DISC ABOVE THE PLAYING SURFACE

[dm4]

803.07 DISC ABOVE THE PLAYING SURFACE
A. If a disc comes to rest above the playing surface in a tree or other object on the course, its lie shall be marked on the playing surface directly below it. If the point directly below the disc above the playing surface is an out-of-bounds area, the disc shall be declared out-of-bounds and marked and penalized in accordance with 803.08. If the playing surface directly below the disc is inside a tree or other solid obstacle, the lie shall be marked on the line of play immediately behind the tree or other solid obstacle.

Question...

How can the disc be above the playing surface, and out-of-bounds? It’s got to be one, or the other, right?

If I knew how to rephrase the rule, I would. Refer me to another thread that answers this. I am sure you have been over this before, but I am confused about it. I tried asking it in the disc hit by a car thread, but was not clear in what I was getting at.

(I really do understand what it means, but I don't think that is what it says).

[rhett]

Since "playing surface" is not defined anywhere, I would infer from this rule that the playing includes all inbounds and out-of-bounds areas of the course.

While it is true that you cannot play from OB according to the rules, this rule says that OB areas are in fact part of the playing surface. Case closed.

[LouMoreno]

Rhett, I'm a little surprised at your answer.

B.If a disc has come to rest above two meters, as measured from the lowest point of the disc to the playing surface directly below it, the player shall be assessed a one-throw penalty. This penalty applies only if the disc is above in-bounds. The player shall proceed from a lie marked in accordance with 803.07 A.

[rhett]

You are going to have spell out what you think the problem is. Again, the disc is marked below on the playing surface. The penalty is assessed only if that part of the playing surface where the disc was marked is inbounds. ie, if the disc is maked on the playing surface below and that playing surface is OB, you do not get the "above 2 meter" penalty but instead get the OB penalty.

[LouMoreno]

You’re right, Rhett. I guess I read your response a little too quickly. I thought you were implying that the both penalties would apply.

A disc can land out of bounds and be above the playing surface, but a disc above 2 meters and out of bounds can only be penalized for being out of bounds.

I should have known better, oh wise one.

[dm4]

I guess what I am saying is, if you cannot play from ob, than ob is not a playing surface. logistically, this rule does not make sense. I know that I am supposed to come up with a better way to say it, but I am not very good at that. This just keeps coming up, and every time I read it I can't get past it. Ob cannot be a playing surface.

[neonnoodle]

Try looking at it this way:

OB has nothing to do with playing surface; If you are ob you are simply ob, it doesn't matter how high off the ground you are.

Or:

Playing surface does not have anything to do with ib or ob it is just the surface upon which one plays; if it is ob then it is ob, if it is ib then it is ib.

Make sense?

[dm4]

quote]Try looking at it this way:

OB has nothing to do with playing surface; If you are ob you are simply ob, it doesn't matter how high off the ground you are.

Or:

Playing surface does not have anything to do with ib or ob it is just the surface upon which one plays; if it is ob then it is ob, if it is ib then it is ib.

Make sense?

[/QUOTE]

I understand the content of the statement, I just feel that this particular part of the sentence, ("...If the point directly below the disc above the playing surface is an out-of-bounds area..."), is a contradiction, because a disc that is above ob cannot by definition be above a playing surface.

[gnduke]

because a disc that is above ob cannot by definition be above a playing surface.

by what definition ?
There is no definition of playing surface.

[neonnoodle]

I understand the content of the statement, I just feel that this particular part of the sentence, ("...If the point directly below the disc above the playing surface is an out-of-bounds area..."), is a contradiction, because a disc that is above ob cannot by definition be above a playing surface.

You are the only one saying that "playing surface" by definition must be ib. Our rules make no such definition. So the question is:

Do you want our rules to be changed so that "playing surface" MUST be considered "In Bounds"?

And my answer (and apparently our PDGA RCs) is: NO!

