jolson
Jan 22 2010, 04:41 AM
I was wondering about a disc being stuck in the outside of the pan and have a few questions concerning this matter.

1) Does the disc need to be pulled from the inside to be counted as holed out?

2) When a disc is stuck in the outside of the pan is there a time(disc coming to rest) that it needs to be counted as holed out?

3) Or if this happens Would the thrower need to run as fast as possible to the basket hoping that the disc is still stuck there.

md21954
Jan 22 2010, 08:16 AM
no
no
yes

after i remove my disc from the pan i like to release the brown bits and drippings with a simple red wine reduction. sangiovese, eschalot, butter and creminis... voila.

august
Jan 22 2010, 08:37 AM
no
no
yes

after i remove my disc from the pan i like to release the brown bits and drippings with a simple red wine reduction. sangiovese, eschalot, butter and creminis... voila.

Exactly! It's also important to remove the disc from the pan before it begins to melt and ruin the sauce.

md21954
Jan 22 2010, 08:47 AM
i've found champion plastic to have hints of floral accents while dx tends to be more on the earthy side. pro plastic exudes citrus on the nose, mineral on the palate and leaves a stellar, prolonged aftertaste of spice. don't even consider bringing r-pro anywhere near my pan.

august
Jan 22 2010, 11:38 AM
i've found champion plastic to have hints of floral accents while dx tends to be more on the earthy side. pro plastic exudes citrus on the nose, mineral on the palate and leaves a stellar, prolonged aftertaste of spice. don't even consider bringing r-pro anywhere near my pan.

Oh yeah, a nice Cab. Sauv. with DX medallions topped with a nice Stilton and drizzled with sauce from the pan!

veganray
Jan 22 2010, 11:51 AM
no
no
yes

I disagree with this interpretation. I read 803.07B:
If a disc at rest on the playing surface or supported by the target is moved, the disc shall be replaced as close as possible to its original location, as determined by a majority of the group or an official.
as requiring that a disc that comes to rest supported by the target (in this case, wedged in) be replaced into its "at rest" position in the event that it moves after having come to rest. In this case, that would entail re-wedging it, therefore making the original throw "IN".

Therefore, my opinion is:
no
yes (zero additional time after the disc is completely at rest)
no

BTW - pan pizza sux

NOHalfFastPull
Jan 22 2010, 12:06 PM
The group must agree that disc is at rest.

Not easy to get your opponents to concede the ace
in a tight competition from 180-300 feet away.

Only vegan's vomit can "rest" in the taco position.

Pan pizza bad - pan taco good

http://c2.api.ning.com/files/i56hck4Ebon1iVr7adjwuacLdwuijWVhImBxQ7mY5tTjRSkZhd EPsXd3GT8zp4aXf4qsn5QUvOpnb9x38PQe6CmT5rWf2Cbs/Vibramputter002.jpg?width=612&height=600

steve timm

veganray
Jan 22 2010, 12:14 PM
Darn tootin'. I've had 'em wedge all the way in, wedge all the way out, taco & stick on the way in, & taco & stick on the way out. I've yet to have one wedge all the way in and all the way back out, but I look forward to it.

exczar
Jan 22 2010, 02:11 PM
I've had one wedge all the way in, but how on earth did you get one to wedge all the way OUT?

august
Jan 22 2010, 02:24 PM
I've had one wedge all the way in, but how on earth did you get one to wedge all the way OUT?

I'd bet it was due to the cooking oil still in the pan....

veganray
Jan 22 2010, 02:27 PM
It was a <12-foot "gimme" at Loriella park #3 at the Loriella Challenge 2009 (my final hole of the event). I softly tossed my rubber vomit VP nose-up into the center of the chains, it hit the pole & dropped straight down into the pan, it hit the space between the rungs diagonally just right, it compressed a little bit, and it dropped with a thud straight down next to the pole, barely seeming to slow down.

No major heartbreak; I missed last cash by 2 in Pro Masters. If it'd been 1, my love of the disc may have lessened significantly.

If you've handled one of these discs you can attest that, while it takes a perfect storm of circumstances, the uber-floppiness of this disc makes that outcome a possibility.

veganray
Jan 22 2010, 02:28 PM
I'd bet it was due to the cooking oil still in the pan....

