At a tournament over the weekend, the following scenario happened on my card both rounds on the same hole each round. The hole is a short, downhill shot with OB immediately behind the pin that is well marked. The OB area is a extremely soft bottom area with tall grass that is nearly impossible to walk in. Each round, a player shot long of the pin and into the OB, and there was little to no doubt that the disc ended up in the OB area. Well, there was disagreement on the card as to whether the disc was OB or lost (line of flight spot near the pin or re-tee), so in each instance, the player in question played out the hole both ways. The TD after the round ruled that the disc was infact lost and the re-tee option was the score the player was to get on the hole. I'd like to hear thoughts from the gallery on this one. Lost disc or 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.



If y'all saw the disc go in the water, it's OB. If the shot was blind downhill and there was literally nowhere else for the disc to be, then that seems like reasonable evidence to me that it's OB. If, however, the disc went off a the edge of a hill and it could be in a tree, deep in the schule, or in an OB pond, that would be a lost disc.

My opinion is OB. On top of that, if the player was arguing with me under the circumstances, I'd let him re-tee. OB being "directly behind the pin position" sounds like an easy 3 if the disc went OB, where a re-tee can go OB again for a 4. The TD should be educated on the pdga rules, and if the vote was three to one that the disc went OB, without the TD in direct sight of the shot then the conclusion should be to play the shot where the disc crossed the OB line. I'd feel different if the ruling on the hole was that an OB shot resulted in a difficult drop zone or re-tee that would insure 4, possible re-tee or second drop making a likely 5. With a disagreement that I think you have discribed the right action was taken, by playing the hole both ways then letting the TD decide the outcome

The main problem here is that it is a blind downhill hole, so there is not much precision in spotting the last place inbounds. Either a drop zone should be implemented or a spotter needs to be in place on that hole.

That and the rule that OB takes precedence over lost disc when both are true.

One thing you don't mention is:

Was the disc found?

If not, "lost disc" rule.........no matter if it was last seen going out of bounds.

If it was "found" out of bounds.......of course there is no LOST disc, and no re-tee.

Dlo #21847

One thing you don't mention is:

Was the disc found?

If not, "lost disc" rule.........no matter if it was last seen going out of bounds.

If it was "found" out of bounds.......of course there is no LOST disc, and no re-tee.

Dlo #21847



Quite possibly the most incorrect statement I have ever seen.

One thing you don't mention is:

Was the disc found?

If not, "lost disc" rule.........no matter if it was last seen going out of bounds.

If it was "found" out of bounds.......of course there is no LOST disc, and no re-tee.

Dlo #21847



100%.......wrong

ob

No drop-zone, no spotter, and the disc was not found in the OB area (kinda thought that was implied).

That's the type of thing that SHOULD be covered by the TD before the first round.

The players on the card should have sent a spotter down if there was a good chance that discs could go flying into an OB area.

I belielve the principle is that O.B. takes precedence over lost. The "reasonable evidence" is not clearly defined. I would accept "little or no doubt" that discs landing O.B., per the original post, as "reasonable evidence".

To me reasonable evidence is defined as such:

If under a decent investigation of the area IB (including trees, if applicable) the disc cannot be found and it was headed toward an OB area, then the disc is declared OB.



You don't have to identify the disc in the OB area, despite what most disc golfers (it seems) tend to believe. I love rule changes, if only because of the optimism of some here that golfers will be able to understand and interpret them clearly. (See "OB line is OB" misinterpretations at a course near you for another example.)

I hate to see people try to be overly punitive on a lost disc. My home course is ripe for this with tall weeds along side OB water. "If you can't find it in the tall weeds it must be lost." Dunder heads.

Don,

My understanding is that the OB superceded lost disc. As an example, if you throw into the water, it is OB, even though you may or may not retrieve the disc.

Thank you,

SEnk

To me reasonable evidence is defined as such:

If under a decent investigation of the area IB (including trees, if applicable) the disc cannot be found and it was headed toward an OB area, then the disc is declared OB.



You don't have to identify the disc in the OB area, despite what most disc golfers (it seems) tend to believe. I love rule changes, if only because of the optimism of some here that golfers will be able to understand and interpret them clearly. (See "OB line is OB" misinterpretations at a course near you for another example.)



Agreed. If there is "reasonable evidence" that the disc landed OUT OF BOUNDS then it is played with OB strokes from where it went out. You certainly cant expect people to identify their disc if it's 10 deep in a murky pond/lake.

