We had a heated discussion at our club about a double-mandatory on our course that I thought I would get the board's opinion on. Consider the following

First off, the hole is about 550' long with a fence line along the right side. The tee box is right against the fence. In an effort to keep players from throwing a big hyser over the road on the other side of the fence and to make the hole pretty tough, there is a double-mando about 150' straight that is about 12' wide. The right side of the mando is a telephone pole within about a foot of the fence/out of bounds line. Now that you have a hopefully reasonable picture in your mind of the hole, we can move on to the rule queston.

A player throws their disc from the tee pad and it crosses over the fence line 25' short of the double-mando, passes to the right of the double-mando and then hysers back across the fence line/out of bounds line and lands in bounds about 150' past the mando.

The question is, where does the player throw from?
1. The designated drop zone for the mando
2. The point at which the disc went out of bounds

I think it should be at the designated drop zone because a disc is not technically out of bounds until it comes to rest per 803.09A. Because the disc made it back in bounds, it should be treated as simply missing the mando.

Both our course pros say that the disc never missed the mando because it went out of bounds before it past the mando and as such was dead at that point.

I contend that this would only be the case if the disc did not return into play, if even then. A case could be made that the mando line extends on either end indefinitely and as long as the mando line is crossed and missed, the only rule that is enforced is the missing of the mando per 803.12E

So who is right, our course Pros or me with my embarassing PDGA #32183?

Mike
<><

Edit: He missed the mando, go to the drop zone.

Think of it this way: If the mando wasn't there and the player threw that same shot, he would be in bounds no question, because that's where the disc came to rest.

You can throw over any kind of OB that you want, as long as the disc comes back in bounds. Therefore, if his disc would be inbounds were the mando not in play, since the mando is in play, his shot missed the mando. He would play from the designated drop zone. Doesn't seem all that hard to me. Maybe there's some kind of local standard/not really a rule that your course Pros are used to playing?

If the disc had stayed out of bounds and not come back into play, than the player had not yet missed the mando. He would play from where his shot went OB and still be required to make the mando.

By the way, I'm assuming the drop zone is only for having missed the mando, not for OB purposes.

The Course pros are the ones who "missed the mando" question. Rule 803.12B answers the question. Mandos are the highest on the list of potential penalties to be determined followed by OB. Since a mando is determined to be made or missed during the flight of the disc, its status is first to be determined in terms of making or missing it. OB status is not determined until after a disc is at rest. So mando miss takes precedence. That would also be true if the disc had remained OB and not crossed back IB.

However, if the disc was popped in the air such that it crossed the "missed mando line" but floated down back on the tee side of the mando line, it would not have missed nor made the mando yet. If it stayed OB then the call would be OB and the player would have to throw from the tee or where it went OB and still have to make the mando on that next throw. If it stayed IB and short of the mando, it's just a weenie IB shot that still hasn't split the double mando yet.

If the disc had stayed out of bounds and not come back into play, than the player had not yet missed the mando. He would play from where his shot went OB and still be required to make the mando.



Nope. Missed mando line continues to cut thru OB territory.

If the disc had stayed out of bounds and not come back into play, than the player had not yet missed the mando. He would play from where his shot went OB and still be required to make the mando.



Nope. Missed mando line continues to cut thru OB territory.



Alright, sure. Makes no sense to me in that case. I suppose I could go back and read the thread that covers this. Maybe later...

Here's an interesting twist that might occur on a hole with a double mando. If a high stall shot flies over the missed mando line on the right side of the double and floats back across the missed mando line on the left side of the double, the mando wasn't missed yet according to the rules. Not sure why you would make that shot but I've seen many rec players throw a boomerang type shot unintentionally.

It still makes sense in that a disc is not OB until it comes to rest. The path it took to get there is only important in marking the lie for the next throw.

The disc either made, failed to make, or failed to reach the Mando while still in flight (or motion in the case of a roller). It can only be IB or OB after it comes to rest.

I understand the concept now and how it works as applied to our rules. I just find it conterintuitive to logic.

Sounds like Hole 1 Blue long in Tyler.

