This is an attempt to un-hijack the disc bought during a round thread.

From the "Building a Lie" Q&A


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




There is much disagreement as to if the extrapolation of this statement (i.e. One cannot place a towel behind the marker) is a good/valid rule.

i was under the impression that building a lie was perfectly legal and that you could even carry a ladder with you during the round and this rule is more towards things that lengthen your arm, like throwing a spear with a stick so that your arm becomes longer.

A follow-up to Chuck Kennedy's comment...

I think the RC is relying on common sense from players and the group that would indicate whether a player was taking unusual "one shot only" actions in violation of the spirit of not building a lie. I think a player could put rubber boots on to play a shot from the soggy/muddy area on the edge of a swamp and be in compliance since that's standard clothing for those kinds of conditions.



And when you are kneeling on a hard surface (concrete, gravel, wood chips, etc.), is not using a towel(or disc) standard for that kind of condition.


If they carried specially modified platform shoes with 6" elevation for trick shots, I think that might violate the artificial devices rule along with building a lie. Are you saying you can't make these kinds of judgments regarding whether a player is attempting to circumvent the rule interpretation regarding building a lie?



Is there anything in the rule book that states that the Q&A is part of the rules? Creating a new rule as an extrapolation of a footnote on a Q&A doesn't work. Laying a towel down on the ground is not anymore building a lie than slipping on rubber boots over your shoes to play from casual water.

Read the full Q&A on Building a lie. The previous decision has been reversed.

Seriously If illegal, I'd do it anyway (kneeling on a towel)

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

Is there anything in the rule book that states that the Q&A is part of the rules? Creating a new rule as an extrapolation of a footnote on a Q&A doesn't work. Laying a towel down on the ground is not anymore building a lie than slipping on rubber boots over your shoes to play from casual water.



the Q&A could be looked at like supreme court rulings (to a lesser extent of course)... its the Rules Committees real world examples of the rules in use. If a rule is 'foggy' or vague and can be argued in the field that creates turmoil... if a rule could be foggy or seen to mean a couple different things but the rules committee says it is actually 'this'... making it black and white then that is that.

the Q&A isnt an update or addition to the rules... its the rules being interpreted to make it easier (hopefully) to figure out when on the course.

this is my interpretation at least. sure there are times when things get confusing but I think this is actually there to help. Something that proves that point is that a lot of players (myself included) were breaking the rules without knowing it by using towels/discs/whatever in situations like this.

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



go ahead... point is if you might hurt your knee by kneeling (and i assume everyone is talking about tourney or non-casual rounds) then dont kneel... its pretty simple.

that'd be like landing in a patch of really rough rocks where you might turn and ankle and instead of throwing from a stand still you put out some boards so you can 'safely' do a run up.

i think a lot of people are looking at this as if kneeling is a must have stance. sure theres times when it helps but if you dont want to kneel on a rock or in some mud then crouch or try a different stance.

Sometimes you accidentally land under some bushes. Soft grass often has trouble growing there.

Accidents don't constitute breaking the rules. I still believe COMMON SENSE should prevail but I have noticed it is becoming an out-dated concept.

A towel is not a built stance. Stacking sticks in a casual creek to keep your feet dry is building a stance.

the Q&A isnt an update or addition to the rules... its the rules being interpreted to make it easier (hopefully) to figure out when on the course.

this is my interpretation at least. sure there are times when things get confusing but I think this is actually there to help. Something that proves that point is that a lot of players (myself included) were breaking the rules without knowing it by using towels/discs/whatever in situations like this.



Actually this wasn't breaking the rules until recently (w/o date stamps I have idea when). The RC flip flopped "Important Note: Previously we had ruled that this was permitted.This opinion reverses that ruling."

I guess if we can legislate from the bench in the US, there's no reason it can't be done in the PDGA.

I would think that landing in a cactus patch is a little different scenario. If you placed your towel on a part of the cactus to prevent being stuck with a thorn, you would likely be moving that part of the cactus which is clearly a no-no.

Most courses that I have played that have cactus or other sticky & prickly bushes, the TD normally uses the special relief rule (play it straight back on the line of play to obtain a thorn-free spot) to keep players somewhat safe.

Rules are often left to interpretation, perspectives are diffent and mole-hills become mountains.

Rules are often left to interpretation, perspectives are diffent and mole-hills become mountains.



i agree totally... which is why it try to learn the roles and use them in a defensive role. i've heard times when people tried calling BS non-rules against people including myself and its good to know the real rules to defend yourself.

I also like to try and keep up on this to let my friends and others know so they dont 'get in to trouble' on the course

maybe that'd be something cool/interesting for them to add to the new magazine... random rule of the month

Placing a towel or inverted disc directly behind your mark in order to "keep clean" may be against our rules, I personally would never dream of calling a player out on this. I belive no competitive advantage can be gained by doing either.

[...] I personally would never dream of calling a player out on this. I belive no competitive advantage can be gained by doing either.



Nothing personal, but this comment illustrates part of the problem really well. People either don't know the rules or they pick and choose which ones they think should be enforced. Some people think falling putts don't give any advantage, 30 seconds is too short, breaking branches is ok, etc.

i'm not making the ball golf disc golf comparsion here, just bringing up some anecdotal trivia....

in a pga event in phoenix about 20 years ago craig stadler "built a stance" by kneeling on a towel while hitting a shot from under a low-hanging limb (he hit his shot from his knees). apparently someone watching the telecast on TV called into the PGA or the tourney staff and called stadler on this infraction. he was disqualified from the event the next morning after admitting to this horrendous infraction.

talk about calling someone on a seemingly innocent infraction....

I guess the only reason I would say the no-towel rule is good and valid is...if it ain't gonna be a good place to throw from, don't throw it there. That aside, to consider that a built stance is somewhat ludicrous. This is NOT ball golf, let them do what they want. OTOH, as dirty as I often am after a round, maybe it should make no difference...

So now I'm part of the "problem". I could say the same thing about the opposite side of this point. Real brilliant that the rules state that you cannot have a towel or inverted disc under you knee right behind the mark but it is perfectly fine to put what ever you want under your other knee/foot/leg that is in contact with the ground.

Big difference - the supporting point behind the lie has to be in contact with the ground at the time of release and the other doesn't. Has nothing to do with which knee you want to keep clean. Now THAT would be silly...

Should be called the Mike Kernan Platform Denial Clause.

It appears Mikey can still carry his rolled up Fly 18 Teepad with him.
As long as he leaves room just behind his mini for a support point,
he can run up on the pad and place that support point just off the pad
& throw.

Loophole?

steve timm

Maybe Sliphole?

How is putting a towel under my knee any different from putting a shoe on over my sock. Unless we are playing barefoot we never have a supporting point of our body actually touching the playing surface. Does this rule interpretation mean it's o.k. if the towel is sewed to my pants but not o.k. if it is not? Can I wear knee pads under my pants since I can wear a sock under my shoe? This rules invention/"interpretation" makes no sense at all.

802.04 Artificial Devices

A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed.

While it could be argued that kneeling on a towel behind one's mark can be considered illegal (aka "Building a Lie"), one can simply carry a knee pad in their bag to legally address the kneeling stance. No need to wear the knee pad during the entire round or beneath one's clothing....one could simply wear the knee pad for the shot, then remove the knee pad afterward. The Artificial Devices rule posted above allows use of a knee pad as it is used to help prevent abrasions to the skin. Please note, one would have to "wear" the knee pad in order to kneel behind the mark. In other words, one could not simply lay the knee pad on the ground and then kneel upon it.

Here's a question for discussion, however....

What if player doesn't have a knee pad? Could a player simply wrap a towel around their knee like a bandage? After all, a bandage is clearly allowed under the Artificial Devices rule.

I already decided if it comes up that I need to kneel I am tying the towel to my leg.

The only time I use a towel is when I have to kneel down on pine needles. They give me a rash. I can claim under the "control abrasion to the skin" clause.

IMO, the way the rule is written, it doesn't prohibit the use of a towel.

Placing a towel or inverted disc directly behind your mark in order to "keep clean" may be against our rules, I personally would never dream of calling a player out on this. I belive no competitive advantage can be gained by doing either.



