knowing the readers here haven't seen the hole, maybe I can explain things as correctly as possible:

at a recent tournament, we tee off from an area declared as OB and your disc must cross a stream/ditch and cross into the in bounds area - you can take the easy route, or try and cut off a larger chunk (protected by trees of course)

well, there are a few trees on both sides of the stream, meaning some are in bounds - the situation is a player tees off and plays the turnover shot, which in turn, hits a tree that is in bounds, and then deflects back into the OB area - if a player never cross into bounds, then they must go to the drop zone - unfortunately in this situation, due to the trees in the OB area, nobody could in the group could see what part of the tree the disc deflected off of...

so basically I have 2 separate questions:

1) if for instance the group could see that the disc indeed hits the trunk of the tree and then deflects OB, then the disc is OB and the player may take their lie where the disc went OB from the tree deflection (obviously because the disc had to have crossed in bounds in order to hit the tree in the first place) - is this a correct interpretation?

2) the 2nd question involves the initial situation - what if the tree that is in bounds has a few small limbs hanging out of bounds and the group can not see which part of the tree that the disc deflected off of - part of me says it is possible that the branches (although small, with small leaves) prevented the disc from crossing in bounds in the first place and therefore, the player must go to the drop zone - however, another part of me says a disc going full speed with enough deflection power to knock it back OB would have to have hit something more solid than a few leaves and small branches and thus would have crossed in bounds and either hit the trunk or a bigger part of the branch that is in bounds - the disc was certainly deflected and did not just get caught up by branches and drop straight down, which for obvious reasons, did not allow the group to come to a concrete conclusion - so what is the correct ruling on this situation (hopefully I explained it well enough)

the rules also say the benefit of the doubt goes to the thrower in group disputes, but to what extent does this really mean? (the rule book is not too clear in this regard) - if I use my arguments as per the 2nd example above, does that mean the thrower gets the benefit of the doubt in that situation? because nobody in the group could tell with absolute certainty?

In a case like that, IMO the TD should designate all shots that end up OB either be re-teed or go to the drop zone, whether or not the disc ever crossed inbounds. Sounds like way too difficult a call to have to make time after time.

We utilize the drop-zone regardless for the Players Cup on hole 6 due to a tall tree that is inbounds, but hangs well into the OB.

ditto

It sounds to me like this hole needs to be reworked. If you are indeed teeing off from OB you are already breaking the rules. You cannot make a throw from OB according to 803.04. A

The tee itself is IB and everything around it is OB.

It sounds to me like this hole needs to be reworked. If you are indeed teeing off from OB you are already breaking the rules. You cannot make a throw from OB according to 803.04. A


Wrong wrong wrong wrong.

Please read the title of section 803.04.

There is no requirement in the PDGA Rules of Play for the tee area to be inbounds.

The tee itself is IB and everything around it is OB.


You're wrong, too, Chuck. :) The tee area is not required to have IB status.

For clarification:

If the tee shot is required to carry a certain distance to reach inbounds and a player hits a tree before that and richochets back onto the tee itself, are they then shooting 2 or 3?

For clarification:

If the tee shot is required to carry a certain distance to reach inbounds and a player hits a tree before that and richochets back onto the tee itself, are they then shooting 2 or 3?


Based on the wording of your question, I say they would be shooting 3 (hopefully from a drop zone), unless the TD has specifically declared the tee-pad to be an "island of in-bounds" within the OB area. The TD is not required to do this as the tee-pad does not have to be IB.

There is a hole like this at a tournament I play every year. You are shooting from the "in bounds island tee" and are throwing down a paved road in the park. You MUST either cross grass on the right or left of the hole or land in the grass to NOT have to re-tee shooting 3. However, this is an open hole and it is easy to see if you crossed over grass or not.

In another event that I have played in the past, you must shoot over a finger of a lake. There is a tree that is in bounds, but the majority of the branches are hanging over the lake. The TD specifically declares that if you hit the tree and fall in the lake, you are OB and move to the drop zone. You must SEE the disc hit the ground on the other side of the lake and roll into the water in order to shoot from the other side of the lake for the possible circle 3.

In a situation where that distinction is not easily made from the tee, the TD should designate a drop zone to speed things up.

