I was sure I read a rule change for foot stance to marker after throwing an up shot in a fairway, however I can not find it. :confused:

I don't think there has been a change. You can step past your mark once you have released the disc on a shot outside 10m from the basket.

The only change was a clarification of LOP by adding it to the definitions in section 800. The clarification was that the LOP had no width and extended through the center of the marker disc. This removed any doubt about the legitimacy of a stance behind one edge of a full sized disc being used as a marker.

What I thought I read had to do with landing behind the marker and a certain distance you could be beside it in an upshot on a fairway . It might have been an aberation, but I swear I read it in the new rule changes.

It's never OK to be "beside" the lie during the throw. You must be directly behind it.

true. i think we need a new rule saying that participants should call foot-fault violations :eek:

803.04 Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off
A. When the disc is released, a player must:
(1) Have at least one supporting point that is in contact with the playing surface on the line of play and within 30 centimeters directly behind the marker disc

Supporting Point: Any part of a player�s body that is in contact with the playing surface or some other object capable of providing support, at the time of release.

Line of Play: The imaginary line on the playing surface extending from the center of the target through the center of the marker disc and beyond. This line has no thickness; therefore one support point must be directly behind the center of the marker.

simple

803.04 Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off
A. When the disc is released, a player must:

(2) have no supporting point contact with the marker disc or any object closer to the hole than the rear edge of the marker disc; and,
(3) have all of his or her supporting points in-bounds.

All clear...

A. When the disc is released, a player must:
D. A player must choose the stance that will result in the least movement of any part of any obstacle that is a permanent or integral part of the course.

Play with integrity.

DA! Yes I know the rule. Did you read my post or are you just board to tears and have to repeat what already :confused: has been posted? :o

DA! Yes I know the rule. Did you read my post or are you just board to tears and have to repeat what already :confused: has been posted? :o



Jeez, Jeff, are you trying to make more friends??

It seems that you actually got a complete answer from frisbeeguy and you then attack his response??
:confused:

Hey Big Nagulla, dont you just love me. You must, it seems you search me out just to chat. Your concerned that I need more freinds, Wow! that is so sweet of you. :p I never knew you cared. God love ya!:confused: :D:cool:

What I find interesting in the rule is the definition of supporting point. I never noticed it before, so according to the rules I can have my hand behind the marker and it's fair. I'm trying to think of a time when my hand would be better than a foot or knee, maybe on a steep bank?? strandling the marker with one hand on the ground?? I'll be have to be on the look out for a time to use it now! :D

The rules mention a supporting point, but do not define that it must be anything in particular. A foot, head, hand, butt, knee; any of these can be used to support oneself upon the playing surface.

Another interesting issue about the supporting point is that it does not necessarilly have to be the ground (even if though the mini is on the ground. I have been in situations where my disc slid under a very large fallen tree trunk. The only way I could legally place my foot behind the mini was to place it on top of the tree trunk so that my right foot was about 3 ft off the ground while I kept my left down.

Then that was a foot fault. The trunk qualifies as a solid object (see 803.04E) where you can take a stance right behind the object even if it 20 feet behind the original mark.

Can the log be be considered a playing surface in which case he's ok. How large can a stick be before it is no longer the playing surface?

Then that was a foot fault. The trunk qualifies as a solid object (see 803.04E) where you can take a stance right behind the object even if it 20 feet behind the original mark.



How is that, Chuck?? Doesn't the rule of Verticality allow a foot placement such as this. As long as you are still within 30cm behind it shouldn't matter vertically.....

Ive never read/heard that I could go "20ft back" if I wanted... :confused:

Supporting Point: Any part of a player�s body that is in contact with the playing surface or some other object capable of providing support, at the time of release.



I think it is this statement in the rule quoted above that makes my 'tree stance' legal. The rule acknowledges that it may not be possible to contact the playing surface, so they allow any "other object capable of providing support" as an alternative. I think in my situation the tree was that other object that was capable of providing support.

What do you think Chuck? I value your opinions on this board more than anything else I read!!

