One thing that will continue to be an issue is the transition between pro and am. Not much difference between a 965 am or pro. By raising the bar from a playing rules standpoint to become a pro, the distinction can be made long before we get to the point where there's enough added money that it will be necessary to qualify to become a pro. One additional rule to consider just for pros might be to have them use larger diameter, lighter weight putters inside 10m or 15m to raise the bar for that skill.

Okay Diana Moon Glampers...Nothing about the equipment or game play needs to be changed. Once there is a need for a true professional class, the National Tour and Majors should have strict qualifiers to gain entry.

Nothing about the equipment or game play needs to be changed.


The manufacturers just had a collective heart attack...
Get real. Rules need to evolve at times just as technological innovation continues.

The manufacturers can still come up with new discs, but not discs based on contrived rule changes. I am real, you are the one out of touch with the membership, in fact, I'll start a poll...

I do not agree that stand and deliver will better mimic ball golf. We throw, we do not hit. We would be better off with basket locations that require precise approach shots. I don't know why so many course designers think that baskets should be placed in wide open areas. Block them with trees and bushes, put them on the sides of hills, or close to OB. Put a premium on placement and move away from the "up and down from 200 feet" mentality that dominates most course design. Stand and deliver does not make you think, it merely hinders your throwing motion. We need to be challenged more mentally on the course, not physically!

I do not agree that stand and deliver will better mimic ball golf. We throw, we do not hit. We would be better off with basket locations that require precise approach shots. I don't know why so many course designers think that baskets should be placed in wide open areas. Block them with trees and bushes, put them on the sides of hills, or close to OB. Put a premium on placement and move away from the "up and down from 200 feet" mentality that dominates most course design. Stand and deliver does not make you think, it merely hinders your throwing motion. We need to be challenged more mentally on the course, not physically!



Chuck, you should listen to this guy, he is much smarter than you or me.

David's a contemporary and infrequent roommate :eek:
Tricky pin placements have failed to change the putting statistics. It's still easier than BG which screws up the par issue discussed ad infinitum on other threads.

Allowing runups on the fairway is sort of like giving biathletes shotguns instead of rifles so they don't have to take their time and concentrate to hit the targets.

I'm not saying we need to duplicate ball golf, but do things in a way appropriate to the differences in the games. BG has clearly defined differences in their shot types. We don't even come close considering that our top pros can drive with putters. When's the last time you saw a BG pro tee off with a putter?

BG has clearly defined differences in their shot types. We don't even come close considering that our top pros can drive with putters. When's the last time you saw a BG pro tee off with a putter?



Not correlated. I have seen players drive with approach discs off the tee, you know, Aviars, Wizards, Challengers etc. Just like BG pros use irons; irons are used off the tee, for approach and chip shots, and sometimes even for putting. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_(golf))

Hey Chuck, watch the roommate stuff, people might get the wrong idea!

Nockamixon at the Worlds in PA had several fairways with abundant rocks that did not allow run-ups. I had no problem with that, in fact I welcomed it as an extra challenge. I just don't like the idea of dictating it on all holes. Stand and deliver should be similar in spirit to BG rough.

You might as well force us to throw with our "off" arm while you are at it (Actually we used to have that rule if you landed in a flower garden on our campus object course in Boulder).

You could have easily added many strokes to the WI courses with nasty basket locations, so I don't buy your argument about pin locations not increasing par. Hole 17 at the Woodsy is a perfect example (and yes, many people complained about it, but that is usually a good thing, right? ;))

As Nicklaus, one of the longest hitters of his time puts it, "Golf is a game of skill and accuracy, not power." Our game will become more like a driving range as longer par 4 and 5 holes get installed and there continues to be little difference between drives off the tee versus throws from the fairway.



I am pretty sure Nicklaus is referring to the game of golf in regard to course/shot management.

Your statement holds no water against good course design.

S&D could be implemented and not be a detriment to the game.

Steve Brinster I think would disagree about the S&D being for declining players trying to limit others. Watch the 2006 USDGC DVD, he has no problem cranking out shots from a standstill from what looked to be at least 300', if not longer.



I played the Memorial on Steve Brinster's card, and he definitely wouldn't have a problem standing and delivering. I would bet that he doesn't have a problem with the run up rule as it is now. In fact, if you polled the membership, not just the message board users, I bet the overwhelming majority would be completely against stand and deliver only as a fairway rule.




Agreed!

I wasn't talking about putting, Chuck. S&D for a 250' throw can easily lead to injury, if balance must be demonstrated, similar to a putt. Not following through can lead to back injuries, neck injuries, and arm injuries. CAN..not will. But the liklihood of getting injured seems to be much higher without any follow through allowed.



I was the one that proposed adding the following to define S&D: "...and maintain that point of contact until balance is demonstrated;"

Note, it is different than the putting rule. This definition of stand and deliver allows follow through (i.e. you can step past your mark); it does not allow you to leave your mark. Defining it this way will not increase chance for injury. Try any type of throw from a standstill (other than Jump-putt) and you will find that you can still follow through with a lot of force and naturalness and your pivot foot behind the mark will still be there.

On Stand and deliver there are two things that should be debated: a) Should we do it? and b) how does one clearly define it? I am trying to answer the latter so that it isn't an issue in the former.

I can see the merits of either option but using the current putting requirement would make it easier to define. I can see players using forehand more often. In addition, the development of the 180 "follow-thru" spin where on a backhand release you let your pivot foot continue spin clockwise (for righties) on release at least 180 so your non-pivot foot can whip around and come down behind the mini so you're facing backwards. :eek:

Not that we should make this change, but:

What is wrong with "Put a support point on the mark and keep it there for 1 second then throw your your disc maintaining contact with the spot until the disc is released."?

Otherwise, I could take a three step run up, plant and flick no problem with staying on my final contact pre-throw.

But try getting any distance when you are trying to throw around a set of trees while stretched out. Your follow-through makes it tough to keep that mark foot down.

Still, it seems like too many people are wedded to their "preferred lies" version of the game. (Preferred lies is technical ball golf term for winter rules where you pretty much tee up your ball on a nice tuft of grass for all your fairway shots.)

I thought about a time requirement (and suggested it at one point), but it seems that it would add a difficulty in enforcement as it becomes a different type of ambiguity (e.g. when does the one second begin?). It also would be a pain for short putts where you have demonstrated balance immediately and want to go retrieve your putter. We don't want to replace one rule that doesn't get called with another rule that will cause arguments.

I'm still trying to picture Chucks 180 follow-through spin. I guess I haven't seen that one yet. Anyone have a video of this online?

Not that we should make this change, but:

What is wrong with "Put a support point on the mark and keep it there for 1 second then throw your your disc maintaining contact with the spot until the disc is released."?<font color="red"> Um people already complain about the jump putt so who will hasve the stopwatch and who will look at his disc and foot at release. </font>

Otherwise, I could take a three step run up, plant and flick no problem with staying on my final contact pre-throw.

But try getting any distance when you are trying to throw around a set of trees while stretched out. Your follow-through makes it tough to keep that mark foot down.

Still, it seems like too many people are wedded to their "preferred lies" version of the game. (Preferred lies is technical ball golf term for winter rules where you pretty much tee up your ball on a nice tuft of grass for all your fairway shots.)



Ok I heard someone compare this to BG and the difference in a tee shot and a shot from the fairway.

In BG the player tees the ball up which gives them the best opportunity to have a clean drive. Once you are off the tee you no longer have a your ball teed up and your odds of hitting a clean shot depends on where your ball lands. If you are in the rough you will have a harder time than in the fairway.

The same holds true for DG but IMO Teeing up a ball corresponds to having good footing in DG not the runup as some seem to think. Just like in BG the odds of throwing a successful shot depend on where you land. If you land in tall grass you will have a tough runup if you go for power just as Tiger has a hard time hitting a 5-wood from deep rough.

S&amp;D would be like forcing Tiger to hit safe wedge back into the fairway eliminating the option to go for it and risk a bad shot or play smart. Also saying players will throw more sidearms is like saying players in golf would start hitting lob shots because they are easier to perform when compared to a punch.
'

Now you're on the right wavelength. I'm not touting S&amp;D because I like S&amp;D in particular. But it's one way to differentiate between tee shots and fairway shots better than we do now. It hasn't come up as an issue before because we haven't had lots of par 4s &amp; 5s. If we did, then the lack of difference between tee shots and fairway shots would be more evident. The funny thing is, if the rule had been S&amp;D from the fairway when DG started, you'd now have everyone being negative about allowing run-ups on the fairway for various reasons such as safety and needing more property for proper challenge and making the game too easy.

If there's a better way to differentiate, let's hear it. I'm more interested in exploring how we can enrich the game challenges so that fairway shots on courses that lack sufficient terrain features can still be challenging. We really don't need S&amp;D on wooded courses as a requirement since that happens already much of the time due to footing and tree positions. Unfortunately, not every course is blessed with good terrain nor do most place have the budget to change it.

Take Winthrop for example. Harold pretty much forces many of the shots from the fairway and even tee to not be full power shots as mentioned regarding Brinster. But without the rope, the Winthrop Gold layout the rest of the year has many more bomb shots than the USDGC layout.

Another way to differentiate fairway shots would be to limit the edge sharpness of the discs allowed for fairway throws once you leave the tee. That would be more like ball golf where you don't use a driver from the fairway. But that would be much tougher to apply than the S&amp;D. In my view there would be little reason for par 5s down the road if the fairway shot doesn't provide challenge. You can argue that our par 4s have a higher challenge from an accuracy standpoint to reach the 10m circle. That provides some differentiation versus the usually more flexible landing area options for tee shots. So it's not like we don't have some differences as it is, especially on long wooded holes.

Any other ideas on making fairway shots different? Maybe it's enough already for many courses. Places without terrain features will just not provide as much challenge on second throws and be less of championship caliber without fake or contrived OB for events. But I think it would improve the game if we could find some way to provide a little more difference within the game for pros versus ams and have those differences built into the game itself rather than solely relying on terrain elements that many designers don't have the budget or resources to change.

You want to make a difference between Pro and AM? Looks like you are trying to make them shoot the same scores.

Artificial elements do not make the game better in most cases but I would rather see something artificially modify the fairway such as OB than something which takes from the excitement of throwing a great 400ft shot right under the basket on an 800ft hole.

No. If the rules were changed enough, ams couldn't say they shot the same as the pros and ratings would be calculated separately between Am and Pro pools. Considering our lack of spectators, I think it might boost interest in ams watching the pros because the ams wouldn't be playing under the same rules and/or with somewhat different equipment.

For example, having different rules for ams versus pros isn't uncommon. The 3-point line is farther back in pro vs lower levels of b-ball, shot clock is shorter and games are longer. Different catching and timeout rules in football. Even in golf, ams can't usually handle the high compression golf balls. Aluminum bats allowed in college baseball but not in the pros to retain the long ball challenge at the pro level (sans steroids).

I'm saying it's going to take a while for the differentiation in monetary rewards to materialize between am vs pro in our sport, if ever. So why not consider creating our own reasons why the pro game is tougher and potentially more interesting to watch for those who already play it because the pros have some tougher conditions to overcome. I know it kills Harold to see guys still throwing righty backhand shots on holes which are obviously meant for sidearm because even our best designs don't require players to learn as many shot skills as ball golfers and yet can still play at an extremely high level.

Maybe some of those guys are like me and throw sidearm with a different hand than they do backhand. I have had to learn a good anhyzer shot to make up for this and I say if you can throw backhand where you are meant to throw sidearm you are making it harder on yourself.

Chuck all of those other sports are totally different than DG with the exception of BG. Anyway I cannot see the presumed benefits outweighing the negatives of implementing such a action reducer. Bottom line, galleries like to see the longball and if you keep that from being an option it will make watching a final 9 more boring than it already is.

I can really see a lot of people leaving the PDGA and starting something new like SN in protest. S&amp;D would be worse than Amnesty and extra divisions.

I can really see a lot of people leaving the PDGA and starting something new like SN in protest. S&amp;D would be worse than Amnesty and extra divisions.



We have a winner for hyperbole of the day!

:)

I would only advocate doing it for pro competition as I suggested. Lots of rules are bent for recreational play and even sanctioned play. Stand and Deliver would make sense as one way to tighten up the rules for pro play if the payoffs increase relative to Advanced, if that ever happens.

I know there are some trees around Texas, although initially Houck was a little overwhelmed with the number he had to deal with for his IDGC course. Each of you take turns sharing your handful with other courses when they host tournaments, right? ;)



Courses

TX &gt; MN

I can really see a lot of people leaving the PDGA and starting something new like SN in protest. S&amp;D would be worse than Amnesty and extra divisions.



We have a winner for hyperbole of the day!

:)



I have heard from two people who are looking are planning their own tournament systems for a Tour that isn't PDGA.

Why do you think the Pros would stay in the PDGA? It isn't like there is any big money and if you have 2 orgs in which one is S&amp;D and the other has runups I bet the $$$ and spectators would go to the action.

Haven't seen too many injuries during putting due to maintaining balance. If you're not coordinated enough to safely throw 250-300 with stand and deliver, you're likely not a current pro, who is regularly faced with this type of throw anyway.



Um I can't! Mainly because all the power i have comes from my legs. I can throw 375 with no runup but it isn't that accurate and it hurts my plant knee.

The PDGA and the rules are global and Markus can outhrow most people with a putter flat footed. The Japanese already have raised the challenge bar by adopting 150 class for more than 15 years. Much wide ranging discussion similar to the latest disc standards review would have to occur for any kind of change like this to happen. And no one's initiating these discussions formally. Just messing around on here.

On the other hand, the pro scene is not standing on its own financially now. Doing more of the same and expecting a different result is foolish. There are many who would be glad to see the pros be successful with their own group and branch off like the PGA. No need to tweak the rules then. On the other hand, tweaking the rules so playing pro is more challenging might actually help lead to that much sought after success so that the only difference between ams and pros of the same rating isn't just the collared shirt.

The PDGA and the rules are global and Markus can outhrow most people with a putter flat footed. The Japanese already have raised the challenge bar by adopting 150 class for more than 15 years. Much wide ranging discussion similar to the latest disc standards review would have to occur for any kind of change like this to happen. And no one's initiating these discussions formally. Just messing around on here.

On the other hand, the pro scene is not standing on its own financially now. Doing more of the same and expecting a different result is foolish. There are many who would be glad to see the pros be successful with their own group and branch off like the PGA. No need to tweak the rules then. On the other hand, tweaking the rules so playing pro is more challenging might actually help lead to that much sought after success so that the only difference between ams and pros of the same rating isn't just the collared shirt.




