Short version. A card plays three holes, tee to basket, that aren't in play. How many strokes? I'm on my phone so I can't type much, but will give the rest later tonight.

Two throw penalty to each player in the group for playing the course out of order. You don't get 2 throws for each hole played out of order.

Plus all of the strokes they took on the holes that were not in play.

Sorry I read that as three holes out of order, not extra holes. But as Gary says, all of the throws on those holes plus the 2-throw penalty. If these out-of-play holes were played instead of three other holes and the correct ones were not played later, then might as well DNF since the round wasn't completed?

That was my call also. Kicker, when they realized they had gone astray, they erased their recorded strokes and wrote in their new scores. What do you do if they don't recall their stroke count?

If they turned the card in before approaching the TD prior and asking how to address the problem, Disqualification. Probably followed by a suspension. Cheating as it relates to scores is not looked upon lightly by the PDGA.

It was not a case of cheating...an unusual course set-up and not studying the map prior to throwing. Very unfortunate as I think the next card of players followed them as they went astray. The course was set-up with tee "A" playing to basket "E" and then tee "F" playing back to basket "C".
A costly mistake...each player was given a color map along with OB rules upon check in.
Bet none of the players involved do that again!

Just mentioned that because a similar case caused by a confusing temp course layout resulted in disqualification because the card was turned in without the misplay being identified.

This happened at the Spring Valley Spectacular. The players were REC, and it is my understanding that they went to the TD to ask for clarification, but I'm not sure. It does seem that they modified their card before asking for help, but I talked with at least one of them, and it was clear they just didn't think. I agree with Gary on the DQ if they can't or couldn't recall their strokes, simply because ther is no fair way, IMO, to go forward. On the other hand, I hate to do that to a rec player. Btw they felt dumb as all get out about it...

Just mentioned that because a similar case caused by a confusing temp course layout resulted in disqualification because the card was turned in without the misplay being identified.

I remember this case, they thought they were out of the money so didn't report the infraction, and then, things changed. One player moved up and immediately turned himself in. Had to suspend, but really admired the guy.

If they turned the card in before approaching the TD prior and asking how to address the problem, Disqualification. Probably followed by a suspension. Cheating as it relates to scores is not looked upon lightly by the PDGA.

That one made me laugh. Thanks.

Err, rather someone assuming that the PDGA enforces their own rules made me laugh.

All throws were treated as practice throws since the holes were not out of order, but not used during that round. They were brought to the TD's attention during the round(First Round). She made the appropriate call, and correct penalty strokes were applied. There was also another card that made the mistake playing only 1 incorrect hole(the card behind them, but there had gotten to be a gap between the cards...), which also got their appropriate penalty. We tried to make sure that everyone knew to consult the program which had the course layouts for each round. We had hole signs for every hole, which had the hole number, any pertinent ob or mando info.

All throws count as practice throws and no course misplay strokes sounds right to me.

It was not a case of cheating...an unusual course set-up and not studying the map prior to throwing. Very unfortunate as I think the next card of players followed them as they went astray. The course was set-up with tee "A" playing to basket "E" and then tee "F" playing back to basket "C".
A costly mistake...each player was given a color map along with OB rules upon check in.
Bet none of the players involved do that again!

Assuming they played A to A, B to B, and C to C,

On A to A they played the right tee, wrong basket, holed out without realizing their mistake and played another hole. They get their actual score plus two penalty throws for that hole. 801.04(B)(3).

On B to B they played wrong tee to wrong basket. Or they played an unassigned hole. This is a species of misplay not identified in rule 801.04. I think you could treat these as practice throws. I think you could instead rule by analogy from 801.04(B)(1) and (3) and treat it as a misplay and completed hole: actual score plus 2. Giving the players the benefit of the doubt, I'd probably go with practice throws.

On C to C, wrong tee, right basket, completed hole. Actual score plus 2. 801.04(B)(1).

Erasing scores and forgetting what they shot? Well, you could just DQ them for substance abuse. Who else plays three holes and has no idea what they shot on them? :D I'd tell them to sit down and come up with actual scores for what they shot on those non-holes. Otherwise, I have to DQ you. They'll come up with some scores. Hopefully all those penalty throws make up for them playing different and probably easier holes.

But next time put big Hefty bags over the baskets you aren't using. Even pros make these kinds of mistakes.

The players talked to the TD and wrote their "made up holes" on the back of the card so they could record the actual holes in the correct blanks.
Each player was stroked 2 strokes for the misplay and each stroke they took on the made up holes, based on the fact that every throw taken after the 2 minute warning is counted as a stroke.

The players talked to the TD and wrote their "made up holes" on the back of the card so they could record the actual holes in the correct blanks.
Each player was stroked 2 strokes for the misplay and each stroke they took on the made up holes, based on the fact that every throw taken after the 2 minute warning is counted as a stroke.That is an arguably correct ruling, too. You don't stack two-throw penalties for non-sequential play. Presumably you do for wrong tee and wrong basket play. This is kind of something different from either of those. We really need a rule for playing one or more holes that were not assigned.

i'll give you guys a little more detail to help with understanding the problem.

the course is set up at a ball golf course permanently. there are 9 holes that go with the 9 ball golf holes, we call these the "power 9". there are 18 holes in the woods surrounding the course, we call these the "finesse 18". so, there are 27 baskets but we were playing two rounds of 21 each.

during round one, when you finished finesse 7 instead of going to finesse 8 you were supposed to go to power 4. you played a few of the power holes and then went back in the woods for finesse 15.

the players in question did not go to power 4 but instead continued to power 8,9 and 10 before realizing their error.

hope this helps.

I read and re-read the rulebook pretty carefully on Sunday following the tournament.

And here are the circumstances - they played 3 holes that were NOT slated to be played that round and then they eventually picked backup up at the hole they should've gone to before the misplay. So, in effect, they played 3 holes worth of practice throws, but because they didn't play any holes of the course in the wrong order (or out of sequence) they shouldn't be penalized there.

The other rule that might seem to come into play is playing from then incorrect teeing area...again, they weren't teeing off from the wrong tee because they eventually ended up playing the remainder of the course correctly. Therefore, there shouldn't be a penalty for playing from the wrong tee.

I found this difficult to believe and so I chased down an old rulebook, and it seems like some verbiage that used to be in the old book was removed from the new one. The newest rulebook seems to only consider that playing the course in the wrong order, playing to the wrong target, and playing from wrong tee are the only possibilities of a misplay.

At first, I wanted to see them assessed a 2-throw penalty too, but if you really think about it, that would amount to double jeopardy since they counted each of their throws toward targets that weren't part of the stipulated course. They played ALL of the correct course and made about 9-10 practice throws doing it.

I think that any baskets NOT being used during the round could've been bagged to prevent just such a situation from occurring. I think that I saw two baskets "bagged" during the second round. The baskets that were bagged for the second round were baskets that were used as targets during the first round though.

I agree that there should be a general misplay rule with two levels of penalty.
1) A single throw penalty (equivalent to a practice throw) if the misplay is detected before a second shot is made, and play continues from the correct lie prior to the errant throw.
2) A two throw penalty in addition to practice throws if the misplay is not discovered prior to the second shot after the misplay, and play continues from the correct lie prior to the errant throw.

The rule would only come into play in situations not specifically covered by the other misplay rules in the book. The penalty is severe because the reason for he misplay is normally lack of attention to the game, the player's meeting, or the course markings.

So if they played a few holes thinking they were in play for the event, and scored stroke accordingly. When they found they were really all practice throws, I hope they remembered to not count any other penalties they incurred during that period of practice.

Any OB or Two meter penalties or stance violations, would be meaningless during a practice throw.

Courtesy violations would all be valid.

Bob

At first, I wanted to see them assessed a 2-throw penalty too, but if you really think about it, that would amount to double jeopardy since they counted each of their throws toward targets that weren't part of the stipulated course. They played ALL of the correct course and made about 9-10 practice throws doing it.
They could have been considered "late" for playing the correct three holes after the three they played and taken 7s on those next three correct holes once they finished the incorrect three. Then, they would play those holes they could have had 7s on resulting in a misplay. Overall it seems reasonable that they got the 2-throw penalty plus the practice throws as was done.

