We all can figure out where I played and who I played with but I don't need to embarrass anyone, so we'll just pretend we don't know. And we had a lot of fun too. No complaints, just observations and questions.

#1 -- Called, though arguably incorrectly: 804.03(C). I thought the new rules required scores to be recorded with arabic numerals, and not using other systems like the + - / system. Now that I read the new rule instead of the explanation, this is not clear at all. But it was too cold to be messing around with secret code scoring anyway, so I'm fine with the non-rules call if I called it wrong. Can anyone find a rule that says you can't write + for 4 or / for 3? The explanation says you can't but the rule does not unless I'm missing something.

#2 -- Called incorrectly? 803.05. The announcement guy said the creek was ob. I asked about the very large puddle and the very small outlet that had been constructed to allow the large puddle to drain into the creek. He said casual, which means you can play it to the side, no closer. ??? He seemed to be saying not that the TD was allowing "greater relief," but that playing it to the side was a standard, normal option. And would allowing lateral relief fall under "greater relief" or does "greater relief" just mean further straight back than five meters? I don't know. I was just happy to have the rule called in advance. I don't need to argue with the announcement guy about rules they've called in advance.

#3 -- 804.05(A)(4). Let's just go right to the excuses: I don't drink beer so I don't know the NA brands from the real stuff. It was covered by a coozie. He said he was only drinking it for it's anti-freeze properties, and not to gain a competitive advantage, so maybe it was Red Bull. I was whooping him that round. And if you call what he was doing "drinking" then I don't know what word is left for what my dad used to do! He was sipping. Last excuse: they came out with a new rule book and it still is not in the rules! If I had had a copy of the rules in my pocket, which maybe I did, I still could not have shown him that he was breaking any rule. As a TD I'm required to enforce the secret rules, but as a player I don't even know what they are, because the rules committee came out with like 20 new rules and did not bother to include the secret rule.

#4 -- 804.05(A)(4). Yeah, there were a lot of violations. I don't make any presumptions about what might be in your pipe or hand rolled cigarette. Enforcing that is strictly for cops. My role in the process is to make a recommendation on how the judge should call the Constitutional issues like search and seizure. I did not see any Constitutional violations! If smoking were against the rules, maybe I would be out of excuses. Otherwise I'll just stand upwind and beat you on strokes, if I can.

#5 -- 804.05(A)(4). As to the rule that is in the rule book, every single player at the tournament except the woman who won a free entry fee for donating lots of canned goods violated the rule. My lawyer friend who used to do gaming law says it is not even a close call if we were in Michigan. But Kelsey and I thought we were in Ohio. We saw exit 2 something like 20 minutes before we would have got to the course if we had not made a little detour to see Lake Erie, which is definately in Ohio. We drove through the town of Erie, which used to be in Pennsyvania! The tournament was run by a club named after a town in Ohio. Our last Michigan map was so shredded, we were using a mapquest map that did not show the state line. Oh, and Kelsey played in the women's division because someone said this other woman was "the best am woman in the state." Since Kelsey is the best am woman in Michigan, the other woman must have been the best in "the state" of Ohio. Oh, and we were both playing for the Junior Girl's Club, so it is not like we really won anything. After that, I'm out of excuses and looking for a plea bargain.

#6 -- 803.09(B)(2). Everyone on every card I could see was playing river o.b. one meter from the top edge of the bank rather than one meter from the edge of the water. I thought maybe it was one of those local rules that all the local players just know.

Technically, under the new rules, since we don't allow lateral relief for unplayable lie, I think a lot of those players should have been throwing with a penalty from the previous lie because the unplayable steeply inclined river bank was often more than a meter wide. This is just another reason why the new unplayable lie rule is dumb. There were a lot of places on those two or three holes where if you went in the water, you'd have to retee throwing 3 under the new rules, because the o.b. relief would not get you to a place where you could possibly take a stance.

#7 -- 803.05(A). This guy moved this really big stick while I was still walking up after taking a throw out of the schule. I was kind of slow getting there so I could not be certain where it was before he moved it, but I did not see any of it in his lie or throwing motion, and if it was you'd think other parts of it were between his lie and the hole. If Rhett had been there, maybe 200 feet away on another hole or something, it would have been an easy call, but from 50 feet away it was tricky.

Anyway, I think the correct answer under the new rule is stroke without a warning for failing to get a majority ruling from the group before moving it. Technically, under the new rules, before you move anything at all you have to get a ruling, I think. Anyone want to expound on that aspect?

Anyway I was not the guy who didn't call it but then asked the TD about it. I was the guy beating that guy on throws if I could, and not trying to win on tricky rules calls. But am I right? Don't the new rules require you to get a group decision before you move an acorn or butterfly eyelash?

Kelsey and I both had a lot of fun. I like rules-lite disc golf! Play it where it lies and win or lose on fewest throws. We were happy to support the food charity and the girl's club with my money and our prizes. We got no complaints. I'm just having fun with new and old rules and secret rules.

On #1, I think 804.03C is pretty clear. "The scorekeeper shall record the score for each player on each hole as the total number of throws, including penalty throws." That must be a number since the meanings of - / + are not absolute. By extension, the TD could declare the total scores on the card wrong. The TD knows some holes are par 4s and 5s and the players in the group based their -/+ on "every hole is par three."

bruce, was this a pdga sanctioned event?

Bruce, i don't quite get #5: 804.05 Disqualification and Suspension

did everyone except one person loudly curse at some point? :D
did everyone admit to illegal consumption of drugs or alcohol?

i like your observation #6. it bugs me that i as a RZ-wannabe would go out of my way to play by the rules and might lose to someone who followed the 1 meter in from the top of the bank misinterpretation of the rule. (more reason to mark the OB areas of a creek rather than use the water-land intersect -- especially near pins)

btw, is it true that if a TD forgets to announce that a lake is OB -- even if it has always been treated that way -- it isn't OB? would that make a disc thrown to the center of it Lost? :o

wrt #4 -- good point. too many seem too quick to ignore the Constitution prohibitions on illegal search and seizure. for instance, a TD should not wiretap anyone without obtaining some semblance of judicial oversight within 72 hours after-the-fact :eek: :D

He was referring to Gambling Laws in #5. He thought he was in Ohio but technically he was in Michigan which has strict gambling laws.

He was referring to Gambling Laws in #5. He thought he was in Ohio but technically he was in Michigan which has strict gambling laws.

Strictly written but almost never enforced. It is quite a conundrum for someone who has a higher obligation to be law abiding than your average citizen. I didn't REALLY think we were in Ohio, but Kelsey and I were jokingly rehearsing our lines in case we might be making an appearance before the Saturday magistrate.

I didnt buy for a second that you actually thought you were in Ohio, the Judge would not have either ;)

It is possible that a lot of players did not know it was PDGA sanctioned since it was an ice bowl and those often are not sanctioned. I quit playing disc golf in Michigan in 2004 because of the Michigan Supreme Court's new zero tolerance policies regarding appearances of impropriety within the judiciary, and because my friend who did gaming law for years one day said, "So how do you get around the pool law and the carnival game law doing what you do?" So it is possible that during the past two years or so all semblance of respect for the secret rule has broken down, if there ever was any respect for it, and I was unaware because we follow the rule at our tournaments in Illinois.

As for the river bank thing, I've played PDGA tournaments all over the midwest. Everywhere I go there are funky local rules that aren't exactly PDGA. When it is not my tournament I just go with the flow. Everyone was taking their penalty and playing from a safe lie at the top near where they went o.b. That is a reasonable way to play it if that how they do it there.

But I'm still curious about the big stick issue from this slightly different angle. It seems to me that the new rules say it is a one stroke penalty without a warning to move anything without a group ruling first. Kick an acorn out from under foot when you are stting up to putt and it is a stroke penalty. You have to actually read the rule to see what I mean. I'm not going to spoon feed anyone who wants to be on the DGRZ team.

On item #2, "greater relief" would have to either be on the line of play or to a specific drop zone. Otherwise, it violates the rule. No lateral relief is allowed unless permission from the Competition Director is received.

That's my belief, but I couldn't substantiate it from the rules last night at 2 a.m. I'm not sure why "greater relief" could not mean lateral relief.

My take on funky rules is that the TD is obligated to play by PDGA rules but the player is obligated to play by the TD's rules. I love it when the TD lays out all the funky rules, but if I can look around and just see that certain situations are played a certain way here where I've never played a tournament before, I'm going with that. It's not the Championship of the World. It's a fund raiser for a charity.

Some people seem to think that Competition Director approval is required for using a drop zone with a casual relief area and that's in the rules. So, getting lateral relief would seem to require approval even more.

the dissent is easy. if "greater" can be understood as "better", then the rule permits lateral relief. does the specification of a drop zone actually alter the meaning of an unrelated word?

#1 -- Called, though arguably incorrectly: 804.03(C). I thought the new rules required scores to be recorded with arabic numerals, and not using other systems like the + - / system. Now that I read the new rule instead of the explanation, this is not clear at all. But it was too cold to be messing around with secret code scoring anyway, so I'm fine with the non-rules call if I called it wrong. Can anyone find a rule that says you can't write + for 4 or / for 3? The explanation says you can't but the rule does not unless I'm missing something.



<font color="blue">801.01 Courtesy

C. Refusal to perform an action expected by the rules, such as assisting in the search for a lost disc, moving discs or equipment, or keeping score properly, etc., is a courtesy violation.

G. A player violating a courtesy rule may be warned by any affected player, even if from another group, or by an official, with all players of the group advised of the warning. The player shall be assessed one penalty throw for each subsequent courtesy violation of any type in the same round. Repeated violations of courtesy rules may result in disqualification in accordance with section 804.05.

804.03 Scoring

B. After each hole is completed, the scorekeeper shall call out each player�s name. The called player shall answer with the score in a manner that is clear to all players of the group and the scorekeeper. The scorekeeper shall record that score and read it back, in a manner that is clear to all players of the group. If there is any disagreement about the score a player reports, the group must review the hole and attempt to arrive at the correct score. If the group cannot reach consensus on the player�s score, they shall consult 803.01 D.

C. The scorekeeper shall record the score for each player on each hole as the total number of throws, including penalty throws. The round total shall also be recorded as the total number of throws, including penalty throws. The use of anything else (including the lack of a score) represents an incorrect hole or total score and is subject to penalty as described in 804.03.G(2).
</font>

�+/-� is not �total number of throws� so you were right to give a courtesy warning, the rules requires �numbers� to be used.