That is only making it more challenging for some people while giving those who throw sidearm or stand still an advantage. I would continue in my BG pursuits if that rule came into effect. I can't see how reducing the drive length in the fairway by 25% will make spectating more appealing.

I take a runup on every shot basically whether it is 500ft or 75ft if I am not putting I take 1-2 steps min just for timing.

S&amp;D = Playing your fairway lie in golf but with one foot up or with no backswing.

The PDGA and the rules are global and Markus can outhrow most people with a putter flat footed. The Japanese already have raised the challenge bar by adopting 150 class for more than 15 years. Much wide ranging discussion similar to the latest disc standards review would have to occur for any kind of change like this to happen. And no one's initiating these discussions formally. Just messing around on here.

On the other hand, the pro scene is not standing on its own financially now. Doing more of the same and expecting a different result is foolish. There are many who would be glad to see the pros be successful with their own group and branch off like the PGA. No need to tweak the rules then. On the other hand, tweaking the rules so playing pro is more challenging might actually help lead to that much sought after success so that the only difference between ams and pros of the same rating isn't just the collared shirt.




Pros and AMs should not have the same rating and should also not be in the same division with AMs. Anyway if there was a qualifying process to be a pro there would be a difference.

Hey Chuck, how's the membership feel about your stupid S&amp;D idea?

Not my idea. Not pursuing it except with the whiners on here who use weak and emotional pleas against it such as picking up their marbles and playing elsewhere.

The guys with the marbles are part of the membership, and the vast majority at that. You should listen to their opinions, whether emotional or not.

Not my idea. Not pursuing it except with the whiners on here who use weak and emotional pleas against it such as picking up their marbles and playing elsewhere.



Not weak! That would just probably be the straw that breaks the camel's back. If many members leave the PDGA it seems probable that they would form their own group.

I'm just one of several guys messing with you on here and you're counterpoints aren't very persuasive. There's a lot to be said for tradition such as the reason the keyboard layout isn't optimum. but only a few have adopted the Dvorak layout.

As far as impressive, anyone who saw Pete May destroy the ping pongers at USDGC would say that Pete crushing them with anything but a paddle was way more impressive than if he were using the high tech equipment his challengers used. Don't you think people would tune in to see Tiger still whip someone with only a five iron? Players in any individual sport who can still whup good amateur players with limited equipment is pretty impressive. It's no big deal if they do it with the same equipment everyone else is using. That's expected.

The guys with the marbles are part of the membership, and the vast majority at that. You should listen to their opinions, whether emotional or not.



The pros have many fewer marbles than the amateurs anyway (love that line... wait, I'm a pro, too ;)) in terms of membership numbers. I'm only talking about them. Others are proposing it for everyone. Do you have some survey results I missed? Those who make the decision would certainly listen to the membership if it ever even came up. There's no movement underway behind the scenes or any type of survey being prepared. I'm not even on the RC. You guys are such easy marks.

And the irony of this thread drift is that players "stand and deliver" when kneeling on a towel behind their mark. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Do you have some survey results I missed?



I'm surprised you didn't see the results, you must have voted at least twice to get that many votes for S&amp;D.


You guys are such easy marks.



It's easy to get us regular members worked up, especially since you're the one in bed with the guys that make decisions...

I've asked for a separate posting account so you can tell the difference when I post more officially versus just discussing like this thread.

Here is a dialogue I had with Carlton about this issue.
He said it was okay to post this, so in the interest of greater understanding...


Hi Carlton,
There's certainly been a lot of chatter, about the reversal of the rules committee decision on building a lie.

I have been asked about the effects this rule will have by the local players and I find I don't have all the answers they want.

I will ask their questions in a true/false format to hopefully make it more clear.

T/F I can put my disc or towel down behind my mini to keep my pants clean/not get small rocks or sticks in my knee. Broken glass was mentioned as well.

T/F I can clear loose debris such as leaves and sticks and rocks from behind my mini to allow for a good stance.

I'm not sure if one then the other. Any deeper thoughts into this topic would also be appreciated.

Thanks,
Bob Graham


Hello Bob,

Long time no see!

I trust all is well.

Have you read the Q &amp; A?

Your first question? The answer is False. One can not put a towel down behind their mark. But they can clear out the sticks, rocks and broken glass, per 803.05 C.

Question 2? It is True. (Obviously so, given my answer to the first Q!)

Yours Sincerely;

Carlton Howard
PDGA Rules Committee Chairman



Thanks for the fast reply Carlton,
There are a lot of theories flying arround the message board and local players look to me to clear the confusion. I did read the Q and A and was correct in my reading. I was asked to contact you directly as these things are easy to get confused.

Anyway, I was asked to explain the reasons for the rule change. ANY insight would be appreciated. You know how players get, looking for loopholes and such.

All is well with me, I hope the same for you.
Do you have a Carlton tour all set?
Best,
Bob


Bob,
My pleasure. Be sure to let me know if you're ever passing through and we'll golf some.

The reasons for the change? Discussion board query. We had the old ruling out there for years (one could put a rock behind their mini in order to avoid getting a wet, muddy shoe) but the old Craig Stadler argument came up on the discussion board again and we were asked to take another look at it.

We did and the result was a reversal of our previous decision. (I think the vote was 4 - 3.)

Golf is a sport that's based upon playing it where it lies, this includes standing where you threw it as well. While I know it's practically impossible to gain an unfair advantage by placing something under someone's foot/knee I also agree that's a slippery slope to allow folks to move things (generally obstacles) on the fairway. That's basically how our discussions wound us to the conclusion to reverse.

Stated differently, why should anyone be able to build up their lies?

Take care,

chh
ps: Most of this year's tour involves fishing!!!

Carlton,
Thanks again for the backstory, It will go a long way towards player understanding.
Bob


Bob,
My pleasure. You can post it if you like. I never post on the discussion board, I don't think it's appropriate for me to. (Folks may confuse my opinion with that of the "official" PDGA.)


So a little insite and hopefully some slack.
I think this is one of the more difficult pieces of legislation the committee has had to rule on.

Bob

putt it right!

thanks for posting bob!

thanks for posting that... it def. helps!

and just curious but what is the 'Craig Stadler argument'? that someone could mound up a pile or rocks or something?

Found this online.


To artificially manipulate surroundings so as to improve your footing before a hit.

To a limited extent, you are permitted to snug your feet into the sand of a bunker before addressing the ball. But otherwise, building a stance is illegal and will cost you a penalty stroke.

A rare example of this occurred on tour some years back. In the 1987 San Diego Open at Torrey Pines, Craig "The Walrus" Stadler wanted to hit his ball out from under an evergreen on the 14th hole. And before kneeling, he placed a towel on the ground so that his slacks would not be stained. A close-up television shot prompted one Iowan viewer to phone the tournament to complain.

Oops! The PGA agreed with the viewer and interpeted Craig's action to be building up a stance and Stadler was disqualified for signing an incorrect score card, not having assessed himself a penalty stroke. The cost to Stadler for preserving his trousers and his dignity? $37,000 in forfeited prize money.

After the affair was over, Stadler was asked why he had gone to the trouble of protecting his pants when he was not known for stressing his appearance.

The portly Stadler confirmed that it was true "It's hard to dress this body"... but he was aware that the event was televised and the slacks were light blue and he "didn't want to finish the round looking like a gardner."

Eight years later, newspapers around the country carried a photo of Stadler chopping the tree down. Torrey Pines had decided to eliminate the tree and had invited Craig to participate in its demise.

In a PGA event, Stadler once put a towel under his knees to hit a shot under a tree. He was DQed for signing an incorrect scorecard because he did not penalize himself for building a lie -- by laying the towel down to keep his pants clean. The kicker? A viewer phoned in the ruling and he was notified the next day.

When the tree got a disease later, he was given the honor of cutting it down.

EDIT: From memory... :)

And he wiped his brow with that same towel after sweating to cut that tree down...

(j/k good story addition though!)

...and....and...then he burnt the wood in his fireplace and said "take that!". Yeah, that's the ticket. :D

He had that tree pulped, made into toilet paper, and . . .

Yes, thanks for sharing, Bob. Unfortunately, there is the other rule which was an integral part of this discussion:

<font color="blue">802.04 Artificial Devices
A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed. A player is specifically prohibited from using any artificial device that changes the position of the disc in the player�s hand or artificially lengthens any of the player�s throwing levers (fingers, wrist, arm, shoulder, etc.). The use of devices which assist in determining distances over 10 meters, such as range finders and GPS devices are prohibited. Measuring devices such as a tape measure may be carried and used to determine distances 10 meters and less for the purpose of rules enforcement.

B. A player shall receive two penalty throws, without a warning, if, during any portion of a round, he or she is observed by two players or an official to be using or carrying an artificial device that is determined by the director to violate section 802.04 A. A player who uses an artificial device after it has been determined by the director to be in violation of 802.04 A has also violated 804.05 A (3) and shall be penalized accordingly. </font>

If someone kneels on a towel behind their mark to protect against skin abrasion, which rule holds precedence? 803.04 or 802.04?

It should be noted that no where in the Artificial Devices rule does it state that devices must be worn in a specific manner or for a specified amount of time. Nor does the rule specify what area of the skin is allowed protection from abrasion. For example, gloves and bandages are allowed, however, the rule does not stipulate that gloves and bandages must be worn throughout the entire round. That said, one could carry a bandage, knee brace or knee pad in their bag, wear it exclusively for the kneeling shot, then remove the artificial device once the shot is executed.

Personally, I don't see much difference in kneeling on a towel versus kneeling on a knee pad, brace or bandage.

I agree. It doesn't make sense to allow one and not the other. On the other hand, I don't think we should be building lies. I also think it would be wrong to not allow knee braces and the like; some people need them as I did after recovering from a head-on collision last year. The trick is to craft a rule that addresses both of these concerns.

I wonder if ball golf has an artifical devices rule?

14-3

I understand this is a very difficult issue to rule on. That's why I sought clarity for the questions asked me.

I have to trust a little that the committee gave a fairly thorough effort to address this. I don't think they would be adverse to players' attempts to write up a rule and propose it.

In fact, I think the "vocal" minority of the message board could quickly arrive at a wording that addressed the issue and covered all the gaps.

This could then be presented as a "Bill" to ammend the "Laws".

Bob

Putt it Right!

After reading through many of the posts one thing has become abundantly clear...Chucker needs to move to a warm location so he can play DG instead of typing all winter!!!

It's definitely been a cold winter here. Too cold to even worry whether I can use a towel on ice...

14-3



Just read it. And the penalty is a DQ. I didn't see any language about medical devices as in the DG rules, but similarly, both rules allow gloves, tape and gauze.

so if i wrap my towel around my knee and tie it before i kneel down im fine as long as i refer to it as a knee brace and not a towel right?..if not there need to be an approved list of medical devices,brands,etc..correct?

Well...I'm not going to read through all this thread to find out if it is now against the rules to put a towel down before kneeling on it for a throw. I'll just go ahead &amp; do it as I have for the past 20 years. If I get penalized it will be my last tournament penality &amp; pdga membership renewal.
From what I've seen over the years it is O.K. to put a towel down on the tee pad to throw from but now it sounds like you can't put a towel down to protect your knee while throwing from your knees?? Crazy

From what I've seen over the years it is O.K. to put a towel down on the tee pad to throw from but now it sounds like you can't put a towel down to protect your knee while throwing from your knees??


You still can as long as the knee on the ground is not behind your lie. Just move to the side so your foot, connected to the knee you want on the ground, is behind your marker. No problem with a towel under the knee then.

what about my previous statement..towel=brace or is there a deffinition of a brace im missing?

From what I've seen over the years it is O.K. to put a towel down on the tee pad to throw from but now it sounds like you can't put a towel down to protect your knee while throwing from your knees??


You still can as long as the knee on the ground is not behind your lie. Just move to the side so your foot, connected to the knee you want on the ground, is behind your marker. No problem with a towel under the knee then.



??

I have no idea what you just said.

I will continue to put a towel down under my knees directlly behind my mark to make a legally stanced throw.

Stroke me -

I'm ready to move on...dg used to be fun.

I agree there's no specific statement on the amount of time an abrasion or medical device needs to be used during the round. I think it falls under personal conscience but the RC hasn't figured out how to convey that in words for this situation. You know whether you're technically subverting the intent of the rule to play it from where it lies by using a towel. In ball golf, they have more reliance on personal responsibilty in following the rules and that expectation has unfortunately not transitioned as deep in the DG environment.

We all have likely taken a coat or sweats off or put them on for parts of a round due to weather changes. The intent of our rule is to cover situations where the device is used for more than one throw in sequence the way a true abrasion or medical device would typically be used and not just used for one throw, not the next several and then again. For example, rangefinders and extensions to your arm are disallowed even though they would not be used for every throw.

I may not call you for subverting the rules by tying a towel on your knee for a shot. But might make you feel guilty about it sort of how calling someone a bagger is supposed to do that. ;)

I have no idea what you just said.



You've been around long enough to have thrown from a stance where your body is sideways to the pin with your right foot behind the mini and your body out to the left (and still behind) the marker and your knee on the ground. No problem putting a towel under your knee. Just don't back up 18 inches so your knee is behind the mini (with a towel) and your foot out to the right of the mini. Same stance, slightly different angle, both legal, only one allows the towel under the knee.

so if i wrap my towel around my knee and tie it before i kneel down im fine as long as i refer to it as a knee brace and not a towel right?..if not there need to be an approved list of medical devices,brands,etc..correct?



My recommendation would be to wrap your knee with a towel and call it a bandage. Rule 802.04 (Artificial Devices) does not stipulate what constitutes a bandage nor does the rule specify that a bandage must be worn in a specific manner to protect against skin abrasion.

You know whether you're technically subverting the intent of the rule to play it from where it lies by using a towel.



In the history of disc golf, I seriously doubt there have been any players who have knelt on a towel behind their mark and thought they were "subverting the intent of the rule to play it from where it lies". My assumption would be that 100% the players who have knelt on a towel did so to protect their knee. The truth of the matter is that the original question submitted to the rules committee did not specifically address the issue of kneeling on a towel. Here's the Q&amp;A on this topic:

<font color="blue"> Rule Question: Building a Lie
Question
A player�s shot lands in a creek that has been declared casual. Can she place a rock or a broken limb behind her mark, in order to keep her feet dry?

Important Note: Previously we had ruled that this was permitted.This opinion reverses that ruling.