There is no need. As far as I know you are the only person to be confused by it. Our rules are rarely changed to appease one confused person.

[dm4]

Can you play from ob? (no). How can it be a playing surface?

dm4 I think we all get your point. Let's try not to beat it in any further. What change would you suggest that would resolve this apparent ambiguity? I think you take the term "playing surface" too literally rather than assume they meant the ground or some other surface closely related to the ground. I mean really do you argue about this when you're playing and your disc gets stuck in a tree somewhere OB? C'mon people we're arguing semantics here!

[Jake L]

Question...

How can the disc be above the playing surface, and out-of-bounds? It’s got to be one, or the other, right?

Sorry but your wrong, it can be both. if a disc gets stuck in a bush anywhere from 1 inch to 6 feet up it is still IB, (above playing surface) but if that bush has been roped off by string to be OB then the disc is ABOVE PLAYING SURFACE AND OB.

I think that the point of this rule is to determine where the spot to throw from next will be. Which is behind object, on line with pole, move mark in bounds, or last spot seen in bounds.

Sound good, just my opinion.

[dm4]

Sorry but your wrong, it can be both. if a disc gets stuck in a bush anywhere from 1 inch to 6 feet up it is still IB, (above playing surface) but if that bush has been roped off by string to be OB then the disc is ABOVE PLAYING SURFACE AND OB.

I think that the point of this rule is to determine where the spot to throw from next will be. Which is behind object, on line with pole, move mark in bounds, or last spot seen in bounds.

Sound good, just my opinion.

I am talking about a disc that is below two meters and in an out of bounds area. This disc cannot be above the playing surface. If it was it would be in bounds (that’s what a playing surface is, a surface you can play from). If the disc lands in a bush that has been roped off by string, if it is outside the roped off area, than it is not ob. If it is inside the area, it is ob, but it is not above the playing surface, is it? If it is inside the string, ob, how can that be a playing surface?

[neonnoodle]

You're funny.

Can you find in the rules where "playing surface" is defined as being exclusively "In Bounds"?

I'll answer that for you since you seemingly refuse to read our rules: "Playing surface appears 16 times and not once is it defined as "In Bounds" so the answer is NO!

For your apparent fixation on the word "playing"; Can you answer the following:

Can it logically be said that even if your lie is out-of-bounds that you are still "playing" disc golf? Or do you stop "playing" once your disc is ob?

If you remain confused about this there is a link in the "Contact" link here at PDGA.com where you can send a question directly to the PDGA Rules Committee. Give them a shot, maybe they will be able to see what you are trying to get at.

[dm4]

You're funny.

Can you find in the rules where "playing surface" is defined as being exclusively "In Bounds"?

Out-of-bounds: An area designated by the director prior to the start of play from which a disc may not be played. The out-of-bounds line extends a plane vertically upward and downward. The out-of-bounds line is itself in-bounds.



Well, here it is. “..may not be played” is clear to me. So far Jake L has helped me understand a little better and therefore my original question is slightly different, but I still have not seen an answer to it.

How can the disc be above the playing surface (below two meters), and also be in an out-of-bounds area? If it is suspended in an out of bounds area, it is not above the playing surface, is it?

My “fixation” lies in the fact that my question has not been answered. If you do not wish to answer, or you don’t know, than you may choose to not post, but don’t try to insult me.

[neonnoodle]

Does "may not be played" equal not "playing" disc golf?

The rule you sight is not related to "playing surface", it is related to you may not "play" a shot from Out of Bounds. Two completely separate things.

[dm4]

Don't we play our disc golf shots from the playing surface? If the answer is yes, than an area where a shot cannot be played must therefore not be a playing surface.

[gnduke]

The fact that a disc can not be played within a certain area does not exclude that area from the playing surface. There is no definition of playing surface that declares all playing surfaces are legal to be played from. Hosever, there are several rules that explicitly describe areas of the playing surface to be unplayable.