There is no four throw penalty for being late to a hole in the middle of a round. The four-throw penalty is only for being late to tee at the start of the round.

Rule of Fairness might indicate the par+4 penalties or Excessive Time with everyone being "late" (more than 30 seconds) to make their throws on the correct tee. But as I said, the 2-throw for misplay that was applied seems more than reasonable in addition to the practie throws. Of course, this type of thing wouldn't happen in ball golf, but if it did, it would likely be a DQ. We do everything possible to complicate penalty calculations and keep people playing in comparison with ball golf.

We do everything possible to complicate penalty calculations and keep people playing in comparison with ball golf.

Yes, we do. I think we are far too accommodating. Easier and more efficient to just DQ them.

Probably could have been avoided by players paying more attention to instructions as well as tournament staff bagging or marking the baskets not to be used.

Excessive time is only a warning for the first occurrence and could only be applied to the player who should have thrown first. Rhett had it right under the current rules: the only penalty should be the practice throws on the series of holes. As Bob pointed out, any penalties on those holes (other than courtesy violations), would not be assessed.

There probably should be a two-throw penalty for playing a completely extra hole, but the rules as written don't support it as 801.04 is for specific types of misplay and this doesn't fall in one of those specific types.

The very first tee played on the wrong hole initiates the 2-throw misplay rule for Wrong Tee 801.04(1) if a subsequent throw is made which it was.

Should the groups (if any) who passed the group(s) who were playing the extra holes have gotten penalized under 801.02D for passing a group without permission? :eek:

The definition of hole here is "numbered segments of the course that are separate units for scoring". My understanding of 801.04.B(1) and 801.04.B(2) applies to scenarios where there are multiple tees/targets for a given hole and the wrong tee/target used. It does not include a hole that isn't part of the round as that would not mesh with the part about proceeding to complete the hole. Since they were not playing in areas that would be considered holes for the round, these are merely practice throws.

I find that this discussion is in many ways similar to playing from an incorrect lie that is not another players lie. The are gaps in the rules, but closing those gaps gets rather difficult.

The very first tee played on the wrong hole initiates the 2-throw misplay rule for Wrong Tee 801.04(1) if a subsequent throw is made which it was.

Should the groups (if any) who passed the group(s) who were playing the extra holes have gotten penalized under 801.02D for passing a group without permission? :eek:

They didn't play from a wrong tee Chuck. They played the entire (correct) course in the correct sequence, and from the correct tee boxes. They simply took a little detour while making a bunch of practice throws.

They didn't play from the wrong tee. They didn't play the correct holes out of sequence. The stuff they played wasn't part of the correct course. If anyone wants to see penalties applied, then state under which rule number the penalties apply.

It wasn't clear if anyone else passed them or not. I think that their misplay occurred on the final set of holes for them. I had heard that these cards experienced a five-hour long round for 21 holes.

The rulebook specifically cites infractions, and this kind of misplay wasn't specified. I think part of what is key about it all, is that they finished playing the stipulated course in the correct order from the correct tees.

Ching, the first hole they played that was not part of the course was the "wrong tee" for the next hole, was it not? That's a 2-throw penalty in 801.04B(1) if they continue playing from those tee shots which they did. The rule simply says "teeing from the wrong teeing area" is an infraction.

Chuck I don't think you can "double" penalize them with a wrong tee call as well as a practice throw.

I don't see it as any different than misssing the mando, landing OB, and not finding your disc only penalizes you for missing the mando and ignores the rest.

Ching, the first hole they played that was not part of the course was the "wrong tee" for the next hole, was it not? That's a 2-throw penalty in 801.04B(1) if they continue playing from those tee shots which they did. The rule simply says "teeing from the wrong teeing area" is an infraction.

I'm not really certain about this Chuck, but if it isn't a hole that is part of the stipulated course, then it just so happens to be an unused area with a concrete tee pad. They weren't throwing in the direction of the next hole/basket and therefore it isn't part of the course. And, they ended up (eventually) at the correct tee box for the correct basket and continued playing from there. Of the existing holes of the stipulated course, they played them all, and they also played all of the stipulated course holes in the correct order that they were supposed to be played from their correct teeing locations without ever playing any hole twice.

Because the extra holes those folks played weren't part of the stipulated course, they should be considered indistinguishable from an open field...or at least as irrelevant as an open field. They never misplayed any portion of the stipulated course...they just made a bunch of extra throws in between a couple of the holes.

A) Did the card play the stipulated course? Yes
B) Did the card play from the correct tee areas for the stipulated course holes? Yes
C) Did they play any of the holes of the stipulated course in incorrect order? No
D) Were any of the targets they "practiced" at in play during the round? No

Maybe I'm missing something...

I think to clarify the issue, you have to decide if all potential "teeing areas" are well-defined. If they *are*, then they clearly did not throw from an improper one because the place they threw from was *not* a teeing area. On the other hand, if we define "teeing area" as any place one tees off from, regardless of location, then this issue is more complex.

Case study: A TD decides that all divisions will play the "advanced tee" on hole X, even though there is a "rec tee" defined. All tees in this event have a tournament sign on them, including the "advanced tee" in question. the "rec tee" does not, as it is not intended for play. A Rec card steps up to hole X and mistakenly goes to the "rec tee", completing their hole from there. Is this throwing from the wrong tee? They holed out on hole X's basket, but teed from an area not defined as a tee for the tournament.

As a TD I would rule that the card receive two penalty strokes according to the incorrect tee rule. I would be confident in that decision, had I not read this thread :).

Sorry for not quoting rules here, but I am leaning toward all of those shots not played on the stipulated course as being practice throws. Since they were not taken from a stipulated tee box, those throws taken from the concrete pads that were not part of the stipulated course could not, IMO, be ruled as being taken from the wrong tee, or as Chuck quoted the rules, "teeing from the wrong teeing area". If Chuck's interpretation was correct, I would think that any throw made after a hole out would be considered a tee, and I don't think that is the case.

Someone else said that on one of the holes they played a correct tee and on one of the holes they played to a correct basket. So thats why I thought you could apply the penalties from the rules for correct tee to wrong basket and wrong tee to correct basket for those two holes. Now someone else is saying they never played from a correct tee or to a correct basket. If that is true, those should all be counted as practice throws, and they have to play the missed holes with one two-throw penalty.

Sorry for not quoting rules here, but I am leaning toward all of those shots not played on the stipulated course as being practice throws. Since they were not taken from a stipulated tee box, those throws taken from the concrete pads that were not part of the stipulated course could not, IMO, be ruled as being taken from the wrong tee, or as Chuck quoted the rules, "teeing from the wrong teeing area". If Chuck's interpretation was correct, I would think that any throw made after a hole out would be considered a tee, and I don't think that is the case.

Agreed Bill. That was the conclusion I came to as well...

They didn't play 3 wrong holes in place of 3 correct ones, they played 3 additional holes which weren't part of the stipulated course.

I don't think a penalty can (or should) be applied. They counted the extra throws as part of their scores.

It appears that people can make an argument for and against adding a two stroke penalty to the practice throws. The question I have is: why would one want to fashion an argument that adds two more strokes? It's bad form.

It's pretty simple really. Let's say these players each decide to take one practice throw after finishing every other hole in an 18-hole round, perhaps from the basket just finished toward the next tee. Those would be nine legit practice throws with no additional penalty than the throws.

In the case being reviewed, in addition to the practice throws, their choice to play those unofficial holes potentially disrupted the flow of the course for other groups, especially when they returned back into the flow. Let's say some group took a half hour break from play disappearing in the woods during a tournament round and let's assume no illegal activities occurred and no practice throws. Should there not be a penalty for allowing other groups to pass them and not playing their next hole for 30 minutes?

