DSproAVIAR
Jun 18 2010, 09:52 AM
What's the call? In or not?

krazyeye
Jun 18 2010, 10:05 AM
Poor design.

DSproAVIAR
Jun 18 2010, 10:11 AM
Yea I knew that was going to be the popular response, but it is actually a sweet basket placement for the hole. This is the only picture I can find of the full hole. #4 at Lakeshore in Ypsilanti, MI.

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/gallery.php?id=3216&mode=gal&view=hole&hole=4&page=1#

Does it count?

futurecollisions
Jun 18 2010, 10:32 AM
"suspended by basket or chain"

Its in

krazyeye
Jun 18 2010, 01:26 PM
I'd say it is in as well. But you should not be able to touch a basket and another object at the same time, in my opinion.

august
Jun 18 2010, 01:30 PM
Poor design.

Needed repeating.

veganray
Jun 18 2010, 01:41 PM
Here's a scenario. 2 holes into a tournament round, on a wooded hole with trees relatively near the pin, a player & his group watch a tree fall extremely near the basket, to a position not unlike the weird horizontal tree in the image above. Player putts & ends up with a lie exactly like that illustrated above. Shall his putt be considered in? Can he then pick up & move the tree, effectively denying the players behind him the advantage of having a "prop" to use in helping to "make" a putt?

HUGGY
Jun 18 2010, 02:19 PM
I've seen the same situation before except basket was next to a rock wall, the ruling was in

cgkdisc
Jun 18 2010, 10:40 PM
Not in. When the marshals, TD and Exec director looked at this issue for the basket in the triple tree at Highbridge BEFORE PW2007 (just in case), the decision was that if the other object like a rock or tree was taken away, would the disc still be supported by the basket? The answer was no. It's possible there are some scenarios where the disc is balancing on the wire and touching a rock where it would be too hard to know whether removing the rock would not change the balancing disc. In that case, benefit of the doubt to the player. However, in most cases, the disc will not be suspended once the other object outside the basket would hypothetically be carefully moved.

veganray
Jun 19 2010, 06:44 PM
Where is that decision published so that the teeming masses can use it as an aid in making a ruling? Or is that 'privileged' information, saved for the PDGA elite to whip out when necessary to make a cunning ruling (possibly one to benefit them or their favored lambs)?

august
Jun 19 2010, 11:57 PM
I think it's published in the extrapolation section.....

cgkdisc
Jun 20 2010, 12:33 AM
Logical interpretation of the rules that doesn't really need a Q&A or explanation posted.

august
Jun 20 2010, 08:03 AM
Logical interpretation of the rules that doesn't really need a Q&A or explanation posted.

Add the word "solely" to the rule and this becomes true. The decision cited from 2007 is not logical because the rock or tree cannot be removed as they are part of the course.

Nonetheless, I think the design here is the problem, not a lack of guidance in the rule. This type of thing should not happen and it should not be in.

krupicka
Jun 20 2010, 06:50 PM
There's also an old thread with a similar discussion with the basket and rock.

http://www.pdga.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=27830

The rules should simply be changed to say solely supported to eliminate any problems in the future.

perica
Jun 22 2010, 12:59 AM
the decision was that if the other object like a rock or tree was taken away, would the disc still be supported by the basket? The answer was no.

If the area below the disc and supporting object is OB, would it also be ruled as such?

cgkdisc
Jun 22 2010, 09:42 AM
Not necessarily. Since the basket and the playing surface are treated the same in the Interference rule 803.07B, you could infer that the basket could be considered the equivalent of a multiple playing surface (see Bridge over OB Q&A), especially since you would not call a disc completely in the basket or chains OB if you have the 1 in a 1000 courses with a basket mounted in an OB area. So if there's any part of the basket under the disc, it would be IB because it's not fully OB. You would probably just declare the score one higher than the number of throws to that point since you couldn't really mark it "in the basket" or under it, and it wouldn't be fair to move the lie back to the closest IB area on the ground.

august
Jun 22 2010, 01:00 PM
Wow! Is there a course that actually has a basket in an OB area? And is the intent to increase the difficulty of holing out?

cgkdisc
Jun 23 2010, 12:11 AM
Hyzer Creek in NY. There's been a photo posted of this hole a few times on this site.