It might not seem obvious, but if the TD designates an "in bounds island tee" within the OB area and you happen to hit something and bounce back and land on the tee fair, you must mark your disc and adhere to the stance rules. (On the LOP and within 30cm, no supporting point contact beyond the mark at release.) This is only true if the teebox is inbounds and you land on it after teeing off because you are no longer taking a tee shot even though you are throwing from the tee. :)

You're wrong, too, Chuck. The tee area is not required to have IB status.



What are you talking about? I believe 803.04A(3) requires the tee to be IB.

What are you talking about? I believe 803.04A(3) requires the tee to be IB.


803.04 has nothing to do with teeing off, hence the name of the section. :D 803.02 is the rule to look at, and it doesn't say anything about OB/IB.

The teeing area definition could use an extra sentence to address this question. I'd be in favor of having the tee itself always be IB whether it's immediately surrounded by IB or OB.

It doesn't say anything about IB/OB other than all supporting points must be on the tee pad at the time of release just like all supporting points must be IB when throwing from other lies. By this deduction, the teeing area is IB. If a player standing at the back of a cement tee drops the disc towards the basket and it stays on the pad, does it count as the player's actual throw? ...is it OB? ...a practice throw if it goes any distance, even less than 2m? ...not a throw? What's the player's next lie and score at that point?

It doesn't say anything about IB/OB other than all supporting points must be on the tee pad at the time of release just like all supporting points must be IB when throwing from other lies. By this deduction, the teeing area is IB.


I completely disagree and I think your deduction is fallacious.

803.02 defines the tee area without reference to OB. It simply states that all supporting points must be within the confines of the defined teeing area at the time of release, and that at least one supporting point must be in contact with the teeing area at the time of release.

803.04 deals with stance after the tee shot, and it is here later in the rules that the requirement to have all supporting points be inbounds is put forth.

The tee shot and the "shot subsequent to teeing off" are completely different shots per the rules. The tee shot allows you more leeway on your footing (be within an area) whereas the subsequent shot restricts your footing to on the LOP within 30cm and inbounds.

The tee box is not necessarily inbounds, and the rules do not require it to be.

They don't define shots from the tee pad as IB in 803.04 because the tee pad is IB. Point at any reference in the rules that might hint at a tee pad being OB. It would be inconsistent with the other rules pointed out. Answer the other part of my post and you'll see the problem with the tee being OB. Would it be true that a location on a playing surface can only have one status which is either IB or OB? Or is it your claim that tee pads have a third status which is neither IB nor OB?

Would it be true that a location on a playing surface can only have one status which is either IB or OB? Or is it your claim that tee pads have a third status which is neither IB nor OB?



This could be the case or it could be the case that teeboxes are always IB. The problem is that the rules don't spell out whether the teebox is a special instance of IB or a unique third category.

Q: If a disc ends up on a teebox for another hole that's surrounded by OB, is it IB?

As you cannot throw from an out of bounds area, I would assume that the tee box has to be in bounds.

Would it be true that a location on a playing surface can only have one status which is either IB or OB? Or is it your claim that tee pads have a third status which is neither IB nor OB?


Nobody said anything about a "not IB nor OB" stauts, but nice misdirection play.

If it's not excluded by the rules, then it's okay. There is absolutely nothing in the rules that disallows an OB teepad, therefore an OB teepad is legal.

Again, there is nothing in the rules that states that the tee area is or must be inbounds. 803.02 covers Teeing off and says nothing about OB or IB. 803.04 covers "Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off" and is the only place that says all your supporting points must be in bounds at the time of release.

One more time: the only place in the rules that states that all of your supporting points must be in bounds at the time of release is in section 803.04 which deals only and specifically with shots that are not tee shots.

If it's just semantics that you're arguing, then it's been a waste of time. There's no need for the RC to specify that the tee is IB because OB would violate the "off the tee pad" throw rule. In addition, the TD would have to specify which tee pads are IB or OB on every course for PDGA play since the tee pad is an optional place to play your next throw if tee shot lands OB, is lost or is declared unplayable. That alone makes the tee pad IB by default. Or is it your contention that the tee pad magically becomes IB after the tee shot?

If you have a point where it would make sense for a TD to specify that a tee is OB, then say it. You still haven't answered my question posed above about a forward drop/throw on the tee pad that stays on the tee pad.