I also see your point that it would have also been legal to play that particular lie behind the tree if I so chose. (That is, if I actually have a choice ;))

Hey Big Nagulla, dont you just love me. You must, it seems you search me out just to chat. Your concerned that I need more freinds, Wow! that is so sweet of you. :p I never knew you cared. God love ya!:confused: :D:cool:



Concerned about your friends...NEVER...not that many to be concerned about.. :eek:

Sequence: you asked a question...many people give part answer...1 individual gives COMPLETE answer...You attack him...
:confused:

THAT I care about... :p

It's obviously a disconnect in the actual writing versus common sense. If we imagine standing behind the marker with a stick under our foot and magically the stick diameter inflates. At a certain point, most would call the stick a solid object and would allow the player to stand behind it rather than on it. It's a case where the RC didn't want to get into defining exactly how big a solid object or stick had to be and left it to common sense. Depending on how far the stick is behind the marker, the player might still not have to stand on the stick and have their toe within 30cm behind the marker even with a 9" diameter log. My suspicion is that a 3 ft log would be considered a legit solid object under the rule.

How is that, Chuck?? Doesn't the rule of Verticality allow a foot placement such as this. As long as you are still within 30cm behind it shouldn't matter vertically.....

Ive never read/heard that I could go "20ft back" if I wanted...



Sounds like Mark Ellis pulling a fast one. Verticality is only a "rule" where it actually is stated as such for OB. Players seem to think it applies where it doesn't. Ellis persuaded his group that he could mark his lie on the bridge above his lie in an inbounds dry creek bed at Iowa Worlds using the "law of verticality." Nope.

The 20 ft would be if the solid object itself was 20 feet such as a building. You have to take your stance immediately behind the solid object whatever its size.

Thanks, that is very interesting. In my situation, it was actually a veteran pro who instucted me to take my stance as I did and it seemed a little strange at the time yet I trusted that it was the right thing to do.

If this situation is not what is being addressed by the "other supporting object" portion of the rule, then when would this come into play??? In other words, what other alternative to the playing surface would qualify for a player to place their 'supporting point' on?

Sounds like Mark Ellis pulling a fast one.



That is very hard to believe /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif (end sarcasm)

If you look at the Glossary definiton of Playing Surface, it's usually the ground unless the TD or an official allows something like the bridge or a log to be used. The veteran pro didn't have the authority to force you to play from the top of the log. However, if you got an official or the TD and asked, you might get permission. Or, you could probably force the issue and taken a shot as a provisional from on top of the log and from behind the log and let the TD sort it out later.

In the Ellis situation, if the TD indicated that the bridge was a playing suface, he still couldn't move the disc from the creek bed to the bridge if he was under it since the creek bed was the playing surface under his dsic per the definition of playing surface. The only shots to be played from the bridge would be those where the disc landed on the bridge.

Under the current construction of the wording, both approaches appear to be legal.

In a similar situation I remember, Carlton Howard took a stance on top of a 4" X 4" wooden fence post that had fallen on the ground. His lie was in front of the post. I asked him afterwards why he did that, and he said it was to comply with the "30 centimeters behind the marker" rule. I would have thought that the fence post qualified as a solid object and therefore relief, but he obviously considered it part of the playing surface or the course.

Note that the stance relief for a large solid obstacle is immediately behind the obstacle, whereas relief for casual obstacles can be up to 5 meters on the line of play.

How is that, Chuck?? Doesn't the rule of Verticality allow a foot placement such as this. As long as you are still within 30cm behind it shouldn't matter vertically.....

Ive never read/heard that I could go "20ft back" if I wanted...



Sounds like Mark Ellis pulling a fast one. Verticality is only a "rule" where it actually is stated as such for OB. Players seem to think it applies where it doesn't. Ellis persuaded his group that he could mark his lie on the bridge above his lie in an inbounds dry creek bed at Iowa Worlds using the "law of verticality." Nope.

<font color="red">A "TOP 5 Player" tried something similar in NorCal a few years ago BUT it wasnt a bridge, it was a disc "impaled" in a creek bed UNDER WATER. said player tried to use verticallity to state that part of his disc was dry because "vertically" above it was DRY
It didnt work by the way... </font>

The 20 ft would be if the solid object itself was 20 feet such as a building. You have to take your stance immediately behind the solid object whatever its size.