#2 -- Called incorrectly? 803.05. The announcement guy said the creek was ob. I asked about the very large puddle and the very small outlet that had been constructed to allow the large puddle to drain into the creek. He said casual, which means you can play it to the side, no closer. ??? He seemed to be saying not that the TD was allowing "greater relief," but that playing it to the side was a standard, normal option. And would allowing lateral relief fall under "greater relief" or does "greater relief" just mean further straight back than five meters? I don't know. I was just happy to have the rule called in advance. I don't need to argue with the announcement guy about rules they've called in advance.




<font color="blue"> 803.05 Obstacles and Relief

C. Casual Obstacles: A player may obtain relief only from the following obstacles: casual water, loose leaves or debris, broken branches no longer connected to a tree, motor vehicles, harmful insects or animals, players� equipment, spectators, or any item or area specifically designated by the director before the round. Obstacles may not be moved if any part of the obstacle is between the lie and the hole. The type of relief a player may obtain is based on the location of the obstacle and is limited as follows:
(1) Casual obstacles between the lie and the hole: A player may move obstacles which became a factor during the round as described by 803.05 B.
(2) Casual obstacles to stance or throwing motion: The player must first attempt to remove the obstacle unless a portion of the obstacle is also between the lie and the hole. If it is impractical to move the obstacle, or if a portion of the obstacle is also between the lie and the hole, the player�s lie may be relocated to the nearest lie which is no closer to the hole, is on the line of play, and is not more than five meters from the original lie, as agreed to by a majority of the group or an official (unless greater casual relief is announced by the director). Alternatively, the player may declare an unplayable lie and proceed in accordance with 803.06.

E. A player shall receive one penalty throw, without a warning, for violation of an obstacle or relief rule.

804.01 Special Conditions

A. Rules governing special conditions that may exist on the course shall be clearly defined and disseminated to all players prior to the start of the tournament. All special conditions shall be covered in the players' meeting. Each player is responsible for adhering to all points covered in the players' meeting.

B. The drop zone may be utilized in special conditions. The director must announce prior to the tournament how it is to be used and if a penalty throw is to be assessed. If no penalty is announced prior to the tournament, none will be assessed for use of the drop zone in special conditions.

D. No rules may be stipulated which conflict with the PDGA Rules of Play, unless approved by the Competition Director of the PDGA.

803.06 Unplayable Lie

A. A player may declare his or her lie to be an unplayable lie. The player is the sole judge as to whether the lie is unplayable. The unplayable lie may be relocated to a new lie that is: (1) No closer to the hole, on the line of play and within five meters of the unplayable lie; or (2) The previous lie as evidenced by the marker disc or, if the marker disc has been moved, from an approximate lie as agreed to by the majority of the group or an official. The original throw plus one penalty throw are counted in the player�s score.
</font>

Lateral movement of the lie would not fall under any of these rules, so it would not be allowed by the rules (perhaps as an exception by the PDGA Competition Director if requested and approved in advance) A drop zone is expressly allowed.

So this was not called correctly and you should challenge it at the players meeting and educate the announcer and competitors.

well I wasn't confused before but I am now. what vague new rules will be implemented for 07 can't wait :confused:

which rules do you feel are vague and what is the exact re-write that you would propose in order to improve them?

Greater relief does not only mean farther back on LOP.
Greater relief means greater relief, as in last year's unsafe lie rule where relief was anywhere within 5 meters no closer to the target.

Lateral relief is a form of greater relief.

Greater relief does not only mean farther back on LOP.
Greater relief means greater relief, as in last year's unsafe lie rule where relief was anywhere within 5 meters no closer to the target.

Lateral relief is a form of greater relief.

Somehow I find it comforting that there are reasonable people on both sides of this one.

#1 - The rule states "total number of throws" and specifically disallows anything else.

#2. - It sounds like the TD needs to be familiarized with the actual rule, but lateral relief is greater relief.

#3 - Unfortunate, but true. It listed in the Tour standards document, and states that where it is legal, the TD must make an event rule prohibiting it during play. It is not listed as a requirement in the Sanctioning agreement.

#4 - Same as above, except (I've been assured) that it is not legal in a public park in the U.S. even with a prescription.

#5 - You haven't managed to get a specific exemption for Disc Golf yet ?

#6 - Poor course marking or instruction by the TD. This weekend, going in the water (over the edge actually) on the two holes were it normally happens, meant that you played from the drop zone with penalty.

#7 - I read the part of the rule that mentions majority agreement to come into play if the obstacle can't be moved, and relief is desired.

well I wasn't confused before but I am now. what vague new rules will be implemented for 07 can't wait :confused:



I would hope that the PDGA in it's greater wisdom (Tongue firmly planted in cheek) would not change any rules but clarify the existing ones. Specifically OB (the line) and the function of the line. Drop Zones and penalties. It would be unfair to chastize a TD in the second month of ambiguous rules...

#7 -- 803.05(A). This guy moved this really big stick while I was still walking up after taking a throw out of the schule. I was kind of slow getting there so I could not be certain where it was before he moved it, but I did not see any of it in his lie or throwing motion, and if it was you'd think other parts of it were between his lie and the hole. If Rhett had been there, maybe 200 feet away on another hole or something, it would have been an easy call, but from 50 feet away it was tricky.

Anyway, I think the correct answer under the new rule is stroke without a warning for failing to get a majority ruling from the group before moving it. Technically, under the new rules, before you move anything at all you have to get a ruling, I think. Anyone want to expound on that aspect?

Anyway I was not the guy who didn't call it but then asked the TD about it. I was the guy beating that guy on throws if I could, and not trying to win on tricky rules calls. But am I right? Don't the new rules require you to get a group decision before you move an acorn or butterfly eyelash?



#7 is the big newly discovered rule, as far as I'm concerned. No one has commented on this but I think the new rules say you cannot move anything at all, not even a maple leaf under your back putting foot, without first at least waiting until everyone is there, or something might be unclear. The big stick was unclear to me because I was still walking up after throwing from somewhere weird. I think I threw, ran out to see where it was going and then had to go back for my bag or marker.

It would seem to me that if you move something, and someone in your group challenges and then anyone in your group says, "I dunno. He moved it before I really saw it," that's a stroke without a warning.

Anyway, I don't call that kind of stuff. I notice that stuff and then post about it. I'm not trying to win by working my vastly superior misconceptions about the rules. I'm trying to win by taking fewer throws and not throwing any discs in the river.

803.05 Obstacles and Relief
C. Casual Obstacles:
(2) <font color="blue">Casual obstacles to stance or throwing motion: The player must first attempt to remove the obstacle unless a portion of the obstacle is also between the lie and the hole. </font><font color="green">If it is impractical to move the obstacle, or if a portion of the obstacle is also between the lie and the hole, the player�s lie may be relocated to the nearest lie which is no closer to the hole, is on the line of play, and is not more than five meters from the original lie, as agreed to by a majority of the group or an official (unless greater casual relief is announced by the director).</font>

Sentence 1 - Movement of casual obstacles.
Sentence 2 - Movement of lie.

1 does not mention card members, 2 does.
The card members decision is not about the practicality of moving the object, but on the placement of the relocated lie.

I'd love to talk about one that happened today.. But in the end I don't want to be considered a rules #$*&$!. I got screwed. Three other player know it. A penalty throw was not counted. Nothing to do with payout but principle.

If you don't want to bring it up here PM me.

yeah, PM me too please

803.05 Obstacles and Relief
C. Casual Obstacles:
(2) <font color="blue">Casual obstacles to stance or throwing motion: The player must first attempt to remove the obstacle unless a portion of the obstacle is also between the lie and the hole. </font><font color="green">If it is impractical to move the obstacle, or if a portion of the obstacle is also between the lie and the hole, the player�s lie may be relocated to the nearest lie which is no closer to the hole, is on the line of play, and is not more than five meters from the original lie, as agreed to by a majority of the group or an official (unless greater casual relief is announced by the director).</font>

Sentence 1 - Movement of casual obstacles.
Sentence 2 - Movement of lie.

1 does not mention card members, 2 does.
The card members decision is not about the practicality of moving the object, but on the placement of the relocated lie.



This is basically my interpretation of that rule. You can move anything behind your lie, just not under it and in front of it. I seen alot of that going on in the last tournament I was at as well....people moving branches from under their lies to mark their lies.....confusing! :eek:

Greater relief does not only mean farther back on LOP.
Greater relief means greater relief, as in last year's unsafe lie rule where relief was anywhere within 5 meters no closer to the target.

Lateral relief is a form of greater relief.



Yes, greater relief that is not against other rules. Lateral relief would be against all rules in our rulebook. Can you show me where it allows lateral relief?

If you want a rule that is not in the rulebook you need to ask permission from the PDGA Competition Director. You do not need to do this for non-sanctioned events, then again you don't need to play be PDGA rules then either.

803.05 Obstacles and Relief
C. Casual Obstacles:
(2) <font color="blue">Casual obstacles to stance or throwing motion: The player must first attempt to remove the obstacle unless a portion of the obstacle is also between the lie and the hole. </font><font color="green">If it is impractical to move the obstacle, or if a portion of the obstacle is also between the lie and the hole, the player�s lie may be relocated to the nearest lie which is no closer to the hole, is on the line of play, and is not more than five meters from the original lie, as agreed to by a majority of the group or an official (unless greater casual relief is announced by the director).</font>

Sentence 1 - Movement of casual obstacles.
Sentence 2 - Movement of lie.

1 does not mention card members, 2 does.
The card members decision is not about the practicality of moving the object, but on the placement of the relocated lie.



This is basically my interpretation of that rule. You can move anything behind your lie, just not under it and in front of it. I seen alot of that going on in the last tournament I was at as well....people moving branches from under their lies to mark their lies.....confusing! :eek:



Where is the confusion? Do not move anything between your lie and the hole. If you need to move back a little not to move it, do so. All covered within the rules.

"greater" in cludes "lateral". case closed. no special permission required.

"greater" in cludes "lateral". case closed. no special permission required.



Show me where.

I have no trouble with their being a greater variety of relief, so long as it is specified in our rules. Perhaps someone should check with the PDGA Rules Committee?

If they say directors can put additional relief anywhere they want I'll be glad to put that rule to some interesting uses.

If you land in this puddle move to within 1 meter of the basket?

Monopoly Disc Golf anyone?

better for you to show us where "greater" can not mean "lateral".

you example is pretty silly, btw, for someone who believes a disc stuck 40' above the basket is just as good as one that landed gently on the ground 1' from the basket.

better for you to show us where "greater" can not mean "lateral".




you example is pretty silly, btw,



Better yet, can you show me where "greater" can not mean "pretty silly"?.

that has nothing to do with the topic, as you know. ah well, what else is new.

that has nothing to do with the topic, as you know. ah well, what else is new.



Lateral relief is not permitted by our rules. If you think it does, great, show us where?

I have no problem with it other than it not being expressly allowed within our written rules of play.