It's a different story if the water is declared "casual water." I think that's where some people are getting confused. If a thrower throws into a casual water hazard then the disc must by found/identified before getting relief...otherwise it's lost. :D

if you can clearly see the basket....and clearly see that the disc went OB, but you can't find the disc, then it's still OB

just because you can't find it doesn't mean its lost....you saw it go OB...it's just not worth walking through a bunch of crap to get it right then

the only way i could see it being declared lost is if the OB line is blind, and u didn't see where the disc went

If a thrower throws into a casual water hazard then the disc must by found/identified before getting relief...otherwise it's lost.



Nope. The RC has indicated that the same logic applies for casual water as OB. You don't have to find the disc in casual water to get casual relief. However, if the group identifies the approximate spot in the marsh where the disc probably landed, then you might have a casual relief penalty if it takes more than 5m to move back from that point.

If a thrower throws into a casual water hazard then the disc must by found/identified before getting relief...otherwise it's lost.



Nope. The RC has indicated that the same logic applies for casual water as OB. You don't have to find the disc in casual water to get casual relief. However, if the group identifies the approximate spot in the marsh where the disc probably landed, then you might have a casual relief penalty if it takes more than 5m to move back from that point.



Thanks for clearing that up Chuck.

The disc is never lost grasshopper, it is only the unenlightened who cannot see.

Before enlightenment, haul discs, throw discs, make putts, then you will clearly see the disc that is not lost.

Thanks for clearing that up Chuck.



I just love it when you can use the phrase "up Chuck". :D

I'm just so sick of it that I go by Carlos when playing doubles... :D

To me reasonable evidence is defined as such:

If under a decent investigation of the area IB (including trees, if applicable) the disc cannot be found and it was headed toward an OB area, then the disc is declared OB.



You don't have to identify the disc in the OB area, despite what most disc golfers (it seems) tend to believe. I love rule changes, if only because of the optimism of some here that golfers will be able to understand and interpret them clearly. (See "OB line is OB" misinterpretations at a course near you for another example.)



Agreed. If there is "reasonable evidence" that the disc landed OUT OF BOUNDS then it is played with OB strokes from where it went out.
<font color="red"> not to nitpick :eek: :D, but that is 1 of 3 options....
where it went out, from last lie, or retee if tee-ing off, are the PLAYERS WHO THREW the discs choice...the group can help decide where the disc went out, BUT the player can choose where to thjrow the next shot from </font> You certainly cant expect people to identify their disc if it's 10 deep in a murky pond/lake.

It's a different story if the water is declared "casual water." I think that's where some people are getting confused. If a thrower throws into a casual water hazard then the disc must by found/identified before getting relief...otherwise it's lost. :D

..With a disagreement that I think you have discribed the right action was taken, by playing the hole both ways then letting the TD decide the outcome



That was the only thing we were certain we were right about.

...the only way i could see it being declared lost is if the OB line is blind, and u didn't see where the disc went



There was no spotter, and the thrower in one instance ran up and got a spot himself (nobody else in the group saw the shot end), and in the other instance, the guy never went out to take a look, and therefore did not know where it went in. No doubt to me both drives went OB, but also no way of giving either a definite spot.

_Quote:___________________________________________ ________
Don,
My understanding is that the OB superceded lost disc. As an example, if you throw into the water, it is OB, even though you may or may not retrieve the disc.

Thank you, SEnk
__________________________________________________ __







Thanks for clearing this up SEnk. I do agree this is a much better interpretation and understanding of the rule.

Playing the provisional was an excellent way to continue play, and give the benefit of the doubt to the thrower!

Dlo

<font color="red"> not to nitpick :eek: :D, but that is 1 of 3 options....
where it went out, from last lie, or retee if tee-ing off, are the PLAYERS WHO THREW the discs choice...</font>



Actually the three are: <ul type="square"> where it went out from last lie and drop zone [/list] Reteeing is not an option (see my post in the Crossing In Bounds thread).

<font color="red"> not to nitpick :eek: :D, but that is 1 of 3 options....
where it went out, from last lie, or retee if tee-ing off, are the PLAYERS WHO THREW the discs choice...</font>



Actually the three are: <ul type="square"> where it went out from last lie and drop zone [/list] Reteeing is not an option (see my post in the Crossing In Bounds thread).



if it goes ob when teeing off, you CAN MOST DEFINATELY REE-TEE which is what i said in response to john's post...in my insert in red(which you even quoted :p)

[QUOTE]
[QUOTE]


if it goes ob when teeing off, you CAN MOST DEFINATELY REE-TEE which is what i said in response to john's post...in my insert in red(which you even quoted :p)



which is exacly the same as last lie and therefore redundant.

if it goes ob when teeing off, you CAN MOST DEFINATELY REE-TEE which is what i said in response to john's post...in my insert in red(which you even quoted :p)

which is exacly the same as last lie and therefore redundant.



last lie being the tee pad "usually" gives you the entire tee pad, but according to the rules in theory you would need to pick a spot on the tee pad and put a mini down and then throw from behind the mini as indicated in the rule below....