Now you're getting demeaning. Add you're continuing to thrwo in more "stuff" to confuse the issue.

It's really quite simple: each and every friggin' tee-pad does not have to be identified as IB or OB by the TD. Sheesh. You have your course OB defined however you define it, by roads or streams or rope or sidewalks or whatever. The tee area can be wherever you want it!

As the original poster stated, there is a hole where he plays where the tee area is in the middle of an OB path and your shot has to clear the grass to make it in bounds. THE RULES DO NOT RPOHIBIT THAT BECAUSE THE TEE AREA DOES NOT HAVE TO BE IN BOUNDS!!!!

Most tee pads are inbounds. That is great. Some tee pads are OB and you have to throw a certain distance to get to IB. That is also great. The tee-pad doesn't have to be "magic" because there is nothing in the rules that states that the tee pad has to be inbounds. You are allowed to tee off from out of bounds.

That last part is the part you are having trouble with.

I never said that tee areas that are on fair ground should be specified as OB, so there is no reason for me to try and give an answer to a question that you made up and tried to assign to me. I never stated that. I said that per the rules the tee area does not have to be in bounds.

There is no need for any fancy special cases here. Just read the two rules in question. If you insist on claiming that tee area must be declared in bounds by the TD, then please show me the rule.

If you have a point where it would make sense for a TD to specify that a tee is OB, then say it. You still haven't answered my question posed above about a forward drop/throw on the tee pad that stays on the tee pad.


I have never claimed that a tee area that is in-bounds should be declared OB. I have no idea where you made that up from.

As for dropping the disc and having it come to rest within the tee area, I would rule a drop a drop and not a throw. Spirit of the game and all that, ya know? Thrower picks up the drop and tees off as usual.

Rhett: Not trying to be a pain, just a question, so you're saying that a tee surrounded by OB that a disc lands on (whether thrown from that tee or any other part of the course) is OB?

Rhett: Not trying to be a pain, just a question, so you're saying that a tee surrounded by OB that a disc lands on (whether thrown from that tee or any other part of the course) is OB?


Yes.

I am saying that per the PDGA Rules of Play a tee can be located in OB territory. Any thrown disc that landed on such a tee would be OB. It's not really that big of a deal.

Here are the rules in question:

803.02 Teeing Off
A. Play shall begin on each hole with the player throwing from within the teeing area. When the disc is released, at least one of the player�s supporting points must be in contact with the surface of the teeing area, and all the player�s supporting points must be within the teeing area. If a tee pad is provided, all supporting points must be on the pad at the time of release, unless the director has specified a modified teeing area for safety reasons. If no tee pad is provided, all supporting points at the time of release must be within an area encompassed by the front line of the teeing area and two lines perpendicular to and extending back three meters from each end of the front line. The front line of the teeing area includes the outside edges of the two tee markers. Running up from behind the teeing area before the disc is released is permitted. Following through in front of the teeing area is permitted provided there is no supporting point contact outside the teeing area when the disc is released

B. Any supporting point contact outside the teeing area at the time of release constitutes a stance violation and shall be handled in accordance with sections 803.04 F, G and H.



and


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.

B. Stepping past the marker disc is permitted after the disc is released, except when putting within 10 meters.

C. Any throw from within 10 meters or less, as measured from the rear of the marker disc to the base of the hole, is considered a putt. A follow-through after a putt that causes the thrower to make any supporting point contact closer to the hole than the rear edge of the marker disc constitutes a falling putt and is considered a stance violation . The player must demonstrate full control of balance before advancing toward the hole.

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.

E. If a large solid obstacle prevents a player from taking a legal stance within 30 centimeters directly behind the marker disc, the player shall take his or her stance immediately behind that obstacle on the line of play. The player must comply with all the provisions of 803.04 A other than being within 30 centimeters directly behind the marker disc.

F. A stance violation must be clearly called within three seconds after the infraction to be valid. The call may be made by any member of the group or an official. When the call is made by a member of the group, it must subsequently be confirmed by another member of the group. A player shall receive a warning for the first violation of a stance rule in the round. Subsequent violations of a stance rule in the same round shall incur a one-throw penalty.

