This came up on our local club board. (and nearly happened at Worlds last week)

A foursome putts out and heads to the next tee, bags are dropped on the bench, scores are taken and the player throwing 1st reaches down, grabs an orange Valkyrie and makes his drive. After throwing he notices that he may have grabbed the orange Valkyrie from another players bag by mistake (the two bags were identical Phenix bags, same colors). What happens next? What if the player he "borrowed" the disc from doesn't mind, saying he was happy (in retrospect) to loan his opponent that disc for that shot? Does the ruling change if the alleged Orange Valkyrie flies into thick grass and can never be found?

The discussion brought up things like courtesy violations, penalties for throwing from wrong lie, and a discussion of what exactly a "unique mark" is.

One official at Worlds would have ruled it a penalty for throwing from the wrong lie but he was over ruled by a marshall. They would have ruled (if it happened) the player whose disc was thrown wanted to throw it, the first player needed to go mark the lie and retrieve the disc for the owner to throw. Seems to me to be the proper ruling. A case of common sense prevailing.

It was in the Pro Grand Masters division and it was ruled a "senior moment" Turns out the guy actually threw a different orange disc from his own bag and was surprised to still see his Valk in there.

Comments?

There's no penalty for borrowing or using another player's disc (assuming it's not the other player's active disc just thrown). You may legally play a whole round without bringing any of your own discs. The only time there's a penalty is if you pick up and throw another player's disc that's indicating their lie. The 2-throw penalty you get could either be for interference from touching their live disc or for playing from the wrong lie. I don't think the TD/marshal would compound the penalties and give you both.

The player whose disc it was could call a courtesy violation. but that's about it. I know I've been lazy and asked a player if I can borrow their disc in the basket and use it to putt out drop in's. It saves bending over an additional time plus I've fetched their disc for them.

Krup,

Good one! Since I am now a GM, I will have to remember that one!

This came up on our local club board. (and nearly happened at Worlds last week)

A foursome putts out and heads to the next tee, bags are dropped on the bench, scores are taken and the player throwing 1st reaches down, grabs an orange Valkyrie and makes his drive. After throwing he notices that he may have grabbed the orange Valkyrie from another players bag by mistake (the two bags were identical Phenix bags, same colors). What happens next? What if the player he "borrowed" the disc from doesn't mind, saying he was happy (in retrospect) to loan his opponent that disc for that shot? Does the ruling change if the alleged Orange Valkyrie flies into thick grass and can never be found?




An excellent and challenging question, Mr. Kenny! You have stumped the panel so far---even Chuck.

Allow me to provide the correct interpretation of the Holey Rule Book. The answer to your first two questions is: the player who threw the wrong disc receives a one-throw penalty and re-tees.

Let's turn to Verses 803.07 and 803.01.B and read from the Holey Book:


803.07.B. If a disc at rest on the playing surface or supported by the target is moved, the disc shall be replaced as close as possible to its original location, as determined by a majority of the group or an official. If a marker disc is moved, the marker disc shall be replaced as close as possible to its original location, as determined by a majority of the group or an official. (If the two meter penalty is in effect See also 803.08 C and D for movement of a disc above the playing surface.)


The GM took a disc at rest and made a throw that can only be interpreted as a practice throw. It doesn't matter if the other GM approves or not, because as we know, every player must have their own name or mark on every disc. The penalty for a practice throw is one stroke.


803.01.B. Practice Throws. A player who throws a practice throw or an extra throw with any disc any time after the
start of his or her round and prior to his or her finishing the last hole of the round (except
for throws that must be re-thrown in accordance with the rules, provisional throws made
pursuant to 803.01 C and 803.01 D (3), or throws during a suspension or postponement of play) shall receive
one penalty throw. The practice throw or extra throw must be observed by any two players or an
official.


I'll also reference the other rule for good measure:

801.02.F. All discs used in play, except mini marker discs, must be uniquely marked in ink or pigment-based marking which has no detectable thickness. A player shall receive a warning for the first instance of throwing an unmarked disc if observed by two or more players of the group or an official. After the warning has been given, each subsequent throw by the player with an unmarked disc shall incur one penalty throw if observed by two or more players of the group or an official.


So do you follow the logic there? In my next post I will answer your third and even more challenging question (I'd do it in one post but I'd probably get timed out by the MB software).

uniquely marked doesn't mean the same thing as "their own name or mark"

Does the ruling change if the alleged Orange Valkyrie flies into thick grass and can never be found?

The answer is: yes, the ruling does change. An additional stroke and distance penalty (Lost Disc Rule)shall be assessed in addition to the one stroke practice throw penalty. The player would then re-tee throwing his 4th shot.

I'm sure some here will cry this penalty is too harsh; but think about it, if someone threw your best disc and lost it you'd have to play without that disc for the rest of the round if not forever. 3 strokes is nothing if that disc happened to be a CE Roc :)


803.11 Lost Disc
A. A disc shall be declared lost if the player cannot locate it within three minutes after arriving at the spot where it was last seen by the group or an official. Two players or an official must note when the timing of three minutes begins. All players of the group must, upon request, assist in searching for
the disc for the full three minutes before the disc is declared lost. The disc is considered lost immediately upon the expiration of the three minute time limit.

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




Thank you for an excellent challenge for the rules zealots, Mr. Kenny. It was a pleasure answering your question today.

uniquely marked doesn't mean the same thing as "their own name or mark"

Agreed; however, the spirit, or intention of the rule is to establish that a player must throw discs that can be clearly identifed as his or her own.