Me neither but then again there are those who will. Spring is around the corner and many of us will be playing in WET conditions. With lots of casual water on fairways and with wet grass. Maybe TD's simply need to make a statement before we play to say that putting something under your knee, such as your alternate putter,to avoid getting soaked is ok. would such a statement pass muster with the RC?

The TD doesn't have that power
"D. No rules may be stipulated which
conflict with the PDGA Rules of Play,
unless approved by the Tour Manager
of the PDGA."

Of course the conflict is with the RC's current interpretation of the Rules and not the actual rules.

Player A sets towel behind mini and proceeds to kneel on it preparing to take his second shot on a hole.

Player B says: "Hey, you are not allowed to use a towel behind your mini."

Player A says: "Here's my rule book. Please show me where this is illegal."

Player B says: "It is not in the rule book, it is in the Rules Q & A. I don't have a copy of that with me. But, it really is against the rules to kneel on your towel."

Player A says: "As far as I know, this is legal. Unless you can prove otherwise, I am taking my shot now."

What is the penalty for Player A? Does he get a two stroke penalty for violating 802.04 B? Or does player B need to call a stance violation of 803.04 and hope the guys on his card will second it?

It seems like the Q&A is implying that it is a stance violation of 803.04 which means you have three seconds and need a second before a penalty can be assessed.

The TD doesn't have that power
"D. No rules may be stipulated which
conflict with the PDGA Rules of Play,
unless approved by the Tour Manager
of the PDGA."

Of course the conflict is with the RC's current interpretation of the Rules and not the actual rules.



Mike you appear to be correct. I don't run tournaments. If I did I would have a water pistol at the main table. I would announce that anybody who demonstrates wet legs because this was called will be given the super soaker either between rounds or before the awards ceremony and the person who made the call would be pubicly contratulated for his/her correct rules interpretation. :eek: I guess that's one of the reasons why I don't run tournaments. I have some velcro bands that I use to tie around my ankles when I wear regular clothes and ride my bike. I will put these in my bag and affix something to my leg on such a day. Go ahead, make the call. All this being said with tongue somewhat in cheek I agree that the call SHOULD be made on somebody trying to improve their stance because its slippery or precarious. That is a risk of being out there. Somebody who is not getting an advantage and who just doesn't want to spend the rest of the hypthetical 50 degree day with wet knees should be given a break. Both of those things being said, I usually wear Gore-tex pants when I play on any day where I expect such conditons. I will kneel on the good earth.

802.04a addresses being able to a device to prevent slipping on the "teeing surface". I would have serious problems if such devices were used on subsequent throws on a hole. If indeed the Q&A has prohibited the use of a towel under a support point that is on the required 30cm line, I would definitely think that using a portable tee pad for run ups would be prohibited as well, even if it was not placed on the 30cm line.

For Krupika and Barish's benefit, having read the rules interpretation, I think the rules committee was concerned about not moving rocks, sticks and other obstacles on the course to build a stance when you are in bounds in casual water. The last sentence at the end of their ruling is dicta because it is not addressed to the question presented. Your towel is not an obstacle. It is equipment.

There is no rule in the rule book precluding building a lie, per se. There is a rule precluding moving obstacles. There is a rule from which you could infer that it is o.k. to kneel on a piece of equipment to prevent abrasion to the skin.

At IOS tournaments you can count on the fact that today I thought about all of this, came to my own conclusion, and will have forgotten it by next Tuesday. :D

I'd agree. The RC was concerned about building an island to stand on in casual water. It's the little aside that they added at the end of the Q&A that is the subject of all the hubbub. The Q&A doesn't expressly prohibit the towel behind the marker, it only expressly allows it in the condition where it is not behind a marker. The former is purely an extrapolation.

As I stated earlier, this seems like a new rule being added via the Q&A.

OK, I've been gone all weekend and rather than disrupt the other thread which is already dead, except for the disruption, no one has answered my question:

When was this change made to the Q&A, and exactly where was the change announced?

Chuck?

I remember last summer it had the old rule. I've never seen anything posted or published on the web telling me that a section of the Q&A that I've already read had been updated and I need to read it again.

(Just to annoy the anti-ball golfers) In ball golf, the USGA rules committee "Decisions on the Rules of Golf" have the power of law just like Supreme Court Decisions... Of course the USGA sells a book listing the decisions that is 10 times as thick as the rules of golf...

(To make the anti-ball golf crowd happy) While playing Ball Golf on Saturday at least 4-5 times I accidently referred to a ball as a "disc" as in "On my third shot I didn't get my disc out of the trap"

I got an email from Carlton, head of the RC, that it was posted in the Q&A about Dec 1st.

so...what's the advantage gained to your throw by placing a towel or disc or whatever, under your knee behind your mini?
Comfort knowing your knee is dry and clean?
Is this an advantage over other players?
Does this towel use enhance a throw somehow?
Why is it not allowed in PGA play? Is this where the decision reversal comes from?

I have a lot of questions, don't I
Putt it right
BOB

Let me get this straight - so if I have to kneel to execute my shot, I can meet the stance requirements by putting my toe behind the marker and it's legal to put a pad or towel under my knee (which is a supporting point - the main one in fact). But if I want to put my knee behind the mark, the towel or pad becomes illegal. How can I comment on the degree of absurdity of this without offending the RC?? Hmmmmmm

Sorry - that's not one that I would call either - and I'm a bit of a rules stickler. Come on RC - get your heads on straight!! Make rules that make sense!!

802.04 Artificial Devices

A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed.

While it could be argued that kneeling on a towel behind one's mark can be considered illegal (aka "Building a Lie"), one can simply carry a knee pad in their bag to legally address the kneeling stance. No need to wear the knee pad during the entire round or beneath one's clothing....one could simply wear the knee pad for the shot, then remove the knee pad afterward. The Artificial Devices rule posted above allows use of a knee pad as it is used to help prevent abrasions to the skin. Please note, one would have to "wear" the knee pad in order to kneel behind the mark. In other words, one could not simply lay the knee pad on the ground and then kneel upon it.

Here's a question for discussion, however....

What if player doesn't have a knee pad? Could a player simply wrap a towel around their knee like a bandage? After all, a bandage is clearly allowed under the Artificial Devices rule.



Not to be anal, but read the rule once again. It says knee braces are allowed, not knee pads. In my understanding of those two terms, a brace has no pad attached.

802.04 Artificial Devices

A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed.

While it could be argued that kneeling on a towel behind one's mark can be considered illegal (aka "Building a Lie"), one can simply carry a knee pad in their bag to legally address the kneeling stance. No need to wear the knee pad during the entire round or beneath one's clothing....one could simply wear the knee pad for the shot, then remove the knee pad afterward. The Artificial Devices rule posted above allows use of a knee pad as it is used to help prevent abrasions to the skin. Please note, one would have to "wear" the knee pad in order to kneel behind the mark. In other words, one could not simply lay the knee pad on the ground and then kneel upon it.

Here's a question for discussion, however....

What if player doesn't have a knee pad? Could a player simply wrap a towel around their knee like a bandage? After all, a bandage is clearly allowed under the Artificial Devices rule.



Not to be anal, but read the rule once again. It says knee braces are allowed, not knee pads. In my understanding of those two terms, a brace has no pad attached.



To be anal, please note the use of "etc." following the list of examples. If one is allowed to use gloves or bandages to prevent abrasions to the skin, what's difference with using a knee pad? Or a towel, for that matter.

The RC needs to date these things. If I have a copy printed of the previous Q&A ruling on Building lies and someone else has a copy of the current wording. How are we on the course supposed to figure out which is current if it comes up?

Player A:"When did you print yours?"
Player B:"Between Thanksgiving and Christmas."
Player A:"Really, me too."
Player B:"But they are different. Which one is right?"

btw for Those that haven't found the Q&As in one file (and sorted by applicable rule): PDGA Rule Case Book (http://www.pdga.com/rule_casebook.php)

Does anyone have a copy of the previous RC ruling on Building a Lie? I'd like to see it. I tried the wayback machine and they don't have it.

802.04 Artificial Devices

A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed.

