Thoughts on the lie and stance

[Patrick P]

I think the whole premise of this discussion should be rephrased to "Old Men Can't Jump". Most everything you are spewing out Bruce is complete and bloody rubbish. I disagree with all of your proposals and reasons behind them. 95% of all stats are made up. 1/3 of jump putts are illegal? Yeah, ok, NOT. If it is very clear without question that someone has no supporting point on the playing surface upon release of the disc, then make the call. But if the release of disc and supporting point non contact are almost simultaneously, then seriously are you going to make that big of a deal about it? You come up with these off-the-wall ideas that are a) more intrusive for a TD (marking fairways out to 30m vs. a 10m circle), b) goes against the speed of play rule (dude, I'm going to go walk off 30m now vs. 10m), and c) makes the sport look pathetic (carry a little hanky and place behind your disc, or draw out a string).

A jump putt takes skill just like a perfectly executed roller or a 350ft accurate thumber. If a player exhibits a well executed jump putt then congrats to them. In my experience and the players I have competed with, jump putts are the least significant matter that needs to be addressed in this sport. Are there players that violate stance violations with their particular attempt at jump putting, yes? The same can be said about players that miss their LOP on fairway approaches. Typically competitive players will respectfully pull these players aside, and quietly address the issue with courtesy and respect to let the player know of these small insignificant nuances. Rarely is it the case that a player is attempting to gain an advantage from these minor miscues. But when it becomes apparent or repetitive then they should be openly addressed.

I think our attention of the embodiment of our sport needs to be steered in a different direction, how to grow the sport, how to increase viewership, how to encourage ethical sportsmanship of a gentleman's game.

Just to give you one example where I see the PDGA moving away from this ideology. We say this is a self-officiating sport, yet per a 2013 rule change, now a player cannot call a stance violation on themselves.

[cgkdisc]

It's never been self-officiated but player or group-officiated.

[bruceuk]

Disagree with me if you like, that is entirely your right. But be respectful about it or you run the risk of me ignoring your opinion by default.

I didn't make up a stat, we reviewed evidence (well someone else did, this pre-dates my involvement). For the record, I'm not old, and I jump putt. As I already stated, the conclusion of the discussion might well be 'do nothing', but without exploring options how can you tell if there might not be a better way?

To address your issues.
a) In 10 years playing I have seen precisely zero 10m circles marked. I can see how it will take a TD a lot longer to mark zero 30m markers. The fairway marker vs circle option would only require single flag to be placed, I think that would be faster personally.
b) No it doesn't. You have 30s to throw from when you reach your lie, regardless of what you choose to pace off.
c) We're tossing around ideas, some will be wacky. Get over it.

I'll state it once again, the justification for looking at this is not to be punishing players for minor infractions, or to get at pros and da yoof. It's that in an increasingly digitally recorded world infractions are captured and observed after the fact. We can shrug and wait for the winning putt at some future major to be seen as illegal live on the internet and messageboards flooded with people complaining before the prize ceremony has even happened or we can try to explore options for preventing it from happening.

I'm on the rules committee, I'm looking at rules, go figure. As UK national coordinator I look at all the other wonderful things you suggest

[james_mccaine]

Nice on-point rebuttal Bruce. Calm, fact based discussions always yield more.

[futurecollisions]

Originally Posted by james_mccaine

Nice on-point rebuttal Bruce. Calm, fact based discussions always yield more.

Great, Bruce gave a calm answer, but he's still wrong. I'll take substance over delivery. Do we want to go down this road of banning every pro player technique until we are all brought down to the level of novice players? To me this is disc golf socialism. All of this 'level playing field' talk is really dangerous. Maybe the group of players who want to stand still for every throw should look at forming another organization or another game altogether.

[james_mccaine]

Originally Posted by futurecollisions

Great, Bruce gave a calm answer, but he's still wrong. I'll take substance over delivery. Do we want to go down this road of banning every pro player technique until we are all brought down to the level of novice players? To me this is disc golf socialism. All of this 'level playing field' talk is really dangerous. Maybe the group of players who want to stand still for every throw should look at forming another organization or another game altogether.