Chuck, if a group can't reach a decision on a call they can stand aside and let others play through while an offical or TD is summoned. Should they also be penalized for disrupting the flow of play and allowing others to play through? I think this is as close as the rules come to addressing a similar situation.

801.03 D. Appeals:
(1) When a group cannot reach a majority decision regarding a ruling, the benefit of
the doubt shall be given to the thrower. However, any player may seek the ruling
of an official, and the official�s ruling shall supersede the group�s ruling. Any player
desiring an appeal of the group�s decision shall promptly and clearly express that
desire to the group.
(2) If an official is readily available, the group shall stand aside to seek the official�s ruling, allowing other groups to play through.
(3) If an offi cial is not readily available, the group shall proceed in one of two ways. The group may reach a majority decision with the benefit of the doubt going to the thrower, and continue play. Alternatively, if the thrower does not wish to continue play under the group�s majority decision, the thrower may declare a provisional per 803.01 C. The
use of provisional throws is encouraged in all situations where the thrower questions
the group�s or official�s ruling.
(4) A player may seek an appeal of an offi cial�s ruling to the director. If the director is readily available, the appeal shall be heard directly. The group shall stand aside awaiting the ruling on appeal. If the director is not readily available, the group shall continue playing under the official�s ruling. The appeal shall be made as soon as practical. The decision of the director shall be final.

I understand that rule. Answer my question though. As a TD, would you not penalize a group that told other groups, "You guys play ahead, we're going to take a three hole break."? Let's say maybe it was even raining at the moment. Of course, the difference is this group could be construed as subverting the rules by doing it intentionally which was not the case for the group playing the extra holes.

You answered your own question there Chuck.

It's pretty simple really. Let's say these players each decide to take one practice throw after finishing every other hole in an 18-hole round, perhaps from the basket just finished toward the next tee. Those would be nine legit practice throws with no additional penalty than the throws.

In the case being reviewed, in addition to the practice throws, their choice to play those unofficial holes potentially disrupted the flow of the course for other groups, especially when they returned back into the flow. Let's say some group took a half hour break from play disappearing in the woods during a tournament round and let's assume no illegal activities occurred and no practice throws. Should there not be a penalty for allowing other groups to pass them and not playing their next hole for 30 minutes?

Chuck - I see the point you are trying to make here and in general I would agree with you, but these folks didn't intentionally play 3 extra holes. I think that the 9-10 extra throws those Rec. players took was punishment enough and adding 2 extra penalty throws to their scores amounts to double-punishment for their infraction. I am not aware of these cards holding up anyone else other than themselves, so it didn't seem to interfere with flow although I can certainly see how that could happen.

But I still am failing to see under which rule they can be stroked because as I've asserted, they played all of the stipulated holes, they played them all in the correct order and from the correct teeing locations without playing any of them twice. So as far as I am aware of...they only made practice throws. I believe that the TD wanted to penalize them for not playing the stipulated course, but they did.

It would be a lot easier for anyone to have an opinion if someone would condense all of the facts instead of teasing them out post by post.

If they played the missed holes immediately after playing the unassigned holes, and if the missed holes did not share any of the same tees and basets as the assigned holes, there would be no holes played out of order, and I'd agree that there'd be no two-throw penalty for playing holes in the wrong order. If they finished the round, discovered their error, and then went back to play the missed holes, they get the 2-throw penalty for playing the missed holes out of order. If some of the unassigned holes they played have same tees or same baskets as the holes they missed, then they arguable should get the penalty for playing right tee to wrong basket, or wrong tee to right basket.

It all depends on what actually happened, which has never been clear.

If the t or hole is not part of the stipulated course for the round in question, then it can no way be considered a wrong t or hole. This would be a practice throw penalty situation. To throw from the wrong t or play out the wrong hole, the player/s would have to throw from a t or play out a wrong hole that has been stipulated for that round. In the eyes of the rule book only the stipulated course for that round exist.

It appears that people can make an argument for and against adding a two stroke penalty to the practice throws. The question I have is: why would one want to fashion an argument that adds two more strokes? It's bad form.

The argument should be what is correct per the PDGA Rules of Play, and we should all strive for the correct ruling whether it adds two more strokes or not.

But that's a pipe-dream in an idealistic world. Everyone knows that the prevailing mindset of PDGA tournament players, as indicated by James' post, is that calling rules infractions and adding strokes to someone's score is for wimps who should go out and practice more.

Here are two points to consider, the first will need a clarification from Pat. There was a huge delay in the approximate location where these players would have rejoined the regular holes. Patrick, was that delay caused by these players? Second, at the player's meeting it was clearly announced that the holes in play were marked with unique and easily identified tee signs, that had clear instructions on how to play the hole. The three holes in question, while normal in structure, did not have these tee signs (2 by 3 feet in size and easily read). The course was confusing enough that I read the hole number on each hole and off the card when I had the card before doing anything. If you weren't paying attention to the hole, you could easily get lost. That isn't meant to excuse them, simply to point out that you'd have to be clueless to approach any hole without looking for the Tee sign.

BTW - as Patrick pointed out, the TD was right on this issue and handled it very well. I didn't bring this here as a criticism of handling, rather because is was an interesting and unique rules violation that I knew would light up the DGRN team en masse.

The argument should be what is correct per the PDGA Rules of Play, and we should all strive for the correct ruling whether it adds two more strokes or not.

But that's a pipe-dream in an idealistic world. Everyone knows that the prevailing mindset of PDGA tournament players, as indicated by James' post, is that calling rules infractions and adding strokes to someone's score is for wimps who should go out and practice more.

I think the point James might be making is that if you have a situation, where either case can be made clearly, and would work for what happened, he'd go with not adding strokes, since in his very humble opinion, it's bad form. On the other hand, a good conservative would get out the whips and chains, how will the child learn to obey the rules without a good whippin'. :)

We live, or at least should live, in a gray world, i.e., not one that is black and white. Yes, the black and white world is easier, but it seldom exists. That's why we have a rules committee, and various other avenues for settling disagreements. Not every wrong doer is evil, some are simply misinformed. Judging them all the same, while easy, is rather simplistic.

It would be a lot easier for anyone to have an opinion if someone would condense all of the facts instead of teasing them out post by post.

If they played the missed holes immediately after playing the unassigned holes, and if the missed holes did not share any of the same tees and basets as the assigned holes, there would be no holes played out of order, and I'd agree that there'd be no two-throw penalty for playing holes in the wrong order. If they finished the round, discovered their error, and then went back to play the missed holes, they get the 2-throw penalty for playing the missed holes out of order. If some of the unassigned holes they played have same tees or same baskets as the holes they missed, then they arguable should get the penalty for playing right tee to wrong basket, or wrong tee to right basket.

It all depends on what actually happened, which has never been clear.

Excellent point, I don't think we're teasing, rather, we heard about the situation that rolled out over time. My understanding was that the players played the holes in the correct order, with a sojourn to play three additional holes. But I don't know that to be true, it was simply the way the event was described to me. Patrick, can you give us an outline of the actual course of events? Include when in the course of events the players contacted the TD or an outside voice. Thanks!

The argument should be what is correct per the PDGA Rules of Play, and we should all strive for the correct ruling whether it adds two more strokes or not.

But that's a pipe-dream in an idealistic world. Everyone knows that the prevailing mindset of PDGA tournament players, as indicated by James' post, is that calling rules infractions and adding strokes to someone's score is for wimps who should go out and practice more.

"11 strokes. No, 13!!!!!!!"

Ahhh, progress.

OK people. Most of us commenting on here have been doing this long enough where we should know better. None of us even looked at the Rules Q&A. The RC has already answered this pretty definitively.

Played A Hole That Is Not Part Of Official Course
Question: During the third round of a tourney, 2 groups played a hole that was not part of the 27 hole course that was being played that day. One group threw one throw, except one player who threw two strokes before realizing that they were on the wrong hole. A second group played the hole out. The question: Is this a two-throw penalty for the second group or are all of their throws 'practice throws'?