Lard, baby!

gippy
Jan 25 2010, 10:40 PM
what VP is that a Proto A? I've wedged a A several times now.
Slice the destroyer thinly agaisnt the grain add the Summit sauce lightly and top with sprinkles of Whippet chunks.

veganray
Jan 25 2010, 10:46 PM
Proto, but neither A nor B. MUCH softer than either & quite likely the floppiest PDGA-legal disc out there. I like to call it the "rubber vomit".
http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/VP1.jpg
http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/VP2.jpg
http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/VP3.jpg

rizbee
Feb 02 2010, 09:23 PM
Playing doubles on Saturday I had a first for me - my putter hit left-side chains, fell straight down, hit the rim of the basket and tipped towards the outside, then hung on the outside of the basket from one of the nubs. I immediately sprinted to the disc to grab it before it possibly fell, just in case.

veganray
Feb 02 2010, 10:20 PM
just in case.

Just in case the rules magically changed between the time you threw & the time the disc came to rest?:p

krazyeye
Feb 03 2010, 03:48 PM
What some people fail to realize is if a disc is going into the basket and gets wedged then proceeds to fall out. The disc in fact had to come to a stop. There is no way to go backwards after going forward without stopping for a fraction of a second.

JerryChesterson
Feb 03 2010, 03:54 PM
Just in case the rules magically changed between the time you threw & the time the disc came to rest?:p

What some people fail to realize is if a disc is going into the basket and gets wedged then proceeds to fall out. The disc in fact had to come to a stop. There is no way to go backwards after going forward without stopping for a fraction of a second.

I think its fair to run and grab it. The end of the holing out rule reads ...

"The disc must also remain within the chains or entrapment sections until removed."

So if it falls out, it doesn't count. (that's sounds like something Jackie Chiles would say)

pterodactyl
Feb 03 2010, 04:14 PM
It would count if the group agrees that it has come to rest. If it falls out after that, then it counts as good.

krazyeye
Feb 03 2010, 04:16 PM
Touché. I left my rule book at home. Scott er Jerry is right.

pterodactyl
Feb 03 2010, 04:20 PM
I have a question about Vegan Rye's Vibram putter. BTW, that third picture is semi-perverted.

My question is: Since the Vibram decal in the middle of the putter looks like it is raised above the surface of the disc, is that a legal disc?

cgkdisc
Feb 03 2010, 04:26 PM
It's legal and approved.

veganray
Feb 03 2010, 05:05 PM
I have a question about Vegan Rye's Vibram putter. BTW, that third picture is semi-perverted.

My question is: Since the Vibram decal in the middle of the putter looks like it is raised above the surface of the disc, is that a legal disc?
The two molds I am testing in that material (X-Link Soft Eco aka "rubber vomit") are VP & Summit, both PDGA-approved & commercially available in X-Link Firm & X-Link Medium material. Vibram's Ridge (not yet commercially available) is also PDGA-approved & also features the distinctive Vibram logo molded in.

reallybadputter
Feb 04 2010, 07:26 AM
What some people fail to realize is if a disc is going into the basket and gets wedged then proceeds to fall out. The disc in fact had to come to a stop. There is no way to go backwards after going forward without stopping for a fraction of a second.

Ahh, but you forget that we live in a 3 dimensional world. If the disc comes in moving left to right and initially wedges at an angle \ (a little more extreme, but I'm doing ascii art here). It could be that its lateral motion stops, but the back edge never completely stops moving vertically... it goes _ then / then | lands on the ground and unless its Ray's fake vomit novelty toy, it lands on edge and rolls ob... :-)

JerryChesterson
Feb 04 2010, 10:50 AM
It would count if the group agrees that it has come to rest. If it falls out after that, then it counts as good.

Not true. That applies only to lies prior to the holing out. The rule is clear.
"The disc must also remain within the chains or entrapment sections until removed."

august
Feb 04 2010, 12:42 PM
Not true. That applies only to lies prior to the holing out. The rule is clear.
"The disc must also remain within the chains or entrapment sections until removed."

