speed of play. Should the right of the TD to speed play with a drop zone override a player's option to trudge back up the hill for an Optional Rethrow? Or maybe the Optional Rethrow would have to be declared while the player is still on the tee and it cannot be a provisional based on whether the first throw turned out to not be OB. It would be the player's next throw with penalty no matter where the first throw landed.

[bruce_brakel]

Cosmic Encounters!

Provisional Optional Rethrow.

[PhattD]

Originally Posted by cgkdisc

The problem with preventing TDs from overriding the Optional Rethrow rule is speed of play situations. On big downhill holes with a significant OB area far down the hill, I can see where TDs would want to have a required drop zone for the OB area for speed of play. Should the right of the TD to speed play with a drop zone override a player's option to trudge back up the hill for an Optional Rethrow? Or maybe the Optional Rethrow would have to be declared while the player is still on the tee and it cannot be a provisional based on whether the first throw turned out to not be OB. It would be the player's next throw with penalty no matter where the first throw landed.

It seems to me that this is, or should be, a non issue. All the TD has to do is make sure the OB drop zone is such that no one in their right mind would trudge back up the hill to use the previous lie option. I think people are trying too hard to make sure the rules explicitely cover every imaginable situation regardless of plausability. I have rarely had situations where we couldn't come up with a reasonable interpretation of the rules on the spot and whenever there was a disagreement it was easy to take a provisional and ask the TD later. I also don't think that having different TD's make different rulings in similar situations is the end of the world catastrophe some people think it is. There are significant differences in the way different reffing crews call fouls in the NFL, NBA. and NHL and those sports seem to do just fine. And they have far more resources for not only writing the rules but training and paying refs.

[cgkdisc]

While the reffing crews may call the rules slightly differently, the different outcomes that might occur are due to human judgment and not confusion in how the rules are supposed to be applied. We shoud at least attempt to write our rules as clearly as possible even if a few TDs might not interpret them in the same way.

[keithjohnson]

Originally Posted by cgkdisc

Casual relief rule allows the TD to specify objects other than those listed for casual relief such as cactus or poison ivy without a PDGA waiver. The amount of free relief can be extended beyond 5m by the TD. Usually this is done when the casual area is either larger than 5m or a decent width waterway runs parallel to the fairway such that the line of play can sometimes remain in the water for longer than 5m due to the LOP angles. Extended relief doesn't mean the player can go indefinitely back with no penalty, but just to the edge of the casual area. The player needs to take the Optional Relief penalty 803.05C to go back farther if desired.

I typed for 15 minutes to respond why this didn't apply to the situation, but being an idiot i forgot to copy it first knowing that if you type for more than 30 seconds, you get logged out and therefore lose everything - I'l try again tomorrow when I reassmble my desk.

[keithjohnson]

Originally Posted by cgkdisc

Casual relief rule allows the TD to specify objects other than those listed for casual relief such as cactus or poison ivy without a PDGA waiver. The amount of free relief can be extended beyond 5m by the TD. Usually this is done when the casual area is either larger than 5m or a decent width waterway runs parallel to the fairway such that the line of play can sometimes remain in the water for longer than 5m due to the LOP angles. Extended relief doesn't mean the player can go indefinitely back with no penalty, but just to the edge of the casual area. The player needs to take the Optional Relief penalty 803.05C to go back farther if desired.

We all agreed about the first part.

We disagreed on the second part as the hole has a creek running from the tee to the basket with the first 250-300 feet being parallel to the fairway and the last 75-100 feet meandering in front of and to the left of the basket. The TD wanted to give unlimited relief - and it was argued relief could in theory with the right angles be carried all the way back to the teeing area - which seems to be counter to the spirit of the rules. At that point you might as well declare the entire fairway as casual, so that skill is eliminated and the luckiest person wins - since the new rulebook allows it.

We said if it was a small puddle or something else a little relief would be ok, but since most of the creek is only 1-2 feet wide and 6-12 INCHES deep within 100 feet of the basket, we came to the agreement to take the first LEGAL stance if they didn't want to stick their toes over the flowing part of the water to make thier approach or putt.

Of course I spent both rounds playing from out of the creek, and the bad play on that one hole cost me over $150.

I call beyond the creek OB when I run my yearly Event there, so that there is more risk/ reward to the hole as you have to think more on your upshot and whether to go 100% at the putt and risk another stroke if you missleft and at high speed.

