Nov 21 2002, 01:08 PM
Does anyone know if there is a rule specifying that there must be a minimum distance between a basket and an OB line?

I've heard rumours that baskets must be a minimum of 3 or perhaps 5 meters from any OB line. Can anyone tell me if this is correct please and direct me to an official document on the subject?

Many thanks
Jester
Bongos Disc Sports Club
Edinburgh Scotland

ck34
Nov 21 2002, 01:39 PM
There is no official position on this. I feel no closer than 10 meters is an appropriate standard, especially for public courses, since that is what we currently define as the putting area. Some designers are comfortable with baskets as close as 5 meters. I can tolerate that if it's in front of the basket but not behind. At Winthrop Gold, the #6 basket is less than 5 meters beside the basket. I think OB is a little too close but at least the basket is surrounded by sand.

jconnell
Nov 21 2002, 01:42 PM
http://www.pdga.com/rule_book.php

If it isn't in there, it isn't a "rule".

Designers are pretty much free to put o.b. where ever they please.

--Josh

ck34
Nov 21 2002, 02:35 PM
True but GOOD designers follow reasonable standards and those do exist among the design group.

Nov 21 2002, 03:24 PM
Chuck-- what is your opinion on hole 15 short at Millstream?

Nov 21 2002, 03:54 PM
What about 11 & 14 at Kaposia.

davei
Nov 21 2002, 04:08 PM
There is a big difference between a basket on an incline sloping toward a close OB, and a basket on flat ground close to OB. Phoenix's Vista course has several baskets that are very close to OB, but are on fairly flat ground such that spit outs and bounce offs don't go OB much, so you don't get very many fluke OBs. It would be a much different story if the ground sloped significantly toward OB. I think (in course design) we should have pity for the bounce outs and spit outs, but not the fly bys or whiffs.

ck34
Nov 21 2002, 07:35 PM
I'm a little hazy on hole 15 but I seem to remember that having a decent fairway width was also a problem in addition to the pin sort of in a creek button hook?

Jim G, I didn't design either of those holes at Kaposia. Just be glad I persuaded the group to at least have the asphalt path on the left IB at Worlds rather than OB like some wanted.

ck34
Nov 21 2002, 07:43 PM
In general I agree with Dave on bounce outs. But because our basket is elevated (vs BG), OB needs to be at least 10 meters behind the basket to allow misses just left or right, but flying in at the right height, to land "safely". If you must "cheat" with OB less than 10 meters, then cheat on the front side of the basket.

Nov 21 2002, 11:09 PM
I agree with Dave. Basket locations should be made to minimize freak OB's. I like a 10 ft. radius of tall grass, sand, or wood chips to prevent shots that hit the basket or pole from rolling away. I disagree with Chuck's contention that we need at least 10 meters behind a basket before OB. With OB behind a basket one is forced to really think about how aggressive they want to be with their drive/approach/putt. Golf is a game of control and shots that come running in hot at the basket, but miss, should be penalized.

Nov 21 2002, 11:32 PM
Chuck- Yeah that's 15. There is less than 15' on 3 of the sides of the basket.

Jim- Are you talking about the O.B. Hockey Rink on 14? Or the monster hill of death on 15?

ck34
Nov 22 2002, 12:12 AM
Then, change the rule to make the putting area for DG 5 meters instead of 10. There should be no OB in the putting area just like there's not an OB creek running thru a ball golf green. No one should get an immediate penalty for being slightly off when reasonably going for the basket. They might not make the comebacker anyway and adding another penalty is too much relative to the "crime."

Yes, there are some severely sloped spots on greens in BG where you're almost certain to roll in the water OB. However, we have those sloped challenges in DG which Dave doesn't like if it results in flukey OB.

davei
Nov 22 2002, 08:43 AM
Arizona's Vista #18 is fairly close to the water. Probably about 15'. I run a putt at the basket, with the water 15' behind, every time. Out of more than a dozen tournament putts at that hole, and many more practice putts, I might have ended up in the water once at most. The creek analogy doesn't hold water. Ball golf could not have a creek run through the green because the balls need to roll, but they do have water and traps right next to the putting surface. I agree that there should be some minimum basket distance from OB, (perhaps 10-15 ft for flat terrain like Vista?), but disagree that it should define the putting area, as I disagree that 10 meters defines the putting area. Bottom line is that it should be playable by reasonable skill and not engender unlucky strokes.

ck34
Nov 22 2002, 09:20 AM
Vista #18 illustrates my point though. The direct route from the tee is over water with OB in front of and to the left of the basket, not essentially behind it. If water was 15' directly behind the basket, OB would be much more punitive rather than fair. Once you're putting, OB within 10 meters is livable since you can arch the shot more easily to reduce potential flyby distance on a miss. It's driving/approaching with OB closer than 10 meters behind the basket that seems too close for fairness.

Nov 22 2002, 09:30 AM
Chuck, I know you didn't design Kaposia, I just wanted your opinion on those holes.