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 (except as specified in 803.04 E); and,
(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.

which also says having points in bounds which can't happen if the tee pad is out of bounds...

previous lie was probably "supposed" to NOT include the tee pad in the rules OR was not joined into the clarification of the rules when redone......

someone needs to ask the rules committee for a ruling on this scenario so it at least can be in the q&amp;a part of the rules section....


keith

I must be missing something here, so I apologize in advance.

Where was the disc last seen? If it was last seen over an OB area (such as water, if so declared), then the disc that cannot be found is declared OB. If the disc was last seen IB, even though is may have been *obvious* that it was going OB, then the disc should be declared lost.

Is my "where last seen" phrase where I am going wrong?

"where last seen" was part of the old lost disc rule, 804.09.A is the applicable rule for determining the status now and the operative phrase is "reasonable evidence".

<font color="red"> not to nitpick :eek: :D, but that is 1 of 3 options....
where it went out, from last lie, or retee if tee-ing off, are the PLAYERS WHO THREW the discs choice...</font>



Actually the three are: <ul type="square"> where it went out from last lie and drop zone [/list] Reteeing is not an option (see my post in the Crossing In Bounds thread).



if it goes ob when teeing off, you CAN MOST DEFINATELY REE-TEE which is what i said in response to john's post...in my insert in red(which you even quoted :p)


I agree with Keith. If your "last lie" was a tee shot, then you get a tee shot per 803.02. It seems like a minor oversight of the latest rules re-write that this language does not match the lost disc language.

Mike, reteeing is an option. Read the definition of 'lie." Nothing precludes the tee from being your lie. Happens 18 times a round on lots of courses! :D

...the only way i could see it being declared lost is if the OB line is blind, and u didn't see where the disc went



There was no spotter, and the thrower in one instance ran up and got a spot himself (nobody else in the group saw the shot end), and in the other instance, the guy never went out to take a look, and therefore did not know where it went in. No doubt to me both drives went OB, but also no way of giving either a definite spot.



so i'm assuming that the OB line <font color="red"> IS </font> out of sight.....then the disc should be declared lost with a retee

According to the original post, there was little or no doubt that the disc ended up OB. That sounds like reasonable evidence, therefore the disc should be ruled OB in accordance with 804.09.A.

If there was some doubt that the disc was in the OB territory, then you could consider a lost disc ruling.

This is the most asinine rule in disc golf.
Lost disc = rethrow.
How can it mean anything else?
O.B. or not...it's lost-take a stroke &amp; rethrow. (and lose another one perhaps?)
Truly the worst rule change I've seen in the last 20 years.

Can a TD stipulate before the start of play that a throw that goes O.B. and is lost can be dropped as if it went O.B. &amp; was found?

This becomes a new question that must be answered at every players meeting. I've found very few players that have played this rule correctly this year.

Can a TD stipulate before the start of play that a throw that goes O.B. and is lost can be dropped as if it went O.B. &amp; was found?

To my understanding, that is the correct way it should be played, that a disk that goes OB takes precedence over the lost disk rule. Whether you find the disk or not (or where it is) is irrelevant to the setting next lie, as long as it is there is reasonable evidence/group agreement that the shot went OB.

SEnk

This is the most asinine rule in disc golf.
Lost disc = rethrow.
How can it mean anything else?
O.B. or not...it's lost-take a stroke &amp; rethrow. (and lose another one perhaps?)
Truly the worst rule change I've seen in the last 20 years.




Why is this asinine?

When a disc flies out over a lake, and everyone sees the splash, but you can't find the disc (because its in 10 feet of water with a cover of duckweed). You play it where it crossed into OB.

This isn't a change from the old way of playing. It just used to be that if the disc was lost and the group didn't agree that it was OB, you could play it from where it was last seen (or in the case of lost and OB, last seen in bounds).

They just changed the rule for lost and not OB to be more penal.

Although some hate the ball golf rule comparisons, we have 2 penalties for a disc that goes where it shouldn't:

OB: Stroke, Play from last in bounds, or last lie, or a drop zone.
Lost: Stroke, Play from last lie.