G. Any throw that involves a validly called and seconded stance violation may not be used by the thrower. Re-throws must be taken from the original lie, prior to subsequent play by others in the group.

H. The player may not retrieve the originally thrown disc prior to the re-throw, except in the case of a putt from within 10 meters. Where a disc is retrieved in violation of this rule, a one throw penalty shall be imposed without a warning.

Rhett: Not trying to be a pain, just a question, so you're saying that a tee surrounded by OB that a disc lands on (whether thrown from that tee or any other part of the course) is OB?


Yes.

I am saying that per the PDGA Rules of Play a tee can be located in OB territory. Any thrown disc that landed on such a tee would be OB. It's not really that big of a deal.




what if the tee pad was a rubber fly pad and after you teed off from ob then i rolled it up and placed it in an in bounds part of the course and THEN your disc landed on it??

is it ib or ob cuz it was ob as a teepad before?

i say just put hay bales around all the tees that you want to be ob tee pads and then declare:
IF IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR HAROLD AND THE USDGC IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR MY C-TIER!!

then walk away slowly

keith

I'll go along with Rhett. The Tee area should take the status of the area it is surrounded by.

If you look closely at the OB rules, a thrown disc or mark is required for an OB call. At the Tee box prior to a thrown disc, there is no OB status, only the requirement that the teeing area be used for the shot.

The only problem with allowing a tee pad to be declared OB is that a drop zone must be required as the other options for where to mark a lie would not be valid if the tee pad is OB. Of course, I've seen some tournaments place the drop zone OB and have players throw their subsequent shot from there.

Thread drift: The rules for where to play the next shot when going OB state "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;"

Obviously there is no marker on the tee pad. We always say re-tee, but what gives the right to the full range of the tee pad? In the lost disc rule we have "If the throw was made from the tee, the player will re-tee for the next shot."

So how can one say (courtesy of the rules) that you can re-tee after a shot that goes OB? Should a lie be marked and be required to be hit for a subsequent shot? Seems like the OB rule needs some text added similar to the Lost Disc rule.

From the Glossary, Out-of-Bounds: An area designated by the director prior to the start of play from which a disc may not be played.

Tee pads cannot be OB based on this rule.

From the Glossary, Out-of-Bounds: An area designated by the director prior to the start of play from which a disc may not be played.

Tee pads cannot be OB based on this rule.



I guess that would depend on how you interpret "disc may not be played". I interpret disc in that phrase to mean basically a lie. I make that distinction because:

1) The out-of-bounds rule requires that there be a disc at rest before a determination can be made.

2) The Stance rules that concern IB/OB are in rule 803.04 Stance, Subsequent to Teeing off.

3) There is no stated requirement in 803.02 that the Teeing area be dsignated as IB.


803.09.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.




803.04.A.3 (When the disc is released, a player must:)
(3) have all of his or her supporting points in-bounds.




For me, a great comfort gained from Teeing areas not being concerned with IB/OB status is that you don't have to make strange rulings on what happens when a thrown disc lands on a Tee pad that is surrounded by OB. Once a disc has been thrown, 803.09 and 803.04 come fully into play.

By extension, the same ruling could be made for drop zones, allowing them to be placed in OB territory as well without requiring a small island of IB area. In either case, there is no disc at that location that was completely surrounded by OB that is being played from.

It really is cleaner and more elegant to have the stance rules for teeing areas and drop zones to continue to be separate from the stance rules for subsequent shots and recognition that 803.02 applies to both as far as stance violations are concerned.

Of course that's only my opinion and analysis.

I think you're adding more confusion by implying in any way that the tee pad can ever be considered OB. I can just see a future post here that their group told another player they have no place to play their next shot after losing their disc off the tee because the tee is surrounded by OB and is thus OB. So they have to find the TD to resolve the issue who is ticked off they heard the tee pad could be OB on the Discussion Board.

Gary and Chuck:

So what are your takes on the tee shot thrown from tee surrounded by OB that richochets back onto the tee?

Is the player now throwing 2 or 3?

What about the case of a disc thrown onto a tee pad for another hole that's surrounded by OB?

I think that I stated that both tee pads and drop zones should be ruled by 803.02 which has no reference to OB. Why would someone use part of the post without using all of the post ?

If you wish to stifle all discussion of both sides of any topic by saying that some portion of some single post may cause confusion in real life, then nothing can ever be discussed fully here.