Greg, since this discussion is specific to OB near the basket, I meant the hockey rink.

Chuck, BG greens don't have OB on them because BG greens are defined by the cut of the grass, and the hazards around them, not by some arbitrary distance that draws a perfect circle around the hole. I'm quite sure there are BG hole locations that are within 10m of a water hazard. There are also other features near the hole that are difficult to reproduce in DG such as sand traps that make it quite difficult to get up & down in two. I guess our equivalent would be the hill-o-death.

Dave, I agree with your philosophy, and of course that takes intelligent course design to implement. There are so many varaibles that it would be all but impossible to write down a set of rules to take every case into consideration.

ck34
Nov 22 2002, 10:42 AM
At one point, the hockey rink was not going to be OB for Worlds. It was pretty much 50/50 on which way was better. I was fine either way because the wall changes that 10 meter guideline concern since you can't really slide OB. The rink had traditionally been OB and that tipped the decision for Worlds.

Holes on BG greens have to be at least 5 paces (15') from the first cut.

Nov 22 2002, 01:05 PM
Oh come on, guys - demonstrate your skill and you'll never have to worry about stuff like that!

Personally, I like the challenge: I'd hate to have a course with nothing but cream-puff holes.

(Of course, I have yet to break par ...)

Nov 22 2002, 03:17 PM
The hard thing about a hole like Vista is the erosion. You may initially setup the hole at an adequate distance from the OB, but over time the water will inch closer from erosion. On courses that do not regularly change pin positions or don't have alternate sleeves at all, there isn't much that can be done.

Now let's say a rule gets implemented to say 20ft and Ginnelly decides to use 18 short at the memorial anyway. What is the enforcement going to be? Is the pdga going to pull sanctioning? Fine him? Suspend him? The pdga can't even make a policy deterring smoking on the first tee of a tournament right before the 2 minute warning.

ck34
Nov 22 2002, 03:53 PM
The PDGA has been slowly moving towards having a review of courses for Worlds made by qualified designer(s) from outside the area. We had Tom Monroe review our Worlds courses but it wasn't formally required. However, wording to that effect is planned for future Worlds agreements. I expect a similar review will be required for NT events as the requirements develop for those events.

Nov 22 2002, 04:14 PM
>The PDGA has been slowly moving towards
>having a review of courses for Worlds made
>by qualified designer(s) from outside the area.

I hope Houck, Duvall, and my brother don't get tired of having to review all those Worlds and NT courses.

rodney

ck34
Nov 22 2002, 06:26 PM
At least two are members of the course designers group.

If all Worlds are at Augusta in a few years, it will make the task a few courses easier.

Nov 22 2002, 07:04 PM
Clue, if course design standards were added to the TD sanctioning agreement (they wouldn't be added to the rules of play), I imagine enforcement would be the same as it is currently for other items in there. The most reasonable thing is to deny sanctioning the following year unless the problem has been fixed.

At Vista, 1, 8, 9 and 18 all have anchors within 10m of water. 6 & 7 might also have positions that are within 10m of the OB street. For the Memorial, the temp holes 18 (perm. 18 is 17 in the memorial layout), & 19 & 20 are probably less than 10m from OB, 22 is for sure as is 23, and possibly 27.

I could probably come up with a similar list for the Fountain if I sat and thought about it.

It's no wonder Chuck left after the Summit meeting and didn't play the tourney last year. /msgboard/images/clipart/happy.gif

ck34
Nov 22 2002, 07:34 PM
It's not so much the OB in terms of pin placements, but in the case of Vista it's similarity of holes with so many backhand rollers, at least for me. I actually like the challenge of 18. And with Fountain, the tournament setup is out of my comfortable power range, especially if the wind kicks up. It is certainly fine for Open players.

tiltedhalo
Nov 22 2002, 07:59 PM
personally, i am in favor of pins close to OBs and to very fast greens (baskets on hills). These types of placement require us as golfers to use good course management and to plan each hole carefully. Courses that are poorly designed (IMHO) are courses that lack adequate risk vs. reward scenarios. Baskets close to OB are an excellent example of risk vs. reward.

On the Buffumville Dam course in MA, hole 26 (long position) is within 5 feet of rock pile that is part of the [*****] and marked OB (behind and to the left of the pin). Most people can't get the drive to the OB (about 400 feet), but for those that can, it raises makes the hole more of a challenge off the drive. For the rest of us, it requires us to think about our putts--if we are 40 feet out and have a low chance of making it, should we lay up, or run the putt.

On Renaissance hole 2, the basket is elevated on some steps and placed out on a penninsula, with a deep (40ft?) dropoff 2" behind the basket. If you run that putt and miss, you are worse than OB--you are down in the weeds hammering up the cliff, and have a 1 in a thousand chance of hitting the return putt--you would be better off (score wise) to have gone OB and gotten to drop in the putt. . . however, I don't see anyone complaning about unfair pin placement at Renaissance--it is just an amazing course that challenges every part of your game.