Check out the rules Q&A on missed mando, went OB for a breakdown of how it works. Your question is illustrated by shot A, route 2.

http://www.pdga.com/rules/qa.php

Sounds like Hole 1 Blue long in Tyler.

Check out the rules Q&A on missed mando, went OB for a breakdown of how it works. Your question is illustrated by shot A, route 2.

http://www.pdga.com/rules/qa.php



Nice find, Gary. Note that no matter whether the disc ends up in bounds or out-of-bounds, crossing the mandatory line and missing the mandatory takes precedence. The next shot is played from the drop zone with a one-throw penalty.

Right you are! #1 Blue long at Lindsey Park. Pretty tough hole.

Just to be clear on one of the other comments, if I throw a disc that misses a double-mando to the right and then the disc somehow comes back and lands on the tee-box side of the mando, I haven't missed the mando per 803.12b.

Thanks for the great input. I thought I had this one right.

Mike
<><

Here's an interesting twist that might occur on a hole with a double mando. If a high stall shot flies over the missed mando line on the right side of the double and floats back across the missed mando line on the left side of the double, the mando wasn't missed yet according to the rules. Not sure why you would make that shot but I've seen many rec players throw a boomerang type shot unintentionally.


I disagree because the disc crossed the wrong side of the right side mandy line and came to rest without crossing back. Since it's a double mandy, each of the two mandies has it's own missed mandy line, hence crossing back over another mandy line is not the same as crossing back over the mandy line that was missed.

BTW, a disc that turns over badly and cut-rolls could easily end up in this scenario, so it's not all that far-fetched of a thing to happen. :)

Here's an interesting twist that might occur on a hole with a double mando. If a high stall shot flies over the missed mando line on the right side of the double and floats back across the missed mando line on the left side of the double, the mando wasn't missed yet according to the rules. Not sure why you would make that shot but I've seen many rec players throw a boomerang type shot unintentionally.


I disagree because the disc crossed the wrong side of the right side mandy line and came to rest without crossing back. Since it's a double mandy, each of the two mandies has it's own missed mandy line, hence crossing back over another mandy line is not the same as crossing back over the mandy line that was missed.



803.12B: A throw is considered to have missed the mandatory if it passes the incorrect side of the mandatory line from the direction of the tee, and comes to rest lying completely beyond that line.

Rhett's problem comes into play when there are two mandos, not a double mando. The difference is that with two mandos, each mando has it's own mando line where a double mando has only one mando line.

At least as I recall. I have seen it written somewhere.

I believe the mando rule is the only one where the call is made while the disc is in flight and not where it lands, other than watching a disc flying along an OB line to determine the last point IB if the disc ends up OB. And, it's not consistent with makes and misses. Once your disc has passed over the good side of a mando line during flight/roll, you've made the mando no matter where the disc ends up even if it crosses back over the line by hitting a tree and bouncing back to the tee side. However, if your disc crosses the missed mando line and crosses back over it before coming to rest, it doesn't count as missing the mando.

Rhett's problem comes into play when there are two mandos, not a double mando. The difference is that with two mandos, each mando has it's own mando line where a double mando has only one mando line.

At least as I recall. I have seen it written somewhere.


A double mando has a single "made mando line" but two distinct "missed mando lines", one protruding out of each mando.

Not totally true. It's the default situation in the rulebook but the TD can mark each mando with its own lines. I've seen attempts where a hole had two individual mandos that were far enough apart that drawing a line in-between them wouldn't have made sense or be appropriate for the design.

I think I see Chuck's original point. There are now several new circumstances where anyone playing on my card, including myself, who clearly and obviously misses a mandatory will not be taking a stroke penalty.

Okay, I will admit I am partly at fault for this one. I am sorry I did not understand that the disc came back in bounds, but according to the rule Q&A the mandatory takes precidence, so if the disc went beyond the mandatory line then it does not matter if it came back in bounds or not, it should have been taken at the drop zone. I tried to explain that I thought it should be where it was OB, but it was not until after I said this that I was told it came back in bounds, sorry Mike I let you down. :(

With that said, could someone answer me why the OB rule is supersceded by the Mandatory rule? I know that one answer is that this is the easiest way to handle Manadatory's since most people put a mandatory to guard OB and there are times the players will throw OB intentionally and have a disc come back into bounds and then make the mandatory. However, if the intent is to protect the area, say a street or baseball field, would it not be more punitive to state the disc never came inbounds if it missed the mandatory? Just asking, as stated I see one reason why the rules committee ruled this way.