<font color="red">That is what I was looking for...."as far as necessary to get DIRECTLY behind the "Solid Object"
The way you wrote it , I though it was an "Arbitrary" distance that wasnt defined...that didnt make sense. :p </font>



Thanks.. :D

Okay, I take part of this back. The rules state that in the instance of a solid object interfering with stance, the player "shall" take a stance immediately behind the obstacle.

So, there is a requirement to do so. I had thought it was an option.

Another interesting issue about the supporting point is that it does not necessarilly have to be the ground



A supporting point cannot be the ground. By definition, it is a part of the player's body.

a veteran pro who instucted me to take my stance as I did and it seemed a little strange at the time yet I trusted that it was the right thing to do.



I can't tell you how many times I have heard of players getting burned in this situation. Best thing to do is to know the rules and carry them on the course. If there's any question, you can always play it both ways under the provisional rule and sort it out later.

Sometimes it is tougher when you are out with the guys playing 4 $5 than it is at a tournament. Most people know what they have to do in a tournament when there is a question on how to procede as far as provisionals and contacting the TD.

When there is a group of you playing casually for money, these tricky topics can become tougher to handle. It is virtually impossible to convince someone that has been playing for 15+ years that they are wrong about the rules!!!!! Frequently I find in this situation that seniority rules, and I guess I generally don't have a problem with that.

I find always carrying a rulebook in my bag works also...

What I find interesting in the rule is the definition of supporting point. I never noticed it before, so according to the rules I can have my hand behind the marker and it's fair. I'm trying to think of a time when my hand would be better than a foot or knee, maybe on a steep bank?? strandling the marker with one hand on the ground?? I'll be have to be on the look out for a time to use it now! :D


I've done this when I was under a thick shubbery with no good way out. I've reached in with my left hand and put a finger on the ground behind my disc, and then pitched out with forehand shot with my other hand. I've also pushed a foot in there and layed horizontally to the pin to get even more distance from the shubbery before throwing the little forehand pitch shot. It's tough to get any distance, but it's a lot better than trying to chop through the middle of the shrub.

I find always carrying a rulebook in my bag works also...



Never tee off without it :D

I find always carrying a rulebook in my bag works also...



I need more.... :p
I've handed all mine out to "newbies" :D

I think there's a new print run either underway or soon.

i hope this run is more stable than previous runs

: ) :

"Line of Play: The imaginary line on the playing surface extending from the center of the target through the center of the marker disc and beyond. This line has no thickness; therefore one support point must be directly behind the center of the marker. "

This last week end there was a question of the rule 803.04 where behind the marker you must stand and one of the players stated he could put his foot on the corner of the marker as long as it was directly behind it. So I quoted your response to me thinking the rule book actually says it and went to the rules and could not find your definition "Line of Play".

I have been told this definition before and thought it was in the rules. Please show me where it is or is this a definition that is in the new rule book? Mine says January 2006. :confused:

"Line of Play: The imaginary line on the playing surface extending from the center of the target through the center of the marker disc and beyond. This line has no thickness; therefore one support point must be directly behind the center of the marker. "

This last week end there was a question of the rule 803.04 where behind the marker you must stand and one of the players stated he could put his foot on the corner of the marker as long as it was directly behind it. So I quoted your response to me thinking the rule book actually says it and went to the rules and could not find your definition "Line of Play".

I have been told this definition before and thought it was in the rules. Please show me where it is or is this a definition that is in the new rule book? Mine says January 2006. :confused:



This is found under "Definitions" for "Line of Play" at the beginning of the rules...........

It is NOT stated under the ACTUAL statute..... :(

Line of Play: The imaginary line on the playing surface extending from the center of the target through the center of the marker disc and beyond. This line has no thickness; therefore one support point must be directly behind the center of the marker.

:D

800. Definitions

Line of Play: The imaginary line on the
playing surface extending from the center of
the target through the center of the marker
disc and beyond. This line has no thickness;
therefore one support point must be
directly behind the center of the marker.