I think if anything, we need more OBs and fast greens that can seperate the field at tournaments. A course should have at least a few holes that are possible 2s or 3s, but can easily become 5s or 6s...

Any rule the PDGA implemented placing OB restrictions on distance from the pin would limit course designers in creating some of these risk vs. reward situations.

tim

Nov 22 2002, 08:41 PM
Chuck,

Are you sure you saw the tourney setup for Fountain? To cram 27 on that property, the course was a shadow of it's 18-hole self. Many masters had their best scores on that course. There are only two holes that need a good arm to clear the water, and one of them, it's easy to bail out early with the safe hyzer. For the other one, you lay up short of the water, and throw across on your 2nd shot.

I agree with you on the similarity of holes at Vista, and #18 (tourney #17), even though it sits close to water, meets your criteria of having the OB short of the pin, not behind it.

I find it interesting that you find this acceptable, but not the other way around. For recreational play, anyway, I would think OB behind would be better, because anyone can lay up, not everyone can overdrive a 300' hole.

ck34
Nov 22 2002, 09:58 PM
I played Fountain earlier in that week and thought it was close to the event setup but maybe not. Regardless, I like traveling to play many different courses whether part of an event or not. Even if I like the courses and event, I might not be back so I have time to visit more different courses.

If Vista 18 required a 300' shot to clear the pond with no alternate bail out route, it would have a design problem, at least for day-to-day play. But I like its challenging alternate route over land which leaves a tricky 40'-100' upshot. I still think it's appropriate to not have OB in our putting greens. But at least front side OB is livable which is still a lower rating than acceptable.

I have no problem with sloped greens or those with challenging obstacles. Anyone at our Worlds would have seen that. But I think having an immediate throw penalty from only a marginally missed shot is too much. I'm fine with Renny 2, 13 & 18 tough pin areas. Beave nailed one of those 1 in a 1000 shots from the pit on 2 when in my group which leads me to believe the odds are better than that.

Nov 22 2002, 10:17 PM
Tim, maybe you haven't heard any complaints about #2 at Renny, but it's incredibly stupid. How it came to be is even dumber.

Chuck, I have to agree with Jim on this one. How is having to layup short of an OB boundary (which everyone can physically do) any worse than having to blow long of it and play back to it. I would agree that it is a fairly unique shot whereas OB behind a basket is much more common, but I'm not sure that there would be any good reason to do one and not the other.

Vista doesn't have a great bailout area from the long tee because of the highly populated path to the right on dry land, but the short tee is only about 200 to get to dry land and the bailout is a little easier and safer.

ck34
Nov 22 2002, 11:48 PM
The behind vs in front issue has to do with an elevated basket. For even the slowest shot to have a chance, it has to at least be as high as the basket as it passes it. Then, there's got to be room for it to land. Putts can take a high arch whereas it's not always feasible to drive/approach high due to low ceilings or even being able to reach the basket. That issue doesn't come into play if OB is in front.

Contrast this with ball golf where the player can use just the right amount of energy to reach the hole. If they miss left or right but still using exactly the amount of speed needed to reach the hole, the shot will still be next to the hole or a little past.

My point is that BG can use exactly the amount of energy needed to reach the hole from anywhere and have a chance to sink it since the hole is on the ground. With an elevated basket, you have to have a reasonably safe landing zone behind the basket for equivalent fairness to potentially sink it.

Nov 23 2002, 03:13 AM
So there should be an ace-run at every hole? That's stupid. If a player stands on the tee-pad, and says "oh [*****], there's OB directly behind the pin, I better hit this one", and runs 50' deep, he shouldn't be penalized?

Nov 23 2002, 05:24 AM
Chuck, I don't know why I keep finding myself picking on you lately, but your ball golf analogy is horrible! Not only are there plenty of shots where going at the hole is impossible because the green breaks away from the front, but there are even short pitches from the sand and rough that are impossible to get the speed right without hitting the flagstick. Are you telling me you've never seen a shot that rolls onto the green at a snails pace and picks up speed as it rolls by the hole?

The more times I hear "you don't see that in ball golf", the more I think the games are identical. I truly cannot think of one example that separates the games on any level. The only one that I have ever used is wind affects putting in DG a lot more, but it may even have an affect in BG as well. Chuck, have you ever played ball golf or watched it on TV? Every argument you've ever made using the sport in the par 2 debate and here has been ludicrous. Give up on this one, you may lose a lot of respect.

BTW, I know of several shots that could get into the chains without blowing even 20ft by, so you are wrong about that as well.

ck34
Nov 23 2002, 10:53 AM
Note I didn't say you should be able to go directly at the basket at any speed from any distance. Just like golf, you should be able to shoot for a safe landing on a DG green which is currently defined as a 10 meter radius. And, I realize there are overhead shots that don't flyby but those aren't always available from a distance.