The problem here is that 803.13B is contrary to 803.07B, with the former stating that the disc must remain within the chains or entrapment section until removed, and the latter providing for replacement of discs at rest on the playing surface or supported by the target that are moved. "Moved" can include moved by an animal, the wind, or the kinetic energy stored in the disc that is wedged in the lower entrapment section.

I'm not sure what beneficial advantage exists by requiring the disc to remain in the target until removed by the player. Seems as though this requirment could be eliminated without compromising the sport. In the alternative, baskets could be redesigned so that approved discs won't get wedged in the lower section, but that would increase production costs.

It appears this is one of those rules in disc golf that is dependent upon the local interpretation. Eventually, we need a unified set of rules that can only be interpreted one way.

pterodactyl
Feb 04 2010, 01:09 PM
I was thinking on similar lines. Of course it's going to stay there until removed, but by who or what? Some additional wording of the rule would help. If the rule stated that the throwing player needs to remove the disc, then the problem is solved.

krupicka
Feb 04 2010, 02:04 PM
Adding something that would state the throwing player needs to remove the disc kills the courtesy the many players show others by pulling the disc for another player to improve speed of play.

pterodactyl
Feb 04 2010, 02:56 PM
It wouldn't really kill any courtesy. Nobody else is going to run up and grab your disc wedged in the side of the pan before it falls out.

krupicka
Feb 04 2010, 03:16 PM
I wasn't referring just to wedgies. I was talking about many cases where a player grabs a disc out of the target for his fellow player because he was already getting his, walking by the target, etc.

august
Feb 04 2010, 04:00 PM
I wasn't referring just to wedgies. I was talking about many cases where a player grabs a disc out of the target for his fellow player because he was already getting his, walking by the target, etc.

That alone is a good reason to keep that part of the wording as is. Speed of play is important.

It seems to me that the wording in 803.07B "a disc at rest....supported by the target" should be revised. A disc that is at rest in the chains is considered holed out once removed. A disc at rest on the top of the target is not considered holed out. Nonetheless, both are discs at rest supported by the target and both satisfy the conditions set in the rule, yet each requires a different subsequent action. Reading and following the rule literally, if your disc is supported by the chains and is then removed to complete the holing out process, 803.07B requires you to put it back!!!! Certainly, that's not the intent.

I think 803.07B should be revised to say "If a disc at rest on the playing surface, or resting on the top of, or hanging outside of the upper entrapment section is moved, the disc shall be replaced......" etc. That, to me, appears to be the intent of the effort.

veganray
Feb 04 2010, 04:07 PM
Too cool. An infinite loop prescribed by the PDGA rules. I hadn't even noticed that before, despite hundreds of readings. Kudos to august!

Not sure how I'll ever complete a PDGA-sanctioned round now, though (or even a single hole), without "cheating".:(

geo
Feb 04 2010, 04:14 PM
So, what's the consensus here? If it comes to rest, it's in? If the disc sits in the basket for 30 sec. and then is blown out before you remove it, is it not holed out(I've seen this)? The rule doesn't state removed by what. I always thought if it comes to rest--that's why I always ask the group, especially if it's possible for the disc to move, but now I don't know. I guess the alternate applies as well--your disc is not considered over 3 meters until you mark it--still has a chance to fall out. But if it's considered at rest, then it's a penalty immediately, correct? This is a pretty important rule, especially where there is a lot of wind. Thoughts?

JerryChesterson
Feb 04 2010, 04:38 PM
So, what's the consensus here? If it comes to rest, it's in? If the disc sits in the basket for 30 sec. and then is blown out before you remove it, is it not holed out(I've seen this)? The rule doesn't state removed by what. I always thought if it comes to rest--that's why I always ask the group, especially if it's possible for the disc to move, but now I don't know. I guess the alternate applies as well--your disc is not considered over 3 meters until you mark it--still has a chance to fall out. But if it's considered at rest, then it's a penalty immediately, correct? This is a pretty important rule, especially where there is a lot of wind. Thoughts?