While it could be argued that kneeling on a towel behind one's mark can be considered illegal (aka "Building a Lie"), one can simply carry a knee pad in their bag to legally address the kneeling stance. No need to wear the knee pad during the entire round or beneath one's clothing....one could simply wear the knee pad for the shot, then remove the knee pad afterward. The Artificial Devices rule posted above allows use of a knee pad as it is used to help prevent abrasions to the skin. Please note, one would have to "wear" the knee pad in order to kneel behind the mark. In other words, one could not simply lay the knee pad on the ground and then kneel upon it.

Here's a question for discussion, however....

What if player doesn't have a knee pad? Could a player simply wrap a towel around their knee like a bandage? After all, a bandage is clearly allowed under the Artificial Devices rule.



Not to be anal, but read the rule once again. It says knee braces are allowed, not knee pads. In my understanding of those two terms, a brace has no pad attached.



To be anal, please note the use of "etc." following the list of examples. If one is allowed to use gloves or bandages to prevent abrasions to the skin, what's difference with using a knee pad? Or a towel, for that matter.



"ETC" already noted. The trick is to figure out what the "etc" means with regard to items that reduce or control abrasion as well as medical items. In your post, you have concluded that pads are included in the "etc" by using them in your example.

If the RC is going to rule that towels are not a part of either "etc", then "etc" is a poor word choice for the rule. Replace "etc" with an approved list, or leave it as "etc" and allow towels.

In your post, you have concluded that pads are included in the "etc" by using them in your example.



I will reiterate the fact that gloves, tape, bandages, etc. are allowed under this rule in order to prevent skin abrasions. How could knee pads be excluded from this rule? No where in the rule's verbiage does it state that only a specific area of the epidermis is allowed to be protected.

In your post, you have concluded that pads are included in the "etc" by using them in your example.



I will reiterate the fact that gloves, tape, bandages, etc. are allowed under this rule in order to prevent skin abrasions. How could knee pads be excluded from this rule? No where in the rule's verbiage does it state that only a specific area of the epidermis is allowed to be protected.



Knee pads could be excluded in the same way that towels have been. By an arbitrary RC ruling.

By the way, I don't really have an opinion on whether they are/should be allowed or not. My opinion goes more to the wording of the rule. If the rule is going to say "etc" then what it allows should be broad. If it is intended to be specific and not allow towels, but allow other items, then the rule should be written more specifically. We, as tournament officials, should not have to refer to a Q & A ruling to see if something is allowed under the "etc" part of the rule.

I haven't read the whole thread, but was disturbed when I read that the RC had stated in a Q&A that one couldn't use a towel to put under one's knee. I found that disturbing since as stated above, it offers no competitive advantage, imo at least. Then I actually read the Q&A and the actual language isn't as draconian as I thought. The language indicated that a towel (or pad) could be used, just not under the knee which is meeting the "on the line of play and less than 30cm behind the marker" requirement.

So, while I still think the ruling should allow towels and pads/discs (even though I rarely use them) for all supporting points, it is not as big of a deal as I thought.

Rule Question: Building a Lie
Question

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

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

Applicable Rules:

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

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

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

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

Additionally, 803.04 (Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off) A 1, requires that one �Have at least one supporting point that is in contact with the playing surface on the line of play and within 30 centimeters directly behind the marker disc��

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

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

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

The PDGA Rules Committee

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


<font color="blue"> I posted the Rules question above simply for reference to the discussion. I also bolded the RC's Conclusion verbiage in reference to the applicable rules. <u>My</u> interpretation is that there is still room for interpretation. No, you cannot build a stance by placing rocks or sticks behind your lie, however, one can use the exceptions within the Artificial Devices rule to protect against skin abrasions.

To me, if anyone argues that you cannot kneel on a towel behind your mark, simply play the "I'm protecting my skin from abrasions" card. If a player states that would be considered "building a lie" and thus illegal, simply tie the towel around your knee and call it a bandage "to protect against skin abrasions". After all, bandages are specifically allowed under rule 802.04A (Artificial Devices).

Obviously, there are gray areas in the interpretation of the rules, some of which actually seem to conflict with one another at times. </font>

what if you mark the lie but don't move the disc that was thrown there and then kneel on the disc?

I think you would have to be playing in shorts to pull off the "protecting against abrasions" angle by putting a towel down. I would then require that player to put towels around both knees when walking thru brush on the course following the same logic.

I think you would have to be playing in shorts to pull off the "protecting against abrasions" angle by putting a towel down. I would then require that player to put towels around both knees when walking thru brush on the course following the same logic.



I presume you would require a player to wear gloves the entire round if he/she started the round wearing such artificial devices. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I think you would have to be playing in shorts to pull off the "protecting against abrasions" angle by putting a towel down. I would then require that player to put towels around both knees when walking thru brush on the course following the same logic.



I presume you would require a player to wear gloves the entire round if he/she started the round wearing such artificial devices. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif



And so, the imagining of absurd scenarios created by not allowing towels and the alternative rulings therewith, has begun.

802.04 Artificial Devices

A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed.



So we can place anything(a towel, a disc, a bear skin rug) down at the teeing surface to prevent slipping. Why can't we place a towel down in the fairway to prevent our knee from slipping on the wet grass or loose gravel?

Because the RC said so.

I think if you could propose better wording that would diffrentiate between items that "build a lie" versus "provide traction" versus "medical considerations" the RC might consider it. However, I'm not sure they could find words to adequately make the distinction between these processes that need to be considered separately. In addition, the tee is a special situation where everyone plays from the same lie. On the other hand, once your shot leaves the tee your next footing is directly based on the skill with which you threw it, with the exception of casual relief areas. Why should a player who threw to a good landing area with traction "be penalized" by allowing players to improve their stance and/or traction and/or comfort level who didn't throw to a better spot? That's underlying logic to the ruling.

I think you would have to be playing in shorts to pull off the "protecting against abrasions" angle by putting a towel down. I would then require that player to put towels around both knees when walking thru brush on the course following the same logic.



I don't agree Chuck. I think the intent of the rules was to avoid the building of a lie with rocks, sticks, etc. I don't believe the intent was to prevent abrasion protection. I think the RC just wanted to keep it simple. I don't see why knee pads or a wrapped towel would be bad. At some point, it might become an effort to circumvent the intent of the rule, but that could be covered under sportsmanship or "spirit of the game".

Whether you wear knee protection the whole round or for just that one shot makes no difference to me. Building a lie for going down on your knee seems to be counterproductive. You're down on your knee, you're down to get under something. It's not like you're standing in a depression and want to build a lie to avoid that.

That's underlying logic to the ruling.


That's a leap. Why can't common sense rule. Your implying that someone who throws his disc to a shady area has better skill and course management than a guy in a better spot who happens to have the sun in his eyes?
How many towels would you have to put down to "build a lie"? I think if you throw into a tree 30ft in the air and get a great lie (because of no 2MR), you are not a better player than someone who puts a towel down because a pointy rock juts out or random hole just happens to be in the middle of a fairway.

I think you would have to be playing in shorts to pull off the "protecting against abrasions" angle by putting a towel down. I would then require that player to put towels around both knees when walking thru brush on the course following the same logic.



I don't agree Chuck. I think the intent of the rules was to avoid the building of a lie with rocks, sticks, etc. I don't believe the intent was to prevent abrasion protection. I think the RC just wanted to keep it simple. I don't see why knee pads or a wrapped towel would be bad. At some point, it might become an effort to circumvent the intent of the rule, but that could be covered under sportsmanship or "spirit of the game".

Whether you wear knee protection the whole round or for just that one shot makes no difference to me. Building a lie for going down on your knee seems to be counterproductive. You're down on your knee, you're down to get under something. It's not like you're standing in a depression and want to build a lie to avoid that.



Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn'r Dave Dunipace one of the PDGA RC members WHO WROTE THE RULES.

Any more questions.......

Just last week, when I was building a lie with the case of towels that I was carrying with me...

What a bunch of non-sense.

I used to use a case of towels.....now I just carry around a pallet of 2x4s, a hammer, and nails with me in tournaments and I just build me a deck behind my lie. Oops, I can't do that anymore per the RC Q&amp;A.

I guess the days of using the John Deere with the front loader as a golf cart are over.