Trading discs by players is not allowed during rounds, because it confuses the group if and when they were needed to call Rule 803.10:



803.10 Throwing From Another Player's Lie


A. A player who has thrown from another player's lie shall receive two penalty throws, without
a warning. The offending player shall complete the hole as if the other player's lie were his
or her own. No throws shall be replayed.




Does the representative from Virginia agree with the proposition?

Valiant effort Mike but no penalty for borrowing another player's disc. The key is to let others in the group know that you are doing so. That's what fulfills the "unique mark" requirement. In fact, failure to inform the group could then invoke some of the penalties you suggest might be warranted. Players who are using a disc they bought or traded with someone else that has their name on it had better get their own name or mark on it since that could be construed as perhaps finding a lost disc from a player in another group.

That's just it Chuck, he didn't borrow the disc. Borrow implies that the GM had permission; he did not.

This will be amusing watching your contortionist act as you attempt to defend your original, but wrong, conclusion. Let me go grab a beer...

In the original post, the question indicated what if the owner agreed it was OK for the player to borrow the disc. I agree with you, if permission was not granted, then your scenarios can unfold. The permission being granted or not should occur before a search would ensue in the scenario where it might be lost. But I'm thinking maybe the owner of the disc got a "foot fault" seconded by the thrower on a previous hole and was OK with the disc loan. :)

Did you really have to type 500 words to say I'm right, Chuck? Wait, who am I asking? That was some great contortioning there Chuck.

Don't feel bad Chuck, you do get most of the rules questions correct.

The GM took a disc at rest and made a throw that can only be interpreted as a practice throw. It doesn't matter if the other GM approves or not, because as we know, every player must have their own name or mark on every disc. The penalty for a practice throw is one stroke.

The GM did not take a disc at rest on the playing surface or supported by the target which is what the cited rule stipulates. "Playing Surface" is defined in the rules as "The area below where the disc came to rest from which the stance for the next shot is taken." The GM did not (hopefully) take his stance from the other player's bag.

Agreed; however, the spirit, or intention of the rule is to establish that a player must throw discs that can be clearly identifed as his or her own.

I disagree. The spirit or intention of the rule is to clearly differentiate the disc from the discs thrown by other players. Ownership is not implied.

... no penalty for borrowing another player's disc. The key is to let others in the group know that you are doing so. That's what fulfills the "unique mark" requirement.

No, what fulfills the "unique mark" requirement is a unique mark. Informing others in your group is not required. A unique mark is. It is possible that an individual has uniquely marked discs in his/her bag such as custom artwork, and obsolete phone number, etc.

No, what fulfills the "unique mark" requirement is a unique mark. Informing others in your group is not required. A unique mark is. It is possible that an individual has uniquely marked discs in his/her bag such as custom artwork, and obsolete phone number, etc.
Not required but only at your own peril. If our group is looking for your disc and we find one with a name or mark other than the yours, how do you persuade us it is the disc you threw? We look in your bag and all your discs have your name or some similar mark on them and the disc we found does not.

The answer is: yes, the ruling does change. An additional stroke and distance penalty (Lost Disc Rule)shall be assessed in addition to the one stroke practice throw penalty. The player would then re-tee throwing his 4th shot.


You cannot assess a penalty for missed mando, 2m, lost disc, etc. on a throw that was considered a practice throw. A practice throw by its nature does not change the lie and therefore cannot result in a penalty for a new lie.

Practice Throw: During a round, the projection of a disc of a distance greater than two meters, or of any distance toward a target, intentional or not, which does not change the player�s lie

The unique marks are much more useful when calling a player on playing from your lie than to insure that they are playing from their own. Unique marks simply help you identify your own discs. They don't help you identify discs as belonging to others. I'm pretty sure in one video a pro who carries more discs than my back could handle marked some of his discs with an x. I don't think I could tell the difference between his X and Brakel's X, but they will know their own mark.

The GM did not take a disc at rest on the playing surface or supported by the target which is what the cited rule stipulates. "Playing Surface" is defined in the rules as "The area below where the disc came to rest from which the stance for the next shot is taken." The GM did not (hopefully) take his stance from the other player's bag.


So are you saying there should be no penalty? You need to present proper evidence if you wish to appeal.

Remember this rule, which is what was used to make the correct ruling:


803.01 F. Rule of Fairness. If any point in dispute is not covered by the rules, the decision shall be made in
accordance with fairness. Often a logical extension of the closest existing rule or the
principles embodied in these rules will provide guidance for determining fairness.


Clearly the closest existing rule is 803.07.B. Logically, the player shall be assessed a one-throw penalty for a practice throw.

You cannot assess a penalty for missed mando, 2m, lost disc, etc. on a throw that was considered a practice throw. A practice throw by its nature does not change the lie and therefore cannot result in a penalty for a new lie.

Practice Throw: During a round, the projection of a disc of a distance greater than two meters, or of any distance toward a target, intentional or not, which does not change the player�s lie


You'll have to provide better evidence for your claim.

No where does it say "You cannot assess a penalty for missed mando, 2m, lost disc, etc. on a throw that was considered a practice throw." That statement does not back up your claim at all.

Therefore, the GM will be penalized under the lost disc rule, due to his negligence in losing another player's disc. Feel free to think about it for a while and then agree that your logic is weak.

I disagree. The spirit or intention of the rule is to clearly differentiate the disc from the discs thrown by other players. Ownership is not implied.


The correct interpretation of the rule is to establish that each player must have a mark on his or her disc that others in the group can clearly identify. If you feel that it is legal to trade discs during a round, then it must be made clear to the rest of the group that discs have been traded, and then the trading players must mark their discs with marks that allow the rest of the group to know who threw what disc subsequently.