Let me know how you see it interpreted to where I couldn't just call anywhere on the course casual the way the rule is written now - I'm gonna say now that you can't.




I copied it this time to be safe and of course it will go through with no issues.

Yep!

[jconnell]

Originally Posted by keithjohnson

We all agreed about the first part.

We disagreed on the second part as the hole has a creek running from the tee to the basket with the first 250-300 feet being parallel to the fairway and the last 75-100 feet meandering in front of and to the left of the basket. The TD wanted to give unlimited relief - and it was argued relief could in theory with the right angles be carried all the way back to the teeing area - which seems to be counter to the spirit of the rules. At that point you might as well declare the entire fairway as casual, so that skill is eliminated and the luckiest person wins - since the new rulebook allows it.

We said if it was a small puddle or something else a little relief would be ok, but since most of the creek is only 1-2 feet wide and 6-12 INCHES deep within 100 feet of the basket, we came to the agreement to take the first LEGAL stance if they didn't want to stick their toes over the flowing part of the water to make thier approach or putt.

Of course I spent both rounds playing from out of the creek, and the bad play on that one hole cost me over $150.

I call beyond the creek OB when I run my yearly Event there, so that there is more risk/ reward to the hole as you have to think more on your upshot and whether to go 100% at the putt and risk another stroke if you missleft and at high speed.

Let me know how you see it interpreted to where I couldn't just call anywhere on the course casual the way the rule is written now - I'm gonna say now that you can't.




I copied it this time to be safe and of course it will go through with no issues.

Yep!

It should be noted that the "old" rulebook allowed the TD to grant the same greater casual relief as the "new" rulebook. The text of the rule didn't change with the revision, just the placement [old book rule 803.05C(2), new book rule 803.05B]

Regarding the line I underlined, why would you need to agree to that? That's the way the rule reads already.

Originally Posted by 803.05B

If it is impractical to move the obstacle, the player's lie may be relocated to the nearest lie which is no closer to the hole, is on the line of play, and is not more than five meters from the original lie, as agreed to by a majority of the group or an official (unless greater casual relief is announced by the director).

By rule, casual relief is taking the nearest lie on the line of play. In other words, if a dry playable lie exists 3m behind the original lie, you don't get to go to a spot 4m back, you have to take the lie at 3m back.

I interpret greater relief to mean granting more than 5m on the line of play (so as to not incur a penalty), but not to mean eliminating the "nearest lie" component. So by default, the agreement you all came to was redundant.

[cgkdisc]

I'm not sure I see the problem if extended casual relief under certain angles goes 100 feet back or even to the tee in order to get out of the casual area? No player wants to play from 100 feet back or retee even with no penalty if that's how far back they have to go on the line of play to get out of the casual relief area. This would require a waiver but we've been discussing the option for a TD to declare a dynamic drop zone where if a player goes back up to 5m on the LOP and is still not out of the casual area, the dynamic "drop zone" would be 90 degrees to the left or right side of the casual area and no closer to the hole until you can mark out of it.

[krupicka]

I thought BunCRs used the "or greater relief" portion to be able to declare drop zones for CR areas.

[jconnell]

Originally Posted by krupicka

I thought BunCRs used the "or greater relief" portion to be able to declare drop zones for CR areas.

I always thought BunCRs were declared utilizing 804.01 Special Conditions:

B. The drop zone may be utilized in special conditions. The director must announce prior to the tournament how it is to be used and if a penalty throw is to be assessed. If no penalty is announced prior to the tournament, none will be assessed for use of the drop zone in special conditions.

[cgkdisc]

There are three types of buncrs. One type uses extended relief under the Casual Relief rule where the player is supposed to mark on the edge of the buncr going back on the line of play. The other two types of buncrs use the Special Conditions rule where the player throws from a drop zone which is either marked or it's defined as the previous lie in the way they were played at the 2008 & 2009 USDGC.

[PhattD]

Originally Posted by cgkdisc

While the reffing crews may call the rules slightly differently, the different outcomes that might occur are due to human judgment and not confusion in how the rules are supposed to be applied. We shoud at least attempt to write our rules as clearly as possible even if a few TDs might not interpret them in the same way.