Clue, all of those chip and trap shots are around the pin area AFTER you get in the vicinity. That's why close OB in front in DG is more livable. Once you're around the green in BG/DG, there are more shot options to stop near the basket.

BG greens are flat, bowls, valleys, slope toward the front or side. It's rare to see any green fall off from any pin placement toward the back. It's not considered good design because it makes the hole more blind and the approach shots would run away from the desired approach direction which is from the tee. The closest you might see would be a bowl where the pin was in front with fall off going toward the center, then rising up before leaving the green. I watch a fair amount of golf and can't remember a case where a putt coming from the front of the green went downslope.

You just don't see BG OB behind the pin without the green being at least flat or pitched forward. All of the challenging tin cup type OB hazards in BG are in front or beside the green with it (sometimes) sloping toward the hazard. BG standards provide a chance to land safely on the green even behind the pin. Having the better/safer landing spot to the left or right of the pin is also fine.

No one has stated an alternate OB standard to "No OB within 10 meters." The supporting points are: No OB in the green, Need fair flyby distance because basket is elevated, Added penalty is too punitive for barely missed shot, It is a standard that can be applied consistently everywhere.

The prevailing counter opinion is "Place OB where you want." The supporting points are: Designers should have flexibility to design unique challenges, DG greens need to be tougher, Effective option to add risk/reward thinking. I agree with each of these supporting points. But, all three can be done without introducing an immediate OB penalty. What's the risk/reward when OB is 10'-15' behind the basket? A circle 3 is pretty much in the bag. If OB is 30'-40' behind, making that circle 3 putt is less certain. You know a good shot to the basket is possible and rewarded without unreasonable penalty like OB 10'-15' away. Slopes, bushes, trees and OB outside 10 meters are much better ways to achieve the intent of really close OB.

Nov 23 2002, 03:35 PM
I would agree with a lot of that, but that's why OB should be stroke and distance.

Nov 23 2002, 09:15 PM
No, the "green" is not defined as 10m radius. There is no definition of green. The 10m radius is only for the falling putt rule.

ck34
Nov 23 2002, 09:33 PM
OK, the "green" is at least 10 meters in radius since the rules (Glossary) specify all throws from 10 meters in as putts.

Nov 24 2002, 03:30 AM
The 132 ft 13th hole (http://www.dolf.com/course/lakestevens/hole_13.htm) at Lake Stevens has an OB bog about 7 feet behind the hole.

It works quite well as such, in part because the hole is surrounded by OB bog and trees, with a high delicate hyzer required to get close to the pin. It's all in the character of the course, which is very challenging from tee to target at most every hole.

Besides, the most feared feature of the course isn't the OB that is near a basket, but the 7 (or is it 8?) baskets that have traps as part of their deflection system. The traps can be putt thru from 40 feet, but it's not unheard of to sweat bullets from 7 feet and miss...

As far as BG courses go, there are plenty of greens where the ball can easily roll past the hole into water, OB or a trap. Some PGA hole placements are as close as 6 ft to the first cut with water (or sand traps) just a few feet away.

As an example, one of the better local finishing holes is the 400 yd 18th at BattleCreek (Marysville WA). A frequent pin placement is within 8 feet of the front edge of a 50 yard wide gully/swamp that you have to clear to get to the green. Assuming you get a 250 yr plus drive, you've got to hit over the pin to safely get to the green, for a comeback putt down to the pin. It's not unusual to end up on the green in 2, but then roll a putt off the green back into the gully, which is marked as OB....

It's all part of the reasonable recognizable challenge stuff that golf is all about...

davei
Nov 24 2002, 10:49 AM
As Jim G said, because of all the variables that we have as part of the make up of Disc Golf and Disc Golf courses, it may be impossible to definitively quantify how far OB may be (fairly) placed from the target. And I agree that it comes down to intelligent course design. To help me with my intelligence when I design courses, I test the design, have my friends test the design, test the design in local play and local tourneys and so on. I interview the people doing the testing to get their opinions and reactions. In other words, I use polls, committees, and research. I don't look for my designs to be validated. I look for them to be disproved. If they don't work, I change them until they do. Does the hole provide a challenge? Do the vast majority of scores depend on skill rather than luck? Is it esthetically appealing? Is the hole safe to play? Does it interfere with anything? etc.

flyboy
Nov 24 2002, 03:35 PM
In my designs small creeks 2ft. to 10ft. wide that you wont loose your disc on I will place the basket 15 to 30ft. from OB.If it is a lake that you cannot retrive your disc 25 to 40ft.I think this is fair./msgboard/images/clipart/happy.gifOB 20 to 40ft.No water but retriveable..These are on golf courses and are verry fair..../msgboard/images/clipart/happy.gif

Nov 25 2002, 12:53 AM
* To help me with my intelligence when I design courses, I test the design, have my friends test the design, test the design in local play and local tourneys and so on. *

This can be over done and/or misused.