The correct interpretation of the rule is to establish that each player must have a mark on his or her disc that others in the group can clearly identify. If you feel that it is legal to trade discs during a round, then it must be made clear to the rest of the group that discs have been traded, and then the trading players must mark their discs with marks that allow the rest of the group to know who threw what disc subsequently.


Hmm. Do you care to show us where that is in the rules?

I already have. It's rule 802.02.F.

Do you have a better reason why 802.02.F is in the rules other than to ensure that the group can determine who threw what disc when they get down the fairway? I'd love to hear it...let me get a beer first though.

Therefore, the GM will be penalized under the lost disc rule, due to his negligence in losing another player's disc. Feel free to think about it for a while and then agree that your logic is weak.

OK, technically you are correct, because it doesn't specify when the lost disc rule comes into play. However, by your logic, if I was to leave a disc on the ground after I throw, and return after a couple of holes but I can't find my disc, then I too must receive the lost disc penalty. However, by using a little common sense, it would seem that the rule was intended to be used after a legitimate throw in the course of the game. A practice throw is not a legitimate throw, so the lost disc penalty would not be assessed.

I already have. It's rule 802.02.F.

Do you have a better reason why 802.02.F is in the rules other than to ensure that the group can determine who threw what disc when they get down the fairway? I'd love to hear it...let me get a beer first though.

What rule book are you using? There is no 802.02.F.

What rule book are you using? There is no 802.02.F.

You're right...it's 801.02.F.

OK, technically you are correct, because it doesn't specify when the lost disc rule comes into play. However, by your logic, if I was to leave a disc on the ground after I throw, and return after a couple of holes but I can't find my disc, then I too must receive the lost disc penalty. However, by using a little common sense, it would seem that the rule was intended to be used after a legitimate throw in the course of the game. A practice throw is not a legitimate throw, so the lost disc penalty would not be assessed.

But you would agree that there should be some penalty for losing another player's disc? I think that is a rather large infraction.

You're right...it's 801.02.F.

Can't find that one either.

Thanks for all the responses. I especially like the mostly civil back and forth.

Since the rules don't specifically address this there will be more than one interpretation that can be argued.

UPM - I see how you arrived at all your positions while I don't agree with every one (but I do some) your points I think they are valid positions in the gray area between rules. Except this one

"803.07.B. If a disc at rest on the playing surface or supported by the target is moved, the disc shall be replaced as close as possible to its original location, as determined by a majority of the group or an official. If a marker disc is moved, the marker disc shall be replaced as close as possible to its original location, as determined by a majority of the group or an official. (If the two meter penalty is in effect See also 803.08 C and D for movement of a disc above the playing surface.)"

I don't you see how you could consider a disc on the tee to be at rest on the playing surface or supported by the target.

So are you saying there should be no penalty? You need to present proper evidence if you wish to appeal.

Remember this rule, which is what was used to make the correct ruling:


803.01 F. Rule of Fairness. If any point in dispute is not covered by the rules, the decision shall be made in
accordance with fairness. Often a logical extension of the closest existing rule or the
principles embodied in these rules will provide guidance for determining fairness.


Clearly the closest existing rule is 803.07.B. Logically, the player shall be assessed a one-throw penalty for a practice throw.

This actually comes down to whether the person whose disc is thrown is upset about the disc being used. If they are not, then there is no penalty, play on. If the person is upset, the nearest rule that covers the situation would be a courtesy violation specifically 801.01C. Warn the player and play on. If the affected player wishes to use the disc that was thrown, then the violating player should go to the location of the thrown disc, mark his lie and return with the disc or allow the use of the same disc from his bag.

Remember the fairness clause here. The man wasn't trying to gain any advantage by using the other person's disc. If he had a habit of doing this then there could be a problem which further courtesy violation penalties would address.

So are you saying there should be no penalty? You need to present proper evidence if you wish to appeal.

A wise man once wrote: "Let's be courteous and friendly---let's change the complexion of the pDGA."

In this case, a penalty should be assessed only if the unwitting benefactor wants to use the disc in question. If not, no harm no foul. If so, THEN I would invoke the fairness rule and agree that a practice throw had occurred. Regarding the lost disc scenario, if the throw was deemed practice then the player is out (only) one stroke, one (or more) after round beer(s), and likely the cost of the disc. If the throw is not practice, then normal lost disc rules apply. The status of the throw is determined back at the tee prior to any lost disc determination.

I already have. It's rule 802.02.F.

Do you have a better reason why 802.02.F is in the rules other than to ensure that the group can determine who threw what disc when they get down the fairway? I'd love to hear it...let me get a beer first though.

The rule is 802.01F

F. All discs used in play, except mini marker discs, must be uniquely marked in ink or pigment-based marking which has no detectable thickness. A player shall receive a warning for the first instance of throwing an unmarked disc if observed by two or more players of the group or an official. After the warning has been given, each subsequent throw by the player with an unmarked disc shall incur one penalty throw if observed by two or more players of the group or an official.

As you can see, it doesn't say why the disc must be uniquely marked. By thinking about it, it is so that if player A and Player B both threw a yellow DX Valkyrie on their tee shot, they could figure out who threw which disc by marking the location of each disc, then look at the "unique" mark on each disc to determine where each person's lie is. If you have the same mark as someone else, then that is not a unique mark and a penalty should be assessed.

Can't find that one either.

Who knew Natural Light could make you so dyslexic? Try 802.01.F :)

I don't you see how you could consider a disc on the tee to be at rest on the playing surface or supported by the target.

As I explained to krasinski,

803.01 F. Rule of Fairness. If any point in dispute is not covered by the rules, the decision shall be made in
accordance with fairness. Often a logical extension of the closest existing rule or the
principles embodied in these rules will provide guidance for determining fairness.