Well, since the point was entirely missed, let me try again.

This talk, which I have read from you and others, that shoring up the rule is "disc golf socialsim" or "intended to punish pros" leads to less than productive discussions. Why? Basically, they are emotional reactions that don't address the point. More importantly, they are emotional reactions that aren't even based on any well thought out fact. Nothing about non-jump putting from inside 30m punishes the pros or brings everyone to the same level. That is ridiculous.

Also, when people start coming up with reasons such as marking arguments and speed of play, you have to wonder what really motivates the reaction, because those reasons don't hold water.

[futurecollisions]

I just can't see this as anything but yet another attack on the jump putt and the run-up under the false premise of 'improving the rules'. This is such a non-issue that its almost a joke that we are even debating it. Chuck had the only reasonable compromise I have read on here so far.

[JoakimBL]

Originally Posted by bruceuk

We can shrug and wait for the winning putt at some future major to be seen as illegal live on the internet and messageboards flooded with people complaining before the prize ceremony has even happened or we can try to explore options for preventing it from happening.

Personally I think that is a great idea. No need to be preemptive about a hypothetical scenario that might never happen. And even if it does happen, the discussion should be why it wasn't called, not why the rules doesn't disallow jump putts all together.
A lot of sports have judgement call that are called without uproar when once in a while the call is wrong. I really can't see why this is an issue at all.

I think it was Chuck ,but I might be mistaken, so correct me if I'm wrong, that said recently either here or in another forum, that putting is the most boring part of our sport, should it ever gain popularity as a spectator sport. Why take away the most exciting part of that? If we ever rise to the level where there is a public outcry because of a winning putt whit a foot fault that wasn't called, maybe we should look at having trained officials making the big calls.

[cgkdisc]

That wasn't me who said putting was boring. But what I have said is putting is too easy in disc golf versus ball golf in terms of game balance. I do encourage ideas designed to increase the athleticism in the sport if they can be done either within the rules or by restructuring the rules.

[krupicka]

I have advocated before to change the stance rules such that the supporting point on the line of play stays there until balance is maintained. This would allow for better enforcement of the stance rules and address the jump putt issue. It would still allow a run-up. Outside 10m, one could still follow through past the lie as long as their plant foot remained.

The criticism I generally here is that players would torque their knees or something along those lines. After I was done with my round, I watched the top 6 or 7 seven cards today throw their fairway drives on hole 5 at the USDGC. Roughly 80% of these throws would be legal under that proposal. Thus a number of pros at the top level are already doing this.

[cgkdisc]

Would the other 20% perhaps also have complied with my proposal to allow the follow thru foot to hit the stance area?

[krupicka]

Probably another 10% could have easily left their plant foot if they wanted to. There were a couple where I saw the mini kicked up on their follow through. They would have to work on it.

From my point of view, I don't know that their follow through step would be in a consistent spot per your proposal. I can't really say one way or the other on how they would have fared based on that criteria. Sorry.

[davidsauls]

Originally Posted by krupicka

I have advocated before to change the stance rules such that the supporting point on the line of play stays there until balance is maintained. This would allow for better enforcement of the stance rules and address the jump putt issue. It would still allow a run-up. Outside 10m, one could still follow through past the lie as long as their plant foot remained.

The criticism I generally here is that players would torque their knees or something along those lines. After I was done with my round, I watched the top 6 or 7 seven cards today throw their fairway drives on hole 5 at the USDGC. Roughly 80% of these throws would be legal under that proposal. Thus a number of pros at the top level are already doing this.

That's an intriguing option to pure "stand and deliver". Doesn't seem like it would be terribly hard on knees, not even my old fragile ones.

[Patrick P]

Originally Posted by bruceuk

To address your issues.
a) In 10 years playing I have seen precisely zero 10m circles marked. I can see how it will take a TD a lot longer to mark zero 30m markers. The fairway marker vs circle option would only require single flag to be placed, I think that would be faster personally.
b) No it doesn't. You have 30s to throw from when you reach your lie, regardless of what you choose to pace off.