I looked all over for this quote but didn't go to the beginning of the book. Thanks! it will be highlighted in my book for next time. This is an important definition as so many players when using their disc as a marker will stretch as far to their imaginary corner of the disc for a shot.

I looked all over for this quote but didn't go to the beginning of the book. Thanks! it will be highlighted in my book for next time. This is an important definition as so many players when using their disc as a marker will stretch as far to their imaginary corner of the disc for a shot.



You will find that there are ALOT of "answers" in the "Glossary" or "Definitions" that clear up certain "Rules" issues..

Why not just include those "clarifications" in the actual section/clause???
:confused:

803.04 Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off
A. When the disc is released, a player must:
(1) Have at least one supporting point that is in contact with the playing surface on the line of play and within 30 centimeters directly behind the marker disc

Supporting Point: Any part of a player�s body that is in contact with the playing surface or some other object capable of providing support, at the time of release.


My god, some one please tell us what part of what supporting point is the supporting point. Say it is your foot. Is it any part of the foot that can be behind the marker or is it the most forward point of the supporting point that needs to be behind the marker. I was just told it can be any part of my foot that can be behind the marker, like the ball of my foot. Any body got another answer? :confused:

Anything that's touching the playing surface on your body counts as a supporting point and ALL of them must be behind the marker. However, only the smallest part of one supporting point must be specifically on the line of play thru the center of the mini and within 30cm behind it. Technically, you could be wearing clown shoes and get a wider stance with just the tip of a clown shoe on the line of play behind the mini.

That does not really answer the question. If I am standing sideways to the marker and I have my stance to where the center of my foot is directly behind the marker, is that legal. No where does it say the point farthest forward, as I thought it said. The rule doesn't seem specific enough.:confused:

What's not clear? If any part of any of your supporting points are on the line of play upon release within 30cm behind the marker, you meet that condition. All other supporting points must be IB and no closer to the hole than the rear edge of the marker. That means it's possible for part of your shoe to be in front of the part of your supporting point on the line of play as long as it's still no closer to the hole than the rear edge of the marker. I've seen players have their heels properly behind the marker on the LOP but their toes are illegally beside the marker and claim that's legal.

So as long as I am 11 inches or less behind the line of play I can stand directly behind with my heal and my toe can be forward but not behind the marker? never heard that before.

So as long as I am 11 inches or less behind the line of play I can stand directly behind with my heal and my toe can be forward but not behind the marker? never heard that before.



Read the rule Jeff.

Like Chuck said in the post before ALL supporting points (Any part of your body that is touching the ground) MUST be IN BOUNDS and BEHIND your lie. ONLY 1 Supporting Point has to be on the "Line of Play"
:D

"However, only the smallest part of one supporting point must be specifically on the line of play thru the center of the mini and within 30cm behind it ."

What Im reading here is, if your foot is behind the line and directly behind marker, you can have your heal be the point and your toe as long as it is IB can be on the side of the marker. Therefore you dont have to use your toe as the point in this case as most people think including myself. I just had this argument today on the course and this was there point. I wished I could draw what Im saying.

Technically, you could be wearing clown shoes and get a wider stance with just the tip of a clown shoe on the line of play behind the mini.



I must sure be an idiot for not remembering to wear my clown shoes during tourneys. :p :p :p

Next time maybe I'll just tape a stick to the tip of my shoe, have it curve towards the ground, and claim it's to help allieve a very serious balancing disorder, where I have a tendency to fall forward, violently and without warning. :D

What Im reading here is, if your foot is behind the line and directly behind marker, you can have your heal be the point and your toe as long as it is IB can be on the side of the marker. Therefore you dont have to use your toe as the point in this case as most people think including myself.



Your toe can be in front of your heal on the LOP but all of it still has to be behind the rear edge of the mini as stated in part (2) of the rule. Your foot CANNOT be beside the mini even though some will argue that it can. Part (2) disallows that.

"However, only the smallest part of one supporting point must be specifically on the line of play thru the center of the mini and within 30cm behind it ."