Clearly the closest existing rule is 803.07.B. Extended logically, the player shall be assessed a one-throw penalty for a practice throw.

This actually comes down to whether the person whose disc is thrown is upset about the disc being used. If they are not, then there is no penalty, play on. If the person is upset, the nearest rule that covers the situation would be a courtesy violation specifically 801.01C. Warn the player and play on. If the affected player wishes to use the disc that was thrown, then the violating player should go to the location of the thrown disc, mark his lie and return with the disc or allow the use of the same disc from his bag.

Remember the fairness clause here. The man wasn't trying to gain any advantage by using the other person's disc. If he had a habit of doing this then there could be a problem which further courtesy violation penalties would address.


It's a gentleman's game. I am merely describing the proper ruling. If the offending player is a gentleman, and wished to honor the sport by playing by the rules properly, he would take his one stroke penalty even if the other person was not upset.

I realize honor is a foreign concept to many disc golfers and the Rules Committee's lack of an effort to educate players of the importance of honor has lead many to stretch, bend or ignore rules. Everyone should know the rules and everyone should honorably accept the penalties of their own carelessness, not look for ways to exempt themselves from penalties by saying "but that guy didn't mind that I broke the rule". It's an unfortunate fact that the attitude you just described has often created an unlevel playing field even in the highest divisions of our sport. I hope one day you'll learn to play with honor rather than make excuses.

It's a gentleman's game. I am merely describing the proper ruling. If the offending player is a gentleman, and wished to honor the sport by playing by the rules properly, he would take his one stroke penalty even if the other person was not upset.

I realize honor is a foreign concept to many disc golfers and the Rules Committee's lack of an effort to educate players of the importance of honor has lead many to stretch, bend or ignore rules. Everyone should know the rules and everyone should honorably accept the penalties of their own carelessness, not look for ways to exempt themselves from penalties by saying "but that guy didn't mind that I broke the rule". It's an unfortunate fact that the attitude you just described has often created an unlevel playing field even in the highest divisions of our sport. I hope one day you'll learn to play with honor rather than make excuses.

A) Do not ever question my honor!

B) Now if you had noticed, I quoted what I felt was the fairest ruling on the matter. (remember your quote?) The closest rule on the situation is about courtesy. It clearly was a mistake, and quite discourteous to some people. Thus assess a courtesy violation. Thus it would be up to the player to whom the disc belonged as to what should be done.

I've got my waders.

1. There is no rule against using another player's disc in a competitive round (with or without their permission) as long as it is otherwise legal for play.

2. Discs that are not in play cannot be interfered with (or you could never move your own bag or throw any of your own discs).

3. There is nothing in the lost disc rule that precludes a practice throw from being penalized as lost if it cannot be found or is abandoned.

4. Using another player's disc from their bag without permission violates 801.01.C since it is expected that each player bring and use their own equipment unless granted permission to use the equipment of another player.

Regardless of intent, there should be a courtesy warning and the throw should count along with any penalties.

I think I agree with the entirety of your post Mr. Duke, save for the last sentence. The throw should not count, period. What if the next player wants to throw that very disc?

If you call it a practice throw, you cover both options equally and unequivocally. When I say unequivocally I mean its definition: absolute; unqualified; not subject to conditions or exceptions.

The more we add certainty to the rule book, the better the sport shall be.

3. There is nothing in the lost disc rule that precludes a practice throw from being penalized as lost if it cannot be found or is abandoned.

There is also no where in the rules that give the thrower a burden to find a practice throw. If the thrower throws a practice throw, then asks the entire group to look for it for 2:50, then says, "Oh well, I'm tired of looking (which would not declare it lost)" then he could move on to his lie and continue the round.

I also think there is the clear intent in 803.11.B that the lost disc penalty only applies to discs in play (a.k.a - not practice throws). Allowing the lost disc rule to apply to practice throws completely invalidates and complicates this section. What would I do if I threw a practice throw, threw a second shot, and then had to declare the original practice shot lost? Do you re-tee or shoot from the lie of the legal second shot?

I think I agree with the entirety of your post Mr. Duke, save for the last sentence. The throw should not count, period. What if the next player wants to throw that very disc?

If you call it a practice throw, you cover both options equally and unequivocally. When I say unequivocally I mean its definition: absolute; unqualified; not subject to conditions or exceptions.

The more we add certainty to the rule book, the better the sport shall be.

I hate to break it to you, but the definition of a practice throw doesn't fit your purpose. Here is the definition.

During a round, the projection of a disc of a distance greater than two meters, or of any distance toward a target, intentional or not, which does not change the player's lie, either because it did not occur from the teeing area or the lie, or because the player had already thrown competitively from the teeing area or the lie.

Let's break this situation down.

Was the throw from the tee or a lie? Yes it was. it was from the tee.

Had the person already thrown competitively from the tee? No it was his first throw.

Thus by definition, it can not be a practice throw, unless the rules state it somewhere else, like throwing after the 2 minute warning. It does not.

Conclusion, unless you like to throw penalties at players, the only rule that fits the situation is a courtesy violation.

Now if the Rules Committee was to change the definition of a practice throw to fit this situation then your penalty would be right. Until then, it doesn't fit the rules.

What would I do if I threw a practice throw, threw a second shot, and then had to declare the original practice shot lost? Do you re-tee or shoot from the lie of the legal second shot?

I think this is an area that needs to be cleaned up a bit. The definition of a practice throw needs to include something about the disc used on a practice throw not being subject to penalties.