And I agree with this I'm just saying that trying to get the rules absolutely air tight is a fools errand. I think we need to get as close as we can and then try to explain the intent of the rule so that when a situation occurs that isn't explicitly addressed we are comfortable with letting the people on scene come up with a reasonable ruling and not fret too much if there is some variance in interpretation.

[keithjohnson]

Originally Posted by jconnell

It should be noted that the "old" rulebook allowed the TD to grant the same greater casual relief as the "new" rulebook. The text of the rule didn't change with the revision, just the placement [old book rule 803.05C(2), new book rule 803.05B]

Regarding the line I underlined, why would you need to agree to that? That's the way the rule reads already.
By rule, casual relief is taking the nearest lie on the line of play. In other words, if a dry playable lie exists 3m behind the original lie, you don't get to go to a spot 4m back, you have to take the lie at 3m back.

I interpret greater relief to mean granting more than 5m on the line of play (so as to not incur a penalty), but not to mean eliminating the "nearest lie" component. So by default, the agreement you all came to was redundant.

Referencing the underlined part: You missed the part about going back towards the tee unlimited where the creek was straight and first dry spot was back over 200 feet depending on angle. He agreed to just leave it at 5 Meters, No extra - sorry if that wasn't clear.

We know how the nearest lie worked - that's the part you underlined.

[keithjohnson]

Originally Posted by cgkdisc

I'm not sure I see the problem if extended casual relief under certain angles goes 100 feet back or even to the tee in order to get out of the casual area? No player wants to play from 100 feet back or retee even with no penalty if that's how far back they have to go on the line of play to get out of the casual relief area. This would require a waiver but we've been discussing the option for a TD to declare a dynamic drop zone where if a player goes back up to 5m on the LOP and is still not out of the casual area, the dynamic "drop zone" would be 90 degrees to the left or right side of the casual area and no closer to the hole until you can mark out of it.

I personally don't care - I've waded into mud up to my knees to play shots, but there are players who won't even think to go near water or damp dirt to play shots who can throw over 100 feet.

I'm gonna declare the entire course as a casual relief area at my next Event, so people can just play wherever they feel the most comfortable, or maybe I'll just make every tree and a 5 foot circle around it a casual obstacle since the rule book allows me to.

You see where this could go?
What happened to the old days where you actually got penalized for a bad shot and the person with the best skills usually won - instead of who is the luckiest?

[cgkdisc]

First of all, you would need to specify extended relief with no penalty. Even then, players could only move back on the line of play. Yes, that would probably give players better stances in several cases. But you wouldn't do that since it goes against the unwritten TD "code" to make it tougher on players in tournaments as much as possible. That format would be way too easy, sort of the antidote to "throw and distance" penalties at USDGC. Maybe persuade Harold to do two rounds of T&D and two rounds of this BC (buncr city) format at USDGC to balance it out? Knowing players though, they would probably still find some reason to complain about some unfairness in your CR Max format.

[keithjohnson]

I want Harold to still like me

It does seem silly that I could actually legally pull it off if I wanted to though.

I'm gonna have to smack Garnett around if I see him in Texas for allowing this to be.

[Patrick P]

Let's say I land in a tree above 2m. Rather than taking a penalty and placing my lie underneath the tree, could I call Optional Relief (803.05C), take a penalty stroke and move back as far as I want on the line of play from the tree? If I do this would I still be penalized on the 2m stroke?

[cgkdisc]

We're waiting for the RC to clarify their position on when Optional Relief can be used. If you take what's currently written, you would have to first mark your lie below the disc above 2m and accept that penalty and then decide to use the Optional Relief rule. The wording of the Optional Relief rule specifies you need to move a "lie" back and you don't have a lie until you bring the disc down out of the tree. On the other hand, the Optional Rethrow rule specifically removed the word "lie" from the old Unplayable Lie rule and allows you to move your disc from any location and play from the previous lie with just a one throw penalty, even if your disc is above 2m in a tree.

[bruce_brakel]

Originally Posted by Patrick P

Let's say I land in a tree above 2m. Rather than taking a penalty and placing my lie underneath the tree, could I call Optional Relief (803.05C), take a penalty stroke and move back as far as I want on the line of play from the tree? If I do this would I still be penalized on the 2m stroke?

I've actually done this already this year, thinking it was allowed under the new rules. Now I'm thinking maybe I took advantage of everyone's confusion, my own included.