IMO here is what the spirit intended ....
You must remove the disc to hole out. If its stuck in the pack or in the basket and comes out prior to it being removed, it doesn't count. The other rule about coming to rest applies to shots prior to holing out. Not the holing out process.

cgkdisc
Feb 04 2010, 04:56 PM
IMO here is what the spirit intended ....
You must remove the disc to hole out. If its stuck in the pack or in the basket and comes out prior to it being removed, it doesn't count. The other rule about coming to rest applies to shots prior to holing out. Not the holing out process.
Wouldn't be logical because the wording "or supported by the target" was added to this Interference rule 803.07B in the 2006 rulebook. It was not there in the 2002 rulebook. So, the RC specifically felt the need to include discs being moved from an "at rest" position just on the grod to also in/on the target in the 2006 ruleboook. I believe this was specifically to deal with complaints where discs in/on the basket in the past were stuck by another player's throw and hopped out of the basket or chains or knocked off the top and rolled away.

So, the RC actively discussed the wording and intent and could have been more specific writing that only discs at rest on/in the target struck by another player's disc could be replaced. But they didn't. They made the wording general to cover all situations where a disc at rest on/in the target that's moved in any fashion gets replaced. Taking this further, if a disc at rest on/in the target gets moved, it gets replaced where it was located before the player's turn. If that happened to be in the chains, basket or wedged in it, it gets replaced allowing te player to remove the disc and hole out.

JerryChesterson
Feb 04 2010, 04:58 PM
Wouldn't be logical because the wording "or supported by the target" was added to this Interference rule 803.07B in the 2006 rulebook. It was not there in the 2002 ruebook. So, the RC specifically felt the need to include discs being moved from an "at rest" position in the 2006 ruleboook. I believe this was specifically to deal with situations where discs in/on the basket in the past were stuck by another player's throw and hopped out of the basket or chains or knocked off the top and rolled away.

So, the RC actively discussed the wording and intent and could have been more specific writing that only discs at rest on/in the target struck by another player's disc could be replaced. But they didn't. They made the wording general to cover all situations where a disc at rest on/in the target that's moved in any fashion gets replaced. Taking this further, if a disc at rest on/in the target gets moved, it gets replaced where it was located before the player's turn. If that happened to be in the chains, basket or wedged in it, it gets replaced allowing te player to remove the disc and hole out.

Good info Chuck!

pterodactyl
Feb 04 2010, 07:44 PM
So it appears that I was correct the whole time.

geo
Feb 05 2010, 11:34 AM
That sounds right, once at rest supported by the basket, it's in.
My next question is about two rules that seem to conflict each other. Once a disc is deemed "at rest" and it's moved, it's placed back at the general spot. Now with a disc stuck in a tree over 3 meters and the rule is in effect, why are you allowed to walk up to your disc and mark it before it is considered a penalty? The disc is "at rest", all be it in a tree and difficult to replace, but once it's deemed to be at rest would it not be an instant penalty? I've been saved a couple of times by a disc falling before I got there, but this discussion indicates that it's over 3 meters as soon as it stops moving. Any thoughts Chuck? I like the chance of it falling out and maybe because the rule specifically states this, it over rules the "at rest" :)

august
Feb 05 2010, 11:49 AM
That sounds right, once at rest supported by the basket, it's in.


No, that is not right. Read the rule and you will see that there are other factors to consider. For example, a disc at rest on top of the basket is not considered in. That is called a DROT and the player must mark the lie beneath the basket on the ground, then take another stroke to hole out.

For the rest of your questions, the measurement is 2 meters, not 3, and if you read 803.08, your questions will be answered.

krupicka
Feb 05 2010, 12:00 PM
In the case of the 2m rule, the reason for the ruling makes sense when you consider a disc that is lodged in a tree near 2m. Until a measurement is made, one cannot determine if the disc is above 2m. If the disc falls from the tree, it would be hard to determine the precise spot for the disc to make the determination. So in this case, the rules are made so that the general benefit of doubt goes to the player. The side-effect is that discs that are stuck at 10m and fall before one arrives gets the same benefit.

cgkdisc
Feb 05 2010, 12:07 PM
Quote:
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset" class=alt2>Originally Posted by geo http://www.pdga.com/discussion/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.pdga.com/discussion/showthread.php?p=1410931#post1410931)
That sounds right, once at rest supported by the basket, it's in.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

No, that is not right. Read the rule and you will see that there are other factors to consider. For example, a disc at rest on top of the basket is not considered in. That is called a DROT and the player must mark the lie beneath the basket on the ground, then take another stroke to hole out.