[neonnoodle]

How can the disc be above the playing surface (below two meters), and also be in an out-of-bounds area?

Because out-of-bounds is not a vertical measurement. Anything within an out out-of-bounds area whether on the surface or 100 feet up in the air IS out-of-bounds. And playing surface has NOTHING to do with in bounds or out (see previous posts).

The only reason "playing surface" is used at all in this rule is to define clearly that the disc must be completely within the out-of-bounds area and to verify that you must come straight down beneath the disc on the surface where (hopefully) the OB is marked and you can determine if it is in or out. You don't even have to consider the 2 meters part of it until it has been determined to be in.

So to answer your question directly: By coming to rest above the playing surface and within an out of bounds area.

It is that simple.

If it is suspended in an out of bounds area, it is not above the playing surface, is it?

Yes it is. "Playing surface" does not have any designation of in or out of bounds, both are part of the course, both are part of the play, you simply may not throw when in contact with the out-of-bounds area.

Again, OB IS part of the playing surface, you simply may not throw from within it. If it helps, try thinking of it as the OB Playing Surface.

As you can tell by now I have little aversion to playing word games; I didn't mean to insult you, I just was starting to find it difficult to tell if you were just playing around or not.

Finally, if you wish to get the final word on this then you should write to the PDGA Rules Committee.

Tell'em I sent ya!

PS: If you consider "Above 2 Meters" as OB I'll leave it in the worthy hands of Rhett to straighten you out about that.

[girlie]

Nick,

Why is your username green when everyone else's is blue

I want a green username, too!

[Jake L]

Don't we play our disc golf shots from the playing surface? If the answer is yes, than an area where a shot cannot be played must therefore not be a playing surface.

Can't you throw a disc over OB?

Its an UNplayable surface but still a playing surface.

[neonnoodle]

Your wish is my command.

[girlie]

SWEET! Thanks, Nick.

[dm4]

You know, when you play with anew disc golfer, and they ask you questions, you end up saying the same thing over and over, and then something clicks, or you say it in a different way and then they get it. Well, I get it. Thanks for taking the time to do so. I am doing my best to understand the rules and when something does not seem right, I am going to ask. And if I don’t get it, I am going to keep asking.

I was thinking “playing surface” meant “throwing surface” and then the light bulb came on. Sorry to take so much time. Like I said, I really do understand the rule, it was just the way that it was stated, and now it makes sense.

[neonnoodle]

No problem. Carlton views me in much the same light as I was you for a time there. But there really are no stupid questions when you are trying to get it right.

You did have me going for a moment there though...

[rhett]

I agree with your sentiment, dm4_. Unfortuately "playing surface" is not defined and the "above the playing surface" rule indirectly defines the playing surface as covering OB ground also.

I wholeheartedly agree that calling an area that you are not to play from the "playing surface" is not semantically consistent. But there are bigger fish to fry in the rules so it doesn't really bug me.

[neonnoodle]

But there are bigger fish to fry in the rules so it doesn't really bug me.

Such as?

[exczar]

Such as?

Oh, great. Way to go, Rhett!

[dm4]

I agree with your sentiment, dm4_. Unfortuately "playing surface" is not defined and the "above the playing surface" rule indirectly defines the playing surface as covering OB ground also.

I wholeheartedly agree that calling an area that you are not to play from the "playing surface" is not semantically consistent. But there are bigger fish to fry in the rules so it doesn't really bug me.

Where were you when I needed you! (just kidding).

Really, in all fairness, I now think that the words “playing surface” mean just what they are. I think neonnoodle and some of the others are correct when saying that the game is played on all the ground, or area, surrounding each hole and course. When your disc flies over such out-of-bounds area (ground, water, trees, etc.), it does not stop “playing”, but in fact is in play (as Jake L pointed out); while it’s in the air, over the playing surface (in bounds, and out-of-bounds). Therefore, a disc can be suspended above the playing surface (below two meters) and in an out-of-bounds area.