Player A sets towel behind mini and proceeds to kneel on it preparing to take his second shot on a hole.

Player B says: "Hey, you are not allowed to use a towel behind your mini."

Player A says: "Here's my rule book. Please show me where this is illegal."

Player B says: "It is not in the rule book, it is in the Rules Q &amp; A. I don't have a copy of that with me. But, it really is against the rules to kneel on your towel."

Player A says: "As far as I know, this is legal. Unless you can prove otherwise, I am taking my shot now."

What is the penalty for Player A? Does he get a two stroke penalty for violating 802.04 B? Or does player B need to call a stance violation of 803.04 and hope the guys on his card will second it?



Easily solved. Place your foot behind your mini and kneel on your other leg and that's where the towel is, under the bent knee of the OTHER leg.

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Dave Dunipace one of the PDGA RC members WHO WROTE THE RULES.


He was on the RC and left it longer ago than I did.

I'm not disagreeing with Dave. I just don't think the RC can write the rule in a way that can't be misinterpreted with "common sense" no matter how they do it. So, they have written the more draconian version which makes attempts to circumvent the 'building a lie' precept less likely if a player tries to take advantage by claiming the 'abrasion' precept.

I'd have to say that anything that is attached to your person and prevents contact with the rough playing surface (much like shoes) would meet the abrasion control requirements.

Items placed on the ground that are stationary could be perceived as a built lie. Everyone just needs to add a knee pad or really think knee brace to their bag when playing on rocky or thorny courses.

I also see nothing in the rules that requires the protective device be worn the entire round or even for more than a single shot during the round.

Such as when I've got a cut or blister on my thumb that is only bothered when I throw thumbers. I'll only use the glove to protect my thumb when I am going to use that shot.

I think you would have to be playing in shorts to pull off the "protecting against abrasions" angle by putting a towel down. I would then require that player to put towels around both knees when walking thru brush on the course following the same logic.



Why are you adopting this completely unreasonable stance?

I don't understand what you gain from someone suggesting a logical way to get around the rules committee's inability to write a clearly distinguishing description. If you start the round with a band-aid on your thumb, and it comes off, do you need to replace it or else be DQ'd? I think not. Carry your towel. Carry a safety pin. If you need to kneel behind the mark use the safety pin to put the towel around your leg.


What troubles me more about this whole thing is the lack of communication. Chuck got an email telling him that it had changed. I'm certified official. No one emailed me to tell me they made the change... where was it announced?

I got emailed because I was the one who brought the original issue regarding the rock being placed in the water to build a lie to the RC's attention after it had been bandied about on here for a few days maybe last spring. It might have been UPM who posted the original story about having a caddy carry a step ladder to elevate 3 feet behind his lie because it was allowed at that time.

I think it's a good idea that Certified Officials would be emailed when the Q&amp;A gets updated. Suggest that to the PDGA office.

I will, and also will suggest that they put it into the box with all the other update stuff... and put it into the PDGA announcements on the boards.

If these things have the power of law, I don't want to do something that was right last week and now isn't and then get called on it...

I guess the days of using the John Deere with the front loader as a golf cart are over.



Please share with us the rule which specifically prohibits usage of a John Deere front loader as a golf cart. :D

Well, since I used to use it to build lies and I can't do that anymore............ :D

No motorized vehicles... :)

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Dave Dunipace one of the PDGA RC members WHO WROTE THE RULES.


He was on the RC and left it longer ago than I did.

I'm not disagreeing with Dave. I just don't think the RC can write the rule in a way that can't be misinterpreted with "common sense" no matter how they do it. So, they have written the more draconian version which makes attempts to circumvent the 'building a lie' precept less likely if a player tries to take advantage by claiming the 'abrasion' precept.



I'm a little curious... Poll Time:

Where's the "I've seen past world champions build a lie?"

I would be willing to bet that 99% of PDGA members have no idea that you can't put a towel/disc under you knee.

I'm curious about all of the players that I see put the towel on the tee-pad when there is water/snow/mud etc. To me that very negligent of the PDGA to make a player throw from an unsafe lie IMO

That is allowed.....


802.04 Artificial Devices

A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed.

Lyle, I play from my knee easily at least once per round and sometimes as many as five times. Depending on weather and ground conditions, I'll put down a towel or disc. Now I'll have to make sure to do it for my knee not on the lie unless it's a dry and grassy spot where I won't need a towel. I see several players do it each round. Your poll implies that this is some uncommon procedure.

Ironically, you can remove stones, acorns, twigs and other items listed as debris behind your lie that might abrade your knee and yet putting towel down to prevent a wet or muddy knee is now not allowed.

To me that very negligent of the PDGA to make a player throw from an unsafe lie IMO


Unplayable lie rule means you are never forced to play from an unsafe lie.

I need another option to select, one that states that I have seen a person use a towel under their knee, and the knee was on the 30CM line, but I did not see them build a lie.

I hope you understand what I am trying to say about a towel being considered "building construction material" and I think you do.

Ironically, you can remove stones, acorns, twigs and other items listed as debris behind your lie that might abrade your knee and yet putting towel down to prevent a wet or muddy knee is now not allowed.




Let's get to the good stuff. What's the penalty? Warning first?

I still plan on using a towel under my knee that's on the ground whether it be the knee behind the mini or not. I'll just use the big words like "abrasion control" and nobody will question the action.

what a joke. but I cant wait to call this tonight on someone at our mini :D

Ironically, you can remove stones, acorns, twigs and other items listed as debris behind your lie that might abrade your knee and yet putting towel down to prevent a wet or muddy knee is now not allowed.


There are so many inconsistencies like these in the Rulebook and Q&amp;A.

Let's get to the good stuff. What's the penalty? Warning first?



It's considered a stance violation and must be called within 3 seconds. Then it needs to be seconded. Unless you play with a bunch of people that spend too much time on the message boards, I doubt it would be seconded.

Player A: There's a big rock behind my lie, can I move it?
Player B: Of course, that's totally legal.
Player A Moves rock.
Player A: OK, I'm gonna put down a towel to cover the mud that was under the rock.
Player B: WHOA, WHOA! THAT'S ILLEGAL!

Yeah, make perfect sense to me. Thanks RC.
It's ok to destroy a lie, but not "build" one with a towel.

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

So I can put a towel down under my knee as long as it isn't on a line directly behind my mark?

Let's get to the good stuff. What's the penalty? Warning first?



It's considered a stance violation and must be called within 3 seconds. Then it needs to be seconded. Unless you play with a bunch of people that spend too much time on the message boards, I doubt it would be seconded.



It's only a stance violation by not having a supporting point in contact with the playing surface and within 30cm on the line of play. On the other hand, it could be considered an artificial device violation (802.04) which provides you with two penalty strokes without a warning.

Just be glad the RC hasn't adopted Rule 21 in the USGA that doesn't allow you to clean the ball unless it's on the putting surface. Future rule: You can't clean the disc if you plan to use it for the next throw unless it's within 10m... :eek:

No way 802.04 applies.

do thorns constitute an unplayable lie? ( surrounded or eye level) i was in a tourney a month ago and no one the group was sure about that.

Unplayable lie is to the players discretion. No one can make you throw from flat ground if you don't want to. Move and take the penalty.

Just be glad the RC hasn't adopted Rule 21 in the USGA that doesn't allow you to clean the ball unless it's on the putting surface. Future rule: You can't clean the disc if you plan to use it for the next throw unless it's within 10m... :eek:



I'm sorry but this is too good to pass on, talking about abrasion control and cleaning your balls seems inappropriate for a family friendly MB...

No way 802.04 applies.



If you take a look at the rule Q &amp; A, about which this whole thread is based, 802.04 is listed as one of the applicable rules. "No way" is certainly your entitled opinion, but not a universally held fact.

802.04 in my opinion would be the rule that would allow it not disallow it.

Right. As a device that reduces abrasion to the skin. But take a look at the Q&amp;A for "building a lie" and you'll see an opinion that carries more weight than those of us mere mortals. :confused:

When I make a decision, I try to think through possible unwanted scenarios that could happen as a result of that decision.

I think this "building a lie" Q&amp;A is a very poorly advised opinion.

I know I have read the whole thread I think the opinion is wrong. The work aorund of tieing the towel to the leg or having a knee pad to put on makes it laughable as well.

The critics have yet to come up with alternative wording that might resolve the building a lie situation better than what the RC has done so far.

If someone would post the previous wording (before it was reversed) for this Q&amp;A it would be a good start.

On the PDGA Topics thread was the link to the wayback web site that shows earlier versions of sites all over the web. Frankly, I think you start from scratch with the Rules we have and write the proposed Q&amp;A from the bottom up and see if it's really possible to cover the bases any better.

I already went to the wayback machine last week. No snapshots of the previous version of the Q&amp;A.

Right. As a device that reduces abrasion to the skin. But take a look at the Q&amp;A for "building a lie" and you'll see an opinion that carries more weight than those of us mere mortals. :confused:


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

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

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

Applicable Rules:

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

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

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

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

Additionally, 803.04 (Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off) A 1, requires that one �Have at least one supporting point that is in contact with the playing surface on the line of play and within 30 centimeters directly behind the marker disc��

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

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

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

The PDGA Rules Committee

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

Okay.....I've posted above (in blue text) the specific Q&amp;A which has resulted in this discussion. My first question to the RC is where did the towel/pad comment come from....besides out of left field. It was not part of the original question which basically inquired about laying down a rock or sticks in a creek to keep one's feet dry.

Nonetheless, there has been a lot of good discussion on this topic. Please note I bolded the one sentence in the RC's conclusion which specifically acknowledges and approves usage of the Artificial Devices rule 802.04A. The very next sentence then contradicts that statement to a certain degree.

Let us now expand upon approved Artificial Devices in relation to preventing skin abrasions. Here's the portion of the rule which allows such devices (i.e. protective clothing, etc):

<font color="blue">802.04 Artificial Devices
A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed.</font>

If one lays down a towel to prevent abrasions to the skin, common sense should allow such an act under rule 802.04A. I seriously doubt anyone in a tournament would consider kneeling on a towel as "building a stance". After all, one can wear a glove, bandage, tape or a knee pad to prevent skin abrasions. What's the difference in kneeling on a towel? Technically speaking, the rule doesn't stipulate one having to "wear" an approved device to prevent skin abrasions. For example, the rule allows gloves or bandages so it could be interpreted that simply kneeling upon a glove or bandage would be allowable under this rule.

Correct me if I am wrong, but nowhere in the rule book does it state that players must wear shoes or sandals. I can only find this requirement in the Competition Manual documentation under Dress Code.

That being said, rule 803.04 (Stance, Subsequent to Teeing Off) A 1, requires that one �Have at least one supporting point that is in contact with the playing surface on the line of play and within 30 centimeters directly behind the marker disc��. Since the rule book does not define "contact with the playing surface", nor does the rule book stipulate the requirement of players to wear proper shoes or sandals, one could infer that nearly <u>every single player competing in every sanctioned event </u> is taking an illegal stance behind their marker discs. After all, players wearing shoes or sandals are not "in contact with the playing surface" according verbiage of rule 803.04A. This infraction would obviously not apply to individuals wearing shorts who decided against using a towel and knelt upon the playing surface with their naked knee, on the line of play and within 30 cm behind their marker discs. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Now, let's throw some icing on that cake of absurdity:

Hypothetical Tournament Scenario: Let's pretend the TD has allowed shoes and sandals be be considered as approved Artificial Devices for an event (after all, it is a requirement in the Competition Manual). During the tournament a player kneels on a towel behind his marker, executes the shot and is immediately called out for an infraction by a nearby official. The official, having familiarized himself with the Q&amp;A section found on pdga.com (which is <u>not</u> part of the official rule book, btw), immediately strokes the towel-kneeling player under the B portion of the Artificial Devices rule:

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

Hopefully, the director will not determine that the towel is in violation of 802.04A. Why? Because if the towel is determined to be an illegal Artificial Device, every player in the field who is "carrying" a towel would then be subject to the 2-stroke penalty. :DRead the verbiage again....it could definitely be interpreted that way.

My whole point is that kneeling on a towel on the line of play, within 30 cm behind one's marker should be allowed under 802.04A. In my opinion, this should not be considered "building a stance". If you're still afraid the next time you need to take that kneeling stance behind your lie, as suggested in previous posts, wrap your knee with your towel and declare it a bandage. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

802.04 Artificial Devices
A. During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.). Items used to prevent slipping on the teeing surface are also allowed.

Hopefully, the director will not determine that the towel is in violation of 802.04A. Why? Because if the towel is determined to be an illegal Artificial Device, every player in the field who is "carrying" a towel would then be subject to the 2-stroke penalty. :DRead the verbiage again....it could definitely be interpreted that way.


Well put. Interesting: If a player kneels on a disc, and an official deems it an "artificial device", everyone in the tourney is screwed.

Comedy Gold is the PDGA rule book.

Everyone just carry an extra glove with them and kneel on it when needed since it is specifically allowed to prevent abrasions. Doesn't state that the glove must remain on the hand.

My whole point is that kneeling on a towel on the line of play, within 30 cm behind one's marker should be allowed under 802.04A. In my opinion, this should not be considered "building a stance". If you're still afraid the next time you need to take that kneeling stance behind your lie, as suggested in previous posts, wrap your knee with your towel and declare it a bandage.



Don't worry Jerry. We'll play by our own rules. I'd like to see the RC take a knee at The Vet without a placing a towel between them and earth.

I'm guessing the RC will "soften their stance" on this issue. Pardon the pun. Us older guys can dislocate a knee cap on the hard ground. This is "ageism" and I'm gonna get AARP on it right away.

I have a phobia which doesn't allow me to read any threads titled "Neal on towel behind Mark".

The critics have yet to come up with alternative wording that might resolve the building a lie situation better than what the RC has done so far.

Spell it out.

It is unacceptable to build a lie with blah bla blah. It is however acceptable to place a single towel on the playing surface or to use a disc from the player's bag to avoid soiling ones knee or prevent abrasion.

It is a start. ;)

The wording in the rule book is fine. If I see someone "building a lie", I'll call them on it. If I see someone place a disc or towel on the ground behind their lie, they aren't building anything, so I won't call that on them. Common sense is very underrated.

I agree 100%. I would never call it.

If I see someone place a disc or towel on the ground behind their lie, they aren't building anything, so I won't call that on them.


Then you believe that players shouldn't be responsible for where they throw? Just throw anywhere. No problem since you can improve your stance with a towel. We technically don't allow bending living branches near your lie even though it might give you a better stance. Why should you be allowed to put down a towel in a marginal lie situation? Why is it different? Abrasion is a BS excuse in this situation because no one is forcing you to play from your knee. It's a choice. If that choice isn't good, then you use another stance or take relief penalty unless free relief is allowed by casual rule or TD.

So its ok to remove pine cones, branches, rocks, etc from behind your lie, but not to put down a towel to keep your knee from getting scratched up? Just because you put down a towel, you haven't changed your lie. So if you throw 350ft in the middle of the fairway and there happens to be a hole right behind where your disc lands you are somehow less skillful than someone who throws 3 ft to the right? Sorry Chuck, your argument doesn't pass the smell test.

It is official, I am sick of Chuck's banal asinine comments. Grow some common sense. I notice that you talk from both sides of your face Janus.
Lyle, I play from my knee easily at least once per round and sometimes as many as five times. Depending on weather and ground conditions, I'll put down a towel or disc. Now I'll have to make sure to do it for my knee not on the lie unless it's a dry and grassy spot where I won't need a towel. I see several players do it each round. Your poll implies that this is some uncommon procedure.

Ironically, you can remove stones, acorns, twigs and other items listed as debris behind your lie that might abrade your knee and yet putting towel down to prevent a wet or muddy knee is now not allowed.

So if you throw 350ft in the middle of the fairway and there happens to be a hole right behind where your disc lands you are somehow less skillful than someone who throws 3 ft to the right?


It's not totally about skill because even ball golfers have to play from divots in the middle of the fairway. It's about playing the game as close to 'play it from where it lies' as much as possible. I agree that technically the RC shouldn't even allow you to move leaves, twigs and stones behind your mark. But in BG, you can move loose items by your ball in the fairway but not in hazards. Plus you have a little more leeway for where you can take a stance in that game. So, it's not directly comparable and the RC had to allow some minor relief for clearing the ground. I'm not saying I like the wording, but at least understand the spirit of their intentions.

It is official, I am sick of Chuck's banal asinine comments. Grow some common sense. I notice that you talk from both sides of your face Janus.


Sorry. Thought it was a Discussion Board. This won't be the first nor the last time I present arguments for both sides. Many of these things in the rules area could have been handled either way. Since I have an insider view on many areas, some might want to hear why it's so tough to make some of the choices made by PDGA staff, Board or Committees.

Grow a spine and have a solid opinion.

I'm getting a headache...

I assume the purpose of rules is to prevent someone from gaining an unfair advantage. Kneeling on a towel to preserve skin does not seem to fall into this category. Someone wearing long pants could have taken the same stance, so I fail to see how it is an unfair advantage to kneel on a towel instead.

The issue isn't specifically kneeling on a towel, but improving the lie behind the mark making it better than what it was where you landed. If you allow the towel for the knee then why not towel for standing on? How thick of a towel is allowed? Can it be any kind of cloth? How about a sheet of Velcro with the hook side down? It's literally a "slippery slope" to write this so you get the intended effect if you disagree with the current Q&amp;A ruling.

Grow a spine and have a solid opinion.



My opinion is that I would rather be able to put my knee on something behind the lie sometimes. But I accept that there may not be a better way to handle the wording than what's being done now. And, I believe the trump issue is how do handle it so players come as close to the spirit of "play it from where it lies" as possible with little or no allowances. That should be and mostly is the overriding consideration for most rules in games of golf.

The Truth:

There will always be people that will try to find a loophole in every rule if it will benefit them or maybe just for the sake of argument. Knowing the rules and being able to use them to your benefit is wise(like playing a shot from you last spot to save possible stroke). Knowing the rules and looking for loopholes to break them is just an insult to what the game of golf is really all about. What makes our game great is that it is an individual sport that fouls are not decided by refs or umps. It is up to us to know the rules and enforce them upon ourselves, no matter how stupid they may seem in unique situations. I agree, this rule does not have a great interpretation and I have not followed it in the past due to lack of knowledge which should be passed along to not only Tour Officials(which I am if anyone cares), but to every member in the book. There have been plenty of times I have watched BG and seen someone call a foul on themselves when they had no intention of breaking the rules but inadvertantly did. Honestly, it really sucks to see someone take a stroke or two for something they really had no intention of doing. However, due to the wide range of "personalities" playing our great "SPORT", certain rules need to be followed no matter how ridiculous they may seem.

In a perfect world we would all follow the rules the way they were intended and everyone would just shut up and play their game and win tourneys with a towel under their knee for the winning putt.

Truth:

The only way this would happen is if we were all perfect.

Some rules just need to be followed because we are not as honest or ethical as we should be...

I personaly will not use a disc or towel anymore unless the rule is changed. At the same time I will not call it on someone else, but I will inform them of the rule and let them do what they feel is right.

Some rules just need to be followed for the "Greater Good".

My 2cents

Common sense is very underrated.



I nominate this as the winning post in this discussion. :D

Someone wearing long pants could have taken the same stance, so I fail to see how it is an unfair advantage to kneel on a towel instead.



And the second place nominee goes to.....

Can it be any kind of cloth? How about a sheet of Velcro with the hook side down?



I can see it now... The latest disc golf craze... hook Velcro sewn onto the knees of Chuck's pants.... :D

I can see it now... The latest disc golf craze... hook Velcro sewn onto the knees of Chuck's pants....


We've had innovations in disc grip-ability and Velcro used in bags. What's to stop innovation in "towels" used for better ground traction if allowed beyond the tee? As Cruiser points out, it will happen.

They're called crampons. Would you prohibit these too?

"play it from where it lies"



If this is the biggest argument of this rule, then do you play the 2 meter rule? Because if you don't you are not playing it as it lies right?

What I mean is , if you get relief form throwing it in a tree....why not relief from landing in a patch of stickers?(which one of our courses is covered in) Seems only fair if you don't have to climb the tree to throw from there, you should be able to put a towel down to prevent your knee from getting stuck by a bunch of stickers. Which I would guess is the biggest reason for using a towel behind your lie.

I'm not sure why those who talk about 'common sense' can't see the distinction between 'normal' items you wear during some or all of a round to deal with temps, weather and general traction versus an item you whip out to specifically improve grip for a particular poor lie situation. Wear the crampons all or most of the round and you're golden, just like some do for winter golf on the ice where most lies are not as good as they would be in summer.

If this is the biggest argument of this rule, then do you play the 2 meter rule? Because if you don't you are not playing it as it lies right?



The difference is that no one can realistically follow proper stance rules for discs over 2m (support point on playing surface behind lie in the air). In the case of towel versus no towel, it's not a matter whether a stance is possible but how good you can make it. In other cases where we don't play it from where it lies, either a penalty of a throw, and/or distance is involved, or the position is moved so a player can take a legal stance as in moving 1m toward the pin from OB or moving behind a solid object.

I'm not sure why those who talk about 'common sense' can't see the distinction between 'normal' items you wear during some or all of a round to deal with temps, weather and general traction versus an item you whip out to specifically improve grip for a particular poor lie situation. Wear the crampons all or most of the round and you're golden, just like some do for winter golf on the ice where most lies are not as good as they would be in summer.



Weren't you the same guy who said this:


If you have been wearing clothing items like shoes all round as your standard playing setup including jackets coming on and off and even changing shoes during the round, that's fine. ... I think a player could put rubber boots on to play a shot from the soggy/muddy area on the edge of a swamp and be in compliance since that's standard clothing for those kinds of conditions.



Your statement there seems to imply that putting rubber boots on for one shot is ok. Why not crampons for one shot?

I didn't mention that the place the boots would be used would qualify as a casual relief area where the player could have moved back anyway but chose to throw from a worse position. It's not an easy call either way. It's a spirit of the game issue whether you're doing something out of the ordinary to execute a specific shot versus something routine. If it were easy to write this into the rules, we wouldn't need discussions like this. Some want black &amp; white, when many situations are shades of grey. How many people have said on this and other rules that they themselves wouldn't do something but also will not call it on others? Black for you (in theory). Grey for others.

well I was unable to get anyone to use a towel to build a lie yesterday. Thought Vinnie might but he just went bare knee. :D

<font color="blue"> 802.04 Artificial Devices

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

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

In effort the stir the kettle even more on this topic, let's take a look at rule 802.04 Artificial Devices in its entirety (posted above in blue text). I am positive that no one can disagree with the fact this rule allows artificial devices such as gloves and tape "to reduce or control abrasion to the skin". Shoes or sandals are considered to be artificial devices since they protect our feet. Knee pads or elbow pads would be allowed under this rule. Basically, if it is a piece of protective gear or clothing to reduce or prevent skin abrasion, it is allowed under this rule. Nowhere in the rule does it stipulate only a specific area of one's skin is allowed protection. But I digress...

Please note the following two sentences quoted from paragraph A of rule 802.04. One can argue the two statements conflict with one another:

<font color="blue">During a round, a player shall not use any artificial device that may assist in making a throw, except those devices that reduce or control abrasion to the skin (such as gloves, tape, bandages, gauze, etc.) and medical items (such as knee and ankle braces, etc.).

A player is specifically prohibited from using any artificial device that changes the position of the disc in the player�s hand or artificially lengthens any of the player�s throwing levers (fingers, wrist, arm, shoulder, etc.).</font>

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a glove, tape or bandage technically changes the position of the disc in a player's hand. Not only that, a glove, tape or bandage can technically artificially lengthen a player's fingers. I am sure I understand the intention behind the rule, however, there is a certain amount of gray area left open for interpretation....or discussion, for that matter. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif :)

As with many sports, or life in general, infractions to rules or laws are often subjective by the witnessing parties. I have been playing disc golf for nearly 17 years and I have knelt on a towel behind my mark more times than I can remember and never once did I think I was circumventing the rules (i.e. secretly building a stance). I have seen countless other players, both amateur and professional, kneel on a towel or padding.....not once did I think "hey, he/she might be building a stance". Nor have I ever seen anyone called out for kneeling on a towel in the hundreds of rounds I've played.

Until the RC clearly defines "contact with the playing surface" in rule 803.04 and/or expressly prohibits kneeling on anything behind one's marker, I am confident that the Artificial Devices rule would suffice for any challenge against kneeling on a towel behind one's mark.

v
v
v
v
v

Oh, and here's one for good measure....what if a player throws a tee shot which lands on the teeing surface of another hole? Is he/she then allowed to kneel upon a towel behind the lie without fear of a rule infraction? What if it's a natural tee? :o

well I was unable to get anyone to use a towel to build a lie yesterday. Thought Vinnie might but he just went bare knee. :D



Keep trying! I support this effort and I fully intend to ignore any use of the towel to build a lie. If you're on my card and you bring 10 towels with you, and you build a mini replica of fort knox on which to place your knee prior to throwing, I'll keep it to myself.... unless of course I'm one stroke down in which case all bets are off.

You know, I bet, if you had an elevated basket, and you had enough towels, you could bring your putting lie up to the height of the basket thus gaining an advantage.

They're called crampons. Would you prohibit these too?



If you're wearing crampons and you clap your hands... do they become crampoffs?

The Cramper /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

If you're wearing crampons and you clap your hands... do they become crampoffs?



Only if you keep repeating it over, and over, and over, and over....... ,"Crampon! Apply directly to the shoe! Crampon! Apply directly to the shoe! Crampon! Apply directly to the shoe!........."

i guess if you want to get technical with the rule, then would it not be legal to use the towel if you were wearing shorts to prevent knee damage but illegal to use it if you were wearing pants since you would already be wearing a protective device?

Would it also be illegal to put a glove on over a Band-aid?

Should it be illegal for the RC to write rules?

....all in a sport where truly signficant stance and rules violations regularly go uncalled! Would the person calling the single towel under the knee, also call every footfault on a fairway runup....every 30-second violation....immediately start the clock on every possible lost disc....and enforce the least-possible-movement of branches in a stance?

Here's a solution to solve this and that other nagging problem of calling foot faults. How about specifying an official white PDGA towel with dimensions like say 20cm x 30cm that MUST be placed longways behind your disc/mini for every throw. Your supporting point must be touching or on this towel upon releasing the disc. This would immediately solve this kneeling issue. Plus, it would make it much easier for others in the group to see foot faults and for the throwers to see where their foot needs to end up when running up on fairway shots.

You don't normally play when it's windy, do you? Around here, we would have to carry stakes with us to anchor that towel down on most days.

There goes almost all of our 30 seconds ;)

I like the idea of having an official towel, but the idea of having to use it on EVERY throw to watch for footfaults would be a little redundant. It would make good sense for the kneeling throw though.

Forget the towel, how bout laser sensors and a network of cameras, similar to what they use in tennis, installed by the PDGA. They can install these on every hole of every course used in sanctioned play. At least then it would be easier to "see" where my money is going.

I guess it would be cheeper just to provide a cement block to mark your shot from. Then if you foot falt EVERYBODY would know.

I guess it would be cheeper just to provide a cement block to mark your shot from. Then if you foot falt EVERYBODY would know.



Yeah, the foot fault would be recognized by the offender grabbing their ankle...most likely in pain.

You'd definitey think twice about making a foot fault again

Real men don't use towels, they play with muddy knees. Buncha wimps!

Chuck has proposed his towel option before, it's part of the whole foot fault option thing. I don't like it myself but the notion that one's official towel might get place on top of a doggy doo and then have to be carried for the rest of the round does amuse me.

A better solution is to say one can use a 1 x 2 foot towel in any fashion that one wants to as part of their lie. If you can really build something out of said towel that gives you an advantage in this sport... you deserve to win anyway.

BTW - the way to solve foot faults is simple. On fairway throws change the rule to read, "the player must stand in on any drive after the initial Tee Off. No run up is allowed!" This also solves the high tech discs making courses obsolete problem too.

You don't normally play when it's windy, do you?

Silly. Simple lead fishing weights in the corners. No doubt this would have to be a high tech towel to handle the wear and tear.

You don't normally play when it's windy, do you?

Silly. Simple lead fishing weights in the corners. No doubt this would have to be a high tech towel to handle the wear and tear.



And be non skid proof to prevent people slipping on plant/pivot.

Silly? No, practical is more like it. I'll leave it at that so I don't offend you with my initial reaction. :p

Does the concept of kneeling on a towel come up in your tournaments very often. I guess I would feel that somebody that wants to penalize me for kneeling on a towel is a little TOO obsessed with the rules.

Silly? No, practical is more like it.


Sorry, I meant silly as in no problem to produce it with weights, not as in a silly problem or comment. Hard to convey the inflection with words.

Lyle,

Yeah! What you say! How can we get the PDGA to incorporate this rule - needing a "standstill" stance behind all shots after the tee shot (and convince everyone that it will make the sport a little better)? It's kind of like "playing it where it lay" in bg.

Karl

Pretty easy to legislate:
(addition in red)

803.04
A. When the disc is released, a player must:
(1) Have <font color="red"> had </font> at least one supporting point that is in contact with the playing surface on the line of play and within 30 centimeters directly behind the marker disc <font color="red"> continuously for one second before the throw is released </font> (except as specified in 803.04 E); and,
(2) have no supporting point contact with the marker disc or any object closer to the hole than the rear edge of the marker disc; and,
(3) have all of his or her supporting points in-bounds.

Changing the rule to accommodate the practice will eventually make things worse, in my opinion. Enforce the rule we have now; it's a good one, just not enforced. If you change it to require standing at the lie, then my 800 foot hole at New Quarter becomes obsolete. There's no way that hole can be played without one or two run-up throws after the initial drive.

Lyle,

Yeah! What you say! How can we get the PDGA to incorporate this rule - needing a "standstill" stance behind all shots after the tee shot (and convince everyone that it will make the sport a little better)? It's kind of like "playing it where it lay" in bg.

Karl



The real reason I support the rule is that I'm well versed in throwing that way. My advantage. Actually, a couple of years or so ago I got in a heated discussion with a couple of rules Zealots, Rhett and someone else who's name escapes me. I felt the 30cm rule was stupid and impossible to comply with on a run up. Rhett argued that while it changed your run up and your ability to throw as effectively as off the Tee, that you could do it, if you practiced. Well, after some effort I found him to be correct!. We ignore this rule because we don't want to be a Richard, and we don't want to put in the effort to get it right.

But, once I had learned to comply, I found that standing in gave me almost as much distance (300 feet vs. 350 feet for my average throw) and a whole lot more accuracy. I now stand in on almost all my second throws and on any technical shot. I highly recommend it.

Changing the rule to accommodate the practice will eventually make things worse, in my opinion. Enforce the rule we have now; it's a good one, just not enforced. If you change it to require standing at the lie, then my 800 foot hole at New Quarter becomes obsolete. There's no way that hole can be played without one or two run-up throws after the initial drive.



I agree with you Mike, changing the rule to make what's going on is a bad idea, I once argued we should do that but realized it was a bad precedent.

Are you sure standing in would make your 800 foot hole obsolete. Dave Dunipace points out that the main reason for a run up is timing but that you should be almost as effective just standing in. I find that to be true for me. With my 300 vs. 350 foot throws, Your 800 foot hole is still a par 4 hole shot with a good upshot. It just means my upshot is 150 feet instead of 100.

Lyle,

I hear what you're saying (partially agree...with the 'why change a rule when we don't enforce the one's we have now'), but I think it would be MUCH easier to enforce AND be almost impossible to NOT pull off (trying to execute the shot), unless you do a "falling throw". If this were the case, and the rule were in effect, I would probably have no problem calling you on it (and not feel like a meanie for doing so). As it is now, you run up like crazy, plant your foot "in the vicinity" and wing it. EVERYBODY does it and EVERYBODY fails at hitting their mark the MAJORITY of the time! So why not institute something that most people would have NO problem doing...PLACING their foot down (in the correct place). If they then are so uncoordinated that they fall down, I'm call 'em on it! Think of it sort of like having a pivot foot in basketball.

