VooDoo Chile
Nov 25 2010, 06:57 PM
Is a Basket allowed to stand in OB? An up coming tournament has a Basket that is on a wooden deck which is OB.

Nov 25 2010, 11:30 PM
Is the deck itself OB? Or is the deck above an OB area?

Former Rules Committee chair Carlton Howard probably can answer your question. I saw him play in a tournament in High Point, NC, where one hole had a basket that was on a deck that jutted out from the shore of an OB lake. There was OB water under the basket.

Nov 26 2010, 01:15 AM
Yes, a basket can be surrounded by OB. Here's hole 16 at Hyzer Creek in NY:

VooDoo Chile
Nov 26 2010, 04:11 AM
Thanx for the answers. Hole 16 is without a doubt in OB.

Nov 27 2010, 12:08 AM
Yes, a basket can be surrounded by OB. Here's hole 16 at Hyzer Creek in NY:

It's always been a signature feature of the course, but I maintain that it's a gimmicky idea and makes little sense. From 50' - 30' out you have to layup to the water's edge. From within the circle, you suffer a severely punitive penalty for a shot that is only marginally off. Like SnapChing and USDGC 2010, it's strayed too far in the opposite direction from the underlying game of "golf with discs."

Nov 27 2010, 12:21 AM
Not saying the way it's been done is done well from a design standpoint, but it's legal. I would prefer the basket in a buncr where you moved back to the edge of the buncr on the line of play with no penalty other than a longer putt.

Dec 04 2010, 11:41 AM
Putting at a basket surrounded by OB is similar to driving at a green surrounded by OB. If you allow the one you should allow the other.

Some TD's place a drop zone close to the OB line, while others make you retee. That normally saves a stroke (or more), just as it would save a stroke if you used the buncr option on putts to an OB basket.

Dec 15 2010, 11:58 AM
It's always been a signature feature of the course, but I maintain that it's a gimmicky idea and makes little sense. From 50' - 30' out you have to layup to the water's edge. From within the circle, you suffer a severely punitive penalty for a shot that is only marginally off. Like SnapChing and USDGC 2010, it's strayed too far in the opposite direction from the underlying game of "golf with discs."

There is nothing gimmicky about this pin placement at all. It forces people to take a very solid "risk/reward" late in the round (hole 16) in case they need to gain a stroke (and risk losing one) by deciding whether to lay up and drop it in, or go for it.

I would like readers to take the above "it's a gimmicky idea" comment with a grain of salt, it is just a continuation of the seemingly endless feud between Jeff and myself. I regret that I have to check this discussion board periodically to retract his negative remarks about Hyzer Creek, a course which he has actually never played.

-Morgan Wright, owner of Hyzer Creek

Dec 15 2010, 12:16 PM
It's cool to have differing opinions. It's not cool to be fueding enemies.

Looks gimmicky to me, but that's just my opinion.

Dec 15 2010, 01:24 PM
I would try to make that putt from about anywhere on hole 16. Just throw hard enough that your putter carries past the OB if you miss. Just don't doink it!

Is this property for sale?

Saucer Tosser
Dec 15 2010, 02:46 PM
Hole 16 at Hyzer Creek is not gimmicky, it's an unusual challenge. It would be gimmicky if there were artificial OB lines around the basket making it OB. Instead the basket is in the creek. It is not a gimmick, it is taking advantage of the natural landscape, just like the rest of Hyzer Creek.

There is a rules situation that has been reviewed and discussed. If the disc stops on top of the basket, the disc is OB. It's above the water which is OB, so it's OB.

It's challenging disc golf if natural features make the course harder. It's gimmicky if unnatural features (OB lines) make the course harder.

Dec 15 2010, 03:51 PM
Stephen, I would disagree that your definition of gimmicky to mean that only anything artificial is used. I give you the following hypothetical examples:

A 450' hole down a natural corridor of trees, which also includes low hanging branches which force a tunnel shot. There is thick schule on the outsides of the trees and above the branches which do not allow any shot through. Problem is, the hole narrows at 325' to make for a window which is only 3' wide by 5' high. It's an extremely gimmicky, lucky shot for any golfer to hit this window and even if they do, chances are that at 450' of length there is still very little shot at a birdie. It's a totally gimmicky hole, and it's all natural.

A hole which traverses through heavy woods and travels 200 feet straight, doglegs 90 degrees left, travels another 100 feet, then doglegs 90 degrees right before finishing ahead another 200 feet. The fairway is only 5 feet wide the entire way with heavy schule off the fairway allowing no shortcuts through the woods. Players basically have to throw a putter off the tee to the first landing area, a 100-ft. putter shot to the second landing area, then an approach to the basket. 3 putter shots in a row? That's a totally gimmicky hole, and it's all natural.