Pat, when are you going to fix that glitch so that I don't have to quote you in order to see your posts?

Pat, when are you going to fix that glitch so that I don't have to quote you in order to see your posts?



Now, that's funny! :o :D :D:D :D :eek:

I showed you an example that was in the rule book last year, so the precedent exists, there is currently nothing in the rule book that addresses the issue one way or the other.

There is nothing in the rule book that says greater relief can not be closer to the basket. In fact, drop zones are often closet to the basket than all of the possible areas that can lead a player to them. As well as being within within 1m of OB where the relief places the lie closer to the hole.

I can find nothing that leads me to believe the TD is unable to grant whatever relief he sees fit, be it lateral or closer to the hole.

better for you to show us where "greater" can not mean "lateral".




you example is pretty silly, btw,



Better yet, can you show me where "greater" can not mean "pretty silly"?.



Wow, Nick actually has a sense of humor :eek: :D

read what gary duke said. nothing says "greater" must only mean "further back on LOP". "greater" can mean "more" but it can also mean "better". lateral relief might be better and the TD does not need the CompDir to allow a commonly used definition of an english language word.

i've described this, and so have other including Duke, several times already. it is no longer incumbant on us to prove anything. instead it is on you to show that this interpretation is specifically not allowed.

as far as your glitch goes, i'll fix it as soon as i can figure out how to erase your account without crashing the entire board.

I think what happened here is that the RC overlooked changing the word "greater" to "longer" once the new casual relief rule changed from "no closer to the hole" to "on the line of play." Based on the RCs reluctance to allow TDs to fully use the Special Conditions rule as written without permission (which allows use of drop zones for casual relief), it would seem the RC would expect TDs to now ask permission for using the lateral relief direction for casual relief areas. But extending the lenth of relief along the line of play beyond 5m would be fully supported without permission.

so the RC overlooked something? ohmigosh! how is a common ordinary mortal TD supposed to know or infer what the RC overlooked versus what they actually discussed, deliberated, refined and published???

i would expect the RC words things exactly as they intend, therefore lateral relief, being one form of greater relief, need no special permission.

if we get into guessing what the RC meant to say even though they didnt actually say it, then we have a problem.

Based on the RCs reluctance to allow TDs to fully use the Special Conditions rule as written without permission (which allows use of drop zones for casual relief)



I was not aware of any reluctance along these lines.

I do know of several holes with casual water running parrallel to the hole that are less than a meter across, but 5m (or 15m) along LOP will not clear the casual water.

I'm not saying I necessarily agree, just that the RC disallows what they said in the Special Conditions rule without permission and this is a parallel situation. In math and lengths, the "greater than" symbol means one number is larger than another number. There's no number that is greater than another number that's "beside" the linear sequence of numbers, right?

Linear math vs geometry.

Initially relief is limited to a vectors with no more than 0 degrees variance off of the Line of Play.

Greater relief allows for vectors of greater than 0 degrees from the Line of Play.

i like this gary guy!

As a player, I'll always just play by the TDs rules that are announced in advance. As a TD's humorous sidekick, I've found this discussion helpful to how we might call this issue in the future at our tournaments. I think if the rules committee intended "greater relief" to mean "longer relief on the line of play only," they will come out with an interpretation on the FAQs page and clear the matter up. Until then, we will just do what seems reasonable in light of the condition on the course and the vague wording of the rule. For the most part I'm usually fine with telling people, "If you don't want to play from the middle of the big puddle on hole 12, don't throw your disc there." If you are coming to a disc golf tournament in any of the flood plains where we run tournaments planning on not getting wet, maybe you should wear your prom dress too. But Jon or Brett might see that issue differently, and it is not an issue I need to direct.

There should be an official Q & A soon from the PDGA RC. They are still working on it I believe. But in general it will clarify that relief must not be mixed and matched across different rules, i.e. OB and Special Conditions areas providing greater casual relief.

I am confident that greater means a greater increment of the relief already available, and not some new unamed form. If you believe differently please explain why and point out what in the rulebook supports your idea. Also, you should check with the PDGA RC to see their take on it.

That some folks feel compelled to call certain rules and not others is not some mysterious phenomenon, it is the norm. We all wrestle with it. I don't judge others for calling or not calling, particularly if I am not there to witness it. Even if I am, I just make the call, and if it is necessary for others to 2nd it then I am cool with folks either doing so if they too saw it or not. I don't hold it against them that they missed the call, and in most cases I don't think the offending player meant to cheat or break the rule. I do my best just to make the call. Do I make it all the time? No. I don't beat myself up about it either.

Just do your best. That's all that can be expected and it should be enough.

Thankfully I live in a region of the country with enough folks that feel a certain pride in knowing the rules that when a TD makes a special condition that is not permitted we all speak up and let them know. Also, thankfully, we have a decent enough relationship with each other that it doesn't become an ego thing. We just want to get it right.

Explain why a Special Conditions area and casual relief area are not the same thing? Either an area has defined boundaries or it doesn't.

If it has boundaries, the Special Conditions rule is irrelevant because the OB rule handles the situation. So, the only reasons for the Special Conditions rule to be in the rulebook is to handle items not identified in the casual relief rule in areas without well defined boundaries. So, the Special Conditions rule is, by definition, an extension of the casual relief rule that allows more items and more specific relief (drop zones only, not "lateral relief no closer") without permission from the Competition Director.

If the RC does not want TDs using the rule as written for including more items and/or allowing drop zone relief, then the rule should be stricken from the rulebook or rewritten.

#7 -- 803.05(A). This guy moved this really big stick while I was still walking up after taking a throw out of the schule. I was kind of slow getting there so I could not be certain where it was before he moved it, but I did not see any of it in his lie or throwing motion, and if it was you'd think other parts of it were between his lie and the hole. If Rhett had been there, maybe 200 feet away on another hole or something, it would have been an easy call, but from 50 feet away it was tricky.


Bruce, I'm sure you meant to say this:

"If Rhett had been spotting for our card when we threw, and was standing at almost the exact distance from the tee where the disc landed, and he remembers exactly how that played out at the 2004 PDGA World Championships because the disc landed on the opposite side of a landscape drainage tube because he made a joke about the disc being OB, and then after he and his cardmates walked to the tee while (Bruce) and his cardmates walked to the lie in question, and then when Rhett was 200 feet away and saw the player move the tube that was in front of his lie, then it would be an easy call."

Of course you leave out the part where you asked the inane question "it's on the ground so it can't be in the way" and then you helped pump your card into an "us against them" frenzy that literally almost ended in a fist-fight at the end of the round.

Yeah, it's pretty funny that you keep skewing that story and telling it over and over on here.

Hope you had a FUn birthday Rhett. :D

Explain why a Special Conditions area and casual relief area are not the same thing? Either an area has defined boundaries or it doesn't.



If it does not have a defined boundary then it can not be a special condition area or casual relief area (or even an OB area).

The situation you described was a casual relief area. Within it you wanted to allow casual relief (specified in the casual obstacle rule). You also wanted to by special condition rule allow greater relief by essentially using only part of the OB rules to relocate with penalty and without having to find the disc which is, in addition, in conflict with the lost disc rule.

This sort of mixing of separate and conflicting rules is not permitted by our special conditions rules.

If a director feels they need such a rule, and I am not saying they don't, though an OB rule would seem to work perfectly for such a situation, they may in advance request PDGA Competition Director approval.

Beyond this I don't have much more to say. I'll wait to read the PDGA Rule Committees official Q & A like everyone else.

too bad we cant just read the rules and understand

Not true. Casual relief areas DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE DEFINED BOUNDARIES. A beehive zone, poison ivy, mud, bluebonnets and especially casual water may not have a defined boundary and, in the case of water, might be changing due to evaporation during the round. It's up to the player in many situations.

Why would bluebonnets warrant a relief of any kind?

See the Q&A on this

The Q&A is wrong.

In general, the time to groom a course is not during PDGA rounds. If you see someone moving stuff around during PDGA rounds it should spark your suspicion.

I live in a pretty wooded region of the country and it is not uncommon for golfers to ask others in their group if it is ok to move something, if it is even close to being between the lie and hole. Tiny things like leaves, sticks, blades of grass are considered playing surface. Still, if there is a doubt, Good Sportsmanship demands that you check it out, or ask others to help you check it out.

As this rule becomes better known and understood, I think folks will come to understand that it is a good rule; one there to ensure fair play.

There is really nothing any a good disc golfer can really do to make a bad disc golfer understand why knowing and playing by the rules is important.

Well, other than knowing, following and calling the rules.

Happy Birthday Rhett! Good job with the ol' mess bored and good job at the Worlds.

Not true. Casual relief areas DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE DEFINED BOUNDARIES. A beehive zone, poison ivy, mud, bluebonnets and especially casual water may not have a defined boundary and, in the case of water, might be changing due to evaporation during the round. It's up to the player in many situations.



Incorrect. In order for any of those special conditions or casual relief areas to be in effect the disc must be within those areas. If it is not then the special condition or casual area is not in effect. This is pretty basic stuff. It is not up to the player whether they are within these areas or not, unless you count them controling their thrown disc and where it lands (within a casual area, OB, or a special conditions area).

The bluebonnet Q&A is unrelated to the situation you described Chuck. That rule is correct and it is a classic case of a special condition to protect an area or obstacle. It is completely within the rules and does not rely on the mixing of conflicting rules in order to function properly.

too bad we cant just read the rules and understand



Who's we?

Sorry, Nick. That's the crux of your misinterpretation of the rules. Casual relief areas do not have to be marked and are, by definition, the player's call because they are allowed to play from the lie OR take relief. Do you not agree that the player makes the choice? There is no choice to play the lie IN a marked OB area.

How far back they move from a bee hive is their choice without penalty up to 5m. I'm not going to force a player with severe poison ivy allergy to be within a few inches of it. I'll give them up to 5m. There is no fixed boundary required for casual relief and none is required for Special Conditions or the rule becomes unnecessary.

HOLY EFING MOLEY. That is a great argument.. And I am serious. If I threw a shot that would force me to eat an egg I'd say I am done. I have an allergy. Wait choose another sport. Or carry your anaphylaxis treatment.

That they are within the area designated for casual relief or special condition by the director is not a choice. They either are or are not within that casual relief area.

Now if the director stipulates a special condition that they can play it there or take greater relief, then they have a choice if permitted by the PDGA rules. This is a separate situation from being within the area to begin with. The choice is only available if they are within that area.

Of course taking relief from a casual relief area entails finding your disc for the line of play, unplayable lie, or any special condition rule within the rules of play, otherwise it is a lost disc (this unlike OB where you do not need to locate the disc). Outside of that the director will need approval from the PDGA Competition Director.