So you can tee off with another player's disc by mistake without a penalty? I think certainly the lost disc rule would apply to his tee-off and he would receive one penalty. Since the disc wasn't in play at the time, then you can't call intereference. It seems the only rule to be applied to teeing off with another's disc would be a courtesy violation then?

So you can tee off with another player's disc by mistake without a penalty? I think certainly the lost disc rule would apply to his tee-off and he would receive one penalty. Since the disc wasn't in play at the time, then you can't call intereference. It seems the only rule to be applied to teeing off with another's disc would be a courtesy violation then?

Correct. The only rule applicable is a courtesy violation. If it was an intentional ploy to get under an opponents skin, lose his main driver, etc., the TD has the option of DQ.

Let me see if I have this straight...

Krupicka and Shelton, you both say that there should only be a courtesy violation if someone loses another player's disc after mistaking it for his own? Really? I won't question your honor shelton but I do question if you realize how valuable some people's discs are to them. A courtesy violation for losing my best driver? Shizzle, in some places you wouldn't make it back to the parking lot in one piece for that!

Shelton, you bring up the definition of a practice throw as if to discredit my correct ruling---but your incorrect ruling does not account for the possibility that the other player may actually want to use the mistaken disc. If that were the case, your ruling is silly. You can't expect the offending player to go mark his lie and then bring the disc back to the offended player, or do you?

So you can tee off with another player's disc by mistake without a penalty? I think certainly the lost disc rule would apply to his tee-off and he would receive one penalty. Since the disc wasn't in play at the time, then you can't call intereference. It seems the only rule to be applied to teeing off with another's disc would be a courtesy violation then?


You can only tee off with another player's disc if the other player gives permission, the borrowing player marks the disc as his own, and it is declared to the group and the group can distinguish between each player's disc.

I have already described and quantified the correct penalties for all your questions, Patrick...was I unclear before?

There is also no where in the rules that give the thrower a burden to find a practice throw. If the thrower throws a practice throw, then asks the entire group to look for it for 2:50, then says, "Oh well, I'm tired of looking (which would not declare it lost)" then he could move on to his lie and continue the round.

I also think there is the clear intent in 803.11.B that the lost disc penalty only applies to discs in play (a.k.a - not practice throws). Allowing the lost disc rule to apply to practice throws completely invalidates and complicates this section. What would I do if I threw a practice throw, threw a second shot, and then had to declare the original practice shot lost? Do you re-tee or shoot from the lie of the legal second shot?

Curt, look at the situation from the perspective of the player whose disc was "borrowed" and subsequently lost.

You'd have to agree that the "borrowing" player created an unfair disadvantage to the player whose disc he lost for the rest of the round, perhaps the rest of the tournament, perhaps forever if the disc is never found, right?

I think DQ could be even be called, but since we are assuming it was an honest mistake, a practice throw penalty plus a lost disc penalty seems appropriate.

Also you are wrong when you say that there is no obligation to search for a practice throw. Are you kidding me? You just threw my best disc into the weeds and you won't help me find it? I'd call you for a courtesy violation.

What would I do if I threw a practice throw, threw a second shot, and then had to declare the original practice shot lost?

Why would you have to declare it lost?

It was a practice throw, therefore it by definition will not be counted as in play. Therefore there is no obligation to find the lost practice throw to establish the lie for a subsequent throw, therefore there is no reason to call a lost disc on yourself.


Do you re-tee or shoot from the lie of the legal second shot?

You shoot from the lie of the legal second shot.

You can only tee off with another player's disc if the other player gives permission, the borrowing player marks the disc as his own, and it is declared to the group and the group can distinguish between each player's disc.

I have already described and quantified the correct penalties for all your questions, Patrick...was I unclear before? What's up with all your pretentious comments directed at everyone? A little bit of courtesy (801) can be extended to these forums, right? You have been issued your courtesy warning, ha!

Now with that said, I've read the rule book quite a few times, and so far I am agreeing with the audience here. Forgive my ignorance, but where does it clearly state in the rule book where you have to have permission from another player to tee off with their disc? I certainly don't think it is right, but I could not find the rule that stipulates your statement.

I understand the unique mark rule is vague, could certainly be updated. I think we can all agree the purpose of having marked discs, so that we can identify whose disc is whose.

Now let's apply the rules per the 2007 rule book. 802.01F clearly states a player shall receive a warning for the first instance of throwing an unmarked disk... So if this disc was unmarked uniquely to the thrower of the disc, then he would receive a warning for this throw.

If the disc is lost, then he re-tees and one penalty stroke for a lost disc. If the disc is not lost, then the player will throw from the next lie.

This is not a practice throw since it was thrown from the tee. See the Definition for a practice throw.

Practice Throw: During a round, the projection of a disc of a distance greater than two meters, or of any distance toward a target, intentional or not, which does not change the player’s lie, either because it did not occur from the teeing area or the lie, or because the player had already thrown competitively from the teeing area or the lie.

This discussion does bring up a valid point. What do you do if someone just chucked your favorite driver into the lake on their drive? The rules don't cover this, but if I made an errant mistake like this, I would give the player the option of taking any one of my discs from my bag and giving it to him. Then after the round, I would make every attempt to at least obtain a new disc for the player if available for the next round (I know you can’t replace a favorite broken-in disc). What else could you do? If it was blatant, then automatic DQ is in order. Pull your group aside, call over an official or TD and get the player DQ'ed immediately.

Thinking about this, does it seem strange that not only did the player not notice he was grabbing a disc from the wrong bag, the player whose bag it was didn't notice either?