Response
Applicable Rules:


803.01 (General)
803.05 (Obstacles and Relief) C
803.04 (Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off)A.1
803.04 E
802.04 (Artificial Devices) A

The essence of disc golf is playing �from where it lies.�

803.01 (General) A states �The game of disc golf consists of throwing a flying disc from the teeing area to a target by a throw or successive throws. Players shall play the course as they find it and play the disc where it lies <u>unless allowed otherwise by the Rules</u>.�

Rocks and broken limbs are obstacles on the course, which can not be moved except as specified under 803.05 (Obstacles and Relief) C, pursuant to a safe stance and run up.

Additionally, 803.04 (Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off) A 1, requires that one �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��

803.04 E allows one some leeway with the 30 centimeters assuming there is a "large solid obstacle" present that impedes the thrower from taking a "normal" stance.

Conclusion: You take a stance in the mud or casual water just as you would in the fairway. One should never expect to be able to move obstacles, except as narrowly defined under �Obstacles and Relief�. <font color="red">One can�t �build a stance� except as allowed under 802.04 (Artificial Devices) A.</font>

One could still place a small pad or a towel under any body part that is not the supporting point meeting the requirement of 803.04A (1).

</font>

I'm sure a majority of players would agree that placing a rock or broken limb to stand upon would be considered illegal (i.e. building a stance). That's the logical answer to the original question.

What I'd like everyone to take particular notice of is the one sentence of the RC's conclusion which I have highlighted in red. I will reiterate the fact that Artificial Devices are allowed to protect against skin abrasion. The rule does not restrict towels from the list of Artificial Devices, thus, it can be inferred a towel can be used in such a manner.

I agree that players never considered it subverting the rules to use a towel since it was allowed before. Now it's not. It's left to your conscience to consider the intent since you can "get away with" using the medical/abrasion clause for one time usage. If a player calls you for subverting the rules, the TD gets the fun of sorting it out. Not saying it's a good thing where we're at, just how it appears to be right now.

I agree that players never considered it subverting the rules to use a towel since it was allowed before. Now it's not. It's left to your conscience to consider the intent since you can "get away with" using the medical/abrasion clause for one time usage.



Please show me the rule which specifically disallows kneeling upon a towel behind one's mark. I've already pointed out the Artificial Devices rule which clearly allows protection against skin abrasion. In addition, the RC's conclusion statement specifically allows "building a stance" in accordance to rule 802.04 Artificial Devices. The last sentence of the RC's conclusion statement conflicts with the preceding sentence and is moot in my interpretation.

Just for fun, I'd like to take this a step further with the following absurd scenario (it took me a while to Google an image that would work for this demonstration, but alas....I found one):

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/headstand.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=headstand.jpg)

Now, pretend the person in the photo is on a disc golf course and he has taken this stance, lined up behind the yellow marker which is superimposed on the image. His hand would be considered a support point in allowance of rule 803.04 (Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off) A, requires that one �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��

Okay....now pretend he's wearing gloves.

Is this golfer breaking the rules since the supporting point behind the marker is not in direct contact with the playing surface (803.04) or is this golfer in compliance of the rules since gloves are specifically provided as an approved Artificial Device (802.04)? Which rule holds precedence?

If you wear the gloves for more than just one throw to reduce arbrasion or your hands are cold, you're complying with the intent and spirit of the Artificial devices rule. If you put on a glove for that specific throw then take it back off, you would violate the intention (not to build a lie) but not the letter of the Artifical devices rule. Again, unfortunately it's back to conscience which is difficult to write explicitly in the rules.

From what I've seen over the years it is O.K. to put a towel down on the tee pad to throw from but now it sounds like you can't put a towel down to protect your knee while throwing from your knees??


You still can as long as the knee on the ground is not behind your lie. Just move to the side so your foot, connected to the knee you want on the ground, is behind your marker. No problem with a towel under the knee then.



??

I have no idea what you just said.

I will continue to put a towel down under my knees directlly behind my mark to make a legally stanced throw.

Stroke me -

I'm ready to move on...dg used to be fun.



I'm going to call you on it Alex. :D

Chuck,
I use a mousepad to putt from my knees...the mousepad is about 2 centimeters thick...Am i to understand that i can use said mousepad as long as my knee with the mousepad underneath is not directly behind my lie but to the left or the right? My foot (toe) would be behind the mark...

What happens if you putt from both knees?

What happens if the lie is already built up...ie. rocks underneath your disc...Can you UNbuild a lie?

the Mousepads would be great for player's packages because you could put the logo of the tournament or club on it...

PATENT PENDING!!!

MYERS' ARTIFICIAL DEVICES NOT USED TO BUILD UP YOUR LIE MOUSEPADS

Catchy name huh?

Again, unfortunately it's back to conscience which is difficult to write explicitly in the rules.



I assume you will in good conscience call and attempt to enforce the new ruling all the time in any PDGA event. Is that true? And anyone who does not is cheating?

I didn't say I would call it because there's no explicit writing to support the call IF they wrap the towel around the knee and claim abrasion rule. What I said was I might make the player feel guilty about it. For example, it wouldn't be the first time I might have told someone after they probably missed the mark on a run up or touched the mini with their foot to pay closer attention in the future. If they just put the towel down, I'd probably say something about the Q&amp;A ruling that disallaowed it and show them that legal stance Alex wasn't sure about.

Am i to understand that i can use said mousepad as long as my knee with the mousepad underneath is not directly behind my lie but to the left or the right?


Yes, apparently that continues to be allowed.

do you think it is a bad rule?

My knees arent too bad...(yet)

but I wear shorts most of the time...

for me, I am kneeling because I have a bad lie or I am underneath a tree, so using something under my knee lets me not have to worry about scratching or hurting my knee and concentrating on the shot.

I think it's an unfortunate ruling but you can also see the problems the RC had resolving this with their 4-3 vote. I think if the proper wording could be found to allow a towel or something similar for ground wetness or abrasion protection, the RC could be persuaded to go with it. But they try to be as black &amp; white about things as possible and don't like wordy exception language if avoidable. I think this is one place where clarifying a grayish area even if wordy would benefit everyone and avoid these splitting hairs kinds of discussions. The fundamental concept for any rule would be to avoid loopholes in the wording that might allow players to take a perceived (even if not actual) competitive advantage by how it can be interpreted.

If you wear the gloves for more than just one throw to reduce arbrasion or your hands are cold, you're complying with the intent and spirit of the Artificial devices rule. If you put on a glove for that specific throw then take it back off, you would violate the intention (not to build a lie) but not the letter of the Artifical devices rule. Again, unfortunately it's back to conscience which is difficult to write explicitly in the rules.



If I use the towel/bandage every time I'm at risk for abrading my knee then how is this violating the spirit of the rule?

In winter I might leave a glove on my throwing hand on a drop-in putt, but I only wear it to throw once or twice a round.

What is so difficult about a rule saying "For shots thrown while not standing, a player may place a piece of padding or protective material not exceeding 1" in thickness behind their lie."

If your towel froze to the ice and you left it behind, it would be a stroke for littering.

Is a lost disc a stroke for littering? :)

i don't have the time to go back and review all of the posts in this thread, so forgive me if this has been discussed earlier. i frequently use a disc under my knee when needed. is this now illegal? the only advantage i get from it is keeping my pants clean and dry. also, is it now illegal to put a towel down on a wet tee?

Actually this may be the dumbest "rules thread ever" or "worst interpretation ever" RC needs to get their collective [censored] (okay poop) together. Timbar you need to read it just so you know what you are getting into.

hey tim, legal on the tee, legal under supporting points not behind the mini, illegal under supporting points directly behind the mini as they have construed that to be building a lie. i think it's silly but i'm not on the rc. see you next week.

hey tim, legal on the tee, legal under supporting points not behind the mini, illegal under supporting points directly behind the mini as they have construed that to be building a lie. i think it's silly but i'm not on the rc. see you next week.



Hey Tim....it it obvious there are different opinions and interpretations on this subject. I personally believe there is more evidence toward the legality of kneeling on a towel behind your mark.

The original question submitted to the RC is provided below. <u>It is important to note that the question is not about kneeling on a towel.</u> It is also important to note the applicable rules used to develop the RC's conclusion. I have highlighted (in red) particular rules or RC statements which point toward the legality of kneeling on a towel behind one's mark.

<font color="blue"> Rule Question: Building a Lie

Question

A player�s shot lands in a creek that has been declared casual. Can she place a rock or a broken limb behind her mark, in order to keep her feet dry?

Important Note: Previously we had ruled that this was permitted.This opinion reverses that ruling.

Response
Applicable Rules:


803.01 (General)
803.05 (Obstacles and Relief) C
803.04 (Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off)A.1
803.04 E
802.04 (Artificial Devices) A

The essence of disc golf is playing �from where it lies.�

803.01 (General) A states �The game of disc golf consists of throwing a flying disc from the teeing area to a target by a throw or successive throws. Players shall play the course as they find it and play the disc where it lies <font color="red"> unless allowed otherwise by the Rules.� </font>

Rocks and broken limbs are obstacles on the course, which can not be moved except as specified under 803.05 (Obstacles and Relief) C, pursuant to a safe stance and run up.

Additionally, 803.04 (Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off) A 1, requires that one �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��

803.04 E allows one some leeway with the 30 centimeters assuming there is a "large solid obstacle" present that impedes the thrower from taking a "normal" stance.

Conclusion: You take a stance in the mud or casual water just as you would in the fairway. One should never expect to be able to move obstacles, except as narrowly defined under �Obstacles and Relief�. <font color="red">One can�t �build a stance� except as allowed under 802.04 (Artificial Devices) A. </font>

One could still place a small pad or a towel under any body part that is not the supporting point meeting the requirement of 803.04A (1).

The PDGA Rules Committee

Carlton Howard, Chair
John Chapman
Conrad Damon
Harold Duvall
Joe Garcia
Jim Garnett
Rick Voakes
</font>

Because 802.04 (Artificial Devices) A. allows use of items to protect against abrasions to the skin, and because the RC specifically acknowledges "Building a Stance" is allowed under said rule, it appears to be perfectly legal to kneel upon a towel behind the mark if done to protect one's knee. Again, the original question submitted to the RC did not address kneeling on a towel, rather the question specifically asked about the legality of building a lie with a rock or branch to keep one's foot dry.

Right above Carlton's signature it says this:
One could still place a small pad or a towel under any body part that is not the supporting point meeting the requirement of 803.04A (1).


There would be no need to make the statement the way he did IF a towel or pad could be placed directly behind your lie. That's an explicit statement from the RC with no other interpretation.

thanks john,jerry and chuck. i remember an extremely muddy uphill lie i had at mt.airy in 96 or 97 in which i used a handful of sticks to allow me to stand and be able to throw without falling on my face. it was a new hole that had been cleared just before the event and with a good rainfall prior to play, was very difficult to stand on. nobody had a problem with it then but i see now i could not do it today. it seems to me that there is an endless supply of odd little situations that the RC could spend an eternity trying to create a rule for. i hope they consider keeping it simple every now and then.

Right above Carlton's signature it says this:
One could still place a small pad or a towel under any body part that is not the supporting point meeting the requirement of 803.04A (1).


There would be no need to make the statement the way he did IF a towel or pad could be placed directly behind your lie. That's an explicit statement from the RC with no other interpretation.



And the statement prior to that one reads:

<font color="red"> One can�t �build a stance� except as allowed under 802.04 (Artificial Devices) A.</font>

The RC makes specific mention of the 802.04 Artificial Devices rule as an exception to building a lie or "building a stance". In other words, and in answer to the original question, the RC's conclusion is that one cannot place a rock or branch behind their mark to build their lie (in this example, to keep one's foot dry), however, artificial devices are allowed in order to protect one's skin from abrasion. That's an explicit statement from the RC with no other interpretation. On the other hand, the statement above Carlton's signature is definitely open to interpretation due to the context of the original question, answer and this particular topic of discussion (which had nothing to do with the original question). That final statement above Carl's signature does not prohibit use of artificial devices (to avoid abrasion) which is 100% legal according to the Rules and the RC's statement posted above. Rule 802.04A is the exception to 803.04A.....both the Rule book and the RC state it as such.

Again, the original question submitted to the RC was inquiry about placing a rock or branch behind the lie in a casual creek. One should not surmise the original question also addressed the legality of a towel as an approved Artificial Device. If anything, the RC's conclusion makes it appear that use of a towel (i.e. Artificial Device) is allowed in accordance to the specific mention of 802.04A.

It is perfectly legal to use artificial devices to protect one's skin....gloves, tape, gauze, bandages, knee braces, etc. The rule doesn't state these items need to be worn to protect the skin. For that matter, a player could kneel on a glove if doing so to protect one's skin.

Based on what Carlton said, I would call you on it unless the towel is strapped to your knee and you specifically state the abrasion rule indicating you know why you're doing it. His statement definitely excludes putting an unattached loose towel or pad behind your lie. Otherwise, stating it can be done if it's not behind your lie wouldn't have been stated.

Based on what Carlton said, I would call you on it unless the towel is strapped to your knee and you specifically state the abrasion rule indicating you know why you're doing it. His statement definitely excludes putting an unattached loose towel or pad behind your lie. Otherwise, stating it can be done if it's not behind your lie wouldn't have been stated.




So its easy, just tie it to your leg.

I have no idea what you just said.



You've been around long enough to have thrown from a stance where your body is sideways to the pin with your right foot behind the mini and your body out to the left (and still behind) the marker and your knee on the ground. No problem putting a towel under your knee. Just don't back up 18 inches so your knee is behind the mini (with a towel) and your foot out to the right of the mini. Same stance, slightly different angle, both legal, only one allows the towel under the knee.



Ah ha, thanks for clarifying.
Hmmmm, another "great" rules change IMHO. (I frequently throw from my knees with my right knee behind the mark)

I've seen many stance violations when players put a foot behind the mark and their knee ends up closer to the target.

You can put a towel down on the tee to throw from if you throw from your feet but you can't put a towel down to throw from your knees...hmmm, it gets harder &amp; harder to defend the PDGA against the bashers.

Removing the "build a lie" as within the rules as acceptable is the first rules change I can remember ever agreeing with.

Scooter...play bad enough this weekend &amp; you'll get you chance to make the call!

You can put a towel down on the tee to throw from if you throw from your feet but you can't put a towel down to throw from your knees...hmmm, it gets harder &amp; harder to defend the PDGA against the bashers.


You can still put a towel on the tee and throw from your knee(s), just not a fairway position behind the lie.

