I know this has probably been asked many times but. How is a hole measured as the crow flies so to speak? Or if the hole takes a turn would it be straight line to the corner then straight from that?

GPS.

Read the thread on this in the Course Design topic area.

course design group (i think) recommends measuring to the corner then straight from there.

How about measuring the 10m distance for a putt on a hill or on slopey terrain? Is slopey even a word?

Is the 10m circle measured along the ground or horizontal from the pin?

If it is along the ground, imagine a pin on a hill, a 45 deg hill down for 5m and then a 45 deg hill back up for 5m. If you are on top of the adjacent hill, can you jump putt? It would be 10m along the ground and 8m (or so) along the horizontal plane.

If we should measure by the horizontal plane, iimagine a pin on the side of a 45 deg hill. 10m horizontally is then 13m along the ground.

I want to put 10m ropes on the base of the pins at Maple Hill and it occured to me that in some situations they could be misused depending on how 10m is measured.

Or do we not worry about terrain and just measure from the pin to the disc?

Get rid of the rule that requires a 10m line...

It would appear that measuring the direct line from the base of the target where it enters the playing surface to all points 10m from it on the playing surface would be the correct procedure per 803.04C.

cool. then the rope at the base of the pin will work.

(was the "get ride of that hole" comment a joke?

Sort of (I said "rule" not "hole"). There have been arguments against the standard 10m distance and either allowing jumping all the way to the basket, or not allowing jumping anywhere, or allowing jumping if you release before landing, all which would eliminate the need for a 10m line. In addition, possibly changing the 10m to whatever shape green the designer wants if marked.

Sort of (I said "rule" not "hole"). There have been arguments against the standard 10m distance and either allowing jumping all the way to the basket, or not allowing jumping anywhere, or allowing jumping if you release before landing, all which would eliminate the need for a 10m line. In addition, possibly changing the 10m to whatever shape green the designer wants if marked.



But of course, there is still a rule outlawing jump putting inside of 10m, and frankly, I've heard no talk from anyone on the RC or BoD wanting a change in this. Of course, there is no requirement to paint the 10m circles...but we've found it does tend to speed up play a bit. Totally the TD/CD's call whether or not to paint the circles.

Chap

Not necessarily. Consider the following scenario:

http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/10m.jpg

Discs at points A & B are both 10m from the pole & on the playing surface (assume all brown area is "playing surface"), but B could not be measured accurately with a rope attached to the pole.

B is not within 10m per the rules that essentially requires moving along the line of play 10m, not thru the ground where the disc can't fly. For example, point A would clearly be considered CTP over B if you had to determine the winner.

I realize it brings up the interesting question on how to measure along the playing surface if there's a gopher hole in between the disc and the bottom of the pole. Does the string have to go down into the hole and come back up? That would be a cool one to pull on someone where you wanted to jump putt from 9m away on the sight line but you argue the string has to go down 3 feet and back up thru the gopher hole and you're really more than 10m away. :D

I think the mando rule provides the best rule reference to deal with how the distance should be measured. If you are off to the side of a mando, you mark your lie in reference to the mando, not the hole because the straight line of play to the hole bends around the mando, just like it would bend over the hill when measuring to point B in the diagram.

Quote the rule, then.

Literate people not making up rules to meet their whims read 803.04c:
Any throw from within 10 meters or less, as measured from the rear of the marker disc to the base of the hole, is considered a putt

B is exactly 10 m away, as measured from the rear of the marker disc to the base of the hole.

Maybe the rule is intended to read as you want to define it, but it does not!

I expect line of play is how it would be measured by the RC, not a birds-eye projection. Using your logic, A would be less than 10m using a birds-eye projection. But it's clearly 10m along the line of play as you've shown, especially if the slope continued upward more than 10m.

The only place verticality is used in the rules is for OB relief which does allow the birds-eye projection for measurement. But that doesn't involve line of play issues. In your example, if there was a triangular pit between the basket and B, with A being at the bottom, it would present a similar question as I mentioned above regarding the hole. I think most would accept your 10m straight line to point B but a case could also be made for measuring down in the pit and back up.

The tricky one would be if there were a 6ft high fence that passed thru part of the 10m circle on a hole. The difference is that the fence isn't a playing surface and the pyramid ground shown in your diagram is so I believe it would be treated differently.

I am NOT advocating a bird's eye projection, only EXACTLY what 803.04c (of the PDGA Rule Book, not the Chuck Kennedy Rule Book that you're so fond of using to justify your rules pronouncements) says, that the measurement shall be:

measured from the rear of the marker disc to the base of the hole



There can be no reasonable argument against the fact that both A & B are EXACTLY 10m from the target, measured from the rear of the marker disc to the base of the hole, unless you qualify the measurement with some voodoo that the rule does not allow for.