The hole did not actually exist in the round so the grey area of the rulebook in this area has been a point of debate. The TD ruling was for the first group...one stroke for each player except for the player that threw two strokes. For the second group, each player was stroked two strokes, regardless of how many throws they took.

Response: Applicable Rules: 803.01 (General) B
The second group takes all practice throws, because the hole is not part of the tournament course. It is not a matter of a misplayed hole, because a misplayed hole involves playing a hole that actually exists on the course being played. This instance can only be interpreted as practice throws. They still have to complete the 18 holes on the real course.

A rules interpretation that does not quote the rule it is interpretting and does not provide a date isn't much use. When that rule interpretation was written did the rules book contain different penalties for playing holes in the wrong order versus wrong tee correct basket and right tee wrong basket? And in this case did they play one hole where they used a correct tee but played to the wrong basket and another hole where they used an incorrect tee but played to a correct basket, as indicated previously? Or did they play three holes that were entirely composed of incorrect tees and incorrect baskets as someone else indicated earlier? In the FAQ you've provided they did not play any holes out of order in addition to playing non-tournament holes. In the case we are discussing, we don't know whether they played holes out of order.

And in this case did they play one hole where they used a correct tee but played to the wrong basket and another hole where they used an incorrect tee but played to a correct basket, as indicated previously? Or did they play three holes that were entirely composed of incorrect tees and incorrect baskets as someone else indicated earlier? In the FAQ you've provided they did not play any holes out of order in addition to playing non-tournament holes. In the case we are discussing, we don't know whether they played holes out of order.

All throws were treated as practice throws since the holes were not out of order, but not used during that round.

i'll give you guys a little more detail to help with understanding the problem.

the course is set up at a ball golf course permanently. there are 9 holes that go with the 9 ball golf holes, we call these the "power 9". there are 18 holes in the woods surrounding the course, we call these the "finesse 18". so, there are 27 baskets but we were playing two rounds of 21 each.

during round one, when you finished finesse 7 instead of going to finesse 8 you were supposed to go to power 4. you played a few of the power holes and then went back in the woods for finesse 15.

the players in question did not go to power 4 but instead continued to power 8,9 and 10 before realizing their error.

hope this helps.

And here are the circumstances - they played 3 holes that were NOT slated to be played that round and then they eventually picked backup up at the hole they should've gone to before the misplay. So, in effect, they played 3 holes worth of practice throws, but because they didn't play any holes of the course in the wrong order (or out of sequence) they shouldn't be penalized there.

They didn't play from a wrong tee Chuck. They played the entire (correct) course in the correct sequence, and from the correct tee boxes. They simply took a little detour while making a bunch of practice throws.

They didn't play from the wrong tee. They didn't play the correct holes out of sequence. The stuff they played wasn't part of the correct course.

Seems pretty clear to me that they played three holes that were not part of the course at all, tees nor baskets. These holes were to be simply bypassed, but by the offenders were not. I think the Q&A fits perfectly.

It was not a case of cheating...an unusual course set-up and not studying the map prior to throwing. Very unfortunate as I think the next card of players followed them as they went astray. The course was set-up with tee "A" playing to basket "E" and then tee "F" playing back to basket "C".
A costly mistake...each player was given a color map along with OB rules upon check in.
Bet none of the players involved do that again!
It is easy to apply the rules if you ignore facts that don't fit your preconceptions.

You mean facts like the incident being discussed occurred in the first round which used normal tees, while the "A to E" scenario was only in effect for the second round?

Tournament Course Layout (http://www.houstonbirdshot.com/tourneys/2009/SVSV/SVSV_course_maps.pdf)

It is easy to apply the rules if you ignore facts that don't fit your preconceptions.

Is this admonition or self realization? Serious Question.

Exactly. No one reading this has any idea what actually happened. Everyone who knows anything has a different story.

When we run tournaments and have tees/holes/baskets that are not in play, we put trash bags over the buckets, trash cans on top of the teepads, and spray painted arrows on the ground to indicate where to go.

A problem like this can easily be avoided.

OK people. Most of us commenting on here have been doing this long enough where we should know better. None of us even looked at the Rules Q&A. The RC has already answered this pretty definitively.

Played A Hole That Is Not Part Of Official Course
Question: During the third round of a tourney, 2 groups played a hole that was not part of the 27 hole course that was being played that day. One group threw one throw, except one player who threw two strokes before realizing that they were on the wrong hole. A second group played the hole out. The question: Is this a two-throw penalty for the second group or are all of their throws 'practice throws'?

The hole did not actually exist in the round so the grey area of the rulebook in this area has been a point of debate. The TD ruling was for the first group...one stroke for each player except for the player that threw two strokes. For the second group, each player was stroked two strokes, regardless of how many throws they took.

Response: Applicable Rules: 803.01 (General) B
The second group takes all practice throws, because the hole is not part of the tournament course. It is not a matter of a misplayed hole, because a misplayed hole involves playing a hole that actually exists on the course being played. This instance can only be interpreted as practice throws. They still have to complete the 18 holes on the real course.


I found the reference you cited via a link on the main website. Here is the document: http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/RulesQ&A.pdf
and the interpretation cited is: 2006.28 : Played A Hole That Is Not Part Of Official Course

This seems to EXACTLY fit the situation. The ruling should be: Practice throws only...no penalty throws added.

My bad for not having sought out the Rules Q & A document before. Thanks for citing it wsfaplau!

When we run tournaments and have tees/holes/baskets that are not in play, we put trash bags over the buckets, trash cans on top of the teepads, and spray painted arrows on the ground to indicate where to go.

A problem like this can easily be avoided.

Agreed RhynoBoy...it could've been easily avoided with a few trash bags placed over the baskets too.

When we run tournaments and have tees/holes/baskets that are not in play, we put trash bags over the buckets, trash cans on top of the teepads, and spray painted arrows on the ground to indicate where to go.

A problem like this can easily be avoided.

No matter how well you explain course changes in the player meeting, or even if you provide a detailed course layout, someone will not be paying attention.

When a player is getting ready to throw and sees a huge X on the teepad, or sees a trash bag covering the target, they generally get the message loud and clear. If they don't, at least the TD does not have to share the blame.

Agreed RhynoBoy...it could've been easily avoided with a few trash bags placed over the baskets too.

For someone like me who is attentive to detail, living in the current "whatever" society is a drag. The tounament staff has as much culpability in this case as the players.

I am sure the TD announced the course changes in the players meeting, but who pays attention to those?

Exactly. No one reading this has any idea what actually happened. Everyone who knows anything has a different story.

Hmmm...not exactly true Bruce, but I will be seeing one of the participants of those cards and I will find out exactly what happened, but I've already spent about 20 minutes listening to his story and then searching the rulebook(s).

I want to cite the specific differences between the current rulebook and the one just before and see what might've changed in there. I think that at first, we all assumed that there would be a two-throw penalty, but under the current rules, it doesn't appear that one would apply.

I'll write more after I speak my buddy tonight.

For the record, I would like to point out that I spoke in support of the penalty of "practice throws, *NO* additional 2 stroke misplay".

Sometimes I get a bad rap for trying to dish out more strokes. I just want the right call in all cases so that we have a level playing field on different cards in the same divisions. :) I don't care if its more strokes or less strokes, as long as everyone who commits the foul gets the same.

Here is the "official story" from one of the affected players.

There were 3 cards of Recreational division players.
They were supposed to proceed from the Finesse #7 basket to Power #4 tee box, but instead, they proceeded to Finesse #8, Finesse-9 and Finesse-10. First card of Rec actually played 3 full holes in error, the second card played 1 full hole in error, and one card discovered the error and didn't play anything extra.

Once error was discovered, all 3 cards proceeded to the correct tee and continued their round. They erased the scores from the holes played in error and recorded those throws on the back of the scorecard and added them onto their scores for the 21-hole round.

The TD and others listened to what happened and assessed all of the players who played the incorrect holes, all of the practice throws plus a 2 throw penalty for not playing the stipulated course.

So my friend is reluctant to cause any commotion about it, but wanted to know what the correct ruling would be. We've now discovered that the rules Q & A exactly cites this scenario and specifically states that no penalty throws shall be assessed.