Objective challenging course design isn't about democratically designing what folks find entertaining, it's about what folks find reasonably recognizable and challenging within a set of objective rating guidelines.

Sure, it's valuable to have a few friends play a layout before it's set in stone, but generally only to determine how much folks who aren't familiar with the design objectives of any particular situation can screw up and make unsafe.

Because DG doesn't have any objective course difficulty rating system, if you design a course and end up with a diversity rating (http://www.dolf.com/course/design/par_3_course_analysis_system.htm) of 33, it's likely that the mob will wish it were rated 26.

However, if left untouched (and assuming it's safe), after a few months of play, many or most will come to respect the additional challenges and nuances that were built into the course that weren't dumbed down to the mob's first few impression of what was too hard.

Of course, if one is designing courses without any objective standards or goals for creating a diverse set of challenges, then who cares if a course diversity rating is 33, 30, or 20...?

Bottomline, in BG, it's generally popular to design tougher courses as guided by the objective aspects of the BG slope analysis system (not by the course par rating). However, DG has no such commonly used design standards, and as a result, many courses are poorly designed...

Moderator005
Apr 16 2004, 12:17 AM
Apparently Hole 6 at the Winthrop Gold USDGC course and Hole 4 at the Meandering Greenbelt course at San Saba have OB only 5 or 6 feet behind the polehole. How do people feel about this? Should a missed putt (with appropriate roll-away) result in a 2 stroke penalty? Doesn't ball golf have rules on course design that OB can be located no closer than several dozen yards to the green/cup?

gnduke
Apr 20 2004, 11:59 AM
It's not the 5-6 feet that scare me on #4, but the fact that it is almost on three sides of the basket, including the line from the tee to the basket. Very scary hole from the tee.

james_mccaine
Apr 20 2004, 12:11 PM
I love holes like that as long as it is grass where you don't have to play the slide (by the way, it is probably only a one stroke difference because if you go OB, it is a drop-in). In fact, I see little difference between a basket next to OB and a basket on the edge of a slope. In both cases, if you screw up, you may be looking at an extra stroke (either the OB stroke or the two putt up the slope).

Jake L
Apr 20 2004, 12:37 PM
If the wording changes to "no OBs within X feet of target", this would eliminate ALL tall trees, shrubs, and bushes around the basket!. 2 M up is still OB right? So a hole with a cedar tree next to the basket would violate the rule.
I like the OBs to challenge and make me weigh the risk/reward factor.

neonnoodle
Apr 20 2004, 12:39 PM
Above 2 Meters is not considered OB.

Jake L
Apr 20 2004, 12:45 PM
My bad!

neonnoodle
Apr 20 2004, 03:43 PM
We forgive you. We should keep count of how many times people get this wrong.

Or I'll see if Theo will post it in the header of PDGA.com right under Guru's address. ;)

Apr 20 2004, 06:14 PM
Okay Jeff, sorry it took me so long to get to this after you graciously moved this discussion here.

Chuck wrote above:


What's the risk/reward when OB is 10'-15' behind the basket? A circle 3 is pretty much in the bag. If OB is 30'-40' behind, making that circle 3 putt is less certain. You know a good shot to the basket is possible and rewarded without unreasonable penalty like OB 10'-15' away. Slopes, bushes, trees and OB outside 10 meters are much better ways to achieve the intent of really close OB.




Perfect. What else can be said? Well, a lot if I'm doing the typing I suppose. :)

This was brought up by me whining about being o.b. after a "perfect" (obviously not) shot on MG#4 at San Saba. And yes, as Chuck points out, a circle 3 was a gimme, even for me. Virtually a drop in, in fact.

I know I'm a newbie at course design, but its something I take very seriously as I feel it impacts our sport's future like little else. Making the game exciting, challenging and rewarding for for all skill levels is a key to pushing us forward (sorry if I just opened the thread up to Reese there, my bad).

I do not agree with putting a basket so close to o.b. that a good shot is punished with a lost disc and a stroke, nor do I agree that risk/reward can be defined with a drop in circle 3.

Yes, I know, I'm whining because I missed the hole. But seriously, layup, layup, putt does not an exciting hole make.

On the only course I've had the pleasure to design, some would say that I'm the pot calling the kettle black. I have designed several holes that play near o.b. water hazards. Some are what I would consider "borderline too close." Still, they are not as drastic as this type of hole that got me griping, nor is going right at the water the best shot on the hole, as it was in this case. In addition, these hazards are clearly marked on the tee signs at each hole and in nearly every case there is some protection from these hazards from trees or shrubs.

I guess you could say I'm a big proponent of difficult and risky greens, as long as there's a just payoff and a chance to play the hole well without flipping a coin as to whether or not a "good" shot will be o.b.