The problem with the Q&amp;A explaining rules is that the wording of the rule itself hasn't changed. Any wording improvements in the rules that would allow towels to be placed behind the lie, but not build a lie, have to wait until the actual rulebook update which likely won't occur until 2010. I'm not sure the RC is against using towels, considering their 4-3 vote, if that's all that's used. The problem is phrasing the rule simply and not getting trapped with some players stretching interpretations that go beyond just using a towel behind the lie. Looks like we have a year or two to propose revised wording.

I have no idea what you just said.



You've been around long enough to have thrown from a stance where your body is sideways to the pin with your right foot behind the mini and your body out to the left (and still behind) the marker and your knee on the ground. No problem putting a towel under your knee. Just don't back up 18 inches so your knee is behind the mini (with a towel) and your foot out to the right of the mini. Same stance, slightly different angle, both legal, only one allows the towel under the knee.



Ah ha, thanks for clarifying.
Hmmmm, another "great" rules change IMHO. (I frequently throw from my knees with my right knee behind the mark)

I've seen many stance violations when players put a foot behind the mark and their knee ends up closer to the target.

You can put a towel down on the tee to throw from if you throw from your feet but you can't put a towel down to throw from your knees...hmmm, it gets harder &amp; harder to defend the PDGA against the bashers.

Removing the "build a lie" as within the rules as acceptable is the first rules change I can remember ever agreeing with.

Scooter...play bad enough this weekend &amp; you'll get you chance to make the call!




So you will be at Bass? I may drive to the mini tomorrow as well.

So, based on the wording of the new Q&amp;A, I could in fact stack up several large stones in the water to the side and behind the mark, stand on them and place one hand in the water behind my marker and throw legally. As long as I did it within my 30 seconds.

But I can't place a towel between my knee and the ground if I am using my knee as the legal contact point.

based on chuck's argument that the note above the signatures exempts the non-contact point from the rest of the Q&amp;A

So its easy, just tie it to your leg.



Please show me where the rule says that the artificial device to prevent abrasion must be worn. The rule says "During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.)."

Note, "Use" not "wear"

Here's a thought... I play a lot of ultimate. About 50% of the time during the summer I have some form of scabbed over wound on my knee. If I don't kneel on something, I'll grind dirt into the wound. Especially when you have "road rash" on your leg from laying out less than perfectly, this can be problematic.

I thought we were worried about safety here...

Remember that playing from your knee is a choice not a requirement. Just like you may decide it's better for you to straddle putt instead of foot foward - those are choices. I doubt there's a lie where you can ONLY take a stance with your knee on the ground behind your marker. Waah, waah if you can't do that and have to throw another way. We are spoiled relative to ball golfers regarding our relatively wide variety of stance options.

show me the rule in ball golf that limits the stance options.

What I don't understand is why Chuck wants people to get injured or to damage their pants. He's playing the grumpy guy who keeps saying "You guys don't know how good you have it..." Why Chuck?

There is actually one ball golf rule. If I remember correctly, Back in the 20s or 30s a few folks (including at least one big name) started putting like they were playing croquet... So they made a rule banning straddling the line of the put...


16-1-e. Standing Astride or on Line of Putt

The player must not make a stroke on the putting green from a stance astride, or with either foot touching, the line of putt or an extension of that line behind the ball.

Exception: There is no penalty if the stance is inadvertently taken on or astride the line of putt (or an extension of that line behind the ball) or is taken to avoid standing on another player's line of putt or prospective line of putt.

show me the rule in ball golf that limits the stance options.



Few theoretical limits. But it's obvious we can and do have vastly more body positions available to us to make our shots versus ball golf since our supporting point is fixed and the projectile release point can be from most positions in at least a quarter sphere close to 12 ft in diameter. Stopping the use of one particular stance among those options, and then only from using a towel, may be unnecessary but is trivial in terms of truly limiting playing options nor supporting some red herring safety issue. There are no lies where a player is ever required to play with exception of the tee which is presumed to be safe OR you are allowed to use a towel. Quite logical from the RC standpoint even if it hampers some players from making their preferred throw versus any throw.

Please show me where the rule says that the artificial device to prevent abrasion must be worn. The rule says "During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.)."

Note, "Use" not "wear"



Also, note the use of "etc." in the short list of examples.

There is no place in Rule 802.04 A or the "Building a Lie" Q&amp;A where a towel is excluded from being used as an Artificial Device. The use of a towel on the tee is widely accepted (and practiced), yet the word "towel" is not specifically mentioned in the list of provided examples. What makes anyone think that a towel can no longer be used as an Artificial Device off the tee?

Read the Q&amp;A conclusion again regarding the question about placing rocks or limbs behind one's mark.....the RC explicitly states:

<font color="red">"One can�t �build a stance� except as allowed under 802.04 (Artificial Devices) A."</font>

If kneeling on a towel is used as an Artificial Device to protect one's knee, it's legal. A player cannot place a rock or broken limb behind their mark to stand or kneel upon, however, a player can "build a stance" using artificial devices as allowed under 802.04 (Artificial Devices) A.

Felberg r3 Memorial!!!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7987020@N02/2322093239/in/set-72157604085257159/


:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :D

Felberg r3 Memorial!!!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7987020@N02/2322093239/in/set-72157604085257159/


:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :D




Good stuff!

show me the rule in ball golf that limits the stance options.



Few theoretical limits. But it's obvious we can and do have vastly more body positions available to us to make our shots versus ball golf since our supporting point is fixed and the projectile release point can be from most positions in at least a quarter sphere close to 12 ft in diameter. Stopping the use of one particular stance among those options, and then only from using a towel, may be unnecessary but is trivial in terms of truly limiting playing options nor supporting some red herring safety issue. There are no lies where a player is ever required to play with exception of the tee which is presumed to be safe OR you are allowed to use a towel. Quite logical from the RC standpoint even if it hampers some players from making their preferred throw versus any throw.



Logical? Okay. I'll give the RC that. Unecessary and trivial? Absolutely. And that's why it should not have changed. This ill-advised Q &amp; A opinion where a towel is legal on the tee pad but not on the line of play in the fairway creates more confusion and greater opportunity for debate as it conflicts with the wording of the current artificial devices rule.

This is Exhibit A in my "reasons I probably won't renew next year" file.

I think someone needs to phone Feldberg's infraction in. :o

Either that or the RC needs to not make up new rules without informing everyone.

This is Exhibit A in my "reasons I probably won't renew next year" file.



this is more like exhibit F for me. exhibit A is definitely the new division structure.

Oh, I have others lying around. I just haven't gotten around to labeling them for the file. :D
I almost didn't renew this year. :(

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/Feldbergkneelingontowel.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=Feldbergkneelingontowel.jpg)

How can anyone see what he is kneeling on in that photo? I can't, and though I turn 48 today, I am not blind.

C) Feldberg is using a towel to keep his knee clean.

Follow the original link and enlarge the photo. It is very clearly a towel folded up.

Flickr link (http://www.flickr.com/photos/7987020@N02/2322093239/in/set-72157604085257159/)

I don't know, it looks like the piece of earth that towel is covering looks mighty pristine.

He was fortunate someone left the towel there before the round started so he couldn't move it and conveniently was able to use it. Sometimes the top guys get all the luck. :p

How can anyone see what he is kneeling on in that photo? I can't, and though I turn 48 today, I am not blind.



You can't be serious. You really turn 68 today. :D

I was never here

If you get permission from Dave, it doesn't have to be turned into an X-tier.

This is classic. The RC can make a new rule (in this case w/o publicizing it or needing approval of the BOD), and the competition director can veto it for any that ask. Cool. :cool:

Not surprising. The RC admitted that maybe they should have added the option for specifying a drop zone to be used for lost discs on holes where that was common instead of returning to the tee. So, Dave approved that option for Worlds and I think Sugarbush NT last year without X-tier status. Would you rather wait for four years for a formal rules update?

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/Feldbergkneelingontowel-1.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=Feldbergkneelingontowel-1.jpg)

802.04 Artificial Devices
A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed. A player is specifically prohibited from using any artificial device that changes the position of the disc in the player�s hand or artificially lengthens any of the player�s throwing levers (fingers, wrist, arm, shoulder, etc.). The use of devices which assist in determining distances over 10 meters, such as range finders and GPS devices are prohibited. Measuring devices such as a tape measure may be carried and used to determine distances 10 meters and less for the purpose of rules enforcement.

B. A player shall receive two penalty throws, without a warning, if, during any portion of a round, he or she is observed by two players or an official to be using or carrying an artificial device that is determined by the director to violate section 802.04 A. A player who uses an artificial device after it has been determined by the director to be in violation of 802.04 A has also violated 804.05 A (3) and shall be penalized accordingly.

Leaving aside the fact that I don't think the no towel rule should be enacted. The issue I have is that in this case a new rule was created and no one other than a few of us DGRZ on here know about it. There is currently no means to be informed when a new Q&amp;A ruling comes out (or in this case reversed). How does the average tourney player (or in this case a top pro player) know that what was legal last fall is now verboten. I would not want to be charged with the task of telling Feldberg that his amazing putt that won the tourney for him is not legal as of last December.

We may need to shorten the rules update cycle. Four years is a bit long. Every year would cause chaos. Every couple of years might be a better choice.

Since Gentry can approve rules changes, I may push for a handful for our local tourneys (including a DZ for Lost disc).

If marshals ain't going to call this then I'm not either. :D

The issue I have is that in this case a new rule was created and no one other than a few of us DGRZ on here know about it.



krupica,

Please post the rule you refer to above.

Thank you.

The rule I'm referring to is the no-towel rule inferred by the building a lie Q&amp;A.

I knelt on a mitten on Saturday. I was real slow about doing it in case anyone wanted to tell me I couldn't. Turned out that no one in my group thought I was breaking the rules enough to say so. I play by the rules in the book. There's noithng in the book about not kneeling on a towel or a mitten.

Maybe I'll sew some velcro on the knees of my tournament pants and on some old mittens and just wear my mittens on my knees when the need arises. There's nothing in the rules about not wearing mittens on your knees, either.

If marshals ain't going to call this then I'm not either.


I suspect the marshals may not have been informed yet of the Q&amp;A change but not sure. Chappy reads this D-Board regularly and was at the Memorial so I'm guessing he knows. But he may not have seen it.

Apparently the only people in the world that know about this new interpretation of the rule are the Rules Committee and those of us that have read this thread on the message board.

I asked Brian Graham about this rule at the Memorial. He said he had not heard anything about it. I printed out the new Q &amp; A about the ruling and gave it to him. He then said was waiving this rule at the Memorial. His reasoning was something to the effect that if you can't show a player where in the rule book using a towel behind your lie is illegal, it should remain legal to do so.

Since Mr. Graham said it was ok to place a towel under your knee while taking a stance behind your mini, Feldberg was technically not in violation of the new interpretation.

So Dave should have recieved a warning for a stance violation and had to rethrow? Or 2 strokes for not playing the stipulated course? or DQ for altering the course?

What is the correct penalty for this?

and
Ignorance of the rules is never a valid excuse.

Towel or no thet was some great play. Congrats to Dave and Barry. And Everyone that played too.

BOB

His reasoning was something to the effect that if you can't show a player where in the rule book using a towel behind your lie is illegal, it should remain legal to do so.



Sort of undermines the validity of the Q&amp;A when the ED himself waives them, at least for NTs.

BTW, while Suzette was posting, I had already sent a note to Gentry, Graham and Carlton requesting a resolution on this issue.

A resolution to what? The message board myth that one cannot kneel on a towel behind their mark which is clearly allowed under the 802.04 Artificial Devices rule?

Are you afraid Carlton will make it more clear than he already has that you cannot use a towel? Note that Suzette said Graham waived the ruling implying that indeed a towel could not be used in the way he did without the waiver.

BTW, I lobbied for the towel being allowed...

The issue of the ED having the power to negate rules as he wishes?

Already happened at the HOF NT last year with the waiver to allow sticks to be moved on the fairway even if partly in front of your lie.

Well why do we have rules then? They can be waived for some events on a whim. Brian deciding the rule to not be in effect retroactively is a disservice to any players that followed the rule faithfully. And there where certainly players there that knew.

what is the real rule and the real penalty if there is no veto power by TD's??? :confused: and people wonder why disc golf is not taken seriously

I would certainly opt to allow towels and pads etc... on the line of play,or anywhere. Give a max thickness of 1/4 inch and all this is solved.

He was fortunate someone left the towel there before the round started so he couldn't move it and conveniently was able to use it. Sometimes the top guys get all the luck. :p



I find this set of coincidences, as well as the fact that this makes it legal to use it (in light of the Q &amp; A opinion), hard to believe. Besides, once you kneel on it, you have moved it, unless perhaps it's a towel made of rigid steel. :eek: Add to that the comments attributed to Mr. Graham, and I find that the absurdity is growing, not shrinking.

I'll file this as Exhibit "B".

Are you afraid Carlton will make it more clear than he already has that you cannot use a towel?<font color="red"> Carlton and the Rules Committee has made two things clear: 1) a player can no longer "build a lie" by placing rocks or branches behind the marker disc (i.e. to keep one's shoe from getting wet while standing in a casual creek) and 2) players <u>can</u> �build a stance" as allowed under 802.04 (Artificial Devices) A. </font> Note that Suzette said Graham waived the ruling implying that indeed a towel could not be used in the way he did without the waiver. <font color="red"> Suzette also wrote that Graham's "reasoning was something to the effect that if you can't show a player where in the rule book using a towel behind your lie is illegal, it should remain legal to do so". </font>

BTW, I lobbied for the towel being allowed...

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

I am not afraid of the Rules Committee making any of our rules more clear and concise. To the contrary, I encourage such clarification.

My argument is not against you, Chuck, or anyone else on this discussion board....my argument is in debate over this particular topic. According to our current Rule book, if a player kneels on a towel behind their marker to build a lie, such an act would be considered illegal. However, if someone kneels on a towel behind their marker to simply protect their skin from abrasion, such an act is explicitly allowed in rule 802.04 Artificial Devices.

You're right Jerry,
This is one of the reasons we HAVE a rules committee. To clarify these conflicts. But they are a committee, not a panel of judges.

I am not afraid of the Rules Committee making any of our rules more clear and concise. To the contrary, I encourage such clarification.



My fear is that such clarification is not going to happen, as evidenced by the opinion we are discussing herein.

My hope is that this discussion and resulting communications with the RC and PDGA HQ will produce a better process for all concerned in this important area.

Most of them are way too busy to read all this. Brian had not even heard of this til it was printed out for him. I don't think they are too interested in the voice of the message board. They will listen, but we are not a majority of the membership.