A hole which tees and the edge of a lake and plays to a peninsula only 8' wide and 50' long. The carry over the water to the basket is 425', and any disc which ends up in the lake sinks 30'-40' and is NOT retrievable unless you are wearing scuba gear. To play safely all the way around the lake, the hole becomes over 900 feet long, and even the approach shot to the pin from 50' away on the shore can easily result in a lost disc. Could this possibly be the most gimmicky hole ever? Yes, and it's all natural.

A hole whose basket is placed in the middle of natural OB - a wetlands, a pond, a stream, etc. From within the 10m putting circle, you suffer a severely punitive penalty for a shot that is only marginally off. Make the shot, and you add only one throw to your scorecard. Miss the shot and you add three throws to your scorecard - the original throw, the penalty shot, and the next throw into the basket from the water's edge. (which assumes that shot is a gimme!) Totally natural, yet totally gimmicky.

I could go on all day, but I'm sure you get the picture. Gimmicks can be artificial or they can easily be natural. I've never played any of the above holes because they don't exist - they're typically just not part of disc golf because no course designer worth a salt would ever design something so gimmicky.

Saucer Tosser
Dec 15 2010, 05:12 PM
OK we're mincing words here. Many of the hypothetical natural holes you describe are gimmicky if you want to call them that. They just sound stupid to me. There is nothing "tricky" (gimmicky) about the holes, they were just designed poorly. To me a gimmick implies a device hence man-made. To you it seems to mean any hole not wide open. But I'll let you say what you mean.

I am currently designing a course for 104 acres. I will take your opinion into account. Thanks for the feedback. As a new disc golfer, but long time ball golfer and object golfer I need to hear what disc golfers think.

I've played 16 at Hyzer. I did not think the hole in anyway stupid. Lay up or you are in trouble. That's a good philosophy for every disc golf hole.

Dec 15 2010, 06:16 PM
My problem is not the risk/reward aspect but the amount of penalty is too high for going in the water. My preference would be for the player to either proceed to a drop zone if they go in the water with no penalty but having to make a longer putt say around 30-40 feet along the edge of the bank so significant water is still in play on their putt. Or perhaps even better, play it like a USDGC buncr where the player rethrows if they go in the water with no added penalty other than counting the shot that went in the water. To me, either of those hazard options would make the risk/reward more appropriate.

Dec 15 2010, 07:22 PM
To me a gimmick implies a device hence man-made. To you it seems to mean any hole not wide open. But I'll let you say what you mean.

Stephen, the underlined portion above couldn't be further from the truth. In fact, I vastly prefer wooded courses over open ones. I've played courses all over the Mid-Atlantic, New England, and North Carolina which tend to have the most tightly wooded courses and these are some of my favorites in all of disc golf. I often chuckle when I encounter players from the Plains states and midwest who sometimes consider holes through woods with what I feel are enormous fairways "tight." :D

But there are limits...400-500 ft. wooded holes with 5 ft. wide fairways for the entire length are completely unfair and gimmicky. Additionally, my other two examples above incurred the use of water and how gimmicky it was used; the first hole was wide open and either over or around a lake, but the second example did not indicate what type of hole it was at all. So the "wide open" comment of yours is a little strange. :confused:

As Chuck pointed out, it's all about balancing the risk/reward aspect and the amount of penalty. Bottom line is that I feel that any hole, no matter what the design, which does not properly balance these risk/reward and penalty aspects could be considered gimmicky. Achieving an acceptable balance of these aspects is a good philosophy for every disc golf hole.

Dec 15 2010, 08:09 PM
It's real simple. On a typical hole, if you make a putt you add one stroke to your score. If you miss the putt you add two strokes to your card. If you miss the putt and have a bad comeback putt, you add 3 strokes:

1. You overthrew your putt and have a 40 foot comeback putt.
2. Your putt missed and goes behind a tree.
3. Your putt rolls down a hill
4. Your putt slides on ice

The creek is 5 feet wide. If you miss the putt you almost automatically get a drop in comeback putt. The only difference is the 1 stroke penalty. That's not excessively punative at all. Make the putt, add one stroke. Lay up, add two strokes. Try the putt and miss, add 3 strokes. If you don't want the strokes, MAKE THE PUTT.

Bottom line is, it's a great hole and everybody I've spoken with, who has actually played it, loves it. Jeff would love this hole himself and rave about it if he weren't banned from the course.

Dec 15 2010, 08:17 PM
Sorry Morgan, but no one should get an almost automatic penalty for hitting the basket and not going in it. Same problem with fluky rollaways but that's the nature of our basket in this sport.

Dec 15 2010, 08:19 PM
There are two other strategies that people use at hole 16 to avoid the OB.