We've now discovered that the rules Q & A exactly cites this scenario and specifically states that no penalty throws shall be assessed.

Nice follow up, Larry. I know somebody will try to argue otherwise, but I wish this would just be the end of this. Rules Q&A 2006.28 addresses this EXACT scenario (http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/RulesQ&A.pdf). Every player on the two Rec cards that played extra holes not part of the stipulated course should have been penalized two strokes, regardless of how many throws they took.

Jeff? You quote the rule and then say missplay of course? (2 stroke penalty) Doesn't the rule you quote say only the extra throws? (as practice throws) Am I missreading the rule?

2006.28 : Played A Hole That Is Not Part Of Official Course
Question - During the third round of a tourney, 2 groups played a hole that was not part of the 27 hole course that was being played that day. One group threw one throw, except one player who threw two strokes before realizing that they were on the wrong hole. A second group played the hole out. The question: Is this a two-throw penalty for the second group or are all of their throws 'practice throws'?
The hole did not actually exist in the round so the grey area of the rulebook in this area has been a point of debate. The TD ruling was for the first group...one stroke for each player except for the player that threw two strokes. For the second group, each player was stroked two strokes, regardless of how many throws they took.
Response - Applicable Rules: 803.01 (General) B
The second group takes all practice throws, because the hole is not part of the tournament course. It is not a matter of a misplayed hole, because a misplayed hole involves playing a hole that actually exists on the course being played. This instance can only be interpreted as practice throws. They still have to complete the 18 holes on the real course.

I misread the Q&A the first time through also. The TD in the scenario assessed each player two throws (but not counting the throws), but the RC ruled that the extra throws all need to be counted and merely should be counted as practice throws with no additional penalty. Jeff, I think you need to reread the Q&A on this one.

So, now we have a third interpretation: just a two stroke penalty.

btw, just to fulfill Jeff's prophecy: For the group that played three holes (actually, these aren't truly "holes," but a costly adventure of practice throws), the QA implies that all of their throws are practice throws, not a two-stroke penalty. In other words, since the holes they were playing did not exist, their activity was simply making practice throws.

Nice follow up, Larry. I know somebody will try to argue otherwise, but I wish this would just be the end of this. Rules Q&A 2006.28 addresses this EXACT scenario (http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/RulesQ&A.pdf). Every player on the two Rec cards that played extra holes not part of the stipulated course should have been penalized two strokes, regardless of how many throws they took.

Thanks Jeff, but I think you got it backwards. The Rules Q & A specifically states that the throws count, but NO penalty throws should be assessed as the baskets they threw towards were not part of the stipulated course.

Sorry all, I looked at the TD ruling and not the Rules Committee ruling:



Response -
Applicable Rules: 803.01 (General) B
The second group takes all practice throws, because the hole is not part of the tournament course. It is not a matter of a misplayed hole, because a misplayed hole involves playing a hole that actually exists on the course being played. This instance can only be interpreted as practice throws. They still have to complete the 18 holes on the real course.


Now hopefully THIS ends the debate. :D

I'll throw a wrench in. Given its Rec players, a B-tier, some possibly confusing instructions or situations, and everyone involved did play and score all the 'real' holes, I may have shown discretion and not assessed any throws. Their penalty would have been listening to me give a private group lecture about the importance of paying attention at players meetings, what the penalty would be if it was assessed and so on. With a few boring old movie clich�s thrown in (‘next time I’m going to crack some skulls’) to the lecture to increase the penalty!

Rec is mostly for those who are out to have fun and learn a bit about the tournament atmosphere. I don’t see where hitting them over the head with 10 or so penalty throws accomplishes anything in a situation where there was no real harm and blame can be spread around. Yes, it’s not in the rules that way, but I am not willing to accept that no gray exists in what other’s see as a black and white world. And I’m not too concerned about the possibility of having to talk to a rec player that feels jobbed because he might have gotten a higher finish (i.e. more loot) had the throws been assessed to the guilty parties.

Do I now have to surrender my rules zealot card?

And I�m not too concerned about the possibility of having to talk to a rec player that feels jobbed because he might have gotten a higher finish (i.e. more loot) had the throws been assessed to the guilty parties.

Do I now have to surrender my rules zealot card?

if the strokes when assessed would've changed the order of finish then i'd say yes- hand over the card.

If I'm looking at the correct tournament, difference between 3rd and 12th was 8 throws with top 8 places being paid. I would venture that the throws assessed did change the order.

I'll throw a wrench in. Given its Rec players, a B-tier, some possibly confusing instructions or situations, and everyone involved did play and score all the 'real' holes, I may have shown discretion and not assessed any throws. Their penalty would have been listening to me give a private group lecture about the importance of paying attention at players meetings, what the penalty would be if it was assessed and so on. With a few boring old movie clich�s thrown in (�next time I�m going to crack some skulls�) to the lecture to increase the penalty!



Your "wrench" got my attention.
I can imagine such a position as a TD, but I think I could only (maybe) entertain giving the players a "bye" if it was 1) the NOVICE division, and not the REC, and 2) if the WHOLE division was made of non-pdga members. (a very rare possibility)

Why?
1) REC doesn't = newbie ------ it is just where folks land if they ratings place them there.
2) Making a NoCallThisTime ruling may seem fair for that particular card, but is hardly ever fair for the other cards in the same division.


But, Tim, then I got to thinking if this approach was a "slippery slope" for TD's to get on. If a TD isn't known as a ByTheBooker, then I suggest it will eventually result in more NoCallThisTime scenarios from the players themselves. Why should the player take a stand (make a call) if it later gets passed on by Compassion Charlie?

Just me thinking.

Ron Pittman

BTW, Tim, your card is safe for now. I think I will give you a "bye".

For the group that played three holes (actually, these aren't truly "holes," but a costly adventure of practice throws), the QA implies that all of their throws are practice throws, not a two-stroke penalty. In other words, since the holes they were playing did not exist, their activity was simply making practice throws.

Ok, I think I have caught up on my reading. I've been chewing on this discussion, the rules, and the Holy Q&A's. I confess --- I am having some trouble swallowing this one.

We should call this - Two Wrongs Make a Right!!
If you play from the wrong tee --- misplayed course rulings apply.
If you play to the wrong target ---misplayed course rulings apply.

But .......

If you play BOTH the wrong tee and wrong target --- they magically become just practice throws. ?????? Lucy, ju got some splainin' to do.

I understand that we got a Q&A ruling that answers this specific scenario, but unlike most of these rulings --- I could find no explaination as to WHY!! Somebody help me.

* Almost EVERY course used for a tournament has ancillary tees and targets floating around. IMHO, the spirit of the Playing the Stipulated Course rules demand that you to play the correct "holes". Why does misplaying both tee and target not count?

*How come a "hole" that isn't being used for the tournament is all of a sudden in the position of not really "existing"? Ya'll are way too ethereal for me. Why?

* In 801.04-A, we read about "special conditions that may exist on the course, including extra holes, alternate teeing areas," and so on. How can this section of rules apply to NOT playing the extra holes, but then --- not apply when you DO play extra holes??

Just asking.

Thanks,
Ron Pittman

Here's something excellent to take away from this discussion: three groups of Rec players made a mistake on the course, realized there was a mistake and took action, AND MADE THE RIGHT CALL!!!

Right on, Rec players. Hopefully more people will stop assuming that you have to be a buffoon if you have a low rating.

What is truly unfortunate here is that the Rec players made the correct ruling and then the TD messed it up by adding the 2-stroke course misplay penalty. I can tell you from personal experience (at Worlds in 2004) that when the TD screws up a ruling, it has a definite adverse affect on your belief in the rules.

Ron, that's a good question. Let me see if I can get a satisfactory explanation. Usually, if one is playing the wrong tee or the wrong basket, they are still playing the hole in question, just not correctly. This is why the rules essentially say if you haven't gotten too far, take a penalty and try again or if you have gone too far, take two and complete the hole as started.