In defense of the course designer in question (not that one of the most prolific course designers in our sport and a hall of famer needs me to defend him), this course is not for Rec or casual players. It is a very difficult course set up for World Championship caliber play. On the other hand, that is perhaps one reason why fair and just risk/reward scenarios need additional attention. That is another debate.

Mr. Houck, take it away...

ck34
Apr 20 2004, 06:34 PM
On balance, I still pretty much agree with my comment Mark A just quoted as a basic design guideline. However, #6 at Winthrop is an example where experienced designers can bend the rule to satisfactory (not great) effect. The keys to #6 being satisfactory are: (1) the basket is surrounded by sand so the disc stops where it lands, unlike most common landing surfaces, (2) the OB is short, left of the basket as you look from the tee. And, that whole direction to the basket is essentially a "non-route", even for big arm lefties like Leyva and Martin. With the length of the hole and the primary route coming completely over IB, those who go OB on the tee shot probably deserve to. If it happens to be right by the basket, they get the drop in 3 for the risk.

My point is, like other things, you need to know good design rules to break them, and Harold is as experienced a designer as most. I still would be happier if the basket were a little farther than 5 feet but that's why we have different designers slightly messing with the players in different ways.

james_mccaine
Apr 20 2004, 06:55 PM
I hear what you and Chuck are saying and if I hear Chuck right, he is saying there is a time and place for everything. Distance from pin to OB is just like width between trees in the fairway. It all depends.

If the five foot fairway opening is 20 feet from the box, it is OK. If it is 200 feet away, it is stupid design. Likewise, on an easier drive, pin placement near OB is acceptable, but if it were a difficult drive, then it is probably stupid.

I don't know the USDGC hole, but both the holes at San Saba are perfectly legit (probably more so from the whites) because the drives are not that long. A "perfect" shot on MG 4 is not in the water. That hole is screaming for a pin high shot to the left where there is plenty of room. IMO, a perfectly legit hole.

By the way, any dictums such as "no pin should be closer than X distance from OB" would simply thwart creative design.

Apr 20 2004, 07:03 PM
A "perfect" shot on MG 4 is not in the water. That hole is screaming for a pin high shot to the left where there is plenty of room. IMO, a perfectly legit hole.




I don't agree. That's one shot, doesn't mean its the best or should be the only shot. Even so, you're then putting at a basket that even a close miss is in the water. Sorry James, we disagree on this hole being a legit placement.



By the way, any dictums such as "no pin should be closer than X distance from OB" would simply thwart creative design.




On this I agree with you whole heartedly, and well stated.

Jake L
Apr 21 2004, 02:06 PM
Maybe a count of how many you have helped understand the difference would be nice. I always thought above 2 M was OB, thank you "one of the lighted mind" (neonnoodle) for the lesson! This forum has helped me understand the fine points you miss when reading the rules.

morgan
Apr 21 2004, 10:44 PM
Look at the picture to the left, the painting I made. The pin is installed in the middle of the creek. If you miss your putt, even a little, in any direction, you are OB. To see a bigger image of the painting go to www.hoyhoy.com/subweb/hyzercreek.htm (http://www.hoyhoy.com/subweb/hyzercreek.htm)

johnrhouck
Apr 22 2004, 11:06 AM
Very quickly.

Obviously I think it's OK to have OB with 10 meters, depending on the hole. Easier shots can have more menacing OB, and harder shots should have less menacing OB.

As for MG4:

1. The closest OB is 10 feet, not 6'. Then it quickly bows out to 12-15'.

2. It's not like you can take a circle 3 any time you want. There creek, at its widest, is only 2' wide. It's not at all like having a pond there. If you aim at the closest OB and go 13' deep, you're dry.

3. It is not at all a "layup, layup" hole. I've never even heard of anyone laying up there. Maybe people do. I think a look at the scores pro weekend will show otherwise. Am weekend, too, no doubt.

4. Anything with 9' of that pin is "perfect." As James said, the best shot is short or left.

5. That's one of my favorite holes at CR2, and I think there are lots of really good holes there.

Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be...

Apr 22 2004, 11:34 AM
:D

Apr 22 2004, 08:49 PM
Sounds like a great hole. Kind of like 12 at The Masters in Augusta. You can play safe, and take your 3; or you can try to get close to the pin for a 2, and take a risk. The only problem is the silly drop you get if you go in the creek.

This would be a great place for the 'drop on the line of play at entry to the hazard BUT NO CLOSER TO THE HOLE' rule. This gives the player the choice: either re-tee, or take a drop on the line of play on the OTHER side of the creek. From the measurements given here, that would be a much better risk on the risk side of risk/reward.

johnrhouck
Apr 22 2004, 10:55 PM
Quick look at the Advanced cards on MG4. Out of 32 teams in the high wind Sunday morning, there were:

8 Birdies.
4 Circle 4's

Not sure I want to know what the circle 4's are about -- this was a Best Shot Round -- but it doesn't sound like there was much laying up going on.

Out of all the threes, three had circles.