Strictly a timing thing. The first part of a mando call is made while the disc is in motion/flight and the OB call is never made until the disc stops.

I believe the mando rule is the only one where the call is made while the disc is in flight and not where it lands, other than watching a disc flying along an OB line to determine the last point IB if the disc ends up OB. And, it's not consistent with makes and misses. Once your disc has passed over the good side of a mando line during flight/roll, you've made the mando no matter where the disc ends up even if it crosses back over the line by hitting a tree and bouncing back to the tee side. However, if your disc crosses the missed mando line and crosses back over it before coming to rest, it doesn't count as missing the mando.



What if the disc crosses the "missed mando side" then crosses over the "made mando side" before coming to rest (all in the same shot). Does that count as not missing the mando as well?

Unfortunately, "Yes" the way the rule is written. It should say crossing back to the tee side of the missed mando line is not missing it. If you cross back over the made mando line or the other missed mando line on a double mando, as in Rhett's example, it should be considered missed.

Hi Chuck et al.,

I admit this is confusing to me, and I wish I had a diagram to look at.

"B. A throw is considered to have missed the mandatory if it passes the incorrect side of the mandatory line from the direction of the tee, and comes to rest lying completely beyond that line."

If a disc passes over the line on the wrong side(s) of the mando--AND--comes to rest beyond that line, then it is a missed mando. Right? I'm not sure whether anything else besides those two conditions matters.

So if the disc crosses the mando line on the wrong side(s), then somehow flies back over the correct side of the mando, and comes to rest before that line, it is still a missed mando, since only one of the two conditions was met.

I think that is what you are saying, but correct me if I am wrong. The last reference to Rhett's scenario makes me think that some people out there would consider a disk missing the mando but not resting beyond the mando line would consider that as "not missed" and hence play it where it lies. Which is wrong--I think. :D:confused: :o

Cheers,
Steve

I agree with what you are saying, but when you read the wording of the mandatory rule there is only one line mentioned. Per the rule as written, a disc that passses the wrong side of the mandy and then catches an edge and rolls and crosses the mandy line on the good side of the mandy and comes to rest on the tee pad side of that mandy line has not missed the mandy.

That is what the rule currently says, so if I encounter that in a tourney the thrower will not be penalized.

So if the disc crosses the mando line on the wrong side(s), then somehow flies back over the correct side of the mando, and comes to rest before that line, it is still a missed mando, since only one of the two conditions was met.



Both conditions must be met since they are connected with the word AND, so the mando was not missed (which is what doesn't make sense).

No, what doesn't make sense is that you can cross the mando on the good side, catch an edge and roll back to the teebox side of the mando line and will be rules as having made the mando even though you on the fairway short of it.

If you consider mandos as often being in place for safety reasons, this is a very bad idea.

I've got a hole that goes beside a playground, There is a mando tree protecting said playground. Once you get past the tree, the playground is out of play to the right. I attempt a big annie throw, mess it up and end up rolling. The curve just goes on the good side of the mando, but curls on around 50' right and 30' short of the mando tree. The playground is directly between me and the basket. I've successfully made the mando and am free to throw across the playground.

The requirement for coming to rest beyond the mando should exist for both making and missing the mando.

Maybe we need a new class of mando. Where if you fail to reach the mando off the tee, you have the option of throwing from the mando dropzone with penalty.

No, what doesn't make sense is that you can cross the mando on the good side, catch an edge and roll back to the teebox side of the mando line and will be rules as having made the mando even though you on the fairway short of it.

If you consider mandos as often being in place for safety reasons, this is a very bad idea.

I've got a hole that goes beside a playground, There is a mando tree protecting said playground. Once you get past the tree, the playground is out of play to the right. I attempt a big annie throw, mess it up and end up rolling. The curve just goes on the good side of the mando, but curls on around 50' right and 30' short of the mando tree. The playground is directly between me and the basket. I've successfully made the mando and am free to throw across the playground.