In the case where one plays a completely different hole, the complete the hole as you started doesn't make sense.

Consider where they play the hole incorrectly in three throws. They'll score a five. If they play a hole that is not part of the course with three strokes, they'll add three to whatever they score. Thus playing a completely different hole (or set of holes) is typically a larger penalty than just the you played it wrong take an extra two.

Here is what bothers me about this Q&A.

When a player throws a disc from any spot on the course that is not an active lie, it is a practice throw. Except...

If a player marks their lie with a mini and moves their lie to one side and then throws from the moved disc or a similar disc of another player in the same area, it is (according to several long threads here) a foot fault. This is based on the intention of the player to throw a competitive shot. Why does the same logic not apply here. The player intended to play a hole in competition, but played a hole on an adjacent course.

I like that gary. How does it play any differant than a foot fault? Well a stance violation gets a warning. Not so for the practice throw. Other than that I think they play the same.
Bob

I understand that we got a Q&A ruling that answers this specific scenario, but unlike most of these rulings --- I could find no explaination as to WHY!! Somebody help me.

* Almost EVERY course used for a tournament has ancillary tees and targets floating around. IMHO, the spirit of the Playing the Stipulated Course rules demand that you to play the correct "holes". Why does misplaying both tee and target not count?

*How come a "hole" that isn't being used for the tournament is all of a sudden in the position of not really "existing"? Ya'll are way too ethereal for me. Why?

Thanks,
Ron Pittman

Gosh Ron, I can't explain it either. But look at this particular case for a second...all of these folks played every hole of the stipulated course, and they played them all in the order that they were supposed to be played in. So the only thing you can say is that they played some extra "stuff." The fact that they started out from a concrete area which suspiciously looked like a tee box and they threw at basket-type objects is incidental and that they took turns doing so really doesn't matter much does it? They did NOT misplay any hole of the existing course. Why punish them further than counting all of those throws as practice throws and having them move on?

My initial instinct was to throw two penalty throws on top of their practice strokes, but it seems more like double-jeopardy when I think about it. If it messed up the tournament flow, then I can see an argument for imposing it, but having all of those throws count seems like a heavy-enough punishment...especially if they were taking 3-4 throws per pseudo basket. (I'm thinking about that poor card that played 3 holes worth of practice throws...9-12 throws!!!)

Larry, thanks for the response.

I guess I will get over it if the "why" turns out to be ---- the dreaded double penalty. That line of reasoning is used in some other places in the rule book. But, it sorta' feels like a no-answer answer.

That said, I'm still a bit stuck on finding the logic on this Q&A.
Here is the scenario in my mind;

In the KC Worlds there was a normally used hole at Rosedale (topside) that was skipped for the tournament layout. In it's place another hole was added further down the line so we had a total of 18.

According to this Q&A, if our card had mistakenly played this hole --- along with all of the others--- for a total of 19, we would have racked up only our "practice" throws on the should-have-skipped hole as penalty.

IMHO, in this case, it makes perfect sense to add the typical 2 throw penalty for misplaying the course. Obviously, there is a gap in the original written word or we wouldn't need a Q&A for clarification/ruling. But, now that I think about it -- I bet there are some other creative ways to "misplay the course" that aren't specifically named in the original rules, too. Why do they all have to be mentioned for them to be wrong?

(I know this has been beat to death already), But, out there in the heat of the battle, where the latest Q&A may not be so readily available, I would be proud of any TD who maintained the spirit of the "Playing the Stipulated Course" rules and gave these fine fella's their 2 additional penalty strokes.



Ron

BTW, I may not have read closely enough concerning the Lyle's original story, but did the adjacent holes of fame have a bag over the "extra" tee signs or targets? Ummm... why not?

[QUOTE=rondpit;1394737]Larry, thanks for the response.
IMHO, in this case, it makes perfect sense to add the typical 2 throw penalty for misplaying the course.

You have killed your own point, by expressing that they "misplaying the course". They did not misplay the course. The hole they played was not been part of the course during that round. The hole might be part of the park... But not the stipulated coures for that round. The rule book only sees the stipulated course for the round in play.

JimK,

I would agree with you, if it wasn't for the statement that Ron made near the end of his post: "I bet there are some other creative ways to "misplay the course" that aren't specifically named in the original rules, too. Why do they all have to be mentioned for them to be wrong?"

The title of 801.04B is "Specific Types of Misplay and Penalty Procedures for Each:" - it does not say "ALL Types..." I agree that, on the surface, the situation here may not line up with the five types listed, and my inclination, as I have stated here previously, is to treat the throws as purely practice throws, but I think that the point that Ron makes here is legitimate. Elsewhere in the rules are examples stated for various infractions, and unless it is stated that these examples comprise the total set of possible infractions (or options - see 803.05C - "A player may obtain relief _only_ from the following obstacles:...) Ron was just saying, IMO, that there may be other ways to misplay the course, and it could be decided by a TD that was they did was a misplay. I would argue against it, but I understand and respect Ron's line of reasoning.

it was not the "wrong tee for the next hole" as it wasn't a tee for the next hole. it was a tee for a hole not being used. NO penalty other than strokes for practice shots. Though possibly there should also be a penalty for the TD for not marking the course clearly. If you aren't using a hole there should be a sign on the tee saying not to use this hole. and baskets on safari holes should be clearly marked as out of play. i would hope that not only the players learned a lesson here.

Shooting at the wrong basket is no fun. Espicially when you never played the course and you ask a local player on your card for assistance and they point you to the wrong basket.

I can tell you from personal experience (at Worlds in 2004) that when the TD screws up a ruling, it has a definite adverse affect on your belief in the rules.I remember that hose like it was yesterday!

It was pointed out to me that the practice throw penalty affects a weaker player more than a strong one.
Say a pro and a novice are on the card in question. The pro averages three practice throws per hole and the novice averages five per hole.
After three holes they discover they have been playing the wrong holes.(Ones not in the layout prescribed)
The penalty for the novice is much worse than the pro penalty.
What thoughts on this scenario?

Bob

They play in different divisions. Is the novice really more penalized relative to his division?

It was pointed out to me that the practice throw penalty affects a weaker player more than a strong one.
Say a pro and a novice are on the card in question. The pro averages three practice throws per hole and the novice averages five per hole.
After three holes they discover they have been playing the wrong holes.(Ones not in the layout prescribed)
The penalty for the novice is much worse than the pro penalty.
What thoughts on this scenario?

Bob

Since Pros and Novices are not supposed to play on the same card in PDGA events, your scenario is not likely to happen. :D

That being said - while the Novice player would likely take more practice strokes in this scenario, taking ANY extra strokes would probably have a more adverse effect on the Pro player. A Novice could still "place in the prizes" even after taking three or ten extra strokes. Once a Pro takes a few unnecessary strokes, they can probably kiss the cash goodbye. (Of course, if a Pro is playing with a Novice, they are probably out of the cash already.:eek:)

Again, this situation is not likely to happen at an event where unused baskets and tees are clearly marked as out of play. :)

The course was clearly marked...next to every tee-pad in play for the round there was a large bright yellow posterboard tee-sign planted in the ground.

Missing / ignoring the players meeting is not an issue as every player was given a very clear and detailed full color MAP of each course complete with hole by hole O.B. rules.

The fact is the players did not consult their maps before playing the wrong holes. They did not notice the lack of a LARGE YELLOW TEE SIGN next to the holes they played that were not part of the course.

TD and staff did all they could to make the course clear and easy to follow...the fact they did not block off the tee and bag the holes not in use was a practical one as there were lots of holes/tees not in use.

Adding the extra holes played as practice without any further penalty sure sounds plenty fair to me. I'm pretty sure each of those players feel it's a justifiable penalty. The RZ's can debate this to death yet most players will agree with the TD's decision to not add more strokes other then those thrown.

Thanks for the resposes.
I am not looking to harsh the event this thread began it's focus on. I strongly support, it is the player that is responsible to play the stipulated course.
If the TD did nothing more than say what holes were to be played, it is still the players job to play the course correctly.