...and resulting communications with the RC and PDGA HQ


This part does not rely on the message board but 'full contact' lobbying. Brian has already responded to me and others involved about getting this resolved.

...and resulting communications with the RC and PDGA HQ


This part does not rely on the message board but 'full contact' lobbying. Brian has already responded to me and others involved about getting this resolved.



I'm encouraged that this issue is seen as one worthy of immediate attention and requiring resolution.

Well why do we have rules then? They can be waived for some events on a whim. Brian deciding the rule to not be in effect retroactively is a disservice to any players that followed the rule faithfully. And there where certainly players there that knew.



Hi Bob,

I hope you are doing well. Just to clarify, I was working at the Memorial as a Marshal and was asked about the towel issue by a couple of the ladies just prior to round 2. I told them that because there is no rule in our Official Rules of Play that explicitly forbids the use of a towel under your knee I would not penalize someone for doing so. Suzette mentioned the rules interpretation manual, which I am aware of, and she even printed out the page in question and brought it to the course the next day. The bottom line is that I am unwilling to hold players to an interpretation that has not been properly published and communicated. Can you imagine the fallout if I had tried enforcing a so called "rule" that does not exist in our rulebook?

Players have been resting their knees on towels and discs for over 30 years and it has never been an issue before now. Now all of a sudden it is an issue because a few people think that maybe a rules interpretation implies it? No thanks! I'll wait for the rules committee to specifically address this issue and make a clear and concise decision on this subject. To do otherwise would be unfair to the competitors and irresponsible in my opinion.

The decision to allow players to remove sticks, even if it extended in front of their lie, at the HOF Classic was made by myself as the tournament director of the event and it was purely for safety reasons. This variance from the rules was approved by the tour manager prior to the event. The South Course had just been installed a week prior to the tournament and the ground was rough, uneven and strewn with natural debris. The players safety was my only concern and all of the players I talked to at the event agreed that it was the right thing to do given the potentially dangerous conditions.

Regards,
Brian Graham
PDGA Executive Director

Bravo, Brian Graham!

Brian,

Thanks for weighing in. Can we infer the only rules we need to follow in PDGA play are those in the rule book?

If a situation is not banned in the rule book but is better explained in the Rules Q&amp;A we cannot be penalized?

Please clarify.

Thanks,

Pete

Brian,

Thanks for weighing in. Can we infer the only rules we need to follow in PDGA play are those in the rule book?

If a situation is not banned in the rule book but is better explained in the Rules Q&amp;A we cannot be penalized?

Please clarify.

Thanks,

Pete



That is a slippery slope be careful Brian.

Hi Pete,

Please do not infer anything based upon my opinions or posts. My post above is only in regards to the questions posed to me at the Memorial concerning the use of a towel under a knee. My decision was also made as the Marshal of the event and not as the executive director of the PDGA. I have no authority as the E.D. to make rules decisions or give variances and I have absolutely no intentions or wishes to do so. We have a very competent and qualified rules committee who will address this issue and I will gladly abide by their decision whether I personally agree with it or not.

Regards,
Brian Graham
PDGA Executive Director

Thanks Brian,

I understand. I also urge caution. Very slippery slope.

This is a ridiculous waste of bandwidth

RC: get real :p

Well why do we have rules then? They can be waived for some events on a whim. Brian deciding the rule to not be in effect retroactively is a disservice to any players that followed the rule faithfully. And there where certainly players there that knew.



Hi Bob,

I hope you are doing well. Just to clarify, I was working at the Memorial as a Marshal and was asked about the towel issue by a couple of the ladies just prior to round 2. I told them that because there is no rule in our Official Rules of Play that explicitly forbids the use of a towel under your knee I would not penalize someone for doing so. Suzette mentioned the rules interpretation manual, which I am aware of, and she even printed out the page in question and brought it to the course the next day. The bottom line is that I am unwilling to hold players to an interpretation that has not been properly published and communicated. Can you imagine the fallout if I had tried enforcing a so called "rule" that does not exist in our rulebook?

Players have been resting their knees on towels and discs for over 30 years and it has never been an issue before now. Now all of a sudden it is an issue because a few people think that maybe a rules interpretation implies it? No thanks! I'll wait for the rules committee to specifically address this issue and make a clear and concise decision on this subject. To do otherwise would be unfair to the competitors and irresponsible in my opinion.

The decision to allow players to remove sticks, even if it extended in front of their lie, at the HOF Classic was made by myself as the tournament director of the event and it was purely for safety reasons. This variance from the rules was approved by the tour manager prior to the event. The South Course had just been installed a week prior to the tournament and the ground was rough, uneven and strewn with natural debris. The players safety was my only concern and all of the players I talked to at the event agreed that it was the right thing to do given the potentially dangerous conditions.

Regards,
Brian Graham
PDGA Executive Director



Sweet! In a sport battling for legitimacy, a rogue marshall (who also happens to be the Executive Director or the sport's governing body) unilaterally decides to reverse the duly-decided &amp; announced clarification of the rules committee due to his dissatisfaction with their decision. (Oh, I mean "an interpretation that has not been properly published and communicated.") Maybe we should let every TD pick &amp; choose the rules he wants to adopt for his event. (Or is that privilege restricted to PDGA "insiders"?)

Another woeful episode in the woeful history of PDGA governance. :(

Hi Brian,
Thank you for addressing this publicly.

I applaud your decision making in both situations. I agree safety is and should be a prority in interpreting the rules.
(which is why I disagree with the building a lie ruling)
And that the HOF and The Memorial was not converted to X Tier Status due to the rule alteration, gives me hope that in the interest of safety, other modification can be made to events without an event having to change it's tier.

You are correct that we players have been placing towels and discs under our knees for a long time. I use a circular foam pad myself. I think if you were to take a poll of the players, there would be an overwhelming voice to allow the towel/disc/pad.

You're the Executive Director now. And I don't think you can decide as anything else. It's a higher rank than a Marshall. The President can't just go off and be a regular guy.

I know you Brian. You're a smart guy and I think you're the right guy to be our E.D.

BOB

putt it right!

Sweet! In a sport battling for legitimacy, a rogue marshall (who also happens to be the Executive Director or the sport's governing body) unilaterally decides to reverse the duly-decided &amp; announced clarification of the rules committee due to his dissatisfaction with their decision. (Oh, I mean "an interpretation that has not been properly published and communicated.") Maybe we should let every TD pick &amp; choose the rules he wants to adopt for his event. (Or is that privilege restricted to PDGA "insiders"?)

Another woeful episode in the woeful history of PDGA governance. :(




My decision was also made as the Marshal of the event and not as the executive director of the PDGA.

Regards,
Brian Graham
PDGA Executive Director



He was an official Marshal for the event. How is that a "rogue" Marshal? Additionally, that he is ED of the PDGA has absolutely zero bearing on this issue.

The only things "woeful" here are the exaggerations, the lame conspiracy theories, and the accusations of insider favoritism.

please Jeff,
this has been a nice discussion without any serious conflict.
You're reaction is little more than instigation.
Please leave the inflamations at home.
You are better than this

Bob

Sorry Bob, but I won't sit idly "at home" while wild conspiracy theories and unfounded accusations are bandied about.

I'm quenching the inflammations and instigations others are attempting to start.

I'm quenching the inflammations and instigations others are attempting to start.



yep... that's the ticket.

Thanks Brian for the explanations.
Good rulings in both instances and clearly reasoned.
I do hope both these issues become rules as they were explained in your post.
In Texas players often need padding from the unforgiving terrain and most courses are ungroomed so moving a stick further away from the course is good for the course.

Brian,

the only problem I have is the following part of your statement:

Players have been resting their knees on towels and discs for over 30 years and it has never been an issue before now. Now all of a sudden it is an issue because a few people think that maybe a rules interpretation implies it? No thanks! I'll wait for the rules committee to specifically address this issue and make a clear and concise decision on this subject. To do otherwise would be unfair to the competitors and irresponsible in my opinion.



It is my understanding that the Q&amp;A section is the place where the rules committee specifically addresses issues between rule book updates. They did make a clear and concise (published at least) decision on the issue. They even included the comment that they had carefully re-considered this question and the current one was a reversal of the original decision.

If you had a copy of the Q&amp;A you should have known this information.

By waiving the Q&amp;A as not enforceable because it is not in the rule book, haven't you made all of the Q&amp;A articles not enforceable until they are made part of the rule book.

Brian,

the only problem I have is the following part of your statement:

Players have been resting their knees on towels and discs for over 30 years and it has never been an issue before now. Now all of a sudden it is an issue because a few people think that maybe a rules interpretation implies it? No thanks! I'll wait for the rules committee to specifically address this issue and make a clear and concise decision on this subject. To do otherwise would be unfair to the competitors and irresponsible in my opinion.



It is my understanding that the Q&amp;A section is the place where the rules committee specifically addresses issues between rule book updates. They did make a clear and concise (published at least) decision on the issue. They even included the comment that they had carefully re-considered this question and the current one was a reversal of the original decision.

If you had a copy of the Q&amp;A you should have known this information.

By waiving the Q&amp;A as not enforceable because it is not in the rule book, haven't you made all of the Q&amp;A articles not enforceable until they are made part of the rule book.



Gary,

Please provide us with any information which specifically identifies the Rules Q&amp;A (http://pdga.com/rules/qa.php) found on pdga.com as a supplementary document to the PDGA's Official Rules of Disc Golf (http://pdga.com/documents/2007/PDGA2007rulebook.pdf).

never mind i found it ^^^^ thanks, but it's definitely not clear and concise as it has the 802.04 loophole.
I think that the RC just likes to make really vague rules and sit back and laugh at everyone argueing a rule that doesnt really mean anything or could be interpreted many different ways.



They did make a clear and concise (published at least) decision on the issue. They even included the comment that they had carefully re-considered this question and the current one was a reversal of the original decision.




where can i find the Q&amp;A or the published clear and concise decision made on this rule?

Start with the Rules link on the top left of every PDGA page then click the Rules Q&amp;A link on top of that page.

Brian,

the only problem I have is the following part of your statement:

Players have been resting their knees on towels and discs for over 30 years and it has never been an issue before now. Now all of a sudden it is an issue because a few people think that maybe a rules interpretation implies it? No thanks! I'll wait for the rules committee to specifically address this issue and make a clear and concise decision on this subject. To do otherwise would be unfair to the competitors and irresponsible in my opinion.



It is my understanding that the Q&amp;A section is the place where the rules committee specifically addresses issues between rule book updates. They did make a clear and concise (published at least) decision on the issue. They even included the comment that they had carefully re-considered this question and the current one was a reversal of the original decision.

If you had a copy of the Q&amp;A you should have known this information.

By waiving the Q&amp;A as not enforceable because it is not in the rule book, haven't you made all of the Q&amp;A articles not enforceable until they are made part of the rule book.



Gary,

Please provide us with any information which specifically identifies the Rules Q&amp;A (http://pdga.com/rules/qa.php) found on pdga.com as a supplementary document to the PDGA's Official Rules of Disc Golf (http://pdga.com/documents/2007/PDGA2007rulebook.pdf).



:eek:
Man, I have NOT been paying attention, OR just spending to much time on the www.odsa. com forum.. :p

WHO started this "issue" over "building a lie" anyway??? :confused:


SOMEONE needs a REAL job..

WHY is the placement of a towel or "round foam pad" as noted earlier such an issue??

:p

You can find the Rules Q&amp;A under the Rules tab at the top of the web site page. Please note, based upon the amount of debate on this topic, the Q&amp;A answer is not "clear and concise".

UPM got it started when he observed or reported regarding a player last spring who moved a rock and placed it behind his lie in casual water so his foot wouldn't get wet taking a stance. RC answered saying you shouldn't put anything behind your lie to stand on.

That could have been me with the rock. I should just pack rubber boots in my bag, since changing shoes is not an issue.

BTW in the sanctioning agreement

http://www.pdga.com/documents/2008/08SanctionAgreement.pdf

on page two is the agreement to enforce the competition manual. Which is a printing of the Q and A.

Bob

"except those devices
that reduce or control abrasion to the
skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages,
gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as
knee and ankle braces, etc.)."

my interpretation of this is that any device that reduces or controls abraison is legal especially considering the use of "etc" in the rule.

sorry but your dumb if you don't see that /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif and thats a personal attack on anyone that doesn't get it by the way :p

BTW in the sanctioning agreement

http://www.pdga.com/documents/2008/08SanctionAgreement.pdf

on page two is the agreement to enforce the competition manual. Which is a printing of the Q and A.

Bob



Bob,

Many of us are aware of the requirement to enforce the Competition Manual during sanctioned events, however, the Rules Q &amp; A is not part of said manual. Please advise where it is a stated requirement to print the Rules Q&amp;A for use as part of the Competition Manual? I looked, but could not find any such reference. The closest requirements I could find in the Competition Manual were the following:

<font color="red"> The PDGA Competition Manual outlines procedures and guidelines for
PDGA events, and is to be used in conjunction with the Official Rules
of Play and Tour Standards document. </font>

and

<font color="red"> Section 3: Player Code of Conduct
3.1. General
A. All tournament players must abide by the information
given in the PDGA Competition Manual and the PDGA
Rules of Play. Any player in non-compliance may be
disqualified, or may not be allowed to participate in the
tournament at any time. </font>

Thanks.

Right on Jerry,
I thought the competition manual WAS a printing of the Q and A.

Bob

I was discussing this with another marshal during lunch.

There are really two things about this that bother me.

1. By stating that nothing can be placed between the "official point of contact" and the playing surface, but allowing things between the non-official contact points, the RC has declared that the non-official contact points are not part of the lie and therefore exempt from any "building a lie" rules.

2. By Brian stating that a Q&amp;A decision that was not well known or directly supportable in the rule book could not be enforced, all of the Q&amp;As become basically unenforceable. Because it the subject of the Q&amp;A were clearly defined in the rule book, there would be no Q&amp;A on that subject.

The Q&amp;A is not even clearly defined in the Q&amp;A... If you say that someone can't use a device to control abraisions, you'd be going against what the rule book and what the Q&amp;A state as legal.

That leads to another question. Does 802.04 imply that abrasion control devices must be items that are worn or attached to the player ?

I can see a real difference between something applied to the playing surface versus something attached to the player.

Abrasion conrol is a safty/health issue. As such should not be limited to items that are worn.

side thought, if a player walks with a cane, isn't that a supporting point? Can the player use the cane/point as his official support behind his mini?