Sounds like a good spread of scores to me.

johnrhouck
Apr 22 2004, 11:05 PM
OK, OK. Last year's pro cards are right next to my desk.

27 birdies out of 36 teams.

Don't remember if there was water in the creek.

Again, those are excellent numbers. 75% birdies in best shot translates into about 50% birdies in singles. Just about perfect. But again, there may have been no water.

I'm a pretty conservative player, but it never even crossed my mind to lay up on that hole. It definitely occured to me to make sure I didn't go long.

For those who have never seen it, the hole in question is 228' long, slightly downhill, with a depressed green. Fairly tight off the tee.

ck34
Apr 22 2004, 11:44 PM
with a depressed green



It was sad :( the OB was so close.

(That was too easy :D)

Moderator005
Apr 23 2004, 08:37 AM
with a depressed green



It was sad :( the OB was so close.

(That was too easy :D)



Good one, Chuck! Much better than the Des Reading/Reading, PA groaner. ;)

scottsearles
Apr 25 2004, 04:03 PM
Look at the picture to the left, the painting I made. The pin is installed in the middle of the creek. If you miss your putt, even a little, in any direction, you are OB. To see a bigger image of the painting go to www.hoyhoy.com/subweb/hyzercreek.htm (http://www.hoyhoy.com/subweb/hyzercreek.htm)



:cool:Morgan,
That looks real cool. If i am ever in the NY area that course would make my to PLAY course list for sure. :D

dobbins66
Apr 29 2010, 06:11 PM
Wanted to get peoples opinion on what is a recommended distance that an OB line should be from a basket (minimum distance). We were looking at making a ditch behind one of our placement OB but it's a 280'(ish) hole with some trees in play (including pine in the fairway) and some trees at the pin. The ditch is within 15' just behind the basket and I'm starting to wonder if the OB line would be a little close. Not entirely sure on my opinion yet but am going to measure the distance tonight and wanted to see other peoples opinion.

cgkdisc
Apr 29 2010, 06:38 PM
Behind the pin, it's a bit too close. For a pin that's reachable, the longer the tee shot, the farther back it should be. For 260-280, no closer than 30 ft, especially on a public course. Otherwise, you're just making it a fluky occurrence where a player goes OB and usually gets a circle 3. If the hole is as short as 150 or that's the typical range of an upshot on a par 4, then maybe 20 feet behind is sort of OK. But OB that's inside the 10m circle is better on either one side and/or in front of the pin. In front of the pin, you could go 12-15 feet away.

RhynoBoy
Apr 30 2010, 03:15 PM
Look at Fountain Hills in Arizona. There are several baskets that are within 20 feet of OB/water. Holes 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9...I think those are the right ones. I don't hear a lot of complaints from the NT pros about this. I think you'll be fine, it will really change how people putt around the green for sure.

cgkdisc
Apr 30 2010, 03:22 PM
Public courses are not played daily by NT pros. And yes, some of the Fountain Hills pins are too close to OB for fair play, even for NT pros. Some of those pins do follow the guidelines I posted above such as 1 where the pin is past the water.

ishkatbible
May 05 2010, 03:02 PM
Wanted to get peoples opinion on what is a recommended distance that an OB line should be from a basket (minimum distance). We were looking at making a ditch behind one of our placement OB but it's a 280'(ish) hole with some trees in play (including pine in the fairway) and some trees at the pin. The ditch is within 15' just behind the basket and I'm starting to wonder if the OB line would be a little close. Not entirely sure on my opinion yet but am going to measure the distance tonight and wanted to see other peoples opinion.

not answering one way or the other about distance from the pin... do you expect the ditch to fill with water? or just making an ob? why not just rope it off?

johnrock
Oct 19 2011, 01:58 PM
Just a couple of ideas after thinking about island holes:

I've noticed island holes constructed with hay bales and other items that define where the disc must land to be safe. Some of these "boundaries" are outside of the 10m circle, some much closer. Two things I've thought of (and I'm sure someone else has as well) are making the "safe" area tougher to get into, and making the next shot in the "safe" area a little more difficult.

On the first item:
I know banners are used on the front of hay bale "boundaries" to promote event sponsors. My question is can the event have a rule on this hole that if a disc penetrates the banner, and lands inside the "safe" area, can it be still be deemed "out of bounds" (kind of similar to the disc having to enter the basket in the correct fashion instead of penetrating the front of the basket)? This would eliminate some luck since many hay bale walls are stacked pyramid style, leaving holes in the wall for a disc to pass through. If the banner is tough enough, this will not be an issue.

On the second:
If a player's disc does get into the "safe" area, he normally has an un-interrupted stance. I'm thinking of marking a 1m line from the front of the hay bale "boundary", and calling the banner as the OB line (hence the reason for the first idea). If the player's disc makes it into the "safe" area but is within the 1m line, the player then has a much more difficult stance to deal with since the thickness of the hay bales will use up some the 1m relief area. Sure the player might be able to use the hay bales as a supporting point, but still it will be uncomfortable. Plus, when the 1m. line is inside the 10m circle, the extra pressure of avoiding a falling putt will be magnified.