I've only played 4 years in the PDGA and I've have seen numerous 10m circles in A, B & C tier events. If there is no circle, then a) ask the group if you are outside the circle; or b) walk out a good 11 paces, and if you are close, then consider it outside.

Enlighten me if I am wrong, but my understanding for this 'fairway flag' idea is that you are going to have each and every single basket marked off 30 meters from the basket with a little flag. So draw an imaginary circle with a 30m radius, and then put one single flag down on one point at the edge of this circle. How can you tell if you are 30m out from just this one flag? What if I am behind the basket, to the side? You do realize that is 1) approx 30+ paces, 2) a circle with a circumference of 188m, and 3) an area of 2,827m^2. Now I don't know if you just play in open fields of grass, but many courses are densely wooded, with elevations, creeks, bushes, etc. that makes walking out 30+ paces in a straight line nearly impossible. How do you expect a TD and staff to measure this distance out? How much time would it take to measure this out when changing basket locations between rounds? Some courses have multiple basket locations. If safari holes or new basket locations are setup, are you going to expect staff to spend all this extra time measuring out 30m? Maybe I am not understanding you, so I'll lend an ear.

[Patrick P]

Originally Posted by bruceuk

Patrick: Not sure if you're referring to the whole thing, or the removal of the 10m circle that the 9/5 update refers to.

Let's start with Paragraph 1 after the 9/5 update:

Peter had recommended that we not allow follow through after passing a mark in the fairway that is 40 m from the basket. I would change this to 30 m, since that is very close to 100 feet (97.5 ft), a) so a relatively easy distance to learn to estimate for casual play. I feel this is plenty of distance to discourage jump putts. b) And it would be quicker for TD's to measure.

a) 30m is not a relatively easy distance to measure while traversing through forests, elevations, creeks, trees, bushes. 30m is not a relatively easy distance to measure even on a flat open surface of grass. What is easier to measure than 30m, is 10m.

b) How would it be quicker for TD's to measure 30m over 10m???

[Patrick P]

Onto paragraph 2

I would also leave a default, that if no mark is provided, then you
are allowed to have falling putts at any distance (an option we had already considered anyway). a) It would not take much for a TD to step off the distance and poke a flag into the ground on courses where there is not a permanent marker. If this catches on, b)most heavily used courses would probably cement a post into the ground at the edge of the fairway . Or better yet, plant a stone or cinder block on the line of play 30 m from the most common pin placement. Most tournaments move the pins, so flags would still be needed for most tournaments.

a) So it would be easier for a TD to traverse 30m out through the aforementioned topography to poke a flag in the ground that somehow represents that this one point on the edge of a 188m circumference around the basket clearly defines from all positions that a player is outside 30m?

b) So now you want course designers to plant these cement posts all over the course for every basket location. Will there be color coded cement posts all throughout the fairway for different basket locations? Pin location A, red color post, pin location B, blue color post, etc... Will this be required to be marked on tee-signs? Will all the thousands of courses have to install these posts all throughout their fairways? What do you do with temp baskets, temp courses, or safari setups? How will there be any cohesion to this concept across all courses?

[Patrick P]

Paragraph 3:

I believe this proposal can also solve the problem of players missing the lie with their plant foot. I had previously proposed enlarging the "stance zone" to a 60 cm diameter circle. This would be much easier to hit on a run-up, but might be too large a leeway when you are close to the basket, and you could get an advantage by stretching an extra 30 cm to the side to get around an obstacle. If we use the 30 m mark for a "no follow through" line, we could also use it for a "no 60 cm stance zone" line. Beyond that line, the player would take a stance on the line of play, as we do (or vaguely attempt to do) now.