Patrick, I think you are correct that it is not a practice throw as it was thrown from his current lie (i.e. the tee). If someone threw my disc (that I wanted to throw), I'd make em go get it. For their sake, it better not be on the toboggan hole.

What's up with all your pretentious comments directed at everyone?

As pretentious is defined as "characterized by assumption of dignity or importance", I make no apologies for my pretentiousness. The Rules are extremely important, and it is important that people treat the Rules with dignity and respect. Do not mischaracterize my emphasis of the importance of the Rules as discourteous.

A little bit of courtesy (801) can be extended to these forums, right? You have been issued your courtesy warning, ha!

It's not the first time I have been issued a courtesy violation for speaking the truth. As Galileo once said, "All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."



Now with that said, I've read the rule book quite a few times, and so far I am agreeing with the audience here. Forgive my ignorance, but where does it clearly state in the rule book where you have to have permission from another player to tee off with their disc? I certainly don't think it is right, but I could not find the rule that stipulates your statement.


Agreed, there is no rule that explicitly states you can not borrow or steal another player's disc. To repeat, it is a logical interpretation of the marking rule that every player should play with his own discs, because the authors of the Rules went so far as to ensure that every player's disc can be tracked back to that certain player when they wrote the marking rule. Therefore, certainly using another player's disc without permission, without declaration, and without marking the disc, is a violation of the rules.

So far, no one other than I has proposed a solution that covers all the scenarios of wsfaplau's original three questions. I have eliminated the vague "did the offending player have permission before or after the throw?" question by properly declaring that it does not matter---the Rule was broken, and the other player can not change that fact by being nice. A one-stroke penalty seems very reasonable; if the borrower loses the disc, the addition of the lost disc penalty is less harsh than a DQ, but a DQ could be called because the other player will be at an unfair disadvantage without the benefit of his disc that the borrower lost.

I understand the unique mark rule is vague, could certainly be updated. I think we can all agree the purpose of having marked discs, so that we can identify whose disc is whose.

It may do well to clarify the marking rule in the next rules update and include an explanation that if a player borrows another's disc, it must be re-marked as belonging to the borrowing player.

Now let's apply the rules per the 2007 rule book. 802.01F clearly states a player shall receive a warning for the first instance of throwing an unmarked disk... So if this disc was unmarked uniquely to the thrower of the disc, then he would receive a warning for this throw.

Agreed. The marking warning could be called in addition to the other penalties.

If the disc is lost, then he re-tees and one penalty stroke for a lost disc. If the disc is not lost, then the player will throw from the next lie.

This is not a practice throw since it was thrown from the tee. See the Definition for a practice throw.

Practice Throw: During a round, the projection of a disc of a distance greater than two meters, or of any distance toward a target, intentional or not, which does not change the player�s lie, either because it did not occur from the teeing area or the lie, or because the player had already thrown competitively from the teeing area or the lie.

The definition of a practice throw is poorly written. In fact, a practice throw can be defined as "the projection of a disc of greater than two meters, or"...something else. An English teacher or lawyer would say that the "or" placed where it is in the definition makes any throw over two meters a practice throw...obviously we know that is not the intention of the authors of the Rules. So it cuts both ways. I argue that the practice throw penalty is the rule that is the most logical extention of the existing rules that applies in this very unusual situation.

This discussion does bring up a valid point. What do you do if someone just chucked your favorite driver into the lake on their drive? The rules don't cover this, but if I made an errant mistake like this, I would give the player the option of taking any one of my discs from my bag and giving it to him. Then after the round, I would make every attempt to at least obtain a new disc for the player if available for the next round (I know you can�t replace a favorite broken-in disc). What else could you do? If it was blatant, then automatic DQ is in order. Pull your group aside, call over an official or TD and get the player DQ'ed immediately.


Agreed, if it was intentional, it is a DQ. If not intentional, it is the practice throw penalty plus the lost disc penalty.

So many points, so little time.

Main points, The unique mark does not have to be your own, or even known to the other players unless their aid is sought in finding the disc.

The rest of the practice throw defines where a practice throw can be taken from. A player can never take a practice throw from the current lie or teeing area.

Krupicka - if you go back to my initial post of the thread it (I hope) clearly says it ALMOST happened.

What happened was player A thought he drove with his Orange Valk. He went back to his bag after driving, looked inside, saw his orange Valk and was confused. He saw an identical bag next to his, knew the player threw Valks, and thought he grabbed the orange Valk from the wrong bag.

Turns out he drove with a yellow destroyer. Go figure. (it was really hot).

See...it really was a senior moment. But it led to the question of what would have been the ruling and a week later here we are.

Looking back... Yes, you were clear. I guess I don't see this unintentionally happening to get too worked up about, but it is a good exercise in finding places where the rules can be tightened up (e.g. 2m/OB/Mando/Lost not applying to practice throws).

As pretentious is defined as "characterized by assumption of dignity or importance", I make no apologies for my pretentiousness. The Rules are extremely important, and it is important that people treat the Rules with dignity and respect. Do not mischaracterize my emphasis of the importance of the Rules as discourteous. Lmfao, did you google search the very first definition of this word, lol. Another English version of the word is: Pretentious - lack of elegance as a consequence of being pompous and puffed up with vanity. All in good fun. Back on track now.

…it is a logical interpretation of the marking rule that every player should play with his own discs, because the authors of the Rules went so far as to ensure that every player's disc can be tracked back to that certain player when they wrote the marking rule. Therefore, certainly using another player's disc without permission, without declaration, and without marking the disc, is a violation of the rules. Couldn’t agree anymore, and that’s why 802.01F is in place “A player shall receive a warning for the first instance of throwing an unmarked disc".