How far is to Tokyo from New York? Do they measure the great circle route or thru the earth? Yes, the rules do require some common sense, especially if a measurement would be impossible to make by players in the field.

What the rule states is very clear. You have also made very clear what you want it to state.

If you are unhappy with the rule, maybe you should petition the RC to change it. :o

This is one of those HFO (h.ll freezes over) cases where I won't bother the RC about it. You can live in your 'thru the earth model' but we play the game above ground. I find it humorous that I'm on the common sense side for once since normally I'm the one proposing bizarro world exceptions...

So are we in agreement that a disc at point A:

http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/10m2.jpg

is a 10m putt & not a 20m putt (assuming all brown area is "playing surface", each "jag" is 1m in length, each "pit" is [[3^.5]/2]m deep & each angle is 60 degrees)?

I agree that a putt from A is a 10m putt. I also agree that it conflicts with the assessment that point B in your pyramid example is more than 10m. The only resolution is the common sense aspect of the "flight line of play" being what's relevant and why one is 10m away and the other isn't for the purpose of applying the rule. Again, we play above the ground so that has to be relevant to measurement issues.

I also agree that another conundrum occurs if you have a hole where there's a big pyramid shaped rock (similar to your first example diagram) between the hole and mini such that along the level ground, it's 10m but the rock is say 6m high. I could agree to the 10m in this case versus your solid earth example because the level ground is the playing surface. However, if the TD calls the rock a playing surface, then we get back to calling that point more than 10m since the distance traversed by the measuring tape over the rock would be more than 10m. I think the flight path/playing surface issue is what determines the call for the measurement in all of these examples.

I don't see a conundrum. The rule states measured from the bottom of the pole to the disc. If you happen to have a method of measuring the exact distance to your disc through a mound beside the pole, then it should play as measured. In most cases, there will be no method of measurement that can not follow line of sight.

this seems pretty simple to me. It also seems like the rule needs some clarification. IMO it should read something more like "if the most direct flightpath from the lie to the target is 10m". the ground shouldn't enter into the equation since as chuck says we play above the ground. In the pyramid example, the flightpath is 20m. Should the ground have a depression instead of a rise (basically the same picture with the ground's line inverted), the flightpath becomes 10m. A GPS will tell you that you're 10m away in both cases, a measuring wheel will tell you you're 20m away in both cases, but the disc will need to fly twice as far in the first case as it will in the second.

This example may be a HFO situation... but in the real world, there are slight variations like this on many holes. 10m is hard to accurately define during tournament play even on flat ground. I think the rule needs to be more clear to avoid conflict and ensure fair play. Isn't that the whole point of the rules?

One thing that would be an interesting tweak to the rule would be to make it like the mando drop zone position which says the drop zone is where the TD marks it or use the default. For the 10m putting line, it might be better to allow TDs to mark the putting line in whatever shape they wish with the restriction it can't come closer than X or farther than Y from the pin. I'm not sure what X and Y might be but maybe 6-8 min and 14-18 max? If the line isn't marked, then the 10m default is the case.

This tweak would allow TDs to deal with tricky contours and place lines where it's easier to mark and see them. Plus, it would also allow some creativity, similar to what Harold does to shape the fairways with yellow rope for the USDGC.

One thing that would be an interesting tweak to the rule would be to make it like the mando drop zone position which says the drop zone is where the TD marks it or use the default. For the 10m putting line, it might be better to allow TDs to mark the putting line in whatever shape they wish with the restriction it can't come closer than X or farther than Y from the pin. I'm not sure what X and Y might be but maybe 6-8 min and 14-18 max? If the line isn't marked, then the 10m default is the case.

This tweak would allow TDs to deal with tricky contours and place lines where it's easier to mark and see them. Plus, it would also allow some creativity, similar to what Harold does to shape the fairways with yellow rope for the USDGC.



Now THAT's a cool idea. I'd love to see the crazy stuff Dodge & Southwick would do with that! :D

Get rid of the rule that requires a 10m line...

It would appear that measuring the direct line from the base of the target where it enters the playing surface to all points 10m from it on the playing surface would be the correct procedure per 803.04C.



Chuck, in plain English that even I can unnerstand...this means a measurement along the ground, from the base of the pole? So, a rope stretched, a tape measure, whatever, following the terrain?

I'm not trying to clarify mountains vs craters, just the ground surface vs straight plain.

I think it's the shortest distance along the playing surface. If the ground is bumpy, you stretch the tape as tight as possible, just going from bump to bump and don't press the tape into the depressions. If most of the playing surface happens to be below the base of the basket to the mini, you go straight across the depression and not down into the pit and back up. However, if the playing surface rises high then back down to the mini, you measure along the playing surface with the tape following the contour. Under all cases, you stretch the tape as tight as possible between pin and mini.

I think it's the shortest distance along the playing surface. If the ground is bumpy, you stretch the tape as tight as possible, just going from bump to bump and don't press the tape into the depressions. If most of the playing surface happens to be below the base of the basket to the mini, you go straight across the depression and not down into the pit and back up. However, if the playing surface rises high then back down to the mini, you measure along the playing surface with the tape following the contour. Under all cases, you stretch the tape as tight as possible between pin and mini.


Please note that this pronouncement is from the Chuck Kennedy rule book, not the PDGA rule book, which doesn't address the correct method of measurement at all. Unless & until the PDGA does clarify the rule, it cannot possibly be improper to measure the shortest distance between the two points (i.e., a straight line), or, really ANY method of measurement, no matter how full of bunk it may be, you choose to employ.

It's true that it doesn't state it explicitly. But the Competition Directors over the years have approved such things as attaching a string to the base of the pin and/or measuring from there with a tape to the front edge of the thrown disc to determine CTPs. That's about as good as a Rules Q&A and actually better since the CD makes final rulings as needed for competition. Anyone out there disagree that this is how CTPs are measured from base of pin to the disc? I'd like to see you argue your point using GPS thru the earth as your way to win a CTP by showing the group your pyramid diagram. :)

Nice try to divert the argument, Chuck, but no dice. The measuring of CTPs is not something covered (rightly so) in the PDGA rule book. The measurement of a "putt", i.e., any throw from within 10 meters or less, as measured from the rear of the marker disc to the base of the hole, is. I could not possibly argue the validity of any measurement scheme a TD chose to employ to measure a CTP, because I have no document to back me up. I also would not entertain any argument against the "straight line" scheme I choose to employ for a "putt", since I have documents (the PDGA rule book & a dictionary defining "distance") to back me up.

Ultimately, the TD or official will make the call and follow precedent. Save your diagram in your disc bag and try it if you ever have the chance. Do you even know of an actual hole where drilling thru the playing surface would provide a closer lie by your method?

Since the rule book prevents carrying rangefinders and GPS but allows measuring tape, I'm not sure how you would be allowed to prove your measurement was valid? The rule that could be invoked in this instance would be 803.01 Fairness. Arguing you are closer on a CTP by going thru the earth ain't going to cut it. You take out the tape like the rulebook states and make the measurement 802.04.

ANY lie with topography whose slope has the slightest "hump" in it between the lie & the base of the pole (extremely common examples below) will yield a closer putt measurement with straight-line measurement than "shortest rope" measurement (as I will refer to your method henceforth).

And, as I clearly stated above, CTP measurement is a red herring, since that type of measurement is not specifically covered in the rule book:


I could not possibly argue the validity of any measurement scheme a TD chose to employ to measure a CTP, because I have no document to back me up.


http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/10m3.jpg
http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/10m4.jpg
http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/10m5.jpg
(Please note that the potted plant in example 3 is because I got tired of brown dirt. It is not playing surface & would have no bearing on either method of measurement.)

802.04 is specific to making all types of measurements related to the rules and specifically mentions tape to do that and excludes GPS and laser rangefinders. It mentions tape because stretching the tape from the base of the pole to the disc is how it's measured.

Just because the rules specifically exclude two types of devices that could be used to determine a correct measurement (and it could be argued that it only excludes them to assist in measurements over 10m, and that officials are not precluded from using them in measuring, only players), it does not mandate the "shortest rope" method of measurement. Who's to say that the "follow the playing surface" measurement is not the way to go? Or that the "straight line" method, employing a straight, sharp, 10m long rigid device (or even your beloved rope & some basic trigonometry) is not the preferred method?

My point (and what I've been trying to lead you to this whole time) is that this instance is one of the many instances where the rule book is sorely lacking, and that it needs revision. Just the fact that there can be a "Chuck Kennedy" interpretation, a "Vegan Ray" interpretation (which I absolutely stand by as correct according to the letter of the law), and myriad others on something as fundamental to the competition as measuring the distance from point A to point B is quite disturbing.

And I'm saying you're making a mountain out of a hump because a group in the field will not be confused in how to make the measurement because they will have no other way to do it but use a tape or string like they've been doing since the polehole was invented. Now measuring from a swinging basket or one in a tree could be tricky... There are definitely rules that need more clarification but I don't believe this is one of them.

There are definitely rules that need more clarification but I don't believe this is one of them.



Obviously, it is, since you yourself have pointed out the severe ambiguity of the rule by saying on this very thread:


It would appear that measuring the direct line from the base of the target where it enters the playing surface to all points 10m from it on the playing surface would be the correct procedure per 803.04C.

(emphasis added)


I think it's the shortest distance along the playing surface. If the ground is bumpy, you stretch the tape as tight as possible, just going from bump to bump and don't press the tape into the depressions. If most of the playing surface happens to be below the base of the basket to the mini, you go straight across the depression and not down into the pit and back up. However, if the playing surface rises high then back down to the mini, you measure along the playing surface with the tape following the contour. Under all cases, you stretch the tape as tight as possible between pin and mini.



and


Does the string have to go down into the hole and come back up? That would be a cool one to pull on someone where you wanted to jump putt from 9m away on the sight line but you argue the string has to go down 3 feet and back up thru the gopher hole and you're really more than 10m away.



Two different schemes of measurement, then a third one may employ to try to gain an advantage. The rules need to explicitly define which of the three (all of which you have either advocated or suggested in the past 4 days) is the method that is mandated to be used in PDGA tournament play.

I've suggested alternatives for purposes of discussion just like your proposal. But those are not accepted by players and officials in the field or PDGA office, just the shortest tape line.

perhaps an addendum to the competition guide rather than the rules is necessary. TDs definitely need to know how to properly measure distance from the pin. I think it will be difficult to decide what the proper method is... but one does need to be explicitly identified.

Quote the rule, then.



Now that was funny!

Hey, Biscoe. Why don't you learn how to spell 'measure' boy genius...and quit calling me an [censored].

I started reading back through this thread and realized that I was shortening my life span. Chuck's right, there are real issues that need addressing.

I have dealt with this a bit, having done the rings for the Memorial the last 8 years. The way I see it 10 meters above the pin is the same as 10 meters away from the pin.(Rays first diagram)(love those diagrams Ray) Use a laser range finder, they are the same. The disc still has to travel ten meters to reach the basket. To clear the hump I raise the cable up the pole till it clears the hump. again shoot the distance with a range finder you are 10 meters away from the pole. I believe this would hold true for all the diagrams Ray spent so much time on providing some interesting variables. This may not be explicitly explained in the rules but it passes my common sense test. If the disc has to travel 10 meters to get to the pin you are 10 meters away, regardless of which direction you are coming from.
Gaff

Chuck is the last post true? I agree that measurements should be made with tape, but does the law of verticality not exclude 10m above or below the basket when in actuality the horizontal distance is only a few meters, but slope distance is over 10m?

I don't have any more to add than what I've posted before - use a tape or string to measure from where the pole hits the playing surface to the closest part of the disc, even if that's not on the ground. I can't imagine marshals or Competition folks interpreting the rule used for measuring 10m from the target any other way. Since rangefinders are accurate to +/- 1 yard, I don't see how they even enter this dialog.

Sorry, I thought this was about something else.

If the first diagram was 100 ft up and 100 ft down instead of 10 meters up and down we wouldn't be having this discussion. Trying to measure through a hill seems ridiculous to me. If you could see around or over the hill then maybe.

Sorry, I thought this was about something else.



one could only imagine what you had on your mind hawk, perhaps the manhole at seneca that you are so fond of?

...perhaps the manhole at seneca...



You said manhole.

...perhaps the manhole at seneca...



You said manhole.




but note how i did not reference manhole and dick in the same sentence!! despite dick's overwhelming draw to the manhole while tossing off from the tee pad on the infamous manhole 4 at seneca i opted to not call that out

<post edited for offensive material>

<post edited for offensive material>


http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTb_y9fvlHlKAAJeujzbkF/SIG=12r6pklu2/EXP=1207619645/**http%3A//www.zingerbug.com/Comments/sorry/im_sorry_pale_yellow_flower.JPG

So are we in agreement that a disc at point A:

http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/10m2.jpg

is a 10m putt & not a 20m putt (assuming all brown area is "playing surface", each "jag" is 1m in length, each "pit" is [[3^.5]/2]m deep & each angle is 60 degrees)?



you forgot to incorporate the curvature of the earth into this equation, which will throw off your measurement by roughly 1/100000th of a micrometer.

FOOT FAULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So are we in agreement that a disc at point A:

http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/10m2.jpg

is a 10m putt & not a 20m putt (assuming all brown area is "playing surface", each "jag" is 1m in length, each "pit" is [[3^.5]/2]m deep & each angle is 60 degrees)?



you forgot to incorporate the curvature of the earth into this equation, which will throw off your measurement by roughly 1/100000th of a micrometer.

FOOT FAULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Second!!!!

Stroke