The requirement for coming to rest beyond the mando should exist for both making and missing the mando.

Maybe we need a new class of mando. Where if you fail to reach the mando off the tee, you have the option of throwing from the mando dropzone with penalty.



A mando isnt a one-time requirement. If you make a mando and then somehow end up back on the tee side of it, you still have to make that mando again to get to the pin.

A mando isnt a one-time requirement. If you make a mando and then somehow end up back on the tee side of it, you still have to make that mando again to get to the pin.




Nope. Not according to the rules unless you can show us where?

Ah, youre right. Didnt check the book before posting.... dumb

Here's an interesting one along the lines of Rhett's posts on cut rollers and mandos. Let's say a cut roller, intentional or otherwise, crosses the missed mando line and curls around the tree back across the "made mando" line but continues curling such that it then crosses the "made mando" line in the good direction and stays on the basket side. We now have a situation where the conditions of both making and missing the mando have now been met on the same shot. I say the mando has been made because that condition was met before both missed mando conditions were met during the throw.

Actually just crossing the line in the proper direction on the correct side is all that is required. As soon as that happens, the mando is made. It really doesn't matter which side of the mando line the disc comes to rest on.

That adds a little twist. The disc curls around bad side of the mando over to the good side, circles across the good side in the proper direction, then curls back to end up short of the mando line.

Did you make the mando, or do you still have to make the mando.

Made. Once made, then made for good.

Makes me think that, if possible, don't have park dept mow on the bad side of the mando or even install a barrier (railroad tie) on the missed side to slow down or stop rolling action on the missed side.

Thanks for the clarification. I knew I was getting something wrong. So I wrote:

"So if the disc crosses the mando line on the wrong side(s), then somehow flies back over the correct side of the mando, and comes to rest before that line, it is still a missed mando, since only one of the two conditions was met."

In fact, the way it is worded, the only way to miss the mando is to cross the missed mando line AND come at rest beyond it. Anything else is safe.

And as gnduke pointed out, that seems contrary to the spirit of the rule, since mandos are often in place to protect something (e.g., another tee or fairway, a playground, an area with delicate vegetation). It seems like flying over the missed mando line, then somehow rolling/bouncing back into the area before the line--and hence being safe--should be penalized.

Similarly, if you make the mando, but then the disc rolls back behind the mando line (closer to tee), then you should still have to make the mando to avoid throwing over the protected area.

Cheers,
Steve :)

In fact, the way it is worded, the only way to miss the mando is to cross the missed mando line AND come at rest beyond it. Anything else is safe.


The rule as written only references a "mandatory line". Calling out two separate lines, a "made mandy line" and a "missed mandy line", might actually be an easy fix to the rule.

Having consistent conditions for missing and making would be good too. You shouldn't be able to meet the requirements for both on the same throw.

If what I am reading is correct, then on this hole (http://www.swissdiscgolf.ch/4_Galerie/PrecisionDiscGolf/rppo14.html), which is hole #14 on this map (http://www.swissdiscgolf.ch/4_Galerie/PrecisionDiscGolf/poparcours.html), if a player missed the mando (the marked light pole - you must play left of it) by playing a disc too far to the right and the disc came down in bounds, but past the line of the mando, the player would go to the drop zone (next to the mando).

If the player missed the mando, but didn't cross the mando line, they would play the disc from where it went OB.

And, of course, if a player plays on the correct side of the mando and then goes OB, they simply play from the point it went OB.

Is all of this correct?

If the player missed the mando, but didn't cross the mando line, they would play the disc from where it went OB.




Assuming the missed mando line goes 90 degrees into the ballfield, a player who went OB and never crossed the missed mando line would have thrown a really short tee shot into the ballfield that didn't even get to the light pole.

If the player missed the mando, but didn't cross the mando line, they would play the disc from where it went OB.


Assuming the missed mando line goes 90 degrees into the ballfield, a player who went OB and never crossed the missed mando line would have thrown a really short tee shot into the ballfield that didn't even get to the light pole.



In theory, a player could throw a very low shot that hits the fence and bounces OB in such a way as to never cross the mando line. It's highly unlikely, but you never know!

The scenarios you posted above are correct for this hole according to the mando rule.