How far back they move from a bee hive is their choice without penalty up to 5m. I'm not going to force a player with severe poison ivy allergy to be within a few inches of it. I'll give them up to 5m. There is no fixed boundary required for casual relief and none is required for Special Conditions or the rule becomes unnecessary.



These are two disparate and incorrect rules interpretations.

1. Casual Relief Rules expressly permits for relief from harmful insects or animals. There is a choice for poison ivy or thorns; Unplayable Lie.

2.There is either a fixed boundary or a precise situation in which you ARE or ARE NOT. If you ARE NOT, then there is no choice for you.

These are not directly related issues.

They either are or are not within that casual relief area.



But it's not defined by a definitive line. The player makes the call especially when the edge of casual water is in higher grass and spongey ground. Every player has a tolerable level of water surging up around their feet as they move back. And in many cases, the casual water is in pockets with dry ridges snaking thru the general undefined area.

Show where the casual relief line has to be marked by the TD in the rules like the OB line? It can be but doesn't have to be. And when hazardous insects and plants are involved, the tolerance is much wider, especially when discovered during the round, with a blurry boundary that changes from person to person and group to group.

I never said there needs to be a line.

Water does have a line though, where the water line meets land; mud is not covered unless the director stipulates it as casual too. If you are not in the casual designated water, you do not have a choice under the casual relief rule.

But if the player's lie is not within the casual relief area they have only unplayable lie as an option if they don't want to play from that lie.

Looks like poison ivy now has to be specified by TD. However, I would allow relief anywhere on the course it's found.

Then you would be allowing players to ignore our rules of play or cheating. Which would be a courtesy violation on your part.

I would disagree, Poision Ivy, large Cactus plants, and other some other plants are just as dangerous as stinging insects to people that are alergic to them. The TD should be allowed wide lattitude where the safety of the players is concerned.

Then you would be allowing players to ignore our rules of play or cheating. Which would be a courtesy violation on your part.



803.05C allows the TD to specify any item that's not listed, such as poison ivy, for casual relief.

too bad we cant just read the rules and understand



Who's we?

we, the players. we, who are the pdga. judging from the number of threads asking questions about how to interpret the rules as they are written, we are a rather sizable percentage, perhaps even 100%, of the players. even you have questions about the rules, and sometimes even interpret them incorrectly. and you are smarter than the rest of us, and have a permanent mind-meld with the RC. how can you expect the rest of us to make sense of the rules with our inferior intellect and lacking the lifelong connections to the Pantheon of RC Gods?

I would disagree, Poision Ivy, large Cactus plants, and other some other plants are just as dangerous as stinging insects to people that are alergic to them. The TD should be allowed wide lattitude where the safety of the players is concerned.



Gary, I never said that the director could not specify casual relief for such things, only that a player may not grant such relief via existing rules; other than the existing rule "Unplayable Lie". Certainly a director may provide relief as needed on their course according to our rules or if needed via PDGA Competition DIrector approval.

But because a certain plant is dangerous due to allergies does not make it, under our rules of play, open for ad hoc relief. Only the director may provide such relief and it must be announced at the players meeting. Though I may be concerned that someone is sticking their leg in poison ivy, if the director didn't provide relief from it at the meeting, the player has the choice of using the unplayable lie rule and that is pretty much it. No other player or group of players or even officials may provide greater relief in the middle of a round. How could you ever hope for uniformity in rulings if that were the case?

Looks like poison ivy now has to be specified by TD. However, I would allow relief anywhere on the course it's found.



I'm now guessing that you meant "as a director of an event", right?

Players do not have the authority under our rules to grant greater relief than is provided within our rule books or at the players meeting.

I feel for your confusion Pat. It obviously vexes you very much.

A desire to have every detail layed out for your easy understanding is not a foreign one for most of us. The thing is, not everything is easy. Worthwhile things often involve effort. Understanding and playing by the rules of disc golf are one of those things.

Judging from your comments throughout diffferent rules discussions it seems likely that you are just venting because quite obviously the PDGA Rules Committee and PDGA Board of Directors didn't listen to your advice about 2006 rules revisions. I for one am glad they did not; due to your arguments lack of elegance and disregard for the further implications they necessarily entailed.

Truth is, they didn't fully listen to my advice either, nor did the PDGA Board of Directors even listen entirely to the PDGA Rules Committees full recommendations. The difference between the PDGA RC and you, as well as you and I, is that we did not fly off the handle and flame about it incessantly here in their public forum, casting inferred and stated insults at the PDGA RC and BOD like you have done and continue to do. We are generally pleased with the progress made and will work to see further improvements in the future. Fully understanding that progress is incremental no something bestowed whole from the gods.

I'm guessing you still have not found where in our rules directors are permitted to provide "lateral" relief for casual areas have you?

I'm just not going to fight with you anymore Pat. If you have something to discuss, as always, I am interested in hearing your thoughts and ideas, let's just try to avoid personal attacks, shall we?

Gary, I never said that the director could not specify casual relief for such things, only that a player may not grant such relief via existing rules; other than the existing rule "Unplayable Lie". Certainly a director may provide relief as needed on their course according to our rules or if needed via PDGA Competition DIrector approval.



Sorry Nick, I didn't read the question properly. If asked for a ruling, I would rule that a player can not add things to the list of casual obstacles. He can ask the TD prior to the event to allow relief (for all players) from things he knows may be on the course, or take an unsafe lie.


I'm guessing you still have not found where in our rules directors are permitted to provide "lateral" relief for casual areas have you?



No, I was looking for something to make me believe that greater must be interpretted as linear instead of greater in general.

I don't know the linear argument. But what I find are a variety of available relief options that could be made greater or expanded upon by the director. Making something up outside of those options is something that would need PDGA CD approval though, imo.

Personally, I think the unplayable lie rule covers nearly every "greater relief" need elegantly. Use what is provided in our rules or if absolutely necessary us unplayable lie. It covers all situations I can think of. Of course there is a penalty throw with it, but that's what you get for throwing in that restricted area anyway. Seems fair to me.

nick, you have not shown how "greater" does not include "lateral". i have shown how and why i believe it does. i have not attacked you personally either.

stating that the RC blew it is not an attack or an insult. it is an opinion. believe me, you have never seen me fly off the handle. you'll know it if it happens.

i dont consider any of this a fight. i am not the violent one here, nor the stressed.

besides, you are so goofy you seem to follow me around on every thread, responding to my posts ad nauseum, even though you have me on ignore. what kind of superior bridge-building, mature approach is that? you dont seem to want communication, you seem to want things to go your way, and you seem to hide from opinions that are not exactly like yours. please understand that is not a personal attack. it is a perception.

too bad we cant just read the rules and understand



Who's we?

we, the players. we, who are the pdga. judging from the number of threads asking questions about how to interpret the rules as they are written, we are a rather sizable percentage, perhaps even 100%, of the players. even you have questions about the rules, and sometimes even interpret them incorrectly. and you are smarter than the rest of us, and have a permanent mind-meld with the RC. how can you expect the rest of us to make sense of the rules with our inferior intellect and lacking the lifelong connections to the Pantheon of RC Gods?


I have agree with Pat on this one. If Pro's and Masters, and by this I mean people with age and/or experience, have this much trouble understanding and interpreting the rules, think about how juniors and ams must feel. Why does the rule book have interpretations and summaries? Why can't the rule be self explanatory and clear?
I respect the rules people, because they are doing the job no one else wants to do. But, If a rule has to be re-explained and interpreted, then why is it a rule in the first place? Say what you mean, and mean what you say. If you mean lateral, say lateral, if you mean better, say better.
People should not get in arguments about the rules. When a situation occurs, we should immediately be able to say, ok, here are you options, per the rules, in Black and White. Or, if there are no options, say, here is what you have to do, by rule.
If the rules makers are trying to emulate ball golf, they are doing a horrible job. In ball golf, the rules are clear, and no one gets in an arguments about them.

In ball golf, the rules are clear, and no one gets in an arguments about them.

its the rebel in us :D

Ball golf rules are more complicated than ours. Ball golf has lots of rules we have no equivalent for: You cannot ground your club in a sand trap or take a practice swing in a sand trap. You cannot switch balls unless your ball is damaged and you cease using it for the remainder of the round. You cannot lift your ball except, between holes, on the green to clean it, anytime you are not in a hazard to inspect it for damage, or whenever you are required not to play it where it lies. You cannot touch or move anything touching your ball before you strike it, except as little as may be necessary to identify your ball. You cannot improve a lie or build a stance. The list goes on.

My dad always knew the rules. He and his buddies often played 25 cents a hole or a dollar a hole [or ten cents a hole if Hal Tritz was playing.] Any kind of rules dispute always became a side bet.

That is true, but has nothing to do with what I said. The rules are more complicated, but they are very clear. There are things you CAN'T do in disc golf as well. However, the rules in ball golf are VERY CLEAR! It clearly defines what can and can't be done. Yes, there are alot of intricate little rules, that some people don't know. But if you had a rule book, you could look it up, and clearly see what can and can't be done. That is not the case in our sport.
I understand they are different sports, but in every other sport, the rules are very clear.
I like the idea of playing it where it lies, if you can't, take a stroke, and relief or throw from previous lie. Very clear.

Uh, are you sure about that?

Don't they have some supplement (tomb) that they use to clarify their rules?

Is this a problem with the rules, or the people reading the rules:

A. A disc shall be considered out-of-bounds only when it comes to rest and it is clearly and completely surrounded by the out-of-bounds area. A disc thrown in water shall be deemed to be at rest once it is floating or is moving only by the action of the water or the wind on the water. See section 803.03 F. The out-of-bounds line itself is considered out-of-bounds. In order to consider the disc as out-of-bounds, there must be reasonable evidence that the disc came to rest within the out-of-bounds area. In the absence of such evidence, the disc will be considered lost and the player will proceed according to rule 803.11B.

I still hear "you mean if my disc is touching water, I'm OB." Wow, we had better bash the RC and get them to clarify this rule, it's pretty confusing. ;)

I still hear "you mean if my disc is touching water, I'm OB." Wow, we had better bash the RC and get them to clarify this rule, it's pretty confusing. ;)


That rule is clear, those people are ignorant. It says, in black and white, completely surrounded.

But you still hear that the rule changed, this year if you're touching the line you're OB.

The other one is that above 2m is OB. This makes a difference because there are no options to where you play a disc suspended above 2m.

Yes, and some people will argue apparently anything. They twist and over-interpret sensible language, work themselves into a frenzy, and then complain that the rule writers screwed up. Well, someone is screwing up, but I'm not sure it is the rules committee.

Yes, and some people will argue apparently anything. They twist and over-interpret sensible language, work themselves into a frenzy, and then complain that the rule writers screwed up. Well, someone is screwing up, but I'm not sure it is the rules committee.