What Im reading here is, if your foot is behind the line and directly behind marker, you can have your heal be the point and your toe as long as it is IB can be on the side of the marker. Therefore you dont have to use your toe as the point in this case as most people think including myself. I just had this argument today on the course and this was there point. I wished I could draw what Im saying.



the heel can be the support point behind the center of the mini and on the LOP rather than the toe, but then you have to be careful to keep your heel on the ground as you release the disc. most of us rise on the ball of the foot / toe and take the heel off the ground before releasing the disc so then the heel is no longer the support point unless a deliberate (and sometimes hindering) effort is made to keep the heel in contact with the ground until the disc is completely released ...

:DThis is what my determination has been, but there are many Am/Pro's who do not understand what is concidered a legal stance behind their mark. Thank you for your comment. Very clearly written to me.

a way i find helps it sink home when explaining it on the course is to use something someone here once said about jump putts: jump-putts are illegal; putt-jumps are legal (you must release the disc before jumping because if you jump first and then putt you won't have any support point centered behind the marker and on the LOP -- you'll instead be in mid-air and thus foot-faulting).

What I find interesting in the rule is the definition of supporting point. I never noticed it before, so according to the rules I can have my hand behind the marker and it's fair. I'm trying to think of a time when my hand would be better than a foot or knee, maybe on a steep bank?? strandling the marker with one hand on the ground?? I'll be have to be on the look out for a time to use it now! :D



I've had a lie on a steep hill before where I put a finger behind the disc and stood well away from it, myself...



Note that the stance relief for a large solid obstacle is immediately behind the obstacle, whereas relief for casual obstacles can be up to 5 meters on the line of play.



Actually, according to the casual relief rules under 803.05C2, "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)." The thing I've always found interesting about this is that since you don't HAVE to take casual relief (unless you literally cannot take a legal stance otherwise), the combination of the word "nearest" in that phrasing and the failure to mention "the nearest lie which eliminates the obstacle" within those limits...sort of seems to make casual relief rather unhelpful.



Technically, you could be wearing clown shoes and get a wider stance with just the tip of a clown shoe on the line of play behind the mini.



I must sure be an idiot for not remembering to wear my clown shoes during tourneys. :p :p :p

Next time maybe I'll just tape a stick to the tip of my shoe, have it curve towards the ground, and claim it's to help allieve a very serious balancing disorder, where I have a tendency to fall forward, violently and without warning. :D



I was thinking more along the lines of a snowshoe or ski that could be put on and off quickly, myself. For straddle putts, mostly. As far as I can tell the only ways this could be considered illegal as the rules are written would be as a "willful circumvention of the rules" (which I'd say was a sketchy argument at best) or, if you rocked up on the toe of the snowshoe or whatever as you putted, calling it an artificial extension of your throwing levers...which incidentally is the only reason I can come up with that you couldn't play on stilts, too, if you were that crazy.

The ski thing is intriguing. If someone were to call you on it because it just isn't fair, and if I were the official, I'd say that the ski was an artificial device assisting your throw.

Meanwhile, watch the hand when your opponent is straddle putting from his knees. A lot of players "foot fault" with their hand from that position.

The ski thing is intriguing. If someone were to call you on it because it just isn't fair, and if I were the official, I'd say that the ski was an artificial device assisting your throw.

Meanwhile, watch the hand when your opponent is straddle putting from his knees. A lot of players "foot fault" with their hand from that position.



Good point.

And yeah, I watch for that. I've actually called a falling putt on myself for toppling over onto my hand before, at least a few times. I think my brother-in-law may be the only person who's ever seconded it though.

The ski thing is intriguing. If someone were to call you on it because it just isn't fair, and if I were the official, I'd say that the ski was an artificial device assisting your throw.




I'd let it go. Think about how someone would have to twist their ankle in order to gain the sideways distance advantage. If anything, it's an artificial device hindering your throw.

Shoe - Foot - Artificial device? I have a unique situation as I'm an amputee. Is my artificial foot no longer legal? :eek: Will I have to begin to only throw from my knees? :eek: Are the rules discriminating against disabled players? :D I actually do run across an unusual situation where in a wide stradle putt, my 'toes' come off the ground due to my rigid 'foot'...and thus no longer in LOP. If the shot does not necessarily require a full stretch I'll nudge over a little to get my heal in LOP. Other times, when the inches count I ask the card if they okay the stance. Then on occasions, when the lie is very difficult, I'll just reach to get my 'foot' in LOP, slip the leg off, then thow from an easier location.