1. You aim your putt so that if it misses, you land on the other side of the creek, which is not OB.

2. You line yourself up with one of the two guard trees on the near side of the creek, so that if your putt is not accurate, it hits the tree instead and saves it from going in the creek. There is actually a sweet spot in the landing zone where BOTH guide trees prevent you from going in the creek. The gap between the two trees is roughly the width of the pin. You either slam chains or hit one of the two protector trees.

All is all, this is a brilliantly designed hole and a stroke of genius. For somebody to slam the hole as being "gimmicky," who has never played the course, just because of an ancient feud from 10 years ago, and just to continue the feud, is not acceptable.

I don't even use this message board so it's sort of like talking behind somebody's back. Unacceptable behavior.

Dec 17 2010, 12:48 PM
Morgan: you can rail all you want on the perceived "injustice" of someone making an opinion on something they've never personally played, and blame said contrary opinion as being made merely to "prolong a feud," but the facts are that I've played over 200 courses now since 1995, and I've encountered many times polehole positions only a step or two away from OB or within OB itself, both artificial and natural. And it's a gimmicky, overly punitive course design feature.

Let me give you an example you can relate to: did you know that when the Blue polehole position on Animal course hole#14 at Warwick was originally installed on the peninsula green, the basket position was further right and only a few feet from the water's edge? What happened was that many slightly off-line putts which hit the top assembly, chains, basket, etc. deflected into the OB water. On a hole which is already a challenging one, and a pro par five, it resulted in unacceptable high scores, skewed scoring distributions, and overly punitive course design. By group consensus, a decision was made by Doyle, Wolfe, Brinster, Mahler, etc. and the powers that be at the time to move the basket about 4-5 feet left and away from the water. In all my years of playing disc golf, I have never heard of a pin position being moved such a short amount, but the difference was extremely noticeable and almost universally applauded by all.

Proper course design is all about balancing risk/reward and punitive effects. Less risky play should provide less reward and with less punitive effect. More risky play should produce higher reward, but with increased punitive effect, but not overly punitive effects. Any course designer worth a salt considers these factors and designs accordingly.

On a final note, while you can castigate all you want on what you consider "unacceptable behavior," a man is entitled to his opinion. And as long as said opinions don't violate message board rules, there's absolutely nothing you can do about it.

Dec 17 2010, 12:54 PM
Hey Jeff,
Sneak out to Hyzer Creek when Morgan's passed out on his couch and let us know how you really feel about that hole. :)

Dec 20 2010, 01:15 AM
It doesn't matter. If it weren't for that hole you'd be slamming something else about Hyzer Creek. The main reason you are banned from my course is because I already know that if you ever played Hyzer, you'd run straight home and type out a scathing review that ridicules the course, just for spite, on your course review website. If you do, I will have you arrested for trespassing.

Disc golf is a test of skill. And smarts. If you have a 40 foot putt at a pin in the middle of the creek, and you hit the basket and drop in the water, it's your fault. You should've laid up. If your putting is so superior that you think you can make the putt, and do make it, you deserve the 2 strokes you gain on the loser who plunked, or the one stroke you gain if he laid up.

Hole 14 Blue at Warwick is a bad comparison because that creek is 4 feet deep and discs that go in it are lost, giving an OB AND a lost disc penalty. As it is now, that creek rarely comes into play and might as well not be there. If a creek rarely comes into play, then it's just there for decoration. What is more gimmicky than a creek that never comes into play? You know what's gimmicky? A hole where everybody gets the same score. You know what's gimmicky? A hole designed by people who say "Let's design it so I can get a birdie every time and there is no penalty for making a crappy putt or a stupid course-management decision."

Dec 20 2010, 09:40 AM
the term gimmicky to me is a confrontational word.
i dont like the idea of an ob stroke within the circle of any hole.
that said ive enjoyed every tourny ive played with precarius ob.
sometimes ive played those hole with restraint and been penalized because i didnt commit.
sometimes ive played those holes with reckless abandon and been penalized as well.
sometimes the opposite occurs.
but almost always i can point to the mistakes that i made that create the score, the courses that are difficult for some are less difficult for others and this occurs by natural selection.
if i got to play this hole 16 id probaly lay up, then putt.
then i d wait for the rest of the card to finish then id get a picture with the group as that is a very beautiful hole.

Dec 20 2010, 01:33 PM
Hole 14 Blue at Warwick is a bad comparison because that creek is 4 feet deep and discs that go in it are lost, giving an OB AND a lost disc penalty.
How long have you been playing the game now, Morgan? And you still don't grasp the rules?

There is no such thing as receiving an OB penalty and a lost disc penalty on the same shot. It's one or the other.

So the penalty for going in the creek on 14 Blue and the penalty for going into the creek on 16 Hyzer Creek is EXACTLY THE SAME.