The discussion can be about oddball things like Denny's post above but not whether the tee is IB or OB. There's no support in the rules for the active tee ever being OB and players are prohibited from throwing from an OB position directly by the rules. I apologize for not finding the Glossary definition earlier. Just think how foolish our rules would look if it allowed a player to throw from an OB position under any circumstances. It's not the same as playing from a hazard in ball golf which is not a penalty area by definition.

The tee must remain IB as the only option for a lost disc on the tee shot under current rules. Ball golf never has a tee or drop zone in a hazard or OB although I suppose a tee pad might be completely surrounded by water. I'm not sure it's wise to have a drop zone in an OB area and it should actually be a rubber or hard surface pad. It would have to be IB and if players landed on it, it would provide the confusion similar to those landing on a big rock in the middle of an OB stream who want that to be considered IB.

In Denny's question, if the tee shot boomerangs back onto the tee pad in heavy winds, then the player's next shot is their second throw and they landed IB. I think one tricky question in this dialog is when there are multiple tees on a hole and the shorter tee is the designated drop zone when a shot off a longer tee goes OB. If a tee shot from the longer tee lands on the shorter tee, does the player lie one or two, assuming the shorter tee is also surrounded by OB?

Which is why it is simpler to leave tees and drop zones as being able to be OB.

If a shorter tee is used as a drop zone, does it follow the stance rules for teeing off or the stance rules for lies subsequent to teeing off?

The Glossary says that Drop Zones are handled per tee pad rule.

Rule 803.02 already gives the tee box special status, since your foot placement at time of release is different than it is in Rule 803.04, so the IB/OB status of the tee box on the tee off is not important, per se. It is the designated area from which to initiate one's first legal throw on that particular hole.

Now, let's go to the next shot. If the inital throw is such that one is forced to return to the tee (lost disc?), then one retees with a penalty throw recorded, that is, if the subsequent throw is "successful", then the disc is lying 3. Since your stance returns to the criteria of 803.02, so should the irrelevant status of the tee box, for this particular shot.

Now, let's say that a disc lands on the tee pad after a throw (not a drop, since that is not a throw). The player was not forced by a rule to tee off from that spot, and the player must obey Rule 803.04, so we return to the TD's designation of these tee pads that are surrounded by OB. If the TD explicitly stated that the tee boxes are IB, then the player plays from the tee box, otherwise, the area that is designated as the tee box is OB, except if this area is being used as the area in which to throw your first legal shot for that hole.

Additional rationale: An area, such as across a creek (which was the case in the recent HOF event) is IB for one hole, but OB for another hole [I never did care for such designations-Ed.], so there is precedent for the IB/OB status of a particular area changing. It just so happens, for this particular area, which is designated as a teeing are for a particular hole, the status of this area changes after one's first legal throw from it. It changes from indeterminate (or IB if you like, it really doesn't matter) to OB.

Hope this helps.

DGRZ001

There's no support in the rules for the active tee ever being OB and players are prohibited from throwing from an OB position directly by the rules.


Please quote the rule that states that the tee area cannot be OB. Please do not quote 803.04 as the title of that rule is "Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off", which specifically and intentionally sets it apart from teeing off.

Please quote the rule that states that the tee area cannot be OB.



The Glossary clearly states a player may not throw from OB.


so there is precedent for the IB/OB status of a particular area changing.



Not so fast DGRZ001. The status doesn't change on a specific hole. We all know that it can change between holes such as the obvious example where part of a course is on one side of the park road and part on the other side.

Your logic also falls down when the TD has designated that the tee is OB in the event the player loses a disc on the tee shot. Tee has to be IB.

Please quote the rule that states that the tee area cannot be OB.



The Glossary clearly states a player may not throw from OB.



My rule book doesn't have a glossary, but under the definition of Out of Bounds in the "Definitions" section, it does not say that a player may not throw from OB. The definition of Teeing Area does not mention inbounds or out of bounds.

Right from the PDGA Definitions: Out-of-Bounds: An area designated by the director prior to the start of play from which a disc may not be played.

Right from the PDGA Definitions: Out-of-Bounds: An area designated by the director prior to the start of play from which a disc may not be played.


You are not "playing a disc" when you are teeing off, hence the separate and distinct sections "803.02 Teeing Off" and "803.04 Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off" in the rule book.

You cannot "play a disc" from OB because you cannot comply with the stance requirements from 803.04, which is titled "Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off". We are, however, talking about teeing off here.

If only one didn't have to find rules by looking at definitions. The definitions should merely explain terms, not define new rules.

If only one didn't have to find rules by looking at definitions. The definitions should merely explain terms, not define new rules.



I was wondering about that.

Right from the PDGA Definitions: Out-of-Bounds: An area designated by the director prior to the start of play from which a disc may not be played.


You are not "playing a disc" when you are teeing off, hence the separate and distinct sections "803.02 Teeing Off" and "803.04 Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off" in the rule book.

You cannot "play a disc" from OB because you cannot comply with the stance requirements from 803.04, which is titled "Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off". We are, however, talking about teeing off here.



Very good, Rhett! Good catch! Noticing that there is a difference between teeing off and playing a disc, primarily due to the stance requirement differences!

Your observation also gives credence to my statement that the area designated for teeing off for a particular hole does not need an IB/OB designation for the tee off, because you are not "playing a disc", you are teeing off, and for any legal throw you take that round, if the disc lands on the tee pad, it is OB, unless the TD has declared those area IB.

Just what is the definition of "playing a disc" ?

I would think throwing a disc whether or not from a teepad or a lie is still playing a disc. According to the definition for a throw.
Throw: The propulsion of a disc that causes it to change its position from the teeing area or the lie.

I think playing a disc = throwing a disc.

But who cares what I think! :cool:

My final $.02 and then I'm off for two days of course prettying followed by our SSMP tourney :D


Your observation also gives credence to my statement that the area designated for teeing off for a particular hole does not need an IB/OB designation for the tee off, because you are not "playing a disc", you are teeing off . . .


IMO, the best way to approach tees (same goes for drop zones) is give them their own status reserved for tee shots, re-tees, and throws from a drop zone. Part of this status is a temporary nature. The tee box only exists for tee shots and re-tees on a given hole. After a disc is released on a "tee shot", the "tee" ceases to exist and thereby assumes the status of the ground immediately adjacent to it. This can be IB or OB as the course designer and/or TD see fit.

i.e. A tee box in the middle of OB would be considered OB immediately after the release of the disc. In the event that a re-tee is required, it would morph into a tee box again for one shot with it's own unique properties. Under this scheme a TD would have the option of declaring all tee "areas" themselves to be IB, but I wouldn't go that route.

The current rules require that the tee be IB and remain IB or a lie for the next shot after a disc is lost on the tee shot cannot be located. If you try to weasel on the wording "playing a disc" as not the same as teeing, then you can't avoid it for the next throw after a lost disc.

The current rules require that the tee be IB and remain IB or a lie for the next shot after a disc is lost on the tee shot cannot be located.


A disc that is lost on a tee shot is simply a re-tee. There is no requirement to establish a mark, and you follow 803.02 for the re-tee. There is no "lie" or "mark" for a tee shot. You throw from the teeing area.


803.11 Lost Disc
B. A player whose disc is declared lost shall receive one penalty throw. If the throw was made from the tee, the player will re-tee for the next shot. If not made from the tee, the group will determine the approximate lie from which the throw was made, and the player will throw again from that lie. In all cases the original throw plus one penalty throw shall be counted in the player�s score.



It is my (not so) humble estimation that the additional "If the throw was made from the tee..." language was inadvertently left out of the OB Rule 803.09.B.(1) when the rules were re-written last.

If you are truly re-teeing in either case (lost disc or OB from the tee pad), then you proceed under "803.02 Teeing Off", which has no prohibitions against being OB. Only "803.04 Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off" has the language that prohibits any supporting point from being OB.

You guys have produced a new tweener lie status for a tee pad and drop zone that's neither IB nor OB but a new term called:
LIMBOB
that contains both IB and OB in the word... :p

The teeing area is the same as the ground around it with regards to OB/IB. It's either OB or it's IB. It's not both and it's not something else.

But you continue to try to confuse the issue.

It's too bad we can't both read the same rule book and come up with the same thing. Although in this case I believe the rule book is quite clear. :p

The tee pad cannot be OB if surrounded by OB if a lost disc occurs on the drive. Basically, you're suspending the general rule on not playing from OB to allow playing from OB because it's a tee (or drop zone). This just confuses some players who have a tough enough time keeping up with the general rule for what to do on a lost or OB throw. If you are allowed to make a throw from a location, you are IB. If you are not allowed to make a throw from a location, it's OB. Very simple.

this was posted on the other ob thread but i wanterd to bring it over here as this is where everyone seems to be arguing the most :D


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......

<font color="red"> 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.... </font>


keith

The tee pad cannot be OB if surrounded by OB if a lost disc occurs on the drive. Basically, you're suspending the general rule on not playing from OB to allow playing from OB because it's a tee (or drop zone).


Please show me this "general rule".

I guess I could just say the same things over and over again too, Chuck.

I gave you my opinion on the lost disc rule, where the rule as written makes the absolute distinction between "teeing off" and "subsequent to teeing off". I really don't get what you are saying about a lost disc. Rule 803.02 does not require the tee area nor the thrower to be inbounds when teeing off. The lost disc rule specifically states that if you lose a disc on the tee, you re-tee. Re-teeing means you follow 803.02 Teeing Off which does not require the tee area nor the thrower to be inbounds when teeing off.

So I really don't get what you are saying about the lost disc scenario forcing the tee area to be IB. :confused: :confused: :confused:

801.04 4 edit. I thought there was a rule that stated you could not throw from OB.. Am I crazy? wait no.. Am I wrong?

The rule states that all throws subsequent to teeing off must be thrown from inbounds.

That and the wording of the definition of the term Out-of-bounds that states you may not play a disc from OB territiry. I read that to mean you may not mark a lie in OB territory and play on, others read it to mean you may not throw a disc from OB. There is a difference.

I see a reason for having sections 803.02 and 803.04 separate.

One governs the continuation of play from a lie based on where a thrown disc came to rest. The other governs play from a designated area that has nothing to do with where the a thrown disc came to rest.

The only clarification needed is that throws from a "teeeing area" may happen as a result of a penalty as well as the first throw on a hole and both are governed by 803.02.

The definition of drop zone already specifies that it is to be marked and played similar to a teeing area so the application of 803.02 is not a stretch.

OK Chuck, how about thinking of it like this:

"Playing a disc" means that the player is playing from a lie established from a disc that has been put in play successfully. This would mean that tee offs are not playing a disc, and a re-tee would not be playing a disc, because a disc has not been put in play successfully.

If you buy into that, then the IB/OB status of the tee pad does not matter. Now, after a disc has been successfully put in play, the area formerly known as the tee pad reverts to OB, assuming of course, that it is surrounded by OB.

I respect your opinion, as well as Rhett's, but in this case, I am leaning towards Rhett's standpoint, that a tee off is a special situation, with the requirements for teeing being wholly encased in section 803.02, which makes no mention of the IB status of the tee pad.

DGRZ001

OK, in the scenario you provide, can I assume that if the disc never crosses IB and lands on the tee pad, it is considered OB? In this scenario, I would assume that the only available option would be to re-tee?

What if there is a designated drop zone for OB tee shots? Could that not open this up for some some sketchy behavior.

Scenario: (I understand that this may not be a 100% realistic)
-hole has a water on the dominant side (Right hand for RHBH)
-Shot to clear OB is 180 feet out with some heavy shule in play.

Player:
-newer player (read low rated) with a tendency to Grip Lock
-does not have an endless number of discs to play with
-can drive 200 with some regularity, but direction is at times an issue.

Can that player
-throw (not drop) the disc on the tee pad
-pick up the disc and move to the drop zone shooting 3

This may be to be out of the spirit of competition, but it seems that this would dissuade some folks from trying a challenging shot when a drop zone is available..

SEnk

Note: I would at least make an attempt at it. I would hate the s___ given to me on the way home from the boys if I pulled that stunt.

Take the tee-pad out of your scenario. If the tee pad is placed in an OB area under the situation you describe, a thrown disc that ends up OB anywhere (including on the teepad) will allow the player to move to the drop zone without losing a disc. The teepad being OB really is inconsequential to your question because the disc does not have to land on the teepad to be OB. The player can fling it 0 to 179 feet to move to the drop zone.

There is a hole like this at the tournament I run. The distance to clear the water isn't really a fair distance for all skill levels, so I allow the players to "concede the water" and move to the drop zone throwing three, without having to put a disc in the water.

Take the tee-pad out of your scenario. If the tee pad is placed in an OB area under the situation you describe, a thrown disc that ends up OB anywhere (including on the teepad) will allow the player to move to the drop zone without losing a disc. The teepad being OB really is inconsequential to your question because the disc does not have to land on the teepad to be OB. The player can fling it 0 to 179 feet to move to the drop zone.

There is a hole like this at the tournament I run. The distance to clear the water isn't really a fair distance for all skill levels, so I allow the players to "concede the water" and move to the drop zone throwing three, without having to put a disc in the water.





So clearing the water is a skill based challenge, but can someone without this skill, choose to play the disc to the side of the water and still get to the target without going over water? If so that seems fair, a risk reward scenario, if the only option is to go over the water, then it seems you are unfairly penalizing those who do not have distance off the tee!


The distance to clear the water isn't really a fair distance for all skill levels


Would this be below your skill level, because I am sure if the Organizers of the Memorial made a hole at fountains that had a water clearing distance requirement that 50% or greater of AM's could not make without a bail out area then they would recieve copious amounts of crap.

...because I am sure if the Organizers of the Memorial made a hole at fountains that had a water clearing distance requirement that 50% or greater of AM's could not make without a bail out area then they would recieve copious amounts of crap.


50%??? :confused: Where did that come from?

Would it be fair if 20% couldn't make the distance? How about 10%? How about 5%?

Should you pretend that these players aren't really playing in your tournament, or should you make a provision for them that is fair? Anybody that thinks they can make it across is going to try, because that is the only way to get a 2 or realistically get a 3. The drop zone makes for an easy 4p with only a small prayer chance of sinking it from the DZ.

So if you know you can't make it across, I don't make you throw one in. In four years, no one has complained that someone conceded the water and moved to the drop zone with a penatly and "got over". It's actually a pretty sweet compromise because there is no clear bail-out path around the small pond like there is on hole #1 at Fountain Hills.

Plus the Ints play from the long pads, and it's a long ways across from there. I don't break every division up into their own custom course configuration because then many small divisions wouldn't get ratings. (I'm capped at 90 players.)

There is a lot to think about when you TD event. It's not as cut and dried as a cursory first look might seem.

BTW, the teepad and surrounding area is inbounds on that hole. :)

Thanks guys..now I have a headache. :-(

...because I am sure if the Organizers of the Memorial made a hole at fountains that had a water clearing distance requirement that 50% or greater of AM's could not make without a bail out area then they would recieve copious amounts of crap.



50%??? :confused: Where did that come from?

Would it be fair if 20% couldn't make the distance? How about 10%? How about 5%?

Should you pretend that these players aren't really playing in your tournament, or should you make a provision for them that is fair? Anybody that thinks they can make it across is going to try, because that is the only way to get a 2 or realistically get a 3. The drop zone makes for an easy 4p with only a small prayer chance of sinking it from the DZ.

So if you know you can't make it across, I don't make you throw one in. In four years, no one has complained that someone conceded the water and moved to the drop zone with a penatly and "got over". It's actually a pretty sweet compromise because there is no clear bail-out path around the small pond like there is on hole #1 at Fountain Hills.

Plus the Ints play from the long pads, and it's a long ways across from there. I don't break every division up into their own custom course configuration because then many small divisions wouldn't get ratings. (I'm capped at 90 players.)

There is a lot to think about when you TD event. It's not as cut and dried as a cursory first look might seem.

BTW, the teepad and surrounding area is inbounds on that hole. :)



Thanks for the clearification, I was probing to see what you thought a fair amount of the field would be to have the distance clearance requirement, it appears you have covered all bases, I assume you are talking about Emeralde Isle and perhaps hole 9, 10, 15 or 16!

I realize that as a TD you have to work with the given lay of the land and keep it as simple as possible, I personally don't like to hand out OB penalties unless you earn it, I would rather see someone getting a four by going around a lake obstacle instead of conceding the stroke and heading to the drop zone. I understand your idea and I think that is probably the best way at Emeralde Isle.