People with non-artificial legs also throw illegally when their toes come off the ground like that.

The legal stance is to dig your heel in on the hard stretch stance, regardless of your leg type. :)

Literally, you have to hop around on one leg without your artificial foot when you play sanctioned tournaments. ;) If the PDGA had thought of it, I'm sure they would have allowed ordinary prescribed prosthetic limbs, joints, etc. My eyeglasses assist me in making a throw. No one is saying the nearsighted can't correct their vision with lenses.

But if you carried a five foot long "special situation foot" to help you get out of bushes and such, and switched artificial feet for the throw, post pictures. I want to see that! :D

Then on occasions, when the lie is very difficult, I'll just reach to get my 'foot' in LOP, slip the leg off, then thow from an easier location.



Stop the press on the current rule book printing. Have to add the P Katt rule stating the supporting point must remain attached. :D

Hey, thanks for the pdf newsletters, P Katt! I am sharing them with some guys in Omaha who are interested in doing a similar type of publication.

Shoe - Foot - Artificial device? I have a unique situation as I'm an amputee. Is my artificial foot no longer legal? :eek: Will I have to begin to only throw from my knees? :eek: Are the rules discriminating against disabled players? :D I actually do run across an unusual situation where in a wide stradle putt, my 'toes' come off the ground due to my rigid 'foot'...and thus no longer in LOP. If the shot does not necessarily require a full stretch I'll nudge over a little to get my heal in LOP. Other times, when the inches count I ask the card if they okay the stance. Then on occasions, when the lie is very difficult, I'll just reach to get my 'foot' in LOP, slip the leg off, then thow from an easier location.



Actually, I'm pretty sure 802.04A would consider a prosthetic limb to be a "medical item." I sure as heck would. The ski trick, however...and arguably even moreso the clown shoe or snowshoe, which is less likely to hinder more than it helps...would qualify as an "artificial device that may assist in making a throw" and would not be excluded by any of the following clauses.

How about a new shoe designed by Bite that has a pump in it that lengthens the toe when needed? :D

Have stilts been addressed? I've gotten quite comfy working on stilts years ago. Is that any different than an extreme orthotic support?
You can change shoes during the round. If your caddy carries them for specific putt situations...

BOB

If you could get your psychiatrist to prescribe stilts as a remedy for low self-esteem they would have to be as legal as a prosthetic leg.

I have a double extension covered, as in an artifical leg and stilts. Needless to say, I have fun at Halloween parties. One year I was Extra Long D*ng Silver. I made a stilt for one leg, but for the one leg I had an extra long 'one' carved out...the girls loved me. Other years: Long John Silver, a devil (made a hoof), and a pogo stick (had foot peices that flipped out, went up to certain one's of the female persuation, "Want to ride?". Oh the fun.

The supporting point must be in contact when the disc is released. So if your right heel is the supporting point directly behind the mini and as you throw you pivot on the ball of your foot how do you determine if the pivot happens before or after release? and if the pivot happens before release I challenge anyone to make a legal shot and pivot when they follow through.

This is more about fairway drives than aproach shots basicly any shot that requires more than one step into the shot.

If you could get your psychiatrist to prescribe stilts as a remedy for low self-esteem they would have to be as legal as a prosthetic leg.



:eek: :D

I have seen Mr. P Katt remove his artificial leg, place it behind his mini and hop out from behind the pine tree his disc was stuck in. :D Yes, your honor, he did have a foot behind his mini.

A side note: Nice comeback by your Red Raiders, Patrick! It was fun to watch. TTU is one Texas school I can cheer for.

I usually try to gain a sympathy stroke or a joke stroke from my leg situation when playing out of town. /msgboard/images/graemlins/ooo.gif Thanks for the Red Raider support. It was a good week: largest comeback in bowl history in football and winningest coach in men's basketball history. Still, the best fans anywhere are from NU (after what I saw when we won up there especially). Happy New Year to all!