803.01 F. Rule of Fairness. If any point in dispute is not covered by the rules, the decision shall be made in accordance with fairness. Often a logical extension of the closest existing rule or the principles embodied in these rules will provide guidance for determining fairness. Clearly the closest existing rule is 803.07.B. Extended logically, the player shall be assessed a one-throw penalty for a practice throw. 803.07B only applies when “a disc at rest on the playing surface”…”Playing Surface: The area below where the disc came to rest from which the stance for the next shot is taken. The playing surface is generally the ground but can be any surface deemed suitable for play by the tournament director or course official.” This rule only applies to a disc in play, not in the players' bags at the next tee spot waiting to tee-off.

but a DQ could be called because the other player will be at an unfair disadvantage without the benefit of his disc that the borrower lost. The use of “borrower” implies the intent to return to owner. But why would you intend to return a disc that is your own? The only logical conclusion is the player unintentionally used the disc. Are you really going to DQ a player for one unintentional use of another player’s disc? Seems harsh to me and goes against the spirit of disc golf. A courtesy warning for the first violation, then penalty for second and possible DQ.

I've said more than once that it's a one-stroke penalty (practice throw) for throwing another's disc without declaring so.

I've said more than once that if said disc is lost, it's lost disc penalty plus practice throw penalty, with the possibility that it could be a DQ---up to the TD to decide.

So, only if the offending player loses the other player's disc would there potentially be "DQ a player for one unintentional use of another player�s disc".

Did you forget again that there were originally three questions asked?

I've said more than once that it's a one-stroke penalty (practice throw) for throwing another's disc without declaring so.

I've said more than once that if said disc is lost, it's lost disc penalty plus practice throw penalty, with the possibility that it could be a DQ---up to the TD to decide.

So, only if the offending player loses the other player's disc would there potentially be "DQ a player for one unintentional use of another player’s disc".

Did you forget again that there were originally three questions asked? I think at this point we have all stated our position on the rules so no need to go back and forth. It would be interesting to see a poll: How many people think it is a 1) practice throw penalty for driving with another's disc from the tee or 2) courtesy violation and shoot from the next lie. If we take a poll just from the responses here then you lose underparmike:

Courtesy Violation (6)
Patrick P
wsfaplau
DShelton
kkransinski
gnduke
krupicka

Practice Throw (1)
underparmike

So underparmike, maybe if you were an English teacher or a lawyer you would know to use less abrasive tactics and more evidential facts to persuade the audience the position you stand on and learn to apply the rules as written and not how they should be written. Clearly we all understand a practice throw does not result from the initial tee shot on the next hole.

Last I think you need to apply the rules of fairness to your third statement above.

I think abrasive attrition is a more effective tactic with an argument not supported by the rules. If you are the last one shouting, you win.

I do agree with the concept of penalizing a player for a lost disc if they throw and lose another players disc whether it be a practice throw or in competition, but the initial throw from the tee is a competitive throw unless it involves a stance violation.

If we take a poll just from the responses here then you lose underparmike:

Courtesy Violation (6)

kkransinski


Granted, my response was posted before Mr. Shelton advised us as to the definition of "practice throw", but there is no way anyone could possibly interpret my comment as supporting "courtesy violation" when it specifically says "practice throw".

Patrick, until the Rules Committee is asked, you have no definitive proof that I am wrong. We have all agreed that these scenarios are not specifically covered by the rulebook. Therefore, these grey-area scenarios are like many others that are open to interpretation by the TD or the group. Until the Rules Committee makes a statement, we will have to agree to disagree.

If the Rules Committee is asked, I would hope that they would rule on all three of the original questions, and consider the implications of one player losing another player's disc even if by accident. Again, a courtesy violation only for placing the other player at a possibly tremendous disadvantage by losing that player's best driver or best putter, possibly forever, is not even remotely fair.

What if the player throws the mistakenly borrowed disc into a road, damaging it? Is that just a courtesy violation to you as well? Are you one of those people who can not admit defeat?

As you say, there is no need to admit defeat until a ruling is received from the RC.

Shelton, you bring up the definition of a practice throw as if to discredit my correct ruling---but your incorrect ruling does not account for the possibility that the other player may actually want to use the mistaken disc. If that were the case, your ruling is silly. You can't expect the offending player to go mark his lie and then bring the disc back to the offended player, or do you?

I brought up the definition because you said something about having no exceptions to the rules, yet you wish to add one for a practice throw. Quote for me where it says throwing the wrong disc is to be declared a practice throw or where it says the first throw off a tee in regular competition can be declared a practice throw. We have to work with the rules we have, and the only rule that best fits the situation is a courtesy violation. Maybe we need to petition to have this addressed, but until then the only rule (no exceptions) is a courtesy violation.

You can't expect the offending player to go mark his lie and then bring the disc back to the offended player, or do you?
If it were I who had someone inadvertently (as judged by me & only me) throw my driver, I would employ the following algorithm:
1) Jokingly call the inadvertent thrower an idiot with mock indignation.
2) If I didn't then want to throw that disc for my drive: no harm, no foul.
3) If i did then want to throw that disc for my drive: I would ask the "idiot" to mark & retrieve it.
4a) If he did, no harm no foul.
4b) If he refused, I would call a courtesy warning & ask again. If he again refused, I would call a courtesy penalty, go mark & retrieve the disc myself, & proceed. If anybody dared call me for too much time while retrieving, I would choke him out, ask the group if there was a second to the call, and, lacking one, proceed.

If the Rules Committee is asked, I would hope that they would rule on all three of the original questions

Why don't we include all three questions with each post so it would make it easier.