It was just to save me from having to crawl around in mud and thorns to get to my lie -- for the sake of the laundry more than for an advantage on my next throw. Either way, I was going to be down in two.

It's a longstanding tradition in our PDGA to make rule changes in secret and spring them on the membership half-baked and poorly worded. Let's hear it for tradition!

[Patrick P]

Originally Posted by bruce_brakel

I've actually done this already this year, thinking it was allowed under the new rules. Now I'm thinking maybe I took advantage of everyone's confusion, my own included.

It was just to save me from having to crawl around in mud and thorns to get to my lie -- for the sake of the laundry more than for an advantage on my next throw. Either way, I was going to be down in two.

It's a longstanding tradition in our PDGA to make rule changes in secret and spring them on the membership half-baked and poorly worded. Let's hear it for tradition!

The scenario I was thinking is this: I threw a drive and it went 250 feet landing above 2m in a tree half way down the fairway. If I take my lie directly underneath this tree, I have a poor lie to shoot from and would probably have to throw out to the side to get a better position to throw from. However, I'm not sure if I could take optional relief backing me up with enough room to have a better approach shot, say a thumber over the tree line, and just take the optional relief penalty rather than taking a 2m penalty stroke with the bad lie. The rules are somewhat confusing as to the assessment of the correct penalty(s). I would think I would have to either throw underneath the tree with a 2m stroke, or throw from my previous lie (tee-pad) with optional rethrow penalty stroke.

[cgkdisc]

Yep. That's how it reads for the moment.

[gumbputt]

"The most recent 25% of your rounds get double weighted"

I noticed that since rounds of a tournament are listed 1,2,3,4 instead of 4,3,2,1 a player rating can be higher or lower.

In my case I am rated about 934 since it took round 1 & 2 instead of 2 & 3 for double weighting which would give me about a 921.

I don't have that many rounds for rating, it is just something I noticed.

[cgkdisc]

We don't double weight until a player has at least 10 rounds. We always take the highest rated rounds a player has in an event for double weighting regardless of the order they were played.

[J A B]

Originally Posted by cgkdisc

The score is 3. The Optional Rethrow always includes a 1-throw penalty. Double jeopardy means you don't get two 1-throw penalties in situations like landing above 2m when that's in effect and you decide to take an Optional Rethrow rather than mark below the tree. Now it's only a 1-throw penalty.

Under the old Unplayable Lie rule, you could not call the Unplayable Lie until you had a lie to call unplayable. So, you first had to take the 2m penalty to bring the disc to the ground to create a lie. Then, take another penalty for Unplayable Lie if you didn't like your spot under the giant pine tree with low limbs. That double jeopardy penalty doesn't exist with Optional Rethrow because you can call it while the disc is still in the tree above 2m. You avoid the 2m penalty but still get the Optional Rethrow penalty instead. Hopefully this makes sense?

Patrick,
from reading both "Optional Relief" and "Optional Re-throw"... IF the 2 meter rule is in effect, you would avoid the one throw (2 meter) penalty only if you Chose "Re-throw" from previous lie.

If you take "Optional Relief" from under the tree, you have already accepted the throw in the tree as valid, incurred the penalty stroke for 2 meters and are now seeking to position your lie some where other than directly below the disc, an additional penalty stroke.

You have that option for relief, but at the cost of an additional stroke.

To avoid the 2 meter, you have to Optional Re-throw. Previous lie now shooting 3 and risking the same tree/2 meter situation.

The un-quoted ramblings are my opinion/interpretation only and is not intended as a definitive ruling.

JAB

[Patrick P]

Originally Posted by J A B

Patrick,
from reading both "Optional Relief" and "Optional Re-throw"... IF the 2 meter rule is in effect, you would avoid the one throw (2 meter) penalty only if you Chose "Re-throw" from previous lie.

If you take "Optional Relief" from under the tree, you have already accepted the throw in the tree as valid, incurred the penalty stroke for 2 meters and are now seeking to position your lie some where other than directly below the disc, an additional penalty stroke.

You have that option for relief, but at the cost of an additional stroke.

To avoid the 2 meter, you have to Optional Re-throw. Previous lie now shooting 3 and risking the same tree/2 meter situation. JAB

That's what I was thinking, thanks.