Dec 20 2010, 02:26 PM
It sounded to me like he was saying "the penalty of losing a disc" not a penalty stroke for losing a disc.


Dec 20 2010, 08:57 PM
the idea of adding a stroke and losing a disc sucks.
in most disc losing opportunities there is an optional route that can add strokes but no lost disc.
the pride of most of us doesn't let us play the way that would save our plastic and score.
we would like to believe that we can execute the perfect line right before we throw our disc in the water.
sometimes we are successful other times not.

Dec 21 2010, 01:04 AM
There is no chance of losing a disc at 16 hyzer. Unless it's after a torrential rain. I took this video the day after we got 7 inches of rain in 24 hours when a spent hurricane came up north this october.


The hole was unplayable for about 12 hours as the water ran off. Usually the creek is 6 inches deep max.

Patrick P
Dec 25 2010, 07:29 AM
Never seen a basket in the middle of an OB creek, although I've seen courses with water edges, OBs, and bunkers behind, in front, and to the sides of the basket. I'm sure if I played the course I'd have a different opinion, but from the pics and video I would have placed the basket NOT in the creek, just my opinion. Looks like a fun course to play!

Dec 29 2010, 06:50 PM
Holy 16 at Hyzer is definitely a challenge, from beginning to end. I think the hole would have just as much appeal if the basket was 2 feet across the stream, in bounds. But, I like it the way it is now ...

I think it's odd that the rules allow for this and I wouldn't be surprised if there were a rules change in the future that bans OB baskets. In the meantime, it'd be nice to see someone put a basket 30 feet into an OB parking lot .. that would be super gimmicky :)

Feb 10 2011, 10:07 PM
If there is OB under the basket, how you can finish such hole?
To finish the hole rule 803.13B must be fullfiled (disk came to rest inside basket), but at the same time also rule 803.9A (OB) is in place so how it is decieded which rule is applied if they both occured at same time?

Feb 10 2011, 10:22 PM
You can have IB surfaces over OB surfaces (see Rules Q&A). Any place on the basket where a disc can land and be considered holed out is inbounds. TD would have to decide whether being suspended on the target where the disc is not holed out (such as on top) would be OB.

Feb 11 2011, 09:13 PM
cgkdisc: if you refer to "Bridge Over OB (Multiple Playing Surfaces and Verticality)" then even there is no official definition of "playing surface" basket should be more likely object on course rather then playing surface ...

On other hand if basket would be another playing surface (IB) and there will be no mandatory drop zone specified, then if you hit chains (or maybe even put over the top of the basket) and end up OB you should have the option to mark your lie inside the basket, but then you would need to stay inside the basket to have a valid stance ...

(my question / comments are not related to this specific hole for which this topic was started, but cases when basket is fully in OB and TD is not covering these tricky scenarios by additional tournament specific rules)

Feb 12 2011, 02:14 AM
Take a look at the Interference rule 803.07B and you'll see that the target is treated more like a playing surface versus an obstacle on the course. As you point out, it's important for the TD to clarify what to do. The easiest would be to just say if the disc lands anywhere inside the OB area and is not holed out, then go to the last point IB outside the OB area. Oh wait, maybe not having the basket surrounded by OB would be the easiest way to deal with it...:)

Feb 12 2011, 06:29 PM
The discussion of how to rule a DROT on the o.b. basket made me think of something.

I saw a video recently of some pros playing a tournament somewhere and someone's disc landed on the top of a low retaining wall. The wall and everything inside it had been declared o.b. I think it looked like the disc was partly extending into the air over the inbounds part of the course, but I could not say for sure. Fuzzy memory. I know with the rule of verticality and the definition of o.b., if the disc is sticking into the inbounds airspace a little there, it is ruled inbounds. So here's the question: do you think under the rules a TD can announce in advance that a disc coming to rest on the the wall and not touching the playing surface is out of bounds even if it is sticking into the inbounds airspace? Here's the other question: If the wall is capped with stones that are wider than the wall so that they stick out over the inbounds side, and a disc lands entirely on the cap stone but part of the disc is on the part of the capstone that sticks out over inbounds playing surface, is this a multiple playing surface scenario where the player could play it as inbounds if the TD has not ruled otherwise?

Feb 12 2011, 07:44 PM
I think you get in trouble with the first one because the OB line boundary depends on the width of the disc. The other issue would be shots flying near and along the fence line and trying to determine the last point IB if the disc ends up OB. I would say that option would require getting a waiver from the PDGA office.

I think the multiple playing surface rule is valid for your second scenario but I was thinking you would want the entire capstone to be OB, even the part hanging over IB. That's what multiple playing surfaces is about where an OB surface is over an IB surface or vice versa.