Ball golf has 4 variations:

OB: Stroke, Play from last lie
Lost: Stroke, Play from last lie
Hazard: Play it where it lies, no penalty, or stroke and Play within 1 club length of where it went in, or last lie, or drop zone, or keep where it went in on a line between you and the pin, and go as far back as you want.
Lateral Hazard: Same options as Hazard, plus you can also drop on the opposite side of the hazard from where it went in (used a lot for creeks running parallel to the fairway)

In ball golf, Hazards are what we mostly encounter as OB in disc golf. OB is reserved for potentially dangerous areas (i.e. ball leaving the course property.)

I think everyone agrees that if you see it go OB and can't find it (under water) then it is played OB, not lost.

But if you did not SEE it go OB, you cannot assume that it went OB because that's the direction it was headed, the disc should be played as lost.

Since one guy was smart enough to run up and watch his disc go OB, then it should be played OB.

Our Rules Q&amp;A contains a quote from the reasonable evidence discussion for ball golf:

"For example, if a water hazard is surrounded by a fairway on which a ball could hardly be lost, the existence of reasonable evidence that the ball is in the hazard would be more likely than if there was deep rough in the area."

So, if the water hazard has mowed edges like maybe at Fountain Hills, the evidence would be the disc is OB and not lost if it's obviously not visible on well mowed fairways. Unfortunately, the areas around many of our water hazards aren't as well maintained as is typical in ball golf.

This is the most asinine rule in disc golf.
Lost disc = rethrow.
How can it mean anything else?
O.B. or not...it's lost-take a stroke &amp; rethrow. (and lose another one perhaps?)



Excerpt from rule 803.09 A:

"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 <u>the absence of such evidence</u>, the disc will be considered lost...."

Hence, the interpretation that O.B. takes precedence over lost.

I'm going to piggyback a scenario on this topic:

On a hole with declared casual water a player tees off into the drink and everyone clearly sees where it entered.

Everyone proceeds down the fairway and when arriving at the spot where everyone saw the disc enter.... it's gone.

Since the players aren't messageboard nerds they haven't read the above posts and are confused as to how to proceed.

The thrower says "Hey dudes, i'm going to finish out from where we saw the disc enter the water and also go back to the teepad and throw a provisional".

Here are the results:
From the water: 3
Provisional including lost disc penalty: 5

here are my questions.
What is his score?
Is it legal to go back and throw a provisional after the confusion arose or do you need to immediately need to declare provisional?

I would think it would not only be legal, but wise to use take a provisional. One use of provisional is where there is a "disputed ruling"; I think confusion as to the rule is pretty close.

If they're smart enough to consider using a provisional, I would think they are smart enough to realize that the TD can't decide the call. Either the group agrees the disc DID enter the casual area with "reasonable evidence" it "should" be there such that 3 is the score. Or, if not sure, then 5. In this case, the TDs job would be to simply ask the question I just did.

I believe that everyone in the group agreed on WHERE the disc entered, but they weren't sure if he got to play it simply as casual relief (with no penalty) or Lost disc (penalty and retee)

So can you decide to take a provisional after walking down the fairway and discovering the above mentioned mess? If it was lost in tall grass instead of the casual water he would have to make his way back to the tee anyways correct?

You can always take a provisional if the group doesn't understand how to make the call. If lost with no evidence it really went in the casual water, then he needed to re-tee.

The answer lies in understanding your options for casual water. Playing the disc from where it was last seen is not a casual water option. You can:

(1) play it where it lies with no penalty. But i don't see how you can do that if you don't know where it lies.
(2) take free relief straight away from the basket from where it lies. [up to five meters unless the Td has allowed for greater relief] But i don't see how you can do that if you don't know where it lies.
(3) go to the drop zone if the TD has specified one and your group agrees the disc is in the casual water.

I don't see anything in the rules saying you have to find your disc or recover your disc before you can go to the drop zone if the group agrees you went into the casual water. But you do have to find your disc to take any relief from where it lies.

But you do have to find your disc to take any relief from where it lies.



Nope. Guess I'll have to continue posting this until it ends up in a Rules Q&amp;A. If there's enough evidence that the disc went into the casual water, it implies that the group saw approximately where it landed. You can play from that approximate position in the water without penalty or take relief up to 5m back from that approximate position with no penalty. That's in cases where no drop zone is provided.

But you do have to find your disc to take any relief from where it lies.



Nope. Guess I'll have to continue posting this until it ends up in a Rules Q&amp;A. If there's enough evidence that the disc went into the casual water, it implies that the group saw approximately where it landed. You can play from that approximate position in the water without penalty or take relief up to 5m back from that approximate position with no penalty. That's in cases where no drop zone is provided.