Thoughts?

krupicka
Oct 19 2011, 02:18 PM
The mando rules can probably be used to handle your first question.

On the second, you can define the outside of the hay bales as the OB line, BUT it also means a disc landing on the hay bales would be considered IB. Is that acceptable in your plan?

johnrock
Oct 19 2011, 02:47 PM
No, I don't believe on top of the hay would be an issue. It may happen a time or 2, but past the line is past the line. The goal of making the putt more difficult will still be achieved.

johnrock
Oct 19 2011, 02:50 PM
And sorry for the thread title. You still get 1m from OB, you just have less room to work with.

cgkdisc
Oct 19 2011, 03:47 PM
I would suggest getting a waiver from the Tour Director that allows players up to 0.5m relief from the hay bales (toward the pin). Otherwise, you might have players looking for solid object relief because they can't take a legal stance.

I would argue that the width of the hay bales becomes the OB line even if you specify it's the outside edge of them because the top of the hay bales is not a playing surface. You get 1m relief from OB on the playing surface. So the player would get up to 1m from the bales whether you like it or not without getting the waiver. Imagine a wall that's 1m wide and the TD specifies the outside face of it as the OB line. A player who lands against the wall on the other side has no place to take a lie unless the whole wall is considered the OB line.

krupicka
Oct 19 2011, 04:20 PM
You get 1m relief from OB on the playing surface. So the player would get up to 1m from the bales whether you like it or not without getting the waiver.

Chuck, you know the rules better than that. You get 1m relief as measured perpendicular to the OB line using the rule of verticality. It is not 1m on the playing surface. The solid obstacle rule would push them OB. That rule won't be of much help.

cgkdisc
Oct 19 2011, 04:25 PM
Sorry Krupicka. The wall example says otherwise. The reason for the 1m relief rule in the first place is to provide space on the playing surface to take a stance. Your supporting point on the LOP must be on the playing surface. It's also a little too punitive for the TD to provide less than ideal space to take a stance when a player has already taken a 1-shot penalty.

davidsauls
Oct 19 2011, 04:47 PM
How is the top of the hay bale not a playing surface? Disc can land there, player can stand there? I've taken stances on much worse surfaces.

cgkdisc
Oct 19 2011, 05:12 PM
Depends on the hay bales and whether the TD specifies them as a playing surface. They wouldn't be a playing surface by default just as a picnic table is not a playing surface by default but can be if the TD declares that it can be.

krupicka
Oct 19 2011, 05:22 PM
Chuck, can you defend your position on measuring 1m from the OB line based on the rules rather than example?

btw The wall example you cite is an interesting way to require T&D. :-)

cgkdisc
Oct 19 2011, 05:39 PM
I believe the example indicates that the 1m relief is along the playing surface even though it's not stated explicitly. Let's say you have the wall example or there's a 4x4 ft electrical transformer box next to an OB fence and your disc is against it with any relief going toward the basket. You're an official and have to advise the player where he can mark. What's your call? I don't believe the RC would want to force an unplayable lie call. Allowing up to 1m relief on the playing surface is the default call so the player may take a stance IB.

davidsauls
Oct 19 2011, 05:49 PM
I dunno. I'd consider the hay bale a playing surface, by default. It's unlike a picnic table, where there's a surface below the top of the table. It's quite playable, even if a little awkward.

But maybe I'm confused about the whole question here. Are people using haybales that are more than a meter in width? If not, the relief from the outside edge would still be on bare ground; the stance may be awkward (straddle putt, etc.), but that also happens on lots of greens.

Then again, I wouldn't use haybales to define OB as they don't seem very precise. Or at the very least, would use the inside edge.

cgkdisc
Nov 01 2011, 05:47 PM
I got word back from Conrad, head of the RC, that the width of the solid object would not be taken into account to determine the 1m relief from OB. So if there's a solid object up against OB, you take the up to 1m relief from the solid object along the playing surface not the OB line. In the case of hay bales, if they are not considered a playing surface by the TD, then the mark could be made up to 1 inside the bales even if the outside edge is the OB line unless the TD gets a waiver from the Tour Director allowing for less than 1m relief inside the bales.

johnrock
Nov 01 2011, 05:52 PM
If I remember (without going back to check) I declared the hay as a playing surface. kind of similar to rocks and logs in uncleared areas. Not OB but difficult footing.

krupicka
Nov 01 2011, 05:59 PM
That's a slippery slope. Would the same apply if the OB line is at the water line at the bottom of a ravine where standing on the steep embankment is physically impossible due to the slope?

cgkdisc
Nov 01 2011, 06:20 PM
It would simply be a bad choice on the TDs part for the OB line location that might require some players to decide to play from their previous lie.