The assesment of penalty for a misplay as large as threeholes worth of practice throws is clear in the rules, Thanks to the Q and A.
And I appreciate the practical answers given. A novice and a pro are not in direct competition so differing weight penalties are not too much of an issue.

The question asked me was one of fairness. Same mistake, (playing extra holes not part of the course.) with differing levels of added strokes.
Taking a practice throw can be an advantage. Reading wind, guaging distance.
Playing holes that are not on the stipulated course, let alone three of them, is likely tiring and of little if any benefit to the player.

thoughts?
Bob

I disagree with penalizing the players on a 'per practice throw' basis. The penalty should be a bulk penalty of 2 strokes for each player that played holes not part of the course and nothing more. This is the only way you can penalize them equally and fairly since the number of throws on the unstipulated course is completely irrelevant.

Here is the "official story" from one of the affected players.

There were 3 cards of Recreational division players.
They were supposed to proceed from the Finesse #7 basket to Power #4 tee box, but instead, they proceeded to Finesse #8, Finesse-9 and Finesse-10. First card of Rec actually played 3 full holes in error, the second card played 1 full hole in error, and one card discovered the error and didn't play anything extra.

Once error was discovered, all 3 cards proceeded to the correct tee and continued their round. They erased the scores from the holes played in error and recorded those throws on the back of the scorecard and added them onto their scores for the 21-hole round.

The TD and others listened to what happened and assessed all of the players who played the incorrect holes, all of the practice throws plus a 2 throw penalty for not playing the stipulated course.

So my friend is reluctant to cause any commotion about it, but wanted to know what the correct ruling would be. We've now discovered that the rules Q & A exactly cites this scenario and specifically states that no penalty throws shall be assessed.

Is this what happened? Seems some people are posting on this thread that the players got the 2 stroke misplay, and others are posting that they did not.

.
.
.
Adding the extra holes played as practice without any further penalty sure sounds plenty fair to me. I'm pretty sure each of those players feel it's a justifiable penalty. The RZ's can debate this to death yet most players will agree with the TD's decision to not add more strokes other then those thrown.

if the holes had large yellow signs then obviously the course was well marked. sorry, didn't read that previously.

Is this what happened? Seems some people are posting on this thread that the players got the 2 stroke misplay, and others are posting that they did not.

Rhett - I think that Alex was misinformed. I didn't examine the scorecards so I can't really attest that the 2-throw penalty was added to their scores which included the practice throws. But it was announced as such, and at least one of the players told me that his score had a 2-throw penalty added to it.

While I see there are folks who believe that a 2-throw penalty should be applied, I think we can see that according to the Rules Q&A a penalty should not have been applied. I wanted to know the correct ruling and now I know. I think some folks that are advocating the 2-throw penalty need to address that issue with the Rules committee for a possible change to the Rules, but as the rules stand today, the penalty throws should NOT have been applied because the players played every hole of the course in the correct order.

My mistake...I thought the players were penalized only the extra number of throws taken as practice throws. I did not know they were also given a two stroke penalty.

Hmmmmm, not being an RZ, I'm thinking they should have all strokes thrown during the round counted w/o any further action since they did end up playing all the holes correctly after their detour.

Didn't mean to cause confusion on this discussion. Thanks for clarifying the added penality Ching.

A couple of things. It seems that some of the discussion here is centered around finding fault with what the TD did or didn't do. From my perspective this is not fair. First, the TD, and tournament staff, spent a long time debating and discussing this issue. I saw this first hand. They also asked the opinions of any certified official they could identify. The advice I gave them was, don't spend a lot of time worrying, make the best call you can given your knowledge and the situation, being comfortable with the fact that the PDGA will review the TD report, and advise on the ruling.

If our notion is that a TD will be perfect under unique situations, we're going to be sorely disappointed.

Two stroke, or not two stroke. The notion of playing the course correctly is rightly based on the concept of playing each hole from Tee to basket correctly. If your only goal is to accomplish that task, then clearly there is no two stroke penalty. The question arises, what is the intent of those who developed the rules, and of this rule in particular? There are a number of goals in this sport, for example, time of play. Another is fairness of play. Lets look at the misplay in a different fashion. Let's think about this as a run. In running, a competitor is expected to follow the course, not point of play to point of play. Any deviation from the course can result in a huge advantage or disadvantage. Either transgression is treated equally; even if you added distance to your race, you have, whether purposefully or not, broken the rules or the spirit of the competition and are disqualified. If we look at the disc golf tournament similarly, then deviating significantly from the played course breaks the spirit of play and hence is grounds for punishment. Reaching deep into my bs bag - wandering off in the woods to practice your game on baskets out there, possibly overcoming some defect in your style - should be punished.

If you look at the transgression in this light, an argument can be made for a two stroke penalty. You're punishing the player, not simply for the practice throws, but for the transgression of any advantage gained beyond the practice throws and for ignoring the spirit of playing the correct course. Now, I'm not arguing for this, simply pointing out that there is a logic that can be applied.

As an organization, we should be considering, what is the goal here? It seems to me that James would argue that we should not unduly punish. Some others would argue that a rule is a rule, and yet others would argue to look globally at the whole situation, and ask the question, what are we trying to accomplish in regulating play? From there they apply the correct punishments.

Consider, what if the players intentionally, went off the course to play one hole, to loosen up their play and get back on target. Then realized that was bad and turn themselves in for the three practice strokes. Is this a three stoke penalty, a five stroke penalty, a DQ? How much does intent matter and what is the goal? What is fair?

Finally, what does playing the course mean? Does it mean Tee to Pin, or does it mean viewing the course as a course and playing it in order and within a reasonable set of boundaries so as prevent some advantage gained by going off the course? And, do we want to view it that way?

I disagree with penalizing the players on a 'per practice throw' basis. The penalty should be a bulk penalty of 2 strokes for each player that played holes not part of the course and nothing more. This is the only way you can penalize them equally and fairly since the number of throws on the unstipulated course is completely irrelevant.

Wowsers, so, if I want to go off in the woods, sharpen up my game, I can and only get two strokes? I like this interpretation!

Sounds good when there is a 30 minute back up on a long tough hole. Might be better to hit the hole warmed up and give up the 2 strokes.

Holes that historically have a long backup should have a nearby, clearly delineated roped-off area with the stipulation that any time one is within the roped-off area, one's round is officially suspended. Then, players would have an area to keep warm with some freestyle or catch (or have a relaxing outlawed beverage) while waiting for the backup to clear.

A couple of things. It seems that some of the discussion here is centered around finding fault with what the TD did or didn't do. From my perspective this is not fair. First, the TD, and tournament staff, spent a long time debating and discussing this issue. I saw this first hand. They also asked the opinions of any certified official they could identify. The advice I gave them was, don't spend a lot of time worrying, make the best call you can given your knowledge and the situation, being comfortable with the fact that the PDGA will review the TD report, and advise on the ruling.

If our notion is that a TD will be perfect under unique situations, we're going to be sorely disappointed.

Two stroke, or not two stroke. The notion of playing the course correctly is rightly based on the concept of playing each hole from Tee to basket correctly. If your only goal is to accomplish that task, then clearly there is no two stroke penalty. The question arises, what is the intent of those who developed the rules, and of this rule in particular? There are a number of goals in this sport, for example, time of play. Another is fairness of play. Lets look at the misplay in a different fashion. Let's think about this as a run. In running, a competitor is expected to follow the course, not point of play to point of play. Any deviation from the course can result in a huge advantage or disadvantage. Either transgression is treated equally; even if you added distance to your race, you have, whether purposefully or not, broken the rules or the spirit of the competition and are disqualified. If we look at the disc golf tournament similarly, then deviating significantly from the played course breaks the spirit of play and hence is grounds for punishment. Reaching deep into my bs bag - wandering off in the woods to practice your game on baskets out there, possibly overcoming some defect in your style - should be punished.