Bob

That leads to another question. Does 802.04 imply that abrasion control devices must be items that are worn or attached to the player ?




the examples given sort of imply that, but the use of "etc" and lack of stating it has to be worn or attached make it too vague to call.

and I actually pay $$ for this confusion.. awesome once again :confused:

NO PLAYER IS FORCED TO THROW FROM THEIR KNEE. IT'S ONE OF SEVERAL CHOICES.

We have so many options for releasing a legal throw in this sport that to worry about a restriction to disallow use of a towel behind a lie is nonsense. I would prefer to be allowed to use one. But I also recognize it's a choice to make a throw from that position and I have other options. If your disc lands an inch closer to the basket than 10m, you can't jump putt. Big deal, you choose another putting stance. You can still play from your knee sometimes by moving 18" to the left of your lie, put the towel under your knee and leave your right foot behind the mini. It shouldn't be that big of a deal.

However, the big deal in this discussion is simply the procedures to update Q&amp;As, announce them sufficiently and incorporate them in play during the years in between updates. That's the part that's needs to be improved, not whether we should be able to build a lie or not with a towel.

I agree 100% with this statement :D

"disallow use of a towel behind a lie is nonsense"

23 PDGA events this weekend. Can players put a towel under their supporting point or not?

I was told at the Memorial that placing a towel under your knee was against the rules but I wasn't gonna get a penalty for it. Whatever! I think that is GARBAGE. I was staying in Snottsdale and I certainly wasn't going to go back to Snottsdale with dirty knees. Stroke or not :D

23 PDGA events this weekend. Can players put a towel under their supporting point or not?



As a certified official, I would say yes they can.
The competition manual does not contain the Q&amp;A and therefore there is nothing stating that the Q&amp;A must be enforced. Yes, the Q&amp;A helps the RC further exemplify what is intended, but it is impossible to enforce a rule that is not really a rule. I understand the different viewpoints, but I can only go by what is in the book(s).
This reminds me of 2004 World's, where it was stated online that a tape measure would be part of the player's package. I said "you can't then use that during the tourney as no measuring devices are permitted." At which point Carlton stated that he never meant no tape measures, just no rangefinders. In fact he said that he carried a tape measure with him at all times. It doesn't matter to me what was intended when the rule was written, just what is written PERIOD.
The way this is going, we should have comments from every member of the RC after every rule to inform us as to the spirit of the rule beyond what the rule states.

They cannot unless Brian Graham (or some other "official" who thinks he can make up his own set of rules) spuriously bestows that privilege upon them.

They cannot unless Brian Graham (or some other "official" who thinks he can make up his own set of rules) spuriously bestows that privilege upon them.



Hey Ray, check out the list of certified officials here (http://www.pdga.com/certified_officials.php?sort=pdganum). Notice Brian Graham, #5861, certified in July of 1997.

So why the quotes around "official?" That's curious, especially since PDGA#21579 isn't on that list. :eek:

They cannot unless Brian Graham (or some other "official" who thinks he can make up his own set of rules) spuriously bestows that privilege upon them.



Hey Ray, check out the list of certified officials here (http://www.pdga.com/certified_officials.php?sort=pdganum). Notice Brian Graham, #5861, certified in July of 1997.

So why the quotes around "official?" That's curious, especially since PDGA#21579 isn't on that list. :eek:


Funny thing. Dave Feldberg, the one kneeling on the towel in the picture, is a certified official. So I guess he knew the rule would be waived prior to it being waived. Or, perhaps, I guess he was passively voicing his resistance to adopting the rules Q&amp;A.

I agree with what Graham said to some extent, that the Q &amp; A is just a written interpretation of the rules(even though written by the RC), they were not the "rules", and he is right about that. We play by the "rules". If the Q &amp; A raises issues with the rules as written, then the rules need to be re-worded or re-written to clafify said issues, not text posted on cyberspace for the enlightened to seek and find. Chalk up one for The Assocaition here folks.

They cannot unless Brian Graham (or some other "official" who thinks he can make up his own set of rules) spuriously bestows that privilege upon them.



Hey Ray, check out the list of certified officials here (http://www.pdga.com/certified_officials.php?sort=pdganum). Notice Brian Graham, #5861, certified in July of 1997.

So why the quotes around "official?" That's curious, especially since PDGA#21579 isn't on that list. :eek:



That right there is funny as hell. This thread qualifies as the second biggest waste of my time today.

I think using a towel is essential when one does not want to get dirt, sticky tree sap, or goose poop, or whatever happens to be on the ground where you are at on my $100 dollar lightweight, water resistant, sweat wicking, developed on the space shuttle wind pants. And anyone that tells me I cannot put a towel down under my knee to putt is wrong for it. I think if your going to change a rule change the two meter unenforceable, nonone carries a string, the ground is uneven, stupid rule!!!!!!

Here we go,
my first poll :)

I agree 100% with this statement :D

"disallow use of a towel behind a lie is nonsense"



I disagree. You don't have to throw from a lie that requires you to kneel down. If you didn't want to have to kneel down you shouldn't have thrown your disc into a position that requires that. Just my 2 cents.

So, if the RC further clarifies the Q&amp;A to allow a towel, would you feel OK allowing a player to use an upside down disc instead if they didn't have a towel since that's also been another common "knee protector" used over the years?

Sure I would.
What advantage is gained from kneeling on a disc? 6mm? (that's like 1/4 inch)
I use a foam pad that compresses to like 3mm.
This is not really a build up. The soles of my shoes are thicker that that.

Comfort? Not having dirty/wet knees the rest of the round? Arguably a serious advantage.

The flip side of this seems to be, "play it where it lies."
I agree with this. Just how placing a towel,disc or pad under your supporting point on the line of play changes that basic concept is the part that eludes me.

How about you Chuck? Would YOU feel okay allowing a player to use an upside down disc?

BOB

UPM got it started when he observed or reported regarding a player last spring who moved a rock and placed it behind his lie in casual water so his foot wouldn't get wet taking a stance. RC answered saying you shouldn't put anything behind your lie to stand on.



I'm proud to say my foot started this debacle..lol.

http://www.nefa.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=2255&amp;start=0

That could have been me with the rock. I should just pack rubber boots in my bag, since changing shoes is not an issue.

BTW in the sanctioning agreement

http://www.pdga.com/documents/2008/08SanctionAgreement.pdf

on page two is the agreement to enforce the competition manual. Which is a printing of the Q and A.

Bob



This is fine if a group seeks a ruling from a Certified Official (who should know or at least have the Competition Manual and Q&amp;A section available), but are all tournament players expected to study and know the Competion Manual as well as the rulebook? If I were a new player and knew I had to follow PDGA rules, I'd look at the rulebook and treat it as the bible. I would not expect supplemental material to be necessary to discuss/make rulings not in the rulebook.

The Q&amp;A section should be included in the rulebook, with a disclaimer that new Q&amp;A entries may be found online and are also valid.

Yes, all tournament players are expected to follow the rules. The Competition Manual is a supplement to the rules.

-From the introduction of the Competition Manual-

The PDGA Competition Manual outlines procedures and guidelines for
PDGA events, and is to be used in conjunction with the Official Rules
of Play and Tour Standards document. These procedures and
guidelines are required for all PDGA sanctioned events unless
specified otherwise. If a Tournament Director finds any provision in
the document unacceptable a waiver may be requested by contacting
the Tour Manger.
Every effort has been made for this manual to compliment and expand
upon information contained in other documents. Where documents
appear to conflict this manual should be considered the authoritative
source. In the case of a conflict between documents the reader is
encouraged to contact the PDGA office directly for clarification.


No mention of the Q and A, but I think that was discussed earlier in the thread.

Bob

The RC is considering this issue right now. The Tour Manager hopes to get this resolved by this weekend if possible. I've suggested that the language specify an allowable object thickness instead of specifying just a towel.

Yes, all tournament players are expected to follow the rules. The Competition Manual is a supplement to the rules.

-From the introduction of the Competition Manual-

The PDGA Competition Manual outlines procedures and guidelines for
PDGA events, and is to be used in conjunction with the Official Rules
of Play and Tour Standards document. These procedures and
guidelines are required for all PDGA sanctioned events unless
specified otherwise. If a Tournament Director finds any provision in
the document unacceptable a waiver may be requested by contacting
the Tour Manger.
Every effort has been made for this manual to compliment and expand
upon information contained in other documents. Where documents
appear to conflict this manual should be considered the authoritative
source. In the case of a conflict between documents the reader is
encouraged to contact the PDGA office directly for clarification.


No mention of the Q and A, but I think that was discussed earlier in the thread.

Bob



FYI, briefly glancing at the pdf rulebook, it does not appear there is any mention of the Competition Manual. CMs are included in the TDs tournament package but as far as I know are not part of the PDGA membership package for new memberships. If I were a player without internet service I may not even be aware of a Competition Manual or Q&amp;A section.

As a Certified Official we are expected to be up to date on rules in the rulebook, CM, and Q&amp;A, but I would not expect players to be familiar with this material, which as we've learned are necessary to make some rulings.

I hope the RC has a solution to this as well.

- doot

I should have put my poll at the start of a new thread for the rules committee.

Bob

Anyone ever actually use the towel in their line of play? I know that probably 99% of the time I use a towel it is used on my other supporting point not right behind the mini. Normally if I have to throw from a knee I am sticking a foot behind the mini and have the towel under the opposite knee.

C'monnnnn scooter, I did it three times Sunday. (O.K. you're crushing me by 9 after 18 holes...I can understand not wanting to watch such inferior play!)

I agree 100% with this statement :D

"disallow use of a towel behind a lie is nonsense"



I disagree. You don't have to throw from a lie that requires you to kneel down. If you didn't want to have to kneel down you shouldn't have thrown your disc into a position that requires that. Just my 2 cents.



You and 34 are both correct....one does not have to "throw from a lie that requires you to kneel down". You are, however, required to play PDGA sanctioned events according to the official rules of disc golf. Please observe Rule 802.04 Artificial Devices:

<font color="blue"> 802.04 Artificial Devices
A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed. A player is specifically prohibited from using any artificial device that changes the position of the disc in the player�s hand or artificially lengthens any of the player�s throwing levers (fingers, wrist, arm, shoulder, etc.). The use of devices which assist in determining distances over 10 meters, such as range finders and GPS devices are prohibited. Measuring devices such as a tape measure may be carried and used to determine distances 10 meters and less for the purpose of rules enforcement.

B. A player shall receive two penalty throws, without a warning, if, during any portion of a round, he or she is observed by two players or an official to be using or carrying an artificial device that is determined by the director to violate section 802.04 A. A player who uses an artificial device after it has been determined by the director to be in violation of 802.04 A has also violated 804.05 A (3) and shall be penalized accordingly.

</font>
This rule clearly allows artificial devices to be <u>used</u> in order to protect one's skin from abrasion. Allow me to demonstrate:

The following image shows the use of tape and gauze:
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/bandageknee1.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=bandageknee1.jpg)

The following image shows the use of a bandage:
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/bandageknee2.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=bandageknee2.jpg)

The following images shows use of various padded knee braces:
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/kneepadpaddedkneesupport.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=kneepadpaddedkneesupport.jpg)
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/Kneepad2.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=Kneepad2.jpg)
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/kneebrace3.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=kneebrace3.jpg)
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/kneepad3.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=kneepad3.jpg)

The following images show various examples of gloves, also approved Artificial Devices under rule 802.04:
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/glove1.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=glove1.jpg)
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/BreathThermoGlove.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=BreathThermoGlove.jpg)

All of the items pictured above are allowed under rule 802.04 to protect a player's skin from abrasion. Even the Rules Committee acknowledges the legality of "building a stance" using Artificial Devices in their conclusion to the "Building a Lie" Q & A (RC answer provided below):

<font color="blue"> Conclusion: You take a stance in the mud or casual water just as you would in the fairway. One should never expect to be able to move obstacles, except as narrowly defined under �Obstacles and Relief�. <font color="red">One can�t �build a stance� except as allowed under 802.04 (Artificial Devices) A.</font>

One could still place a small pad or a towel under any body part that is not the supporting point meeting the requirement of 803.04A (1). </font>

Please note the sentence highlighted in red which specifically acknowledges (or allows) a player to "build a stance" in accordance with the 802.04 rule. Some folks in this discussion continue to focus on the final statement of the RC's conclusion, disregarding the RC's allowance of Artificial Devices in the preceding sentence. One may imply whatever they want in regard to the last sentence of the RC's conclusion, however, the preceding sentence holds precedence over that final statement. Why? It's quite simple, really. The 802.04 Artificial Devices rule is published in the Official Rules of Disc Golf and use of such artificial devices to prevent abrasion to one's skin are allowed for supporting points meeting the requirement of 803.04A. Shoes or sandals would be considered artificial devices to protect one's skin from abrasion.

:)

Okay, let's continue with this demonstration and let us also reiterate the fact that "gloves" are allowed under rule 802.04. Now, pretend the following image shows a female player on a disc golf course and this is the legal stance she has chosen. All supporting points are behind her mark and her hand is properly positioned along the line of play. For the purpose of this discussion, let's also pretend she is taking this stance on natural ground or dirt:

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/fourPointKneelingLevel02End.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=fourPointKneelingLevel02End.jpg)
Now, pretend she is wearing a glove.

I would have a hard time believing anyone could argue the legality of her stance nor the usage of a glove in accordance with rule 802.04. The rule specifically states she is allowed to wear a glove as does the RC's conclusion to the Building a Lie question.

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/fourPointKneelingLevel02End.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=fourPointKneelingLevel02End.jpg)
Now pretend the female pictured above is wearing a glove and taking this legal stance......in a casual creek. The RC made it clear she can't build her lie by placing a rock or broken limb behind her marker on the line of play, but she can "build a stance" using an Artificial Device to protect her skin.

:D


http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/Feldbergkneelingontowel-2.jpg (http://s214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/?action=view&current=Feldbergkneelingontowel-2.jpg)

As Feldberg demonstrates above, the use of a towel as an Artificial Device to prevent abrasion to one's skin is specifically allowed under rule 802.04:

* Rule 802.04 Artificial Devices does not exclude a towel from being used to protect one's skin from abrasion.

* Rule 802.04 allows the use of a towel on the teeing surface (even though the word "towel" is not explicitly mentioned). Use of a towel on the teeing surface is commonly practiced and, in that aspect, a towel is legally considered an approved Artificial Device. No place in the rule book does it state the towel can no longer be used as an Artificial Device (to control or reduce skin abrasion) once a player is off the tee.