1) After throwing he notices that he may have grabbed the orange Valkyrie from another players bag by mistake (the two bags were identical Phenix bags, same colors). What happens next?

Courtesy violation 801,01.C (Refusal to perform an action expected by the rules[using your own discs]), warning for first offense, stoke each time after.

2) What if the player he "borrowed" the disc from doesn't mind, saying he was happy (in retrospect) to loan his opponent that disc for that shot?

Here's where it gets tricky, but since there is no rule violation, then continue play, with a thank you to the affected player.

3) Does the ruling change if the alleged Orange Valkyrie flies into thick grass and can never be found?

Courtesy violation 801,01.C (Refusal to perform an action expected by the rules[using your own discs]), warning for first offense, stoke each time after, if the affected player calls the violation as per 2 above. Plus re-tee as per the lost disc rule for stroke and distance. You also had better offer to replace the disc if you want to continue to have friends in the disc golf world.

#2 above is why you can't use the practice throw rule (besides the definition). It all depends on whether the affected player minds or not. That is the essence of the courtesy violation.

Here's my take on this:

1 - It is NOT a practice throw, It's his drive regardless of the disc used.
Look at the definition of a Practice Throw, It clearly states that to be a practice throw it can NOT occur from the teeing area unless the player has already thrown from the Teeing Area. Page 4 of the Rule Book.

2 - It's his drive so if the shot is lost it goes to normal lost disc rules and he re-tees throwing his third shot.

3 - Courtesy Violation may be called per 801.01 but by Rule (G) the first violation is a WARNING and he is penalized on subsequent violations so there is no penalty associated with this first offense. Page 5 of the Rule Book.

4 - 802.01 (F) -A player shall receive a WARNING for the first offense of throwing an unmarked disc, Once again there is no penalty associated. If he picks up the same disc and throws it for his second shot than this could get into the "Unique mark" argument but as stated it's clear. Page 8.

If not lost, He's throwing 2 from the lie created by the tee shot.
If Lost he's throwing 3 from the Tee (Hopefully with his own disc this time). He'll need to work out the lost disc with the player whose disc he used. This has no bearing on play unless it can be proven that he did this on purpose then DQ s a possibility.

This seems straight forward to me and everything is covered. People sometimes try to over complicate things when there is already a viable answer. Just my thoughts guys.

An excellent and challenging question, Mr. Kenny! You have stumped the panel so far---even Chuck.

Allow me to provide the correct interpretation of the Holey Rule Book. The answer to your first two questions is: the player who threw the wrong disc receives a one-throw penalty and re-tees.

Let's turn to Verses 803.07 and 803.01.B and read from the Holey Book:


803.07.B. If a disc at rest on the playing surface or supported by the target is moved, the disc shall be replaced as close as possible to its original location, as determined by a majority of the group or an official. If a marker disc is moved, the marker disc shall be replaced as close as possible to its original location, as determined by a majority of the group or an official. (If the two meter penalty is in effect See also 803.08 C and D for movement of a disc above the playing surface.)


The GM took a disc at rest and made a throw that can only be interpreted as a practice throw. It doesn't matter if the other GM approves or not, because as we know, every player must have their own name or mark on every disc. The penalty for a practice throw is one stroke.


803.01.B. Practice Throws. A player who throws a practice throw or an extra throw with any disc any time after the
start of his or her round and prior to his or her finishing the last hole of the round (except
for throws that must be re-thrown in accordance with the rules, provisional throws made
pursuant to 803.01 C and 803.01 D (3), or throws during a suspension or postponement of play) shall receive
one penalty throw. The practice throw or extra throw must be observed by any two players or an
official.


I'll also reference the other rule for good measure:

801.02.F. All discs used in play, except mini marker discs, must be uniquely marked in ink or pigment-based marking which has no detectable thickness. A player shall receive a warning for the first instance of throwing an unmarked disc if observed by two or more players of the group or an official. After the warning has been given, each subsequent throw by the player with an unmarked disc shall incur one penalty throw if observed by two or more players of the group or an official.


So do you follow the logic there? In my next post I will answer your third and even more challenging question (I'd do it in one post but I'd probably get timed out by the MB software).

none of which has any relativity to the OP. The disc was in the bag, not an active disc. It's not at rest. It's not marking anything.

Nothing, ANYWHERE, says anything about a disc needing anything other than a "unique mark". That can be someone else's name, it could be an X, as noted elsewhere in this thread. It could be someone else's name. Nothing anywhere says the rest of the group must be notified of a different mark. Made up rules aren't rules.

I agree: Call them an idiot, ask them to retrieve and mark. If they do it in that order, THEN call 'em on moving the marker disc. If they mark and retrieve, no problem. No time penalty can be called, there's a distraction. A courtesy call, yes, maybe, if the errant person is grouchy at all about it.

how can a practice throw be penalized beyond the penalty for taking a defined practice throw. It doesn't affect a lie. How can a lost disc penalty be assessed?

how can a practice throw be penalized beyond the penalty for taking a defined practice throw. It doesn't affect a lie. How can a lost disc penalty be assessed?

It can't. A practice throw, by definition (Section 800) does not change a player's lie. A lost disc is one that cannot be located (803.11A). So far, this is all coming out of the Rules.

Here comes my thoughts behind the Rules. Why does a disc need to be located? In order to determine its lie, IMO. Therefore, since the practice throw does not change a player's lie, then there is no penalty in not locating the disc used in the penalty throw.

The above does not address any issues regarding the use of another player's disc in the commission of the practice throw.

an oldie but a goodie.

an oldie but a goodie.

to which your answers are still, for the most part, totally wrong, Mike:D:eek::rolleyes: