ok...Here is the situation...

Imagine a U shaped hole or if you are from North Carolina, imagine Castle Hayne hole #15...100 feet straight off the tee/right turn and 250 ft/right turn and 150 ft...Got it?

A Player's first shot does not make it to the first turn but ends up on the right side of the fairway in the trees about 5 feet from the fairway. Player's best foot position has his left foot directly behind the mark and his right foot to the right of and behind the mark. The basket is all the way around the corner and almost behind him as he tries to throw a backhand anhyzer shot to get to the middle of the fairway. There is no way for him to get near the basket or even see the basket because of the dense foliage/woods. For him to stay consistent with the rules would he be able to put his right foot behind the mark and his left foot down the fairway straight since that is really away from the basket or is footing based on the fairway...If you have clarifying questions just let me know...I played this shot with my right foot closer to the basket but behind the direction that I was still going...Very confusing...thanks...

Is there a mandatory? If so, then the answer changes.

The correct placement is on LOP directly behind the marker disc. On holes with a mandatory, the mandatory acts as the target for stance purposes until it is safely passed.

On holes without a mandatory, the basket is the target for stance purposes.

To answer your question, to be in compliance with the rules, both feet need to be on the fairway side of the marker (away from the target).

Yes, it is very confusing and usually played wrong on holes that have players throwing away from the target with no mandatory.

your foot should be placed behind the center of the marker disc in a direct line with the basket. If you're orienting yourself compared to the direction of flight, this would be to the left of the marker. Your other foot can be anywhere that is no closer to the basket than your marker (based on the line directly to the basket, not which way you're throwing)

this rule is stupid.

Imagine someone with thier back to the basket trying to pitch out.

They could technically stand closer to where they are trying to throw to.

your initial question brings up another very pertinent one.... who the [censored] designed a hole this way to begin with?!? :confused:

the rule is not stupid, just consistent.

the rule is not stupid, just consistent.



So its ok to stand to the left of / in front of / to the right of your lie to where you are throwing simply b/c the basket is elsewhere?

your initial question brings up another very pertinent one.... who the [censored] designed a hole this way to begin with?!? :confused:



Harold Duvall designed the hole and the course (Par 64)...the hole is a par 4/5 (depending on pin position) and very challenging. The entire course is tight, long, and demoralizing, but it is still one of my favorite courses in NC. Do we have a clear consensus yet? the rule would also come into play if the player landed well short of the first turn in the middle of the fairway. How should he position his feet to throw 'down' the fairway? behind the mark? or to the side opposite the basket which would be a peculiar stance...More to think about...have at it ladies...

the rule is not stupid, just consistent.



So its ok to stand to the left of / in front of / to the right of your lie to where you are throwing simply b/c the basket is elsewhere?



You need to stand behind the marker on the line of play with the basket (or mando if applicable). Whether or not this is an easier shot than standing behind the marker with regards to the direction you are throwing is irrelevant.

I understand the rule. I'm just saying it is stupid....see very poorly drawn visual below

TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT B TTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT TTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT TTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTT TTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTTTT TTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTTT TTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTT TTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTT X TTTTTT L TTTTT

___

Ok, ___ is the teepad
T's are trees
B is the basket
L is the lie
X is where the player is trying to land.

In this situation, the player has thrown a poor tee shot and wants to pitch out. According to the current rules, the player could straddle out back towards the tee with his right foot behind the mini in line with the basket and his left foot ANYWHERE vertically behind the lie.

this would make this pitch out very very easy.

To me, this is stupid.

Agreed.

Some semblance of consistency must be kept - so the line from the target through your lie extended backwards from that must be gospel. If you (Robert or anyone else) CHOOSE to throw down the fairway, that's YOUR choice! A superhuman being would throw 1000' feet straight up, the disc would level off, come straight down into the basket for a 2...BUT that being would STILL be adhering to the rule that their stance was no nearer the hole than their lie and along the line behind their lie.

Maybe not "clean", maybe "weird", but totally defensable.

Karl

In this situation, the player has thrown a poor tee shot and wants to pitch out. According to the current rules, the player could straddle out back towards the tee with his right foot behind the mini in line with the basket and his left foot ANYWHERE vertically behind the lie.

this would make this pitch out very very easy.

To me, this is stupid.



Stupid would be marking the lie with your mini in this case.

hey myers, you have a certified official across the street that could help you out with some of these questions. :)

: ) :

Good one, Mike.

There's nothing wrong with the rule; there's something wrong with the hole design (at the risk of offending Harold.)

If the rules were taken into account when the hole was designed, I would think there would be some sort of mandatory (or two) in place to force consistant directional lie marking and play.

Just my $.02

hey myers, you have a certified official across the street that could help you out with some of these questions. :)

: ) :



I still haven't gotten a clear answer on here yet, what would you have told me?

A mandatory is not needed because there is no way to cut through...A player must go all the way around the U in order to complete the hole. A corner may be cut but not by much...

I think the mando was recommended so casual players would be taking proper stances on this hole since the current intuitive stances are not legal.

since the current proper stances are not legal.



i'm just quoting this to let it sink in

: ) :

A Mando would be a good idea to get the stance "proper".

since the current proper stances are not legal.



i'm just quoting this to let it sink in

: ) :



Too many edits before posting.....

I think the mando was recommended so casual players would be taking proper stances on this hole since the current intuitive stances are not legal.



I think what it says now is perfect.



I still haven't gotten a clear answer on here yet...



Yes you have; it's right here:


The correct placement is on LOP directly behind the marker disc. On holes with a mandatory, the mandatory acts as the target for stance purposes until it is safely passed.

On holes without a mandatory, the basket is the target for stance purposes.

To answer your question, to be in compliance with the rules, both feet need to be on the fairway side of the marker (away from the target).

Yes, it is very confusing and usually played wrong on holes that have players throwing away from the target with no mandatory.

I think the confusion folks are experiencing results from the term "Line of Play". That term does not refer to any angle on which you decide to play your disc. It refers to a direct line between the target and your lie. If a mando is present (and not yet cleared), then the mando becomes your target for the purpose of defining "Line of Play".

MTL - in your example about pitching out from shule behind the pin, the player would not be able to take a stance closer to the pin unless there is a mando he has yet to clear.

right what I'm saying is someone could take what would be a normal stance with their left foot behind the mini and their right foot directly left of that.

That would be in line with the basket but would putting the golfer much closer to where he is going to throw to.

Why go all the way around. Just hack your way through the woods to the basket in a straight line. No foot problems there plus who's going to call it unless someone wants to follow through there. Problem solved. Next question.

I have a better idea B_______S... and I mean no offense to anyone by this statement... but really, just design a hole that doesnt promote issues like this. there has to be something just as challenging that can be done in the same plot of land, and I say this because there always is, you as a designer and course layer-outerererer simply have to assess the area and see it. Problem NOW solved. Next question.

Straight holes are so much more interesting.

Actually that is my favorite hole on the course especially when dry. I think it just needs a mando sign on right corner like hole 3 on Charlottes WEB. That hole plays the same as above mentioned hole but with a little farther drive.

Straight holes are so much more interesting.



thats not what I am saying at all.

Dear Jason -

This is a good technical question. The issue is actually quite common. The placement dilemma is most pronounced on holes like Castle Hayne #15 or Winthrop Gold #4, but it exists in varying degrees on just about any hole with a bend not defined by a mandatory.

From a technical perspective, Gary and others are correct with their stance analysis. While I believe that players should always strive to be compliant with the technical aspects of the rules, the difference in practice is a matter of inches. More importantly, the incorrect stance by most players actually puts them a little farther away from their intended shot, and as such seems to be within the spirit of the rule.

Mandatories could certainly help to reduce this issue. Mandatories, however, introduce their own set of compliance conundrums. Using them may be an instance of the medicine being worse than the illness. And in some situations, such as Winthrop Gold #5, there would be no reasonable mandatory object to use.

Folks seem to be enjoy dog-leg holes. I would personally not want to see these eliminated because of this stance issue. In my opinion, the question identifies a minor technical deficiency in the stance rules that should be considered in the next rules revision.

Take care,
Harold

Thanks for your input Harold. #15 at the Castle has only been played as originally designed since late last year which is probably why this question has never come up. I wouldn't call it a problem either, just an intelligent question from an intelligent guy.

Not designing U-shaped holes would be like cutting off your head so you won't get another headache.

Thanks Harold,
Your answer helps clear things up...
I love doglegs and think more courses should employ them...
I will be playing Kinston (barnett) this weekend for a monthly and in May for the Kings Cup. Barnett is also a course included in my fave five...

Hole 4 at Kinston is another example of this kind of hole, just shorter, but now it is possible to completely cut the corner with a high thumber or tomahawk straight at the basket so I think a mandatory is going to be employed to stop people from trying this. I personally don't care if people go for that shot as the risk is probably greater then the reward...

Are you designing any other courses in NC or SC?

Are you designing any other courses in NC or SC?



Hopefully Arrowhead park in Wilmington :D

Dear Jason and John -

I am also quite fond of the course and people in Kinston. Perhaps sometime down the road, trees can be planted or the tee can be moved back towards the creek in an effort to canopize the teeing area on hole 4.

As for other projects, we are just about done with the design of a beautiful mountain course in Jefferson, North Carolina. After this is complete, I will start work on a redesign of Owens Field in Columbia, South Carolina. It's hard to tell beyond that.

I would love to work again in Wilmington at Arrowhead Park. A lot will depend on the timing.

Take care,
Harold

Kinston rocks! Well, 17 holes of it :D

Kinston rocks! Well, 17 holes of it :D

whatever, hole 6 short knocker

Kinston rocks! Well, 17 holes of it :D

whatever, hole 6 short knocker

oh.....by the way, mark that for me would ya.

did I say hole 6?

I guess that just shows how bad of a hole it is that everyone knew what hole I was talking about without saying it!

17 good holes is still a great course!

Kinston rocks! Well, 17 holes of it :D

whatever, hole 6 short knocker

oh.....by the way, mark that for me would ya.



LMAO

I WILL NOT throw a thumber on that hole this year, or actually, ever again

good to hear, I wowuldnt want you to go for negative distance off the tee.