I know that the 2 meter rule is now a TD optional, but here is a question I just thought about.

When you have a DROT, you mark your lie underneath the basket and you take your drop in.

But what is the ruling if for some reason that the top of the basket was 2 meters above the ground, and you have a DROT? ASSUME THAT THE 2 METER RULE IS IN EFFECT FOR THE TOURNY.




I know that there are probably 0 baskets in the world where the top of the basket is 2 meters up from the ground, but I figured this would be a fun thread to argue in. :-P

Unfortunately it is not that interesting because you would now do the same thing: mark it on the playing surface below the basket.

The PDGA RC clarified that the basket is a special condition, it only behaves like the playing surface if a disc in the basket gets hit or moved out of the basket, you would never mark your lie in the basket unless you meet the criteria of being hol'ed out.

Now, someday, when holing out is defined as a disc being caught by a disc catching device and completely supported by it, then we won't need these definitions of playing surface, special conditions and DROT. It will just be holed out or not...

Oh...

well there goes my interesting question

*sigh*

There is at least one basket at OG that's dang close to 6 feet over, as is...should a little runoff occur*, a small depression could form before the basket's integrity come into question, and a 2-meter call just could happen... :eek:

...is it fun again?!? :p

*Oak Grove DGC is within Hahamonga Watershed Park.

I don't know what Nick is babbling about, but it seems to me that if the disc came to rest on top of a basket, and the 2m rule was in effect, and the top of the basket was over 2m. There indeed would be a penalty.

That is what I was thinking, but Nick's response made me feel dumb.

I don't know what Nick is babbling about, but it seems to me that if the disc came to rest on top of a basket, and the 2m rule was in effect, and the top of the basket was over 2m. There indeed would be a penalty.



He didn't ask about if there would be a penalty until after my response, he asked where would the lie be marked.

OYE!

And you are not dumb Bill, you just didn't know how the rule worked, that is ignorance not stupidity. For an example of that check out Jim's post... ;)

I knew where it would be marked.

It was quite obvious that my question was what would the ruling be if the disc was on top of the of the basket if the basket was higher than 2 meters!

I knew where it would be marked.

It was quite obvious that my question was what would the ruling be if the disc was on top of the of the basket if the basket was higher than 2 meters!



Really?


I know that the 2 meter rule is now a TD optional, but here is a question I just thought about.

When you have a DROT, you mark your lie underneath the basket and you take your drop in.

But what is the ruling if for some reason that the top of the basket was 2 meters above the ground, and you have a DROT? ASSUME THAT THE 2 METER RULE IS IN EFFECT FOR THE TOURNY.



Anyway, it would be the same, no penalty strokes because the target is neither something that can suspend a disc above 2 meters (like a tree) nor is it like the playing surface in that a lie can be marked on or in it.

Nick, I don't understand your answer [on what would be the ruling in this instance] on why this wouldn't be a penalty. In this [albeit bizarre] instance, the DROT IS 2+ meters above the playing surface. Odd, yes, but that's just the instance. What rules could somebody quote from 'the book' to save a penalty throw?

Even though 'playing surface' is not yet formally defined, a case could be made that the basket itself is also an alternate playing surface. In which case, no disc on top of the basket would be more than 2 meters above A playing surface. The current rules allow a fairly liberal interpretation of what constitutes a playing surface. They can be stacked, such as below and on a picnic table, or the surface of bridges over IB ground. The unresolved aspect of this comes into play when a disc is suspended over both of these stacked playing surfaces. Does it have to be more than 2 meters above the highest one to be a penalty? Of course, this does not have to be resolved in 2005 if the 2 meter penalty isn't in force where the stacked surfaces exist.

Much thanks Chuck...do you think the 'playing surface' will ever/can/should be 'formalized'?

Much thanks Chuck...do you think the 'playing surface' will ever/can/should be 'formalized'?




I think it's an itch that will have to be scratched by the Rules Committee during next year's planned update.

Nick, I don't understand your answer [on what would be the ruling in this instance] on why this wouldn't be a penalty. In this [albeit bizarre] instance, the DROT IS 2+ meters above the playing surface. Odd, yes, but that's just the instance. What rules could somebody quote from 'the book' to save a penalty throw?



That the basket behaves as a playing surface short of you being able to place your marker on or in it. Plus their are rules about how to deal with discs both in and on it within our rulebook. Check'em out.

The top of the basket as a playing surface? Even with no definition, I would never want to maintain that. It seems to open a huge can of worms.