So are you proposing that distances greater than 30m you can use this 60cm circle, but then inside 30m, stance is on LOP? So if a player's disc is 35m away from the basket and behind a bush, now that player is given an additional 30cm to the left or right of the LOP? Why would you eliminate the concept of the LOP? You should throw behind your disc, that's your lie. And so now the rule changes within 30m, you must be on the LOP, which goes back to distinguishing if you are +/-30m outside. I can just see it, player's disc lands behind a bush, and declares he is outside the 30m, so therefore he gets an extra 30cm to the L/R of the LOP to get around that obstacle. I think sometimes it's just easier to keep things simple. The LOP in all circumstances, whether it's a fairway drive or putt is easier to ascertain from another group member's view if the player has committed a stance violation.

[Patrick P]

And onto Paragraph 4:

I know this proposal sounds a bit radical, but we are definitely going to have to make a major change in order to solve the stance issue. a) As we now play, a very large percentage of even the top pros foot-fault on almost every shot. If we were to [b] b) drop the warning for foot-fault, it would be a disaster. b) If we do nothing, the sport will start to lose credibility in the sports world, as more media and photo coverage will illustrate the laxity of our rules.

a) Really? It's exaggerating statements like these that diminish your entire credibility.

b) No need to drop the warning, simply call it out if it's obvious. If it's so close, then as we say, benefit goes to the player. If need be, pull the player aside, be genuine and sincere, and let the player know if you think his stances are very close to being called.

[lonhart]

Hi Bruce UK,

Interesting discussion. I noticed that in a couple of your posts you mention concern over how the public will perceive disc golf when play is reviewed/scrutinized in the way many sports are on TV (slow mo, replay, etc.).

"It's that in an increasingly digitally recorded world infractions are captured and observed after the fact. We can shrug and wait for the winning putt at some future major to be seen as illegal live on the internet and messageboards flooded with people complaining before the prize ceremony has even happened or we can try to explore options for preventing it from happening."--Bruce UK

To avoid the perception that disc golf is not as 'serious' as other sports, have TD-sanctioned marshalls/officials walk with the last four groups on the final day. I think only the final group is followed at this point in time by the TV crew, but in our future we might have the luxury of watching on TV the last 2-4 groups play, and maybe a guy from the second group runs away with the title. So have a marshall/referee go with each group in contention on the last day.

Then you have a stamp of legitimacy that is similar to all other sports on TV. A ref made the call, good or bad. Blame the zebra, not the player.

But the reality is TV is not in the near future. A couple thousand disc golfers watching the USDGC on the web is cool, and an improvement, but not ESPN2 (yet).

For non-televised events, I share the sentiment that most people avoid making calls to reduce the amount of drama in the round. There are so many divas out there, and many with bad tempers, that to call them on something relatively minor is more disruptive than it is worth. I play disc golf for fun, not to make $. This is what I do to take a break from the rest of my life. The last thing I want is to add stress to my pursuit of sporting happiness. And I'd say most people playing in tournaments are interested in doing well, improving their game, and seeing how they measure up against others, but not at the expense of creating stress or conflict.

And if there is a concern over how the sport is perceived by non-disc golfers watching us on TV (praise be the day that actually happens to some real extent!), then have refs/marshalls, just like other sports. Then we remove the issue of players having to make calls, and they can just play.

Cheers,
Steve

[wsfaplau]

Originally Posted by bruceuk

Joakimbl & wfsaplau: Seems to me to be a pretty defeatist attitude to say "the players are a bunch of uninterested wimps who'll never call anything, so why change". I don't want to spend too much time addressing if things should change as not changing anything is a very easy option and I'd rather talk about what/how we should change. That said I'll cover a few of the points raised.

No defeatist attitude here either. Your quoted words in a sentence with my name attached kind of imply I said those words. I absolutely didn't say it or even agree with it.

To begin with, I have thanked you for your efforts to try to improve the rules in multiple threads, even thanked you post posting them for review ahead of printing them (even though that isn't what you actually did it turns out).

I cited a stance violation issue I had this year and your suggested stance violation rule improvements don't even address my issue.

I still believe the reason the rules aren't enforced are people issues, not the wording of the rule.