He is correct when you consider that the basket is not the whole assembly or target, just the actual basket. A disc at rest supported by the basket part of a target will eventually be officially holed out once removed even if it falls or is knocked out and has to be returned to its "at rest" position before being removed.

geo
Feb 05 2010, 12:23 PM
Sorry, I meant supported in the basket and I don't know what I was thinking about the 3m., I guess I should review my posts first. :)

"So, the RC actively discussed the wording and intent and could have been more specific writing that only discs at rest on/in the target struck by another player's disc could be replaced. But they didn't. They made the wording general to cover all situations where a disc at rest on/in the target that's moved in any fashion gets replaced. Taking this further, if a disc at rest on/in the target gets moved, it gets replaced where it was located before the player's turn. If that happened to be in the chains, basket or wedged in it, it gets replaced allowing te player to remove the disc and hole out".

If it's at rest in the basket or chains, then it's in. I've read 803.08 B/C, and it clearly states that if it falls before arrival, it's not a penalty, but the "at rest " rule is what I'm asking about. Because it's specifically written that way, it over rides the "at rest" rule? I was just pointing out that the two rules are conflicting, as I said in my original post. If it's deemed at rest, how can it then fall out. That would indicate a wedgie which falls out is not in.

pterodactyl
Feb 05 2010, 12:47 PM
[QUOTE=geo;1410931], but once it's deemed to be at rest would it not be an instant penalty? QUOTE]

Your disc isn't on a playing surface. It's not OB until you mark it with your mini (if it's still up the tree 2m or more). It's good to always wait until it's your throw to mark a disc that's up 2m because it may fall before you have to throw.

I actually had a player knock my OB drive out of a tree with their throw. How sweet is that?

veganray
Feb 05 2010, 12:54 PM
I had a player knock my DROT in with his throw. It was Friday night glow, so Grange rules superseded PDGA rules & it was counted in. Thanx, Preston.

geo
Feb 05 2010, 01:10 PM
I guess "playing surface" is the key phrase. I always play if it falls out when over 2m. before the mark, this discussion just made me wonder. I've had the same thing happen with some one else's disc hitting mine...awesome!

august
Feb 05 2010, 01:37 PM
He is correct when you consider that the basket is not the whole assembly or target, just the actual basket. A disc at rest supported by the basket part of a target will eventually be officially holed out once removed even if it falls or is knocked out and has to be returned to its "at rest" position before being removed.

Yes, by all means Chuck, if you change the meaning of "basket" in this context from "target" to "basket portion of target", that does make him correct. Around here, the word "basket" is known to be the same as "pole hole" or "disc golf target", i.e. the whole target not just the lower portion. I surmise from your post that this is not a universal understanding of the term "basket".

I guarantee you if a TD asked me to bring a couple of my baskets to a tournament, and I showed up with just the lower portions, the term "idiot" would likely be applied.

cgkdisc
Feb 05 2010, 02:54 PM
Being on the Tech Standards Committee and also involved with rules, it's important to use "target" when the whole contraption is being mentioned rather than the term "basket" which is formally just the actual basket part of the target.

august
Feb 05 2010, 03:57 PM
Being on the Tech Standards Committee and also involved with rules, it's important to use "target" when the whole contraption is being mentioned rather than the term "basket" which is formally just the actual basket part of the target.

Sure, I get that, and I agree it is important to use the proper terms to avoid miscommunication. But certainly you must realize that colloquial use of the term "basket" in America amongst disc golfers means the entire target. In fact, the terms used in 803.13B, entitled "Disc Entrapment Devices" are "upper" and "lower entrapment section", introducing yet a another term for what you refer to as the "basket". There is absolutely no ambiguity at all in what the term "lower entrapment section" means.

If the tech standards use "basket" instead of "lower entrapment section" that may not be the best choice in light of the colloquial use of the word "basket" in disc golf.

discette
Feb 05 2010, 04:01 PM
Target and tray are more descriptive terms that are not likely to be confused.

Target = entire disc catching device (or marked area of object).
Tray = lower entrapment section of target.