Read again James:


That the basket behaves as a playing surface short of you being able to place your marker on or in it.

I really was directing my comment towards Chuck's assertion. However, your comment about "behaving as a playing surface" is even more confusing.

If the top of the basket is above 2 meters and it is OB, then if it is resting in the chains 2 meters above the surface, it is also OB? In this case, would you keep marking it under the basket and putting it back in (since there is nothing that indicates the holing out rule supercedes the OB rule). Endlessly, while the groups behind pile up at the tee. :)

I really was directing my comment towards Chuck's assertion. However, your comment about "behaving as a playing surface" is even more confusing.

If the top of the basket is above 2 meters and it is OB, then if it is resting in the chains 2 meters above the surface, it is also OB? In this case, would you keep marking it under the basket and putting it back in (since there is nothing that indicates the holing out rule supercedes the OB rule). Endlessly, while the groups behind pile up at the tee. :)



First of all James 2 meters above the playing surface IS NOT OB! Got it! Never has been, never will be.

Secondly the target has been illustrated in countless rules and Q & As to be a special situation. I agree with you that this is confusing and hope that "Playing Surface" is finally defined within our rules glossary within the next update.

Whether it is or it is not. As currently understood, and that is what we are talking about here, the basket itself is a device for holing out, and when functioning as such or in the case of a DROT(not yet considered holing out) it behaves as does the playing surface; meaning that if it gets moved it should be replaced where it moved from. However unlike the playing surface you are not permitted to mark your lie or take a stance "on" the target.

Take a look at our Rules and Q & As for further details on this.

Sometimes you are right and that irks me. ;)

On an approach shot a guy on my card impaled his Omaga SS on the top of the pole~hole's flag stick...definitely above 2m. Freaky, as it spun to it's death... :eek: What's the call, ye all?!

Yeah, and what if that flag was bent, and above O.B.?!?
Sorry to be so obtuse, but I don't read every single rules post, and, at present, 'playing surface' is NOT in the glossary.

Or what if said basket is not the target in play?

And what if you guys took a break from typing and read your rulebook? ;)

All aspects of landing in or on baskets are handled already, even without defining "playing surface". Check it out.

Since this is for fun, how about a hint? "Drot" doesn't come-up in my on-line version of the rules, and searches for "target" don't hit this subject, either. It's hard to reference, is my point...

Is an impaled disc the same as a cracked disc? :D

Holing out...

Sounds more like 'hole in' ...the disc

Holy conundrums, MADG-man, was that the hint?

I'll be glad to spell it out for you.

But first you have to do something for me: Copy and paste all of the sections in our Rules of Play that have to do with this topic here on this thread. Read them and provide your informed thoughts on the proper ruling. Be sure to include the related Q & A section.

I'll be happy to answer your question in detail after you have done the above.

Are we having fun yet :confused:

I don't know Mark, how do you propose having fun with rules concerning this scenario?

By just guessing at what the rules are concerning them and going down tangent paths that have no basis in our actual rules?

If that is the intent of this thread then the original poster may want to say that in his instructions:

"And please do not discuss the rules as they really are, because that would be no fun."

803.07 Disc Above the Playing Surface
A. If a disc comes to rest above the playing surface in a tree or other object on the course, its lie shall be marked on the playing surface directly below it. If the point directly below the disc above the playing surface is an out-of-bounds area, the disc shall be declared out-of-bounds and marked and penalized in accordance with 803.08. If the playing surface directly below the disc is inside a tree or other solid obstacle, the lie shall be marked on the line of play immediately behind the tree or other solid obstacle.

B.If a disc has come to rest above two meters, as measured from the lowest point of the disc to the playing surface directly below it, the player shall be assessed a one-throw penalty. This penalty applies only if the disc is above in-bounds. The player shall proceed from a lie marked in accordance with 803.07 A.

---------------

803.12 Holing Out
B. Disc Entrapment Devices: In order to hole out, the thrower must release the disc and it must come to rest supported by the chains or within one of the entrapment sections. This includes a disc wedged into or hanging from the lower entrapment section but excludes a disc resting on top of, or hanging outside of, the upper entrapment section. The disc must also remain within the chains or entrapment sections until removed.




That is all that I can find in the online version of the rule book that seems to be relevant. The sections I've bolded are relevant, but I've included the entire paragraphs for context. I have not included other paragraphs from the same rules section that were not relevant. (803.12 C is for non-basket targets, 803.12 A deals with showing up late, leaving early, or inadvertantly failing to hole out).

Q&A:

Rule Question: Disc resting on top (DROT)
Question: I putted and my disc stayed on top of the basket. Now what?

Applicable rules: 803.12, 803.06.B

The short answer is that it will take you one more throw to complete the hole. Formerly, you could leave it up there and give other players the chance to save you a stroke, but the rule that allowed that (in which a disc struck by another disc was played from its new lie) has been changed. Now, if a disc at rest is struck by another disc, it is returned to its original lie.

Since the person whose disc is on top has no chance of saving the stroke, it is reasonable to ask him to mark it if it may become a distraction.



I'm guessing that the RC screwed up here, and didn't include 803.07 as an applicable rule. Clearly they are suggesting that the player mark his lie beneath the disc, but the only rule I'm aware of that allows for this is 803.07. Are you suggesting that because the RC didn't inlucde .07 in the list of applicable rules to this question that the 2m penalty is automatically ignored? Or am I missing something else?

Are you suggesting that because the RC didn't inlucde .07 in the list of applicable rules to this question that the 2m penalty is automatically ignored?



I am not suggesting it, it is implicit.

Do you do your kid's homework for them too?

You forgot one though: "Glossary Lie: The spot on the playing surface upon which the player takes his or her stance in accordance with the rules."

The lie is on the "playing surface" not on the basket, and in this specific case, no matter how high off the playing surface any part of the target is, the lie is still on the playing surface.

Now could this be clarified, perhaps, but it is reasonable to expect the same ruling based on these provisions.

The rules are serious stuff; the 'fun' part is exploring what might be grey areas, and discussing if someone in charge did indeed 'mess up'.

Anyways, the part where the target is recognized as part of the playing surface...this may be familiar territory to some, but for the guy picking up the book for the first time...where is the connection made? And is it really explicit, or implied?

Steve,

I really am not trying to be a smart alex; there is only one way for you to find out the answers to your questions (well, other than having Jim or I give you the answers) and that is for you to read your rulebook carefully. Trying to figure it out on your own will give you things to consider that you simply can not arrive at by having others provide you answers.

All rules conversations are fun in a way, I just want to see that you are not sitting back and letting others do the work to find the answers you want, it won't do you any good, and in that way I would think it would decrease the fun...

If it says to mark your lie on the playing surface if your disc comes to rest ontop of the target, is that implicitly telling you how to handle the situation or is it just implying an option?

Is the other option to check whether it is 2 meters above the playing surface and apply a penalty throw if it is?

It is clear to me, if it is not, please explain why, if I can't see your point, don't get frustrated with me, just shoot off a question to the PDGA RC. Carlton will certainly give you a speedy reply. (Give as much detail as possible. Note though that the frequency of this coming into question during PDGA Rounds (Never, to my knowledge) may be a source of consternation for the RC, who prefer to deal with stuff that happens more regularly.)

No worries; I totally agree; this place seems more apt than asking the RC...on the outside chance it might be a stupid question. :o:D


803.07 DISC ABOVE THE PLAYING SURFACE
A. If a disc comes to rest above the playing surface in a tree or other object on the course, its lie shall be marked on the playing surface directly below it.

B.If a disc has come to rest above two meters, as measured from the lowest point of the disc to the playing surface directly below it, the player shall be assessed a one-throw penalty.


...that's pretty cut-and-dried...what I can't find is the part about DROTS.


If it says to mark your lie on the playing surface if your disc comes to rest ontop of the target, is that implicitly telling you how to handle the situation or is it just implying an option?

Is the other option to check whether it is 2 meters above the playing surface and apply a penalty throw if it is?


The first part is implicit [but I don't see where it's written]; the second would depend on the definition of 'playing surface'...which is not in the glossary.

...so while I can accept Chucks answer that target=playing surface, I don't "see" where; just going by what's written, it seems like a penalty throw would be in order.

Are you suggesting that because the RC didn't inlucde .07 in the list of applicable rules to this question that the 2m penalty is automatically ignored?



I am not suggesting it, it is implicit.




I think it's implicit that they used .07 to get to the final answer. The Q&A suggests that because of Inteference they disc should be marked. Well the only way to mark a disc that is above the playing surface is to follow the procedure outlined in .07. Therefore .07 should be in effect, and a DROT that is over 2m should be penalized.


The lie is on the "playing surface" not on the basket, and in this specific case, no matter how high off the playing surface any part of the target is, the lie is still on the playing surface.



We agree. The lie is on the playing surface. If a disc comes to rest on top of the basket, the disc is above the playing surface. The lie must be marked, and that is done per 803.07.

803.07 is disc above the playing surface; of course if the target can be considered part of the playing surface, this is moot.

...might the target=playing suface 'notion' come from the 'notion' target <font color="red"> does not = </font> obstacle, therefore, "<font color="red">not </font> obstacle" =playing surface?

...might the target=playing suface 'notion' come from the 'notion' target <font color="red"> does not = </font> obstacle, therefore, "<font color="red">not </font> obstacle" =playing surface?



No, I think that the target=playing surface 'notion' comes from Chuck trying to be clever.

Actually, I do see a roundabout justification for it.


803.06
B. If a disc at rest on the playing surface is moved, the disc shall be replaced as close as possible to its original location



Combined with the Q&amp;A:

. Formerly, you could leave it up there and give other players the chance to save you a stroke, but the rule that allowed that (in which a disc struck by another disc was played from its new lie) has been changed.



Well the wording of that rule only applies to discs at rest on the playing surface. If it applies to discs on top of the basket, it must mean the basket is part of the playing surface.

Again, I think this is an oversight by the Rules Committee, and a misinterpretation of the current rules.

Finally one more item to think about.
801.04 B

(3) Wrong Target: If a player holes out on the wrong target for a given hole, he or she will continue play from a lie directly beneath that target, without penalty. If the player holes out at the wrong target, and believes the hole is completed, and proceeds to play the next hole, a two-throw penalty will be added to that player's score for misplaying the course.



This is the rule that used to state the player got one meter relief. This is no longer true. While this doesn't specify that it's played per 803.07, it is played very much like it except that it does specify "no penalty". One could argue that playing a DROT (since those details are in the Q&amp;A and not in the rules) is "closest" (see 803.00 E) to playing a disc in the wrong basket.

With all that said, I still believe a DROT that is over 2m should be penalized as long as the 2m rule is in effect.

Maybe Snapper will "Drop" the 2 Meter rule for the Team Tourney :confused: /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

We can try out that "Hyzer Bomb to up in the Tree" Theory :p

I just cant figure out WHY we would drop this rule :confused:

UH if you dont want to get stuck in the Tree, THEN DONT THROW IN IT!!
Sure theres the argument of "2 guys throw in the same spot up in the tree, 1 falls out and the other doesnt. Thats not "Fair" :confused:
Hey, Dumb ***, Dont throw in the Tree, Go around it. You know its called "Disc Golf", Not "Tree Golf". How many holes that were designed WITH Tree Hazards will be obsolete now that there is no Risk/Reward involved :confused:

:o

See signature below /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

How many holes that were designed WITH Tree Hazards will be obsolete now that there is no Risk/Reward involved :confused:



Magilla, the TD can still implement the rule if he wants. The default will be that there is no penalty, but TDs will be allowed to put it in. Kinda like water. By default all water is casual, but most TDs declare it to be OB.

How many holes that were designed WITH Tree Hazards will be obsolete now that there is no Risk/Reward involved :confused:



Magilla, the TD can still implement the rule if he wants. The default will be that there is no penalty, but TDs will be allowed to put it in. Kinda like water. By default all water is casual, but most TDs declare it to be OB.



Always the "Loop Hole" :p

Hey, Dumb ***, Dont throw in the Tree, Go around it. You know its called "Disc Golf", Not "Tree Golf". How many holes that were designed WITH Tree Hazards will be obsolete now that there is no Risk/Reward involved




There is an oximoron in there somewhere...

If the 2 meter rule is the "only" Risk Reward" involved in a hole then that hole sucks and needs to be redesigned before all the trees get FUBARed.

...you guys don't seem to have as much fun, when I'm away...

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
803.06
B. If a disc at rest on the playing surface is moved, the disc shall be replaced as close as possible to its original location
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


If I knock somebody out of a tree before they can get to it, NO WAY is it going to be replaced...but on the basket, it's different! This makes sense!

...now, what about the 'skew' situation, where the 'flag' part of the basket is bend, and the disc is actually [over] O.B.? THAT's got to be a penalty throw, eh?

...what if IT gets knocked to a different location? "Replacement" would seem to be the call. ;)

...and has Chuck noticed I'm using 'throw' instead of 'stroke', to eschew obfuscation?!? :D

Is it ok to at least call a putt a stroke :confused:

Is it ok to at least call a putt a stroke

No; a stroke is no longer a noun, but you can use it to describe the putt: Stroke that putt smoothly; etc.

...anybody stroked-off by this explanation?!? :D