I am all for rule improvements that address the problems with the rules.
My opinion is that this rule change doesn't resolve the problem with stance violations.
I think that is a valid, reasoned, and defendable position even if it doesn't align with your position.

[bruceuk]

Been on holiday, sorry for delayed response.

Patrick: You're missing the concept of the fairway marker, it wouldn't be a circle, think of it more like a mando. Although it doesn't matter which side you pass it on, once you have passed it, you are 'putting'. Determining if your lie is past the line is as simple as standing at the marker facing the basket with your arms outstretched and checking which side of the line you fall on. The only difficulty I see is on more extreme doglegs where the line might cross the fairway more than once and place the tee in the 'no-follow-through' area, so that would need thought on the wording.

The majority of your quotes are from the link which is a discussion that pre-dates my involvement on the committee I included for background. I think I've addressed most of your comments around marking 30m above. I thought my original post made it clear I personally would not support having different lie definitions either side of the line, I prefer a single definition everywhere.

I'd agree that the picture isn't as bleak as the quote makes out, but I think it's a pretty indisputable fact that the stance rules are broken a disproportionate amount relative to the rest of the rulebook, and largely goes unpenalised. The evidence is that the players are unwilling to rectify the latter, so the goal is to change the former, by making the stance rules easier to comply with.

Steve: That does resolve the TV issue, but not the underlying rule infraction problem. Still, a good suggestion.

Pete: My apologies, a poor use of quotes there, and a dubious paraphrasing. No doubt any rule change will not be a cure-all. Other rules do get called so I believe it is possible to formulate a version of this that will be. Stand & deliver for example would be, but I'm definitely against that, the trick is to find a sensible compromise position.

Krupika: That is certainly an option and I don't buy the injury argument either. It would completely rule out the jump putt but still allow a pretty dynamic step through putt, and we could retain the 10m mark. Actually, with a 30cm lie area as long as you start and finish in the area, you could jump putt to a certain extent.

[bruceuk]

Chuck: An issue I thought of regarding your suggestion is where you have a lie in a bush. I can stand to the side of the bush, throw then place my next contact behind my lie but to do so I have to force it through some thin branches, have I hit my lie? Or did I miss it by making contact with the foliage?

[cgkdisc]

You would be allowed to contact foliage during your throwing motion same as the current rule. I'm not sure how many people would want to risk jumping into a bush due to possible injury. But it would be allowed same as someone who currently might jump thru/out of a bush on their follow thru. The player would still be expected to contact the playing surface behind their lie not just end up contacting the bush in the general area.

[bruce_brakel]

Originally Posted by wsfaplau

I still believe the reason the rules aren't enforced are people issues, not the wording of the rule.

Good point.

[jimimc]

First let me say I don't jump putt. Why not just do away with the 10 meter rule all together? Of all the rules I try to explain to some one just starting out, this is the one most don't get. Changing the rules inside any distance, 10, 30 or 100 meters doesn't make ant sense. Just make sure your foot is on the ground, behind your mini when you release your disc. Simple, to the point and people get it. Go ahead and try to make a jump putt inside 5' who cares.

[lonhart]

Originally Posted by bruce_brakel

Good point.

I agree that many (maybe most?) people choose not to enforce certain rules for reasons other than their understanding the rules (or not).

Besides ball golf, what other professional sports are officiated by the competing players? I know there must be some, but I cannot think of them at the moment. It seems professional disc golf has forced itself into a very narrow niche wrt to rules enforcement.

Cheers,
Steve

[araydallas]

Originally Posted by lonhart

I agree that many (maybe most?) people choose not enforce certain rules for reasons other than their understanding the rules (or not).

Besides ball golf, what other professional sports are officiated by the competing players? I know there must be some, but I cannot think of them at the moment. It seems professional disc golf has forced itself into a very narrow niche wrt to rules enforcement.

Cheers,
Steve

Tennis does, except at the highest level
I believe maybe Andre Agassi talked about it in his book when he fell from the top 10 to like number 200 in the world, he mentioned something like, "playing on outer courts, calling his own lines," which is what colleges & high schools do except in championships.