* Rule 802.04 does not state Artificial Devices must be "worn". As a result of the rule's wording, a player can technically "kneel" upon any Artificial Device in order to reduce or control abrasion to the skin.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

NO PLAYER IS FORCED TO USE ARTIFICIAL DEVICES. IT'S ONE OF SEVERAL CHOICES. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

C'monnnnn scooter, I did it three times Sunday. (O.K. you're crushing me by 9 after 18 holes...I can understand not wanting to watch such inferior play!)




Yeah but you are the minority. Most players don't even use it behind the mini but instead on the opposite knee. The only way have seen other wise is throwing from both knees.

Alex and I have been around a lot longer than you, Scoot...

Deciding which knee gets the towel treatment depends entirely upon the lie. :D

Your interpretation is invalid because the RC has not considered an unattached towel in the category of artificial devices per their last statement in the Q&amp;A despite your protestions to the contrary. Feldberg's use was allowed because the marshal set aside the Q&amp;A ruling disallowing the towel. It's also apparent in the current dialog among the RC that the towel issue has little to do with artificial devices but pertains to whether an exception should be allowed, like a towel or other appropriate object, for something to be placed behind the lie.

Alex and I have been around a lot longer than you, Scoot...

Deciding which knee gets the towel treatment depends entirely upon the lie. :D



I know but unless you are just trying to get lower to the ground to throw under something I don't see why you would put a knee down behind your mini. I have done it before but not nearly as much as when I have just put a knee down off my mark and then stretched my leg to the mini.

Chuck, are you privy to the committee discusion?

Sccoter, I know of some older players that ALWAYS putt from a knee.

Come back east some time Sunny.

Bob

Your interpretation is invalid because the RC has not considered an unattached towel in the category of artificial devices per their last statement in the Q&amp;A despite your protestions to the contrary. Feldberg's use was allowed because the marshal set aside the Q&amp;A ruling disallowing the towel. It's also apparent in the current dialog among the RC that the towel issue has little to do with artificial devices but pertains to whether an exception should be allowed, like a towel or other appropriate object, for something to be placed behind the lie.



My interpretation is invalid? I didn't realize you were leading authority on interpretations.

Chuck, since you have previously stated that you would call a rules violation on me or other players for kneeling on a towel behind our marker discs (or you would attempt to make players feel guilty for kneeling upon an Artificial Device and using the "abrasion" excuse), I'll just make sure I kneel on my "etc." to reduce or control abrasion to my skin. I'll also discontinue using a towel and, instead, lay down an "item" on the tee pad if the surface seems slippery.....all legal under the 802.04 Artificial Devices rule. Unless, of course, you surmise a different interpretation of "etc." and "items".

I am sometimes when they include a few people beyond the RC but not normally. I suspect there may be deliberations going on amongst themselves at the moment.

Chuck,
so what kind of "etc." can we use as an artifial device? If I write "etc." on a towel would that make it legal?

I think feldbergs use was allowed because it's not a real rule. if it was permission would be needed to waive the rule for the event as stated here in the CM "If a Tournament Director finds any provision in
the document unacceptable a waiver may be requested by contacting
the Tour Manger."

Aren't you glad i paid enough attention to the details of this PDGA picture! :D
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc184/gotcherj/Feldbergkneelingontowel-2.jpg

This day in Knee Towel history brought to you by Scott Towels.

Sung to the tune of Lean on Me

Kneel on me, when you're not strong, a towel to leeeannn on.
When there are rocks, and sticks that will hurt, get out your towel and kneeeel.

Just, swallow your pride, get out your towel and kneeeel.



So, a guy walks into a bar, gets out a towel, and sets it on his seat. The bartender asks him what he's doing? The guy replies,

Rule 808.4, a player may use a protective device to protect their donkey from abrasion, but not to build a lie.

Kobe comes up to take the shot, he lines up but the fans are all waving their knee protection towels to distract him. He quickly borrows a towel puts his knee on it, and drains the shot.

Fashion designer Ralph Lauren has released a new line of knee protection towels to be used exclusively at PDGA events. The towels were tested and sanctioned by the PDGA, but their use is still controversial. Carlton Howard of the PDGA RC states, "the darn things give me a rash, I'm not allowin' it!"

Today, the first PDGA approved knee towel lifted into space aboard the space shuttle Endeavor. Said Astronaut Binge Adolpho as he wiped his face, "I thought it was a sweat towel."

Next week players of the Southern Nationals Disc Golf Tournament are meeting on the in front of the White House where they will place 999,987,076 knee towels that have been sewn into a quilt to commemorate all of the scarred knees that have occurred due to the mis-perception that knee towels were not permitted by the PDGA.

And there you have it, this day in knee towel history... :p

My interpretation is invalid? I didn't realize you were leading authority on interpretations.


I'm saying you've been distracting the dialog using the artificial devices exception applied to loose towels. This has been explicitly pointed out to not be acceptable with their last statement in the Q&amp;A. A towel attached to the leg would pass muster as an acceptable abrasion device albeit a bizarre thing I hope wouldn't be needed once the RC revisits this issue.

It just cracks me up to imagine David Feherty announcing, "There's Doss getting the tape from his caddy so he can attach the towel to his knee and legally take a stance under this bush for the winning putt." :o

As an official, I am "A person who is authorized to make judgments regarding the proper application of the rules during play." I don't see anything within the rules that says anyone else's interpretation is more or less valid than mine. The only exception is that a TD's interpretation rules over all, within the context of their own event.

I don't see anything within the PDGA's organizational docs that says the RC has any authority or responsibility beyond deciding what goes into the rulebook. Please correct me if I'm wrong here.

Nowhere in my "Official Rules of Disc Golf" book does it say that there are more rules of play to be found at another location. It seems to me that the book, and the officials' interpretation of the text within that book, is the final word. I think its great that the RC takes time to answer questions, but I dont think that their interpretation of the text is any more valid than mine. If they dont like my interpretation, then they should have written the rulebook in a way that clearly excludes it.

In my official :) opinion, the key phrase in 802.04 is "device that may assist in making a throw". I dont believe that a towel assists your throw. I believe that it assists you keeping your knees dry and clean. I would never call a penalty on someone for this.

I also believe that the "fairness" rule, while vague, covers the situations where someone tries to bend this rule (like the example where someone is stacking towels). In the end, it comes down to the group/official/TD's idea of what is fair.

I'm saying you've been distracting the dialog using the artificial devices exception applied to loose towels.



Oh, now it's "loose" towels. I suppose you've already realized you can't win this debate if players tie a towel around their knee and call it a bandage. Oh yeah, ....now I remember....that's when you said you would try to make a player feel guilty for doing so.

If I may, let me distract this dialog a bit further with what some may believe as an invalid interpretation of rule 802.04.
The official rule is quoted in <font color="blue"> blue </font> and my invalid interpretations are in <font color="red"> red </font> :

<font color="blue"> 802.04 Artificial Devices
A. During a round, a player shall not use <font color="red"> (note the word "use" as opposed to "wear") </font> any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) <font color="red"> (please note this list of examples includes use of "etc."....for those of you who may not know what that abbreviation stands for, it is short for "etcetera", meaning "And other unspecified things; and so forth.") </font> and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc. <font color="red"> (there's that "etc." abbreviation again)</font> ). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed <font color="red"> (we see players use loose towels as Artificial Devices on the tee, yet no place in the rule book does it state a towel cannot be used off the tee to protect against skin abrasion. A player cannot use a towel to stand upon a muddy fairway or slope for logical reasons: The Competition Manual requires players to wear shoes or sandals, thus, <u>standing</u> on a towel would be considered "Building a Lie" ....the shoe or sandal is equipment/protective gear which protects the skin...no reason for a towel in that situation. Maybe that's why the RC answered the question the way they did....the question specifically asked if you could move a rock or branch into the creek to stand upon)</font>. A player is specifically prohibited from using any artificial device that changes the position of the disc in the player�s hand or artificially lengthens any of the player�s throwing levers (fingers, wrist, arm, shoulder, etc.). The use of devices which assist in determining distances over 10 meters, such as range finders and GPS devices are prohibited. Measuring devices such as a tape measure may be carried and used to determine distances 10 meters and less for the purpose of rules enforcement. <font color="red"> (The rule specifically excludes certain items, however, a towel is not one of them.)</font>

B. A player shall receive two penalty throws, without a warning, if, during any portion of a round, he or she is observed by two players or an official to be using or carrying an artificial device that is determined by the director to violate section 802.04 A. A player who uses an artificial device after it has been determined by the director to be in violation of 802.04 A has also violated 804.05 A (3) and shall be penalized accordingly. </font>


The Rules Q&amp;A is <u>not</u> part of the official rule book or the Competition Manual. That said, Feldberg (or any other player who opts to kneel upon a towel to protect their knee) is in full compliance of the rule the way it is currently written. No marshal needed.

My sincerest apologies to anyone who feels I have distracted this dialog with the 802.04 Artificial Devices exception which is specifically referenced, acknowledged and included in the RC's official answer to the Build a Lie question.

p.s. "Stand and Deliver" was more of a distraction to this particular discussion....but that's just my opinion.

This is a stupid rule The rules people need to get real

There should be a weight limit for towels being used and they should be weighed during check-in unless they are microfiber towels. Only new microfiber towels could be used just once and then thrown away after kneeling on them as they would then be over the manufacturers specified weight. :D

There should be a weight limit for towels being used and they should be weighed during check-in unless they are microfiber towels. Only new microfiber towels could be used just once and then thrown away after kneeling on them as they would then be over the manufacturers specified weight. :D



But I think that if the towel comes from the manufacturer and is on the PDGA approved towel list, it should be good to go. We don't have time for 90 players to line up and check in their towels... besides, what if a player wants to grab a spare towel from his/her car during the round? How are we going to police that?

I think we should limit all towels to a max of 180 grams so a simple balance can weigh them. What about moisture pickup? You say the towel was conforming until you threw it into the lake? Tournament directors will have either a clothes line or a dryer available, and non-conforming towels can be picked up later in the round.

But the question is, do pros think it gives their opponent an advantage if they are carrying something from the Egyptian Cotton Martha Stewart Bath Collection?
http://www1.macys.com/catalog/product/in...PseudoCat=29741 (http://www1.macys.com/catalog/product/index.ognc?ID=257255&amp;PseudoMasterProdID=257272&amp;tra ckingCat=29741&amp;LinkType=EverGreen&amp;PseudoCat=29741)

Personally I think the 180 gram limit is a matter of safety... if you're horsing around and someone snaps a 250gram towel and pops you on the behind, that can do some damage...

:D:o;) :cool:

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

Thanks guys... I needed a good laugh. :D

Hey, but what about "post production modification" of the towel??? How much fraying is too much? And who would decide?

Fraying would be thought of as normal wear and tear.
However a hole protruding through the body of the towel (other than the one provided by the manufacturer) would make the towel illegal for tournament use.

Fraying would be thought of as normal wear and tear.
However a hole protruding through the body of the towel (other than the one provided by the manufacturer) would make the towel illegal for tournament use.



So you're saying an aerobie towel would be legal?

And I thought making the the hem around the edges not equal width would be pushing it... the Epic Towel...

How about a hem on both sides?

What if the edge of your towel is scalloped?

We're going to need a bunch of specs here...

Your turbo towel will only be legal this year

The RC is considering this issue right now. The Tour Manager hopes to get this resolved by this weekend if possible. I've suggested that the language specify an allowable object thickness instead of specifying just a towel.



More stuff to measure to insure compliance. Bad idea.

The "buillding a lie" argument is bull cockey with respect to a towel used behind the lie in disc golf. In ball golf, the situation is such that the game object (the ball) must be on the playing surface when propelled towards the hole. In that scenario, using things to build a lie should not be allowed. But in disc golf, the playing surface is not where the game object (the disc) is located at the point in time at which it is being propelled towards the hole. It is in the players hand.

Altering the playing surface by placing a towel to protect against abrasion does not have any impact on how the disc is released from a player's hand.

Fraying would be thought of as normal wear and tear.
However a hole protruding through the body of the towel (other than the one provided by the manufacturer) would make the towel illegal for tournament use.



If an approved towel got damaged with a hole through it during a round (making it illegal), and the player chose to keep it in his bag for the rest of the round, would he still be able to use it to dry his disc? Or would it be illegal for all uses? Would the penalty be assessed in throws? or just CK approved bad vibes?

Are bad vibes unsportsmanlike????

804.05 Disqualification and Suspension

A. A player shall be disqualified by the director for meeting any of the necessary conditions of disqualification as set forth in the rules, or for any of the following:
(1) Unsportsmanlike conduct, such as; loud cursing, throwing things in anger (other than discs in play), or overt rudeness to anyone present

As long as the bad vibes are covert rudeness maybe it's OK ..... I mean CK

Only those that knew I made the comment on here would ever know to have those pangs of guilt. However, I'm hopeful the RC will resolve this making that just another D-board memory. If the RC explicitly allows towels, I hope sometime down the road that a player in my group whips out some contraption to attach a towel to their leg for humorous effect. :D

What about the shammy? I think we need to check the specs of the shammy! The thickness to square inch ratio could put it over the limit.

I would hate to think of what would happen if my towel lost it's "factory installed" gromit. :eek:

Yea, if I land in a cactus patch and a towel adds a tad bit of protection on my knee while kneeling on it, Im doing it anyways.


In most places (in all places I've played) you get free relief from a cactus. That is a non issue.

I thought I was informing my group when I told someone in my group during play last month that what he did is actually illegal in PDGA play (kneeling on the towel). Now it seems like this "rule" or "ruling" is the same as the 2 meter rule, not used and certainly not enforced. I do appreciate the passion of discgolfers towards many things that have to do with the sport, but threads like this kind of waist my time in a lot of ways. I now have to find this golfer and the other 2 that were in my group and basically tell them I had no real idea of what I was talking about when I told them about this rule.

I would love a tournament to take place with only people that are on this thread. I am not sure if that tournament would begin or end with all the discussion over rules. With that said, at least now I know how to approach these threads because overall they are valuable.

I thought I was informing my group when I told someone in my group during play last month that what he did is actually illegal in PDGA play (kneeling on the towel). Now it seems like this "rule" or "ruling" is the same as the 2 meter rule, not used and certainly not enforced.



It is legal for a player to kneel on a towel behind one's mark in order to protect one's knee from abrasion.

Someone submitted a question to the Rules Committee asking if it was okay to place a rock or branch behind one's marker to stand on. The Rules Committee said no, a player cannot place objects behind his/her mark to stand upon, however, they did specifically state that Artficial Devices can be used behind the mark to protect one's skin from abrasion.

More importantly, the Q&amp;A is not part of the rule book. The Q&amp;A is simply provided on this web site for people to submit questions to the Rules Committee for interpretation. The Rules Committee may decide to use these interpretations to revise future additions of the rule book.