Although I disagree with this specific ruling, keep posting it until the Q&amp;A becomes available in book form as well.

It's silly to have rulings that aren't in the rulebook.

It's silly to have rulings that aren't in the rulebook.


There is no spoon.

So to recap:

A disc that disappears into casual water is different than a disc that disappears into tall grass even if your group is sure where it went in.

You can head back to the tee and take a provisional as long as you declare it (before your next shot?)

Yes. But if you know how to make the call in the first place, a provisional is unnecessary.

If they're smart enough to consider using a provisional, I would think they are smart enough to realize that the TD can't decide the call. Either the group agrees the disc DID enter the casual area with "reasonable evidence" it "should" be there such that 3 is the score. Or, if not sure, then 5. In this case, the TDs job would be to simply ask the question I just did.



I don't believe the rulebook mentions the "reasonable evidence" standard in connection with casual areas, just O.B. To my knowledge, it can be found only in a ruling of the rules committee. If true, this is something perhaps a TD could answer that the players may not know.

I'm a big advocate of provisional throws---there are always players who don't know the rules well, or worse, someone in the group who "knows" a rule incorrectly and insists on his ruling. I am occasionally both of these people. (Perhaps in my first paragraph here). On rare occasions, so is the TD. But, "when in doubt....provisionals" works for these folks, too..

6 pages later, and the only thing setteled was we were correct have the player in question throw the provisional and play the hole out both ways (which at the time was the only thing we were certain of).

"Reasonable eveidence" in the rulebooks provides that you can declare the disc OB, but this rule doesn't give you a spot where you went in either if nobody on the card couldnt get a spot from the tee. So if you know it's OB and have no spot, what do you have? IMO it's lost. Granted we should have sent a spotter down or the hole design might call for a drop zone, but thats all besdie the point when you get down there and you have no disc.

The player is already going to take a shot penalty. So, it's not really a big deal if the group doesn't mark the precise spot the disc was last IB. There are many holes where an OB line runs parallel to the flight path and the group misses marking the exact point a disc went completely OB by 50-100 feet, and everyone in the group watches the shot all the way. So, group decision is acceptable whether they saw the last IB point or not in terms of marking a lie after a disc goes OB.

I don't believe the rulebook mentions the "reasonable evidence" standard in connection with casual areas, just O.B. To my knowledge, it can be found only in a ruling of the rules committee. If true, this is something perhaps a TD could answer that the players may not know.



I agree that if the players are in doubt and no official is available the provisional is the way to go.

I realize that virtually nobody has all the rules Q&amp;A's memorized and that very, very few players have a copy of them in their tournament bags, I don't. I do feal, however, that TD's should have at least one copy available in a prominent location for players to peruse. Every oncourse official should have a rule book and copies Q&amp;A's with them. TD's and officials should continually work to educate disc golfers that the Q&amp;A's exist, can be downloaded and printed from the "rules" tab on this site, and are binding interpretations of the rules.

Also, As the # of Q&amp;A's grows, I think it'd be very beneficial to index them according to the rule(s) covered by a particular answer. RC MEMBERS: I WILL BE HAPPY TO DO THIS AND SEND MY RESULTS. PLEASE SEND ME A PM IF YOU'D LIKE IT DONE.

The issues covered in the Q &amp; A's should be incorporated into the rules during the revision process by creating language that covers the issues addressed therein. The concept of the Q &amp; A's being a printed supplement to the rules is eventually going to be problematic as the list grows.

The issues covered in the Q &amp; A's should be incorporated into the rules during the revision process by creating language that covers the issues addressed therein. The concept of the Q &amp; A's being a printed supplement to the rules is eventually going to be problematic as the list grows.



I agree. With each rules revision, many/most of the Q&amp;A's that have been incorporated into the actual rule book can be deleted from the Q&amp;A list.

The issues covered in the Q &amp; A's should be incorporated into the rules during the revision process by creating language that covers the issues addressed therein. The concept of the Q &amp; A's being a printed supplement to the rules is eventually going to be problematic as the list grows.



But what's interesting is that in ball golf, the rules are a fairly short text. The document "Decisions on the Rules of Golf" is far longer than the actual rules.

It addresses random questions like:

Q. A player, unable to find his ball, puts another ball into play. He then discovers that his original ball is in the hole. What is the ruling?

A. The score with the original ball counts. The play of the hole was completed when the player holed that ball.

Which, if you added every question into the rules, the document would get huge...