If you look at the transgression in this light, an argument can be made for a two stroke penalty. You're punishing the player, not simply for the practice throws, but for the transgression of any advantage gained beyond the practice throws and for ignoring the spirit of playing the correct course. Now, I'm not arguing for this, simply pointing out that there is a logic that can be applied.

As an organization, we should be considering, what is the goal here? It seems to me that James would argue that we should not unduly punish. Some others would argue that a rule is a rule, and yet others would argue to look globally at the whole situation, and ask the question, what are we trying to accomplish in regulating play? From there they apply the correct punishments.

Consider, what if the players intentionally, went off the course to play one hole, to loosen up their play and get back on target. Then realized that was bad and turn themselves in for the three practice strokes. Is this a three stoke penalty, a five stroke penalty, a DQ? How much does intent matter and what is the goal? What is fair?

Finally, what does playing the course mean? Does it mean Tee to Pin, or does it mean viewing the course as a course and playing it in order and within a reasonable set of boundaries so as prevent some advantage gained by going off the course? And, do we want to view it that way?

Lyle - Please don't be an instigator of trouble. I don't think anyone here is "beating up" the TD about it. The TD can correct it when the TD report gets submitted. Without seeing the score cards, we have no way of knowing how it was really handled. I went by what was told to me by a player and Andi - but it took me 15-20 minutes of studying the rulebook to arrive at the conclusion that they should NOT have been assessed penalty throws. I had the luxury of time without being "under fire" for anything...not something that the TD had.

I think we all wanted to find out what the correct ruling should be. Thanks to this exact situation being spelled out in an example in the Rules Q&A we know. The rest of the stuff you're posting about seems to be philosophical discussion which should be addressed to the Rule Committee, don't you think?

Larry,

I politely disagree with you while admitting that it might be my perception. To me, some posts here suggest a blame someone attitude. But it could be that since I felt the TD and staff were very careful in how they handled this, that I wanted to make sure that everyone knew that.

That said, most of my post wasn't about blame, rather about how we view playing the course, how we define the course in such situations, and how we would approach such incidents, given the larger global discussion about giving out two penalty strokes for misplaying the course. That topic is infinitely more interesting to me.

You guys have made for an interesting read, and it is like WOW that it continues. Larry will always be Larry, and Lyle will always be Lyle. We know that some love to point fingers when they should be looking into the mirror and taking a personal inventory.

Bottomline, only folks who've never really played events didn't follow their map. It ususally only takes once of doing this, to insure it never happens again.

An interesting topic, and I was tempted to chime in earlier, but I'm glad that it looks like the forum readers here agree only the practice throw penalty(s) should be assessed. It certainly seems a logical application to assess both the practice throws and an additional two penalty stroke for misplaying the course, but upon further review of the Q&A, it's apparent, no misplay of the stipulated course. They did misplay the course, but not the "stipulated" course defined in the rules.

Just this past weekend in a PDGA event, a card in front of us skipped a hole and realized it afterwards and I was thinking about this similar topic and what action should be taken. The TD assessed the card a two penalty stroke for misplaying the course.

Discussions like this are very useful so that in the future we can interpret the correct ruling when a unique situation like this one ever arises.

You mean something constructive has come out of a discussion in here?!? Who'da thunk it?

Discussions like this are very useful so that in the future we can interpret the correct ruling when a unique situation like this one ever arises.Discussions like this are no substitute for printing out the rules, putting them in a ziplock bag, and putting the bag in your bag's zipper pocket. Sometimes you can even get a free rule book from a TD.

Like Bruce said, I have a Rule Book in a ziplock bag in a zipper pocket of my PDGA golf bag. It is just as important to have that in your bag as any disc.

I have two rules books and I always keep a copy on me when ever I play. Examples, discussions in the forum, and Q&A's on the PDGA site are useful so we can help to better understand the correct interpretation of the rule book.

I normally have two or three in a ziplock bag in my cart. Just in case I find a player without one.:)

If I'd of known this was going to be a competition, I'd of brought along my Xerox machine...

If I'd of known this was going to be a competition...

I keep a current rule book, competition manual, and previous version of the rule book in a ziploc in my bag. :D

I keep the old version just in case there's an opportnity for an arcane rules history discussion at lunch or after a round. :eek:

So much for my Xerox, I concede with bad grace...

You guys have made for an interesting read, and it is like WOW that it continues. Larry will always be Larry, and Lyle will always be Lyle. We know that some love to point fingers when they should be looking into the mirror and taking a personal inventory.

Bottomline, only folks who've never really played events didn't follow their map. It ususally only takes once of doing this, to insure it never happens again.

I see your misunderstanding Sue. In point of fact, Larry has carte blanche to harass me. That's because I greatly respect the contributions that Larry has made to local and national disc golf. Plus I like him.

I keep a current rule book, competition manual, and previous version of the rule book in a ziploc in my bag. :D

I keep the old version just in case there's an opportnity for an arcane rules history discussion at lunch or after a round. :eek:

Same here - except I got to use my 2002 rulebook at Worlds this year to show to one of the top Masters from the Western US who still thought 2002 rules were ok to use.

Of course Karma got me for trying to make sure people played by the rules by launching me head first into a creek while putting a thorn in my nose less than 10 minutes after the rules "discussion".

I watched Keith (successfully) putt from his tip toes to avoid bending back the flora at Maple Hill.
Impessive for his ability and for his commitment to the rules.
Bob

No one says this much, but I think a thanks is in order to those guys who are willing to put themselves on the line and call the rules, no matter how painful. I know that Rhett has taken his licks, as well as others. It is tough, but I for one greatly appreciate it, especially for those who are willing to take a thorn for the cause...

I second that emotion!

Remember, it is a noble cause to defend the defenseless, and the Rules of Play cannot defend themselves; it is up to us, the players, to defend the integrity of the Sport by defending the Rules of Play.

I watched Keith (successfully) putt from his tip toes to avoid bending back the flora at Maple Hill.
Impessive for his ability and for his commitment to the rules.
Bob

If I could have only made the 2 from inside of 20 with my entire foot/feet on the ground, I could have played on Sunday :)
It was a distinct pleasure to play with you BOB and I look forward to doing so again next year!

Working on my Zen golfing techniques for the past 2 weeks in preparation for the last few Events of the year, as I'm tired of being in the lead or tied for the lead with less than a round to play and ending up 3-10 strokes out at the end of the Event as has been the case for about 12 Events this year. :(

don't want to start a new thread, this happened today, 2nd round:

dude was supposed to start on hole #4, he didn't attend meeting, looks frantically for his card. can't find them, drops in on a 3some before start sounds, and plays 18 holes with them.

what is penalty? all holes completed.

thanks

If you don't ever show up 2 the proper card. This would be a DQ.

don't want to start a new thread, this happened today, 2nd round:

dude was supposed to start on hole #4, he didn't attend meeting, looks frantically for his card. can't find them, drops in on a 3some before start sounds, and plays 18 holes with them.

what is penalty? all holes completed.

thanks

I wish it were a penalty on the TD for not having a leaderboard at tourney central. Is that what happened here? If it is then I say no penalty to the player.

Personally, I hate it when there is no record of the hole assignments except on the scorecards. Sometimes even when I am present at the player's meeting and trying to listen other people are talking and carrying on and I can't hear the TD. When cards are handed out it's even worse and everyone "rushes the stage" and starts calling out names on the card they have while the TD is still calling out names and handing out cards.

If you are PDGA sanctioned, IMHO, you should have leaderboard at tourney central.

Thanks for letting me vent. :)

I watched Keith (successfully) putt from his tip toes to avoid bending back the flora at Maple Hill.
Impessive for his ability and for his commitment to the rules.
Bob
So easy, a caveman could do it.

Remember, it is a noble cause to defend the defenseless, and the Rules of Play cannot defend themselves; it is up to us, the players, to defend the integrity of the Sport by defending the Rules of Play.So easy, a caveman could do it.

.....being in the lead or tied for the lead with less than a round to play and ending up 3-10 strokes out at the end of the Event as has been the case for about 12 Events this year. :(So easy, a caveman could do it.