Did this a few times this weekend.

While kneeling on a towel behind your mark is now officially legal, there is a particular throw that is no longer allowed. Bringing one's arm across the body in a fashion that some call "backhand" is no longer allowed. All players must "pitch" the ball oops i mean disc in a fashion overhanded or sidearmed for the throw to count. I have been working for some time to get the rules committee to outlaw this strange "back-handed" throw from the game. Remember, you can still use an anhyzer forehand for those typical left turning holes that you will find on most courses. Finally a rule that makes this wonderful game fair and better. :)

Wow, I need to keep up on the discussion board; that was a long read. With all due respect putting a towel down directly behind your lie is building a lie. The towel provides cushion and added stability which allows you to throw harder than you would without it. You are lying to yourself if you cannot see that. The towel Felburg is Kneeling on in the picture is folded WHY... not abrasion control, Cushion. I was there, he was putting on hole 16 from above the basket. Lets get real, the towel lets you think less about your stance and more about your shot.
This is no different than the ball golf rule; the towel provided stability for the golfer because he could pull on both sides of the towel with his knees allowing him to swing harder at the ball without slipping in the pine needles.

Wait till our top pros are on television for the whole world to watch and scrutinize. We in the youth of our sport need to discuss and fix potential problems that will arise from that kind of scrutiny.
Gaff

With all due respect putting a towel down directly behind your lie is building a lie.


<font color="red"> TRUE! </font>


Wait till our top pros are on television for the whole world to watch and scrutinize.


<font color="red"> None of us will be alive to see the scrutiny! </font>

<font color="red">"One can�t �build a stance� except as allowed under 802.04 (Artificial Devices) A."</font>



The statement quoted above is part of the RC's answer to the "Building a Lie" question.

Gaff....please explain what you think the RC meant by this particular statement and in context with the original question. Afterward, please educate us about the official rule which prohibits kneeling on a towel to reduce or control abrasion to the skin.

All the items mentioned in 802.04 are worn or applied to ones self to reduce abrasion. pants and shoes would also fit into that definition. With a towel you are placing an object on the lie not on your body, thus building. one is using semantics and loop holes to hold onto a slight competitive edge by using the abrasion argument. Again I refer to folding the towel, no longer can be argued "abrasion control" but cushioning. My argument is to those who make the statement that there is no competitive edge, when they know this is untrue.
Respectfully
Gaff

All the items mentioned in 802.04 are worn or applied to ones self to reduce abrasion. pants and shoes would also fit into that definition. With a towel you are placing an object on the lie not on your body, thus building. one is using semantics and loop holes to hold onto a slight competitive edge by using the abrasion argument. Again I refer to folding the towel, no longer can be argued "abrasion control" but cushioning. My argument is to those who make the statement that there is no competitive edge, when they know this is untrue.
Respectfully
Gaff



By far, Gaff makes the best argument I've heard for not allowing a towel to be used! Eloquent enough to IMO influence how this rule plays out. Until this argument, I thought the issue was stupid at best. Now I'm not so sure. I now place this in the foot fault category. Not getting your foot placement on open field shots makes a huge difference in accuracy and distance. In each case we now have a problem.

Thanks Gaff!

All the items mentioned in 802.04 are worn or applied to ones self to reduce abrasion. pants and shoes would also fit into that definition. With a towel you are placing an object on the lie not on your body, thus building. one is using semantics and loop holes to hold onto a slight competitive edge by using the abrasion argument. Again I refer to folding the towel, no longer can be argued "abrasion control" but cushioning. My argument is to those who make the statement that there is no competitive edge, when they know this is untrue.
Respectfully
Gaff



The wording of rule 802.04 does not stipulate an Artificial Device must be worn to reduce or control abrasion nor does the rule specify that only a certain area of the epidermis is allowed protection from abrasion. Even though the "Building a Lie" Q&amp;A is not part of the official rule book, the Rules Committee specifically mentions the fact that players are allowed to "build a stance" in accordance to the 802.04 Artificial Devices rule. The way the rule is currently written, a player can kneel upon a glove, bandage or a folded piece of gauze and be in compliance.


<font color="blue">802.04 Artificial Devices
A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed. A player is specifically prohibited from using any artificial device that changes the position of the disc in the player�s hand or artificially lengthens any of the player�s throwing levers (fingers, wrist, arm, shoulder, etc.). The use of devices which assist in determining distances over 10 meters, such as range finders and GPS devices are prohibited. Measuring devices such as a tape measure may be carried and used to determine distances 10 meters and less for the purpose of rules enforcement. </font>

(such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.).


Which items in this list would the 'average joe' normally expect to NOT be attached to the body?

(such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.).


Which items in this list would the 'average joe' normally expect to NOT be attached to the body?



How about the use of the abbreviation "etc."?
How about the fact rule 802.04 does not exclude a towel from being used as an artificial device to protect one's knee?
How about the fact rule 802.04 does not specify how to use an artificial device in effort to protect one's knee?

I thought the RC would have made a decision by now...

Anyway, the issue is now padding? Abrasion control set aside. (a good argument and one that is dismissed by some, way too easily)

Padding is the reason I use a foam pad to kneel on. I often prefer to throw from a knee and it hurts to grind small rocks and such into myself. (or is that abbrasion control?)
I could take some time to scrape the ground clear as most players seem to, but I would rather leave the ground whole and enjoy the round more.

I could start packing a knee pad, but it's cumbersome and I already carry all sorts of stuff.

Bob

Bob, working against you is a statement in your post:

"I often prefer to throw from a knee..."

Shot preference isn't a guaranteed right, otherwise we'd have a lot more Pro players.

Hmm "shot preferance is not a right." Do you mean stance preferance? Semantics, sorry.

I know you mean, just 'cause I want to, doesn't mean I should always be allowed to.
Say, due to my terrible throw onto some sharp ground cover, or under a shrub, or a low branching tree...

There are times when taking a knee is the only option. Aside of course from declaring an unplayble lie. But you know, sometimes that is not possible either.

I just want the same comfort my foot is given to be avaiable for whatever supporting point I choose. The towel as traction control might be a convincing one, but then why just not allowed behind the mark? I don't push off from my knee.

Bob

Aside of course from declaring an unplayble lie. But you know, sometimes that is not possible either.



One can ALWAYS take an unplayable lie if they wish (and throw from your previous lie). I do agree though that sometimes a knee is the only way to play given some of my previous throws locations.

Do ball golfers have that option? To take a stroke and play from the previous location, based on a consensus of the group.

Does any other sport give a player a "do over"?

Bob

USGA Rule 28. Just like ours, the ball golf rule does not require consensus from the group. The player is the sole determiner whether the lie is unplayable. Ball golf has a few different options we don't have for where the lie can be played after penalty. But both allow playing from the previous lie.

Consensus is not required from the group to determine unplayability, but to determine from where you last played.
How is that determined by USGA rules? What are the options available to them and not to us?

Sorry Chuck, I know I should just find out from the USGA, but you seem to have the info handy.

Thanks BTW,

If the player deems his ball to be unplayable, he must, under penalty of one stroke:
a. Play a ball as nearly as possible at the spot from which the original ball was last played (see Rule 20-5); or
b. Drop a ball behind the point where the ball lay, keeping that point directly between the hole and the spot on which the ball is dropped, with no limit to how far behind that point the ball may be dropped; or
c. Drop a ball within two club-lengths of the spot where the ball lay, but not nearer the hole.

USGA 2008 Rulebook
www.usga.org/playing/rules/pdf/2008ROG.pdf (http://www.usga.org/playing/rules/pdf/2008ROG.pdf)

I would be nice to have option c available to us.
2 meters to the side for a 1 throw penalty.
Didn't that used to be the unplayable lie rule?
Thanks again Chuck
Bob

Didn't that used to be the unplayable lie rule?


It was called "Unsafe Lie" at the time with the other option to take a 2-shot penalty and play from anywhere on the fairway no closer to the hole. You could also take casual relief up to 5m in an arc no closer to the hole with no penalty or add 5 more meters if needed with a 1-shot penalty.

those were the days... :p

I have been hearing about this thread for a little while from some of the local disc golfers so I decided to read a little bit. WOW!! I can't believe so much has been written about such a minute and silly detail. I have been a member of the PDGA (14036) for 10 years and I can't believe that this has caused a big fuss. Kneeling on a towel does nothing for a person other than help keep his leg clean, and maybe cushioned from the ground. BIG DEAL!!! It's not like you are going to get a big advantage out of using a towel. It's a TOWEL for bleeps sake. Seriously now. If another player wants to use his towel to kneel on, fine by me. Because if he is kneeling in the first place, he's already got a bad lie and kneeling on a towel is not going to help him get out of that situation. It may keep your pants dry, or keep you from scraping your knee but so what?

Who cares? I do not choose to use a towel, and I don't care whether or not you use a towel on your shot. It doesn't bother me either way. It's not like you have a towel that is going to lift you off the ground 5 feet so you can throw over a tree or something....what's the thickness of a towel rolled up? Not very thick. Even a beach towel. Come on now people, lets get serious.

Now don't be trying to bring a piece of carpet with you or something to throw from, then I'll get mad..........

Yea, if I land in a cactus patch and a towel adds a tad bit of protection on my knee while kneeling on it, Im doing it anyways.


You usually get free relief from a cactus.

I think the key point being missed at this time is that playing on your knee is a punishment. It is one you earn by making a poor shot. If you are lying under that bush, well you put yourself there.

Gaff's observation that you make a different shot when you have a nice cushion vs not, is correct. The object of any sport is to be able to focus under play conditions. We aren't supposed to have items which make it "easier." This issue now reminds me of the second throw foot fault issue. When you miss your foot placement on open field throws, you have a definite advantage. Making that second shot count and getting your foot placement correct is hard. If you eliminate foot placement, you have an advantage. The same goes for the use of a towel as a cushion.

BTW - I no longer buy the abrasion argument. The abrasion referred to in our rules is abrasion that occurs after multiple throws. You literally abrade the skin off your fingers and a piece of tape to prevent this is necessary. If you spend so much time on your knees during a round that you are abrading the skin off them, you're not playing disc golf, you're playing horsey with your kids.

I end up on a knee zero to five times every round. Of those times, I might have one every three to five rounds where I really have to put my knee on a rock or stick. This forces me to take a different stance. That situation occurred, most typically, because I made a bad shot. I have no one to blame but myself.

Nothing makes this clearer than the picture of Feldberg using a towel to cushion his knee. He put himself on a pile of rocks and then took an easier shot than he should have. I like making people play the lie they ended up in. That is the price or reward of making your throw.

Now, someone is going to come back and say you can't always see every stick or rock out there. But you can definitely see the bushes and areas that are going to require you to take a knee. The secret is to not throw there... :D

While I agree with the logic, the counter argument would be why we allow a player to remove sticks, stones, acorns, loose leaves and essentially any debris behind our lie? If we aren't allowed to ADD items like towels to cushion the stance area from what our "poor" shot gave us, shouldn't the rule also prevent us from REMOVING any items behind the lie to make our regular stance with a foot more comfortable? Why is ADD wrong and SUBTRACT OK? It's math discrimination I tell ya...

Id say that some people need to get a job and QUIT taking a volunteer position so seriously.

Im confused by the whole..."Dont throw there if you dont like the lie" arguement.... :confused:

It sure didnt fly with the 2 meter "discussions"... :eek:

Get a Job, Get a LIFE..........Play by the rules....DONT dream up new ways to confuse the new players with rediculous additions :(

It all comes down to a safety issue.

There should be more emphasis on making a REAL National Tour and SERIOUSLY promoting our sport, than continuing to find ways to hinder players.

What about tieing a towel around your leg? You haven't improved your lie, your protecting your cloths...

While I agree with the logic, the counter argument would be why we allow a player to remove sticks, stones, acorns, loose leaves and essentially any debris behind our lie? If we aren't allowed to ADD items like towels to cushion the stance area from what our "poor" shot gave us, shouldn't the rule also prevent us from REMOVING any items behind the lie to make our regular stance with a foot more comfortable? Why is ADD wrong and SUBTRACT OK? It's math discrimination I tell ya...



While I might worry about a player tripping on a run up behind a lie, if I have to worry about him/her tripping while kneeling, then I'd say it's time for that player to pick up another sport...

If the lie is really that dangerous, then take the stroke and make a better throw next time; or better yet, make the throw while standing up and realize you're being penalized for making a bad throw.

On the other hand, as for moving sticks from behind a lie, I would make an argument that this should be eliminated also. :o Beyond luck of the draw, the fact is that there are many options for throwing out of places where there are sticks that don't require you to move the sticks. Stand in and throw being one such. Again, for the most part, if you throw into an area where there are no sticks, you won't have to move them.

What about tieing a towel around your leg? You haven't improved your lie, your protecting your cloths...



To me this is the funniest argument of all time. Oh man, I really need to protect my clothes, while I'm out playing a sport, where I might have to walk through stickers or brush, where it is possible I'll get really muddy or have to climb a tree to retrieve a disk. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

With all this concern about clothes you'd think you couldn't get a pair of shorts at Wal-Mart for $10...

BTW - when I take a knee, I put it right down there in the mud.

It all comes down to a safety issue.

There should be more emphasis on making a REAL National Tour and SERIOUSLY promoting our sport, than continuing to find ways to hinder players.



What I find amazing is the total number of safety posts that get made about this and other similar issues. Somehow, I find it difficult to imagine that this issue and the safety surrounding it is the determining factor in our sport making it "large." While I never cease to be impressed by the stupid things that people will do, including running up into the middle of a pile of sticks to throw a frisbee (if you changed this rule), for the most part, I find people will do the logical thing, the cautious thing.

The safety discussions remind me of the safety discussions surrounding football. If we add a helmet and pads, the sport will be safer was the logic. The reality is that it got more dangerous as people were able to take greater risks with less fear of being hurt. The injuries, while less frequent, became more severe.

Common sense would tell most that running through a pile of sticks to make a throw, or kneeling in saw grass to make a throw, is a dumb thing to do. The occasional fool who would ignore this is probably going to drive home drunk anyway...

We should not be in the business of regulating common sense, i.e. generating rules that make people act in a common sense fashion. We should make rules that stay as close to the principal, play it where, and how, it lies as possible. Add to that, no tool should be used to aid a player in his/her throw, including keeping his/her knee comfy, and I think we're getting there.

I just watched Barry Shultz kneel on a towel on the Lead Group Live DVD from 2006.

Thought I'd share..