:D Some players will never be happy. Some will complain , just to complain !!! /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif Does that mean they were never any good to start with ? :eek: /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Interesting.

I looked up the casual relief rule after the first time I heard a TD announce that a large puddle of standing water that was normally treated as casual had been strung off as OB (at least I think that's when it was). This was maybe a year and a half ago or more. As a result of this, I have always been very careful to play casual relief no more than 5m back, directly on the line of play, unless greater distance were allowed or a special condition announced (which until recently I had not noticed does not appear to be technically "casual relief" anymore.) It wasn't until after the most recent rules changes that I noticed the peculiarity of the casual relief rule in that it doesn't ever say you are allowed to move back (within the prescribed limits) far enough to eliminate the casual obstacle. It just says the nearest lie, no closer to the hole, on the line of play, within 5 meters. Which in the case of casual relief would be...exactly where you were already.

That one tickled me, although it's pretty obvious what was meant. After all, if your lie is relocated to exactly where it already was, that doesn't relieve much, now, does it?

For my part, I hold with the interpretation of "greater" as being farther back, still on the line of play.

Then again we could have lots of fun with this one...perhaps the determination of the majority of the group or an official is not required if greater relief has been granted by the TD...

Why would bluebonnets warrant a relief of any kind?



WOW. Great thread. I have a question, though...what's the problem with bluebonnets? I've always heard everything's better with bluebonnet on it. :D

Because rumor has it that damaging them is illegal in Texas.

http://www.texastwisted.com/reports/bluebonnets/

I understand much better now, thanks Gary. I particularly liked this quote: "After all, when the honor of state dish was awarded to chili, just imagine how such a thing would have affected the cracker industry."

Texas IS like a whole other country, isn't it? :D

Yes, and some people will argue apparently anything. They twist and over-interpret sensible language, work themselves into a frenzy, and then complain that the rule writers screwed up. Well, someone is screwing up, but I'm not sure it is the rules committee.



I'd tend to agree with this assessment.

If there is a genuine concern about a specific rule, rather than creating panic, what should happen more often is folks contacting the PDGA RC and getting a direct answer to their question.

Rules discussions just to create hysteria are really harmful to the sport, as folks seem to take goofy extrapolations as real sometimes. True Disc Golf Rules Zealots don't get into that game, we want folks to know about, play by and call the rules. Discussion is only worthwhile if it promotes those three things.

got a question when an incorrect scorecard gets turned in does the whole card get penalized or the individual player.
first time td i had this happen on three cards.

Only the player gets penalized for an incorrect total score marked on the card 804.03G(2). The whole card gets penalized when the card is turned in late no matter whose fault it might be.

however, the tourney is over, so no penalty strokes can be assessed as per rule 804.03G(1)

I failed to call stance violations on fairway runups at the Memorial. A whole bunch of times. Two guys on my card were missing the mark by feet, not inches.

Worlds in Des Moines in 2004 taught me that it is not in my best interests to call rules violations during a tourney. However, I will always 2nd the call, every time, if you call it and I believe it is a correct call.

I failed to call stance violations on fairway runups at the Memorial. A whole bunch of times. Two guys on my card were missing the mark by feet, not inches.

Worlds in Des Moines in 2004 taught me that it is not in my best interests to call rules violations during a tourney. However, I will always 2nd the call, every time, if you call it and I believe it is a correct call.


Rhett, feel free to call me on any violation you see me perform, ever.

I failed to call stance violations on fairway runups at the Memorial. A whole bunch of times. Two guys on my card were missing the mark by feet, not inches.

Worlds in Des Moines in 2004 taught me that it is not in my best interests to call rules violations during a tourney. However, I will always 2nd the call, every time, if you call it and I believe it is a correct call.

On a course with lots of run-up second shots you can gain a serious advantage if you don't even have to try to hit your mark. In the women's divisions they deal with this issue more because throwing shorter they have a lot more holes with second throw run-ups. I tell one woman in particular, frequently, you just have to decide whether calling the rules is going to spoil the event for you worse than not calling them, and then go with that decision.

This was my most memorable rules call from 2004 Worlds. A guy stepped on his mini in a run up throw, lost his footing, threw a terrible throw. To be neighborly I said, "Foot fault." It was the only stance violation called yet during the round. He says, "What?!" I say, "Foot fault." He gets all huffy and says, "I just got a crappy throw and you're giving me a #$*&$! penalty besides?" I said, "Absolutely not. There is no penalty for a foot fault if no one seconds the call." So neither of the other two guys second the call.

But wait, there's more. On the next hole or so he asks one of the other guys what the penalty would have been. He's still mad at me. The other guy says, "Bruce, what's the penalty for a foot fault?" I say, "First violation in the round you rethrow with no penalty. Second violation you rethrow with a one throw penalty." The angry guy says, "Wait, you mean I could have rethrown that with no penalty?!" I say, "Absolutely." So now he's mad at everyone. I say, "Look, I did you a favor by calling it. They did you a favor by letting you decide whether to second it and spend your one free foot fault, or not. Its not our fault if you don't know the rules."

Bruce,

That wins post of the day! Man I'm still smilin'. THANKS!

I failed to call stance violations on fairway runups at the Memorial. A whole bunch of times. Two guys on my card were missing the mark by feet, not inches.

Worlds in Des Moines in 2004 taught me that it is not in my best interests to call rules violations during a tourney. However, I will always 2nd the call, every time, if you call it and I believe it is a correct call.



You can call me too Rhett. And after I give you a dirty look, whine under my breath and shank my next drive I'll still know I'm playing with an honest guy who cares more about the sport than my childish antics.

This is mildly amusing because someone once mentioned it hypothetically and then it actually happened today. For the second round the intermediate women started on Monster 14 Short at Hudson Mills. This hole is 650 feet long and for the first 300 feet there is neither a fairway no any landing zones. It is just randomly scattered clumps of russian olive bushes.

So one woman was not at the tee for tee off. The other women threw and then looked at the rule. Then they waited 30 seconds and played on. After they had all played three or four throws the late woman showed up. They told her, we checked the rules you have to take a seven. The scores on the hole were a five, a seven and a nine. So on the average, there was really no penalty at all! :D

That is more a failure of par standards than the rules of play.

And since par is up to the TD it is the TDs failure not to set the par higher than 3 for that hole.

A lot of supposed holes in our rules are actually the TD dropping the ball and not preparing his/her course of players properly.

Nick is right.

The TD should have listed the pars at realistic numbers, even if it is different per division/tee, just for this one rule if nothing else.

And then -- if the women that were on time at the start, made higher scores than the woman who was late left with 1 basket to go they'd get DNF'd . . . . odd how you can be late but you can't leave early. Doesn't seem fair.

For the second round the intermediate women started on Monster 14 Short at Hudson Mills.
...
They told her, we checked the rules you have to take a seven. The scores on the hole were a five, a seven and a nine. So on the average, there was really no penalty at all! :D



The tee sign on that hole (at least from the long) says it's a par-5. Did the card indicate par-3?

For the second round the intermediate women started on Monster 14 Short at Hudson Mills.
...
They told her, we checked the rules you have to take a seven. The scores on the hole were a five, a seven and a nine. So on the average, there was really no penalty at all! :D



The tee sign on that hole (at least from the long) says it's a par-5. Did the card indicate par-3?



I thought it was a par four from the short tee and a par five from the long tee. The rule is par + four, so she should have received an eight.


804.02 A.
If a player is not present to throw when it is his or her turn, the scorekeeper shall allow 30 seconds. If the player has not thrown after the 30 seconds has elapsed, a score of par plus four is to be entered for that hole. This procedure continues on any subsequent holes for which a player is absent. No holes shall be replayed. If a complete round is missed, or if a player does not finish a round, the player may, at the discretion of the director, be disqualified.

If you go look at the tournament results they are saying the course was par 72 for 24 holes. There weren't any par 2s out there, so 14 must have been a par 3.

If you go look at the tournament results they are saying the course was par 72 for 24 holes. There weren't any par 2s out there, so 14 must have been a par 3.

Hmm, that's twice in just a few weeks that this has come up:
Par at Circle R (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Board=Rules%20&%20Standards&Number=524730&Searchpage=0&Main=413702&Search=true&#Post524730)

First call of 2006: A falling putt. No one seconded it. Guy learned rule concerning falling putts.

Discussion: If a player sees a falling putt, but waits to see if it misses before making the call or seconding it; is that cheating under our rules of play? Is it using our rules to gain an "unfair" advantage?

The catch being that he would have called it if the guy had made it...

I think the falling putt rule shoudl be changed to state that a made putt must be re-thrown and that a missed putt is not.

Interesting concept, but the rule is an extension of the foot fault rule, and I like the consistency that no throws that involve a foot fault can be used. Regardless of the outcome.

If it were to be changed for one case, it should be changed for both.

"For stance violations that occur within the 10 meter putting circle, all made putts shall be re-thrown and all missed putts shall count as is."

Where was the recent discussion of the disc below the playing surface? I had one of those last weekend. The disc went way down a horizontal drain pipe, a really freaky throw. We had to fish it out with a stick.

Where was the recent discussion of the disc below the playing surface? I had one of those last weekend. The disc went way down a horizontal drain pipe, a really freaky throw. We had to fish it out with a stick.



Thought:
If the drain pipe were to be declared an OB playing surface, with the surface above it IB and the OB line designated as the Opening of the pipe, then with one stroke the player would get 1 meter relief from the edge of the opening of the drain pipe. The rule of verticality would even allow the player to take relief up on top of the drain pipe within 1 meter from the vertical OB plane. (Or a drop zone could be provided.)

If the drain pipe were declared a special condition casual area with a drop zone with no penalty, then the player could relocate to the drop zone with no penalty. (The director could also stipulate a penalty throw be added to their score also.)

If nothing is stipulated and the disc comes to rest in the pipe and it is impossible to take a legal stance then a player aware of our rules of play could say that the pipe is a large solid obstacle preventing them from taking a stance on the playing surface immediately behind the disc at rest (the legal lie) and the player�s lie may be relocated to the nearest lie which is no closer to the hole, is on the line of play, and is not more than five meters from the original lie, as agreed to by a majority of the group or an official. If that is not possible they can declare an unplayable lie and proceed under that rule.

Seems like the best options are provided if the TD carefully examines their course and provides �fairer� options for these rare but possible situations. In the end, if they do not do their homework the current rules still have their back.


<font color="blue"> 803.09 Out-of-Bounds

A. A disc shall be considered out-of-bounds only when it comes to rest and it is clearly and completely surrounded by the out-of-bounds area. A disc thrown in water shall be deemed to be at rest once it is floating or is moving only by the action of the water or the wind on the water. See section 803.03 F. The out-of-bounds line itself is considered out-of-bounds. In order to consider the disc as out-of-bounds, there must be reasonable evidence that the disc came to rest within the out-of-bounds area. In the absence of such evidence, the disc will be considered lost and the player will proceed according to rule 803.11B.

B. A player whose disc is considered out-of-bounds shall receive one penalty throw. The player may elect to play the next shot from:
(1) The previous lie as evidenced by the marker disc or, if the marker disc has been moved from an approximate lie, as agreed to by the majority of the group or an official; or (2) A lie that is up to one meter away from and perpendicular to the point where the disc last crossed into out-of-bounds, as determined by a majority of the group or an official. This holds true even if the direction takes the lie closer to the hole; or
(3) Within the designated Drop Zone, if provided. These options may be limited by the tournament director as a special condition (see 804.01).

C. The Rule of Verticality. The out-of-bounds line represents a vertical plane. Where a player�s lie is marked from a particular point within one meter of the out-of-bounds line pursuant to the rules, the one-meter relief may be taken from the particular point upward or downward along the vertical plane.

D. If the in-bounds status of a disc is uncertain, either a majority of the group or an official shall make the determination. If the thrower moves the disc before a determination has been made, the disc shall be considered out-of-bounds, and he or she shall proceed in accordance with 803.09 B counting all throws made prior to the determination of the in-bounds status of the original lie. If a player other than the thrower moves the disc before a determination has been made, the disc shall be considered in-bounds, and play for the thrower and the mover of the disc shall proceed under the rules of interference, 803.07 B and C. </font>

<font color="blue"> 804.01 Special Conditions

A. Rules governing special conditions that may exist on the course shall be clearly defined and disseminated to all players prior to the start of the tournament. All special conditions shall be covered in the players' meeting. Each player is responsible for adhering to all points covered in the players' meeting.

B. The drop zone may be utilized in special conditions. The director must announce prior to the tournament how it is to be used and if a penalty throw is to be assessed. If no penalty is announced prior to the tournament, none will be assessed for use of the drop zone in special conditions.

C. The two meter rule may be utilized in special conditions. The director must announce prior to the tournament how it is to be used and if a penalty throw is to be assessed. If no penalty is announced prior to the tournament, none will be assessed when a disc comes to rest two meters or higher above the playing surface. The director may declare the two meter rule to be in effect for the entire course, or just for individual obstacles.

D. No rules may be stipulated which conflict with the PDGA Rules of Play, unless approved by the Competition Director of the PDGA. </font>

<font color="blue"> 803.05 Obstacles and Relief

A. Obstacles to a Stance or Throwing Motion: Players must choose a stance which results in the least movement of any part of any obstacle except as allowed for casual obstacles by 803.05 C. No relief is granted from park equipment (such as signs, trash cans, picnic tables, etc.) as they are considered part of the course. Once a legal stance is taken, a player may not move an obstacle (or hold it back or bend it) in order to make room for a throwing motion. It is legal for a player�s throwing motion to make incidental movement of an obstacle.

B. Obstacles Between the Lie and Hole: A player may not move, alter, bend, break, or hold back any part of any obstacle, including casual obstacles, between the lie and the hole, with one exception: A player may move obstacles between the lie and the hole that became a factor during the round, such as spectators, players� equipment, open gates, or branches that fell during the round. Where it is not known if an obstacle has become a factor during a round, it shall not be moved. It is legal for a player�s throwing motion to make incidental movement of an obstacle.

C. Casual Obstacles: A player may obtain relief only from the following obstacles: casual water, loose leaves or debris, broken branches no longer connected to a tree, motor vehicles, harmful insects or animals, players� equipment, spectators, or any item or area specifically designated by the director before the round. Obstacles may not be moved if any part of the obstacle is between the lie and the hole. The type of relief a player may obtain is based on the location of the obstacle and is limited as follows:
(1) Casual obstacles between the lie and the hole: A player may move obstacles which became a factor during the round as described by 803.05 B.
(2) Casual obstacles to stance or throwing motion: The player must first attempt to remove the obstacle unless a portion of the obstacle is also between the lie and the hole. If it is impractical to move the obstacle, or if a portion of the obstacle is also between the lie and the hole, the player�s lie may be relocated to the nearest lie which is no closer to the hole, is on the line of play, and is not more than five meters from the original lie, as agreed to by a majority of the group or an official (unless greater casual relief is announced by the director). Alternatively, the player may declare an unplayable lie and proceed in accordance with 803.06.
(3) Casual obstacles to a run-up: The player may move the obstacle provided no part of the obstacle is between the lie and the hole. No other relief is provided.

D. In situations where it is unclear if an object may be moved or other relief obtained, it shall be determined by a majority of the group or an official.

E. A player shall receive one penalty throw, without a warning, for violation of an obstacle or relief rule.

F. A player who purposely damages anything on the course shall receive two penalty throws, without a warning, if observed by two or more players of the group or an official. The player may also be disqualified from the tournament, in accordance with section 804.05 A (2). </font>

<font color="blue"> 803.06 Unplayable Lie

A. A player may declare his or her lie to be an unplayable lie. The player is the sole judge as to whether the lie is unplayable. The unplayable lie may be relocated to a new lie that is: (1) No closer to the hole, on the line of play and within five meters of the unplayable lie; or (2) The previous lie as evidenced by the marker disc or, if the marker disc has been moved, from an approximate lie as agreed to by the majority of the group or an official. The original throw plus one penalty throw are counted in the player�s score.</font>

Since I did not play it where it came to rest, I took a stroke penalty for an unplayable lie and played behind it and above it on the playing surface. The drain pipe really was not the obstacle preventing me from taking a legal stance it was the three or four feet of ground on top of the drain pipe. The pipe went into an embankment and under a road, but the disc was not under the road. It was under the playing surface.

If I had asked the TD he would have said that inside the drain pipe was not a playing surface, and it was not more than two meters above the playing surface, so I could mark on the playing surface. But earlier in the round I had called Elliott on an o.b. that no one else in the group was aware of, so I figured this was the Universe getting even. When the Universe wants to get even, I just go with it, because fighting it only makes it worse.

Say the disc came to rest just inside the pipe, would you have placed a foot on the lie (within the pipe) and one outside the pipe no closer to the hole and played on?

Was it a playing surface?

In either case, it would be better if the TD recognized the situation there and provided a better, more fair option, don't you think?

I'm fine with taking a stroke for not playing it where I threw it. That's always fair in golf. I'm not blaming anyone but the guy who threw the disc.

Agreed. But once aware of the situation they'd do well to provide for it in a better way.

Agreed. But once aware of the situation they'd do well to provide for it in a better way.



Until Bruce told me about it later I wasn't even aware that a player could do manage to throw into that pipe even if they were trying! If we play that same basket placement next year, I will declare that inside the pipe is not the playing surface and that the player will mark on top of the ground without penalty--unless their disc has gone so far into the pipe as to be under the road. The road is OB so therefore when they mark above their disc would be OB. I will waste my time siting this incident at the player's meeting where no one pays attention and no one will ever throw in there again.

But it's not a waste of time. It's like carrying an umbrella to prevent needing one. If you plan for it and mention it, it won't happen, but if you don't mention it, someone will throw into it. :cool:

I wonder if it would be worth the trouble for our rule book to state that narrow passages not intended for foot travel, i.e. pipes, drains, ground hog holes, etc that run under the playing surface are all to be treated as if the disc came to rest above the playing surface and played accordingly?

In ball golf if your ball falls down a hole I'm guessing you have to take an unplayable lie and a stroke, right? So such a ruling as Jon and I propose would be a "kinder, gentler" rule for disc golf than is found in bg. Needless to say we don't have the same number of grounds keepers or paid ones at least to fill in those holes...

That would solve the disc below the playing problem.

Something would needed to be added in how one should mark the lie. For a covered pipe no change is really needed as it could be treated the same as a disc above the playing surface, but for a storm grate, ground hog hole, etc. it needs to be marked the same as a solid object.

Similar to a large solid object, with the Disc Above the Playing Surface Rule, you would mark your lie on the line of play in the first available place on the playing surface.

Such a rule is already available via Special Conditions Rule, but it involves the TD explaining it.

Something like:"If your disc comes to rest anywhere on the course within a hole in the ground not intended for foot travel, therefore not considered the "playing surface", you should treat it the same way you would a disc at rest above the playing surface and mark you lie directly above it on the playing surface. If the hole prevents this then mark your lie on the line of play at the first available spot on the playing surface."

Question:"What if you can get your foot down in there and play it from there?"

Answer:"If in normal travels around the course you would not take a natural step down into the hole, then you must treat it as this special condition and mark it up on the playing surface immediately behind the hole. The staff and I do not want to have to call for an ambulance for a dislocated knee."

There is no way of knowing all of the real world scenarios that might arise, so I'd like to see some TDs that have a major ground hog problem or have lots of drainage pipes near their prefered landing areas test this idea out and see what really happens.

Many folks "mis-read" and "mis-play" the "rule of verticality", thinking that it applies everywhere; it does not. It only applies in situations involving OB. This Below the Playing Surface Special Condition Rule provides similar relief but treats the situation more like a Disc Above the Playing Surface does (which is a good and seemingly natural extension or the rule).

So if there's a dry (or muddy) creek bed with a bridge over it, I could take my lie back up on the bank out of the creek bed because I would normally not walk thru it?

So if there's a dry (or muddy) creek bed with a bridge over it, I could take my lie back up on the bank out of the creek bed because I would normally not walk thru it?



No.

A. The creek would likely be OB or the would be casual relief.
B. It would have to be similar to the Disc Above the Playing Surface Rule, where you "couldn't take a stance immediatly behind were the disc came to rest.
C. The creek is not intended for foot travel, nor is it a hole in which you could not take a legal stance (if allowed), and I clarified such holes as such "that you would not take a natural step down into the hole" which is different from "normally not walk thru".

If you were a player at my event and had a specific situation I would clarify it specifically; such as "that creek is OB" or "No, that creek is not part of this special conditions".

Again, I don't know if this would work or not. It is an idea. As with anything only the cold reality of it will decide if it is tenable or not.

If the disc below the playing surface were to be addressed in the rules, the simplest way to address it would be to change 803.08 to "Disc Above or Below the Playing Surface," adding "above" and "below" where necessary to cover both situations. It would still be incumbent upon the TD to define those unusual areas which are or are not the playing surface, like the inside of the drain pipe or on top of a bridge.

this happened in the Ironwood Open. Jerry Gotcher threw his disc into a huge hole....perhaps a bear hole. lol Anyway he was probably 4 feet in the hole, and just played it above the front of the disc, on top of the hole. This is not the preferred way to get a hole-in-one.

Heard a rules story from usually reliable sources:

At this one event last month, a pro throws a drive that sticks over two meters in a tree in the schule. The two meter rule was in effect. The schule was a really nasty thicket. From there it would be pitch to the fairway for 3, upshot and putt for 5, best case scenario. The pro decided to re-tee throwing 3. A spectator said, "You can't do that," but none of the other pros knew what the rule was. The pro parked the basket and took a 4.

Declaring an unplayable lie and re-teeing was fine but he needed to include the 2M penalty in his calculations-- 3 throws + 2 penalty throws = 5.

Shame on the rest of his group for not knowing the rules and letting him get away with that.

--Mike

This is what happens when players (and TDs) refer to 2m and above as being out of bounds. When the 2m rule is in effect, it should not be explained that anything above 2m is out of bounds (which is what I am pretty sure I heard the TD say at my last tourney). If anything above 2m is out of bounds then a retee with +1 seems correct. If simply the 2m rule is in effect, the retee would have to be +1 for the 2m and +1 for unplayable lie.

That's a wording I try to argue every time I hear a TD say it.

I saw some lateral relief from cactus this past weekend as well.

I didn't call a practice throw penalty this past weekend. A guy on my card found a disc in the tall grass. Tournament central was across this big field from us, so he yells at the TD to get his attention and then throws it to him. This guy obviously hadn't played many tournaments since he kept leaving his disc in the basket after putting, so I told him that he wasn't allowed to throw a disc like that during a tourney and that if anyone called him on it it would be a 1 stroke penalty without any warning.

The TD started over to tell him the same thing, but stopped when saw I was already doing it. :)

This is what happens when players (and TDs) refer to 2m and above as being out of bounds. When the 2m rule is in effect, it should not be explained that anything above 2m is out of bounds (which is what I am pretty sure I heard the TD say at my last tourney). If anything above 2m is out of bounds then a retee with +1 seems correct. If simply the 2m rule is in effect, the retee would have to be +1 for the 2m and +1 for unplayable lie.



The solution could not be simpler: Never use the 2MR.

If there is heavy shule like that on your course, do the blood banks a favor and mark them OB or casual. Please.

Sorry to interupt the current discussion, but I had the following occur to me this weekend:

A player said that you could not retrieve an OB disc prior to throwing the next shot. They said this was a "new" rule for 2006. I pointed out that you have 30 seconds to retrieve the disc and that you may indeed throw the retrieved OB disc. I found nothing in the new rule book stating this change. Then several others agreed with this "new" rule saying they played in a Texas NT event where this was the practice. I think this is wrong on so many levels.


Can anyone verify if the NT in Texas did not allow players to retrieve OB shots before subsequent shots?


I can see how a TD would have the authority to prevent players from retrieving discs from a sensitive habitat or a protected area, or from a neighborhood yard where a player could be trespassing, but not for being one inch on the OB side of the line.

I thought that as soon as you have determined a disc is OB and where the lie will be marked, you are allowed to retrieve the disc (if possible within 30 seconds) and use it on a subsequent throw.

Thanks for your input.

At Texas states you were not allowed to get your disc out of the water due to someone in the past nearly dying from a disease or bacteria they got from going into the water at Bass. Had nothing to do with the PDGA rules it was a safety issue.

Yes, people were told that the water was nasty and not to go in. Some may have mistakenly interpreted that "advice" as a rule meaning that you couldn't retrieve your disc.

If that were truly the case, I might not have had anything left to throw that weekend. I walked right into Juarez and picked up my disc. Same with Santa Fe. Same with the road, the parking lot, the ditch, the lake. If it was actually a rule, I cheated my donkey off all weekend. :p

Sorry to interupt the current discussion, but I had the following occur to me this weekend:

A player said that you could not retrieve an OB disc prior to throwing the next shot. They said this was a "new" rule for 2006. I pointed out that you have 30 seconds to retrieve the disc and that you may indeed throw the retrieved OB disc. I found nothing in the new rule book stating this change. Then several others agreed with this "new" rule saying they played in a Texas NT event where this was the practice. I think this is wrong on so many levels.


Can anyone verify if the NT in Texas did not allow players to retrieve OB shots before subsequent shots?


I can see how a TD would have the authority to prevent players from retrieving discs from a sensitive habitat or a protected area, or from a neighborhood yard where a player could be trespassing, but not for being one inch on the OB side of the line.

I thought that as soon as you have determined a disc is OB and where the lie will be marked, you are allowed to retrieve the disc (if possible within 30 seconds) and use it on a subsequent throw.

Thanks for your input.



Suzette,

In the case of stance violations, you may not retrieve the originally thrown disc unless the stance violation occurred inside of 10m from the target (falling putt) (PDGA Rule 803.04H)

In other cases like OB, you can retrieve your disc as long as you can make your next throw in a timely fashion (within 30 seconds if it's your turn). I've typically told people at events to leave their disc in the OB and come back later if it's going to take a long time to retrieve it.

The Texas States thing with the bacteria may be another reason to stay out of the water, but I'd think that's a "retrieve at your own risk" sort of thing, but I don't know the whole story there. If there's harmful bacteria, it probably makes sense to stay out of there.

Chap

I was told this too at the TWC. I thought it a little odd. Just checked the rulebook this morning and there is no rule against retrieving discs from OB.

because the roped areas at TX States are official wetlands, you are not technically allowed to go in and retrieve. this helps protect the very fragile environment. retrieval was done after the round, at one time (or at least was supposed to be). the no retrieaval rule for the roped off wetlands was to honor the laws/guidelines for the park

because the roped areas at TX States are official wetlands, you are not technically allowed to go in and retrieve. this helps protect the very fragile environment. retrieval was done after the round, at one time (or at least was supposed to be). the no retrieaval rule for the roped off wetlands was to honor the laws/guidelines for the park



That makes total sense.

Chap

because the roped areas at TX States are official wetlands, you are not technically allowed to go in and retrieve. this helps protect the very fragile environment. retrieval was done after the round, at one time (or at least was supposed to be). the no retrieaval rule for the roped off wetlands was to honor the laws/guidelines for the park



That makes total sense.

Chap



We actually announce at our Round Lake course that a player that retrieves their disc from OB over the north fence will be DQ'd because it is against park rules to go over the fence and we're trying to keep the neighbors of the park happy. Since doing something against local laws during a tournament is DQable, we have announced our intention of applying that rule there. The course was re-routed to avoid OB over the North fence, but on really windy days anything can happen. Fortunately we have not had to enforce that rule.

At Texas states you were not allowed to get your disc out of the water due to someone in the past nearly dying from a disease or bacteria they got from going into the water at Bass. Had nothing to do with the PDGA rules it was a safety issue.



Similar rule at the Chernobyl DGC. If your disc goes near the reactor, it's OB and you cannot retrieve it for like 10,000 years.

At Texas states you were not allowed to get your disc out of the water due to someone in the past nearly dying from a disease or bacteria they got from going into the water at Bass. Had nothing to do with the PDGA rules it was a safety issue.

Similar rule at the Chernobyl DGC. If your disc goes near the reactor, it's OB and you cannot retrieve it for like 10,000 years.

I hate it when that happens.

At Texas states you were not allowed to get your disc out of the water due to someone in the past nearly dying from a disease or bacteria they got from going into the water at Bass. Had nothing to do with the PDGA rules it was a safety issue.

Similar rule at the Chernobyl DGC. If your disc goes near the reactor, it's OB and you cannot retrieve it for like 10,000 years.

I hate it when that happens.



If you stoked them, wouldn't that be a double penalty?

3 foot faults called. None seconded.

*Saw one two meter penalty (in effect), guy was 380 feet away from the pin and 80 feet short of the turn in the fairway. There were a lot of 2 foot wide OB canals running across fairways (a lot at the ridge of hills and out of sight of the tee and fairway), so landing in them was about the same thing as the 2 meter violation, totally random bad luck... there was no way a player could "plan" not to throw into either of them; not and play the game of disc golf at the same time that is...

This past weekend after our tournament, I heard of an odd situation related to rules...

#1 Player tees off and his disc lands across a street to the left. He thinks that over the street, on this hole, is OB. Before the group can get together and make the right determination (by looking on the course rules sheet) that across the street was IN bounds....he picks up his disc, marks it on the other side of the street, gives himself a penalty, and finishes the hole. Others in the group knew that this was wrong, but werent sure how to proceed. And, he had just 'penalized' himself for no reason, and couldnt be convinced otherwise (for some strange reason). Im not sure how to rule it if I had been called to do so. Do you use 803.09D, call it out, and then mark it where....? Or another rule?

Good one. Let�s read the rulebook together:

<font color="blue"> 801.04 Playing the Stipulated Course

A. It is the responsibility of the player to play the course correctly. Before play begins, players shall attend the players� meeting and ask about any special conditions that may exist on the course, including extra holes, alternate teeing areas, alternate hole placements, out-of-bounds areas, and mandatories.

B. Specific Types of Misplay and Penalty Procedures for Each:
(1) Wrong Tee: Teeing off from the wrong teeing area. If the misplay is discovered after the player�s throw from the incorrect teeing area, but before a subsequent throw, the player shall re-tee from the correct teeing area and treat the initial throw as a practice throw (one throw added to the player�s score). If the misplay is discovered after a subsequent throw, the player shall proceed to complete the hole and receive a two-throw penalty for the misplay.
(2) Misplayed Mandatory: Failing to attempt to navigate a mandatory route. If the misplay is discovered after a player�s throw has passed beyond the mandatory on the wrong side, but before a subsequent throw has been made, the player shall be assessed a one-throw penalty and play from the drop zone as stipulated in 803.12 B. If the misplay is discovered after a player�s throw has passed beyond the mandatory on the wrong side, and a subsequent throw has been made, the player shall finish the hole without playing from the drop zone, and receive a two-throw penalty for the misplay.
(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.
(4) Out-Of-Bounds Play: Playing an out-of-bounds disc as if it were in-bounds. If the misplay is discovered after the throw from out-of-bounds, but before a subsequent throw has been made, the player shall throw from the correct lie and treat the throw from out-of-bounds as a practice throw (one throw added to the player�s score). If the misplay is discovered after a subsequent throw, the player shall proceed to complete the hole and receive a two-throw penalty for the misplay.
(5) Non-Sequential Play: Skipping a hole or playing the holes in the wrong order. If the misplay is discovered after an initial throw has been made but before a subsequent throw has been made, the player shall re-tee from the correct teeing area and count the initial throw as a practice throw (one throw added to the player�s score). If the misplay is discovered after a subsequent throw has been made, the hole being played shall be completed. Immediately thereafter, the player shall proceed to play the course in its proper order from the point where the misplay began. Regardless of the number of holes skipped, or played in the wrong order, a total of two penalty throws shall be added to the player�s score for the misplay infraction. The score earned from any completed hole(s) shall stand. Any completed hole(s) shall not be replayed.

C. In instances where the misplay rules affect players within a group differently, the group shall remain together while a hole is being completed by some of the group to verify scoring and rules compliance.

D. In instances where a misplay is discovered after the pertinent hole or holes have been completed (holed out), the misplay shall not be replayed and the player shall receive a two-throw penalty for the misplay.

E. In instances where a misplay is discovered after the player has turned in his or her scorecard, the misplay shall not be replayed and the player shall receive a two-throw penalty for the misplay.

F. A player who deliberately misplays the course to gain competitive advantage has violated 804.05 A (3) and shall be penalized in accordance with this section.

803.03 Marking the Lie

A. After each throw, the thrown disc must be left where it came to rest until the lie is established by the placing of a marker. This can be done by placing a mini marker disc on the playing surface between the hole and the disc, directly in line with the hole, on the line of play, touching the thrown disc. A player may instead choose, without touching or repositioning the thrown disc, to use the thrown disc as the marker. The marker may not be moved until the throw is released. A marker inadvertently moved prior to the throw shall be returned to its correct location

B. A player is only required to mark the lie with a mini marker disc when repositioning the lie under the rules. This includes the following rules: out-of-bounds, disc above the playing surface, lost disc, unplayable lie, relocated for relief, interference, or repositioning the lie within one meter of the out-of-bounds line.

C. If the thrown disc comes to rest in-bounds but within one meter of an out-of-bounds line, the lie may be relocated to any point on a one-meter line that extends perpendicularly from the nearest point on the out-of-bounds line, and passes through the center of the thrown disc. This holds true even if the direction takes the lie closer to the hole. See the following sections for other considerations in marking a thrown disc:
(1) Relocated for relief - 803.05 C (2)
(2) Interference - 803.07 A, B
(3) Above the playing surface - 803.08 A
(4) Out-of-bounds - 803.09 B
(5) Lost - 803.11 B

D. The Rule of Verticality: The out-of-bounds line represents a vertical plane. Where a player�s lie is marked from a particular point within one meter of the out-of-bounds line pursuant to the rules, the one-meter relief may be taken from the particular point upward or downward along the vertical plane.

E. If the thrown disc breaks and comes to rest in more than one piece, the largest piece, as agreed to by a majority of the group or an official, is deemed to be the thrown disc.

F. A disc thrown in water shall be deemed to be at rest once it is floating or is moving only by the action of the water or the wind on the water.

G. A player shall receive a warning for the first violation of a marking rule if observed by two or more players of the group or an official. One penalty throw shall be assessed for each subsequent violation of any marking rule during the round if observed by two or more players of the group or an official.

803.09 Out-of-Bounds

A. A disc shall be considered out-of-bounds only when it comes to rest and it is clearly and completely surrounded by the out-of-bounds area. A disc thrown in water shall be deemed to be at rest once it is floating or is moving only by the action of the water or the wind on the water. See section 803.03 F. The out-of-bounds line itself is considered out-of-bounds. In order to consider the disc as out-of-bounds, there must be reasonable evidence that the disc came to rest within the out-of-bounds area. In the absence of such evidence, the disc will be considered lost and the player will proceed according to rule 803.11B.

B. A player whose disc is considered out-of-bounds shall receive one penalty throw. The player may elect to play the next shot from:
(1) The previous lie as evidenced by the marker disc or, if the marker disc has been moved from an approximate lie, as agreed to by the majority of the group or an official; or (2) A lie that is up to one meter away from and perpendicular to the point where the disc last crossed into out-of-bounds, as determined by a majority of the group or an official. This holds true even if the direction takes the lie closer to the hole; or
(3) Within the designated Drop Zone, if provided. These options may be limited by the tournament director as a special condition (see 804.01).

C. The Rule of Verticality. The out-of-bounds line represents a vertical plane. Where a player�s lie is marked from a particular point within one meter of the out-of-bounds line pursuant to the rules, the one-meter relief may be taken from the particular point upward or downward along the vertical plane.

D. If the in-bounds status of a disc is uncertain, either a majority of the group or an official shall make the determination. If the thrower moves the disc before a determination has been made, the disc shall be considered out-of-bounds, and he or she shall proceed in accordance with 803.09 B counting all throws made prior to the determination of the in-bounds status of the original lie. If a player other than the thrower moves the disc before a determination has been made, the disc shall be considered in-bounds, and play for the thrower and the mover of the disc shall proceed under the rules of interference, 803.07 B and C.
</font>


Find anything in there?

How many courtesy violations have you called on people for not taking score properly?

<font color="blue">804.03 Scoring

A.The player listed first on the scorecard(s) bears primary responsibility for picking up the group�s scorecard(s), although any player may deliver it (them) to the first player. Players in the group shall rotate the scorekeeping responsibility proportionally, unless a player or a scorekeeper volunteers to keep score more and this is acceptable to all members of the group.

B. After each hole is completed, the scorekeeper shall call out each player�s name. The called player shall answer with the score in a manner that is clear to all players of the group and the scorekeeper. The scorekeeper shall record that score and read it back, in a manner that is clear to all players of the group. If there is any disagreement about the score a player reports, the group must review the hole and attempt to arrive at the correct score. If the group cannot reach consensus on the player�s score, they shall consult 803.01 D.

C.The scorekeeper shall record the score for each player on each hole as the total number of throws, including penalty throws. The round total shall also be recorded as the total number of throws, including penalty throws. The use of anything else (including the lack of a score) represents an incorrect hole or total score and is subject to penalty as described in 804.03.G(2).

D. Warnings and penalty throws given to a player for rules infractions shall be noted on the scorecard.

E. At the end of the round, each player shall sign his or her scorecard indicating that he or she attests to the accuracy of the score on each hole and the total score. If all the players of the group agree that a hole score was recorded in error, the score may be changed prior to the scorecard being turned in. Players whose scorecards are turned in unsigned accept responsibility for the scores reported.

F. All players are responsible for returning their scorecards within 25 minutes after the completion of a round. Failure to do so shall result in the assessment of two penalty throws, without a warning, to each player listed on the late scorecard.

G. After the scorecard is turned in, the total score as recorded shall stand with no appeal, except for the following circumstances:
(1) Penalty throws may be assessed at whatever time the infraction is discovered until the director declares the tournament officially over or all awards have been distributed.
(2) If it is determined that the total score was incorrectly recorded, either by an error on a hole score or by an error in totaling the hole scores, including omission of the total score, the director shall add two penalty throws to the correct total score. These penalty throws are not added when the TD (or an official designated by the TD, such as a course director) corrects a player�s score for other infractions determined after this player had turned in an otherwise correct scorecard.
(3) Late Scorecard. See 804.03 F.

</font>

I'd say it doesn't matter, but I know for a fact that it caused a MAJOR situation that is still talked about at last years Pro Worlds.

I pledge here to call a courtesy violation on the next person that does not do scoring properly.

Let's see... not included in 801.04B...therefore 801.04D applies. Assuming 801.04F doesn't, there should be a two throw penatly. Since one of those throws on that hole was not an actual toss, I would have added one more throw to the total (actual number of tosses +2).

This is a good place for a provisional to be played so that no penalties would need to have been assessed.

This is a good place to apply a little common sense and look at the course rules sheet and see that you havent thrown OB :p But, a provisional would have avoided the penalties also.

The way it was put to me, the player was told after he moved his disc but before he made his next throw that he may have marked his lie incorrectly. The player insisted he was OB (without verifying) and made his throw. The group consulted the course rules sheet at the next tee and determined that he did not throw OB

So, heres the way I see it.

1) The player should have consulted the course rules sheet to avoid the misplay. That is a courtesy violation for not performing an action expected by the rules. 801.01C

2) Since he moved the disc before the determination of the correct lie could be made, 803.09D might be applied at this point, but its a misplay of "playing an in-bounds disc as if it were out-of-bounds" instead of the other way around. A provisional could have been taken since he would have been appealing the gorups interpretation.

3) If he actually finished the hole without consultation of the rules sheet or provisionals, 801.04D should apply.

If this indeed played out the way I understand it, he should have been given a 2 throw penalty per 801.04D added to his actual throws (since there was no 'OB' for the initial penalty to be assesed) and a courtesy warning per 801.01C. That the way you see it krupika?

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

Courtesy violations involving scorekeeping:

Actually, there was a scorekeeping incident. Player A records scores for a hole, but apprently does not repeat the called scores in a clear manner (or at all). Player B gets the cards a few holes later, sees that one of his scores is wrong. Now, I think that they agreed that the score was recorded wrong, but Player B wanted to give Player A a 2-throw penalty for scoring wrong! (that'll learn 'em!!.....hehe). They asked me about it, and I told them that Player A should have gotten only a courtesy warning for not repeating back the scores clearly. Hehe...and, these guys are best friends. However, I did admire Players B taking the tournament and the rules seriously....just maybe a little overboard with the penalty :D

How many courtesy violations have you called on people for not taking score properly? * * * I pledge here to call a courtesy violation on the next person that does not do scoring properly.

I forgot to mark scores for four consecutive holes Saturday. We had a $750 ace pool. On hole 8 tee whoever had the card gave it to me. Then Joe Kowalski got an ace. We whooped and hollered and I forgot I ever had the card. Funny thing was nobody noticed that nobody was keeping score.

I've been teaching my players that they have to record Arabic numerals. No + / - scorekeeping allowed. I just give those scorecards back and make them rewrite the card, but they are learning quickly.

1) The player should have consulted the course rules sheet to avoid the misplay. That is a courtesy violation for not performing an action expected by the rules. 801.01C



The rules don't state that the course rules sheet must be consulted. I wouldn't consider it a violation of the courtesy rules. Now consulting the sheet may have avoided the misplay, but the rules don't state that the rules need to be consulted while making a call. (Which is probably a good thing or someone would have to whip out the rule book for every throw :D ) In addition, 801.01C is pretty much a catch all for all the rules in the rule book that don't have specific penalties. There is already a +2 misplay penalty, so I would consider the +2 misplay penalty sufficient.

The +2 misplay would also be consistent with other similar infractions (e.g. playing from another player's lie).

I was thinking of the courtesy violation for moving the disc before the in-bounds status could be determined by the group (or official). In this situation, he was basically refusing the groups help (even though they were only trying to help him). And, even though it hurt him, he was not performing an action expected by the rules (that being, the group or an officials determination of the in-bounds status of the disc). Given that he was already penalized, I wouldnt call the courtesy...unless he was beligerant or overly rude about the whole thing. He has messed himself up enough