I also think that, in general, this idea would go over like a turd in a punch bowl - because once people get a "taste of power" (grip'n 'n rip'n ad infinatum) they don't want to let it go! Boy, I'd still love for it to happen though.

Mike,

I've never played your course (heard nice things about it) but I know you'd agree that REALLY it "wouldn't make that hole obsolete"...it would "just make it harder". Maybe by say 0.5 strokes or so. And, in fact, having this rule inplace would - as someone else stated - aid in the "help, all the courses are becoming obsolete because of technology" thing by artificially lengthening (or at least keeping them "the same") all courses. It would bring back some of the "finesse" into the game.

Karl

Lyle,

I hear what you're saying (partially agree...with the 'why change a rule when we don't enforce the one's we have now'), but I think it would be MUCH easier to enforce AND be almost impossible to NOT pull off (trying to execute the shot), unless you do a "falling throw". If this were the case, and the rule were in effect, I would probably have no problem calling you on it (and not feel like a meanie for doing so). As it is now, you run up like crazy, plant your foot "in the vicinity" and wing it. EVERYBODY does it and EVERYBODY fails at hitting their mark the MAJORITY of the time! So why not institute something that most people would have NO problem doing...PLACING their foot down (in the correct place). If they then are so uncoordinated that they fall down, I'm call 'em on it! Think of it sort of like having a pivot foot in basketball.

I also think that, in general, this idea would go over like a turd in a punch bowl - because once people get a "taste of power" (grip'n 'n rip'n ad infinatum) they don't want to let it go! Boy, I'd still love for it to happen though.

Mike,

I've never played your course (heard nice things about it) but I know you'd agree that REALLY it "wouldn't make that hole obsolete"...it would "just make it harder". Maybe by say 0.5 strokes or so. And, in fact, having this rule inplace would - as someone else stated - aid in the "help, all the courses are becoming obsolete because of technology" thing by artificially lengthening (or at least keeping them "the same") all courses. It would bring back some of the "finesse" into the game.

Karl



My understanding, perhaps incorrect, was that Mike was saying to modify the rule to allow people to foot fault. That is, essentially eliminate the rule or make it more generous. What you and I are proposing is an alternate rule that is more easily enforced.

See, good writing does matter. Now once I can figure out how...

Yeah, I'm saying enforce what you have instead of changing it.

And maybe "obsolete" is a bit strong, but it would change the design approach, for me at least, if no run-ups were allowed.

And for someone with my very limited golf skills, 800 feet is a par 5. Probably a 7 if I can't run up. The energy required to compensate for the loss of the run-up would cause vertebrae to fly out of my back.

Mike-

But its a Blue tee that is 800 feet. Supposedly designed for the 950-rated golfer. Based on the PDGA recommendations that came with my card in the mail last week, the Advanced player (935+) should be able to throw 300-450 feet... make 5-7/10 putts from 25-30 feet... etc.

If this player loses 50 feet with standing still, its 375 off the tee (525 out), 325 second shot (200+ feet out), if I'm remembering the distances correctly, this puts you just short of crossing the road, with 200+ feet out depending on what line your previous two shots took and the fact that you're probably better off leaving your second shot farther out to the left than close to the treeline. So for the "average" blue level player that leaves you with about a 250 foot turnover to get to the pin.

On a windless day, it becomes a tough par 5 for the blue player. And only tough because you need to make 2 decent shots to get to have a 250 foot par 3...

What it might do, is make the hole better for the guys who have power over the guys with weeny arms that get by on touch and consistency, although those guys can throw 325-275-250 to the mouth of the woods (a total of 850 feet) and be 70 feet out toss it under the basket and walk away with a par. The guy who tries to bomb into the woods on the third shot has more chance of going somewhere ugly.

Of course with wind, it gets ugly, but it does even with run-ups...

I play ball golf courses all the time with holes that I might par once every 10-15 rounds, but I haven't quit that game yet...

The white tee is "only" 667 feet out...:-)

What the change would do is shorten a little how far you need for open field par 4s and par 5s. It would also put a premium on getting a good drive, since you don't get to try it again on the next throw.

I don't get to tee up my fairway shots in ball golf. It would make our rules make more sense to ball golfing ultimate players who would understand... off the tee, you set a pivot at your lie and throw from there.

Not saying we should change the rule, just that it could have been a perfectly logical direction for the rule to have been written in the first place. And it wouldn't drastically change the game.

It's apparently time to start a new topic thread.... .... again.

In my opinion...

Running up in the fairway is like teeing it up. Yes you do have to hit the mark behind your lie, but:
You can take the disc as far backwards to start your run-up as you want.
You can also take it completely off of the line of play to allow your run-up to help dictate the shot shape.

If a player stands at his mark and throws, the farthest the disc will actually stray from the mark in any direction will be 3-5 feet?
A run-up in the fairway can take the disc backwards and to either side as far as the player wants. This seems inconsistent with "play it as it lies"

I'm not necessarily advocating for stand-still shots from the fairway, but it does make a lot of sense. It would also make it a bit more difficult to score on multiple-shot holes, and that's a good thing.

I can only hope that the RC has the wisdom and common sense to NOT require "stand still" shots after the initial tee shot. Just because players are too chicken [censored] to call a rule doesn't mean that we need to change the rule. The rule is fine. Don't cut your arm off if your fingernail is infected.

I would like to see the stand and deliver fairway shot tried in a tournament. I see disadvantages and advantages.

The disadvantages would be the change, (people have a tough time with change), the wow factor (distance) on the second shot would be reduced and the difficulty increased.

The advantages would be: safety, (especially on uneven loose terrain) , no more hitting (missing) your mark, increased necessity for additional skills, (also a disadvantage from another point of view), less land use for multiple shot holes.

I have practiced hitting my mark so that I will hit it pretty much every time, but I think I'd also like to see run-ups limited to the tee. It would help in making disc golf a game of more than just driving and putting. It would also counteract a little bit of the course obsolescence from longer drivers being made.

I would like to see the stand and deliver fairway shot tried in a tournament. I see disadvantages and advantages.

The disadvantages would be the change, (people have a tough time with change), the wow factor (distance) on the second shot would be reduced and the difficulty increased.

The advantages would be: safety, (especially on uneven loose terrain) , no more hitting (missing) your mark, increased necessity for additional skills, (also a disadvantage from another point of view), less land use for multiple shot holes.

How would you define this stand and deliver shot? Do you have to start with both feet on the ground and complete the throw without lifting either foot? Can you step past your mini after your throw?

Last summer Krupicka, my wife and some other Am4 players went round and round on this issue on the course. Some of the Am4s were getting an unfair advantage by taking a run-up when they were incapable of hitting their mark, relying on the expectation that no one was going to call the infraction. So they had to start calling it. Some of them had to practice hitting their mark. The people who couldn't hit their mark had to find other rules to call! :D

Bruce,

Your "How would you define this stand and deliver shot?" is the key question here! The answer (to that question) is up-for-grabs. One potential solution is time-related. You must come to a stop (with your contact point behind the lie legally...and keep it there) prior to disc release. Maybe for 1 second. Yeah, I know, "One thousand o... Oh, you threw to soon, fault!"

I do know one thing though - I believe we can all envision a "standstill" shot / know one when we see one. If someone were to run like hell, come to a grinding halt, and then throw, the usefulness of all that running up would be for naught. The run up only helps if there is a continuous motion through the release. Therefore, I'd think something like...

1. Walk up to your lie. 2. Place your foot behind the lie (legally). 3. Do your "waggling". 4. Check the wind. 5. etc. 6. Rear back. 7. Release the disc. 8. Follow through or not (as long as you're outside 10m). 9. Smile at the results.

All through numbers 2 - 7 above one must have the "contact point" legally in contact with the ground (or whatever the rules now say).

Yes, trying this in a tournament would be neat, but I'm guessing you would get "polar" comments from those participating. Old-timers and newbies would like it (for finesse and "don't know any different" reasons respectively); younger, entrenched players wouldn't because it would "take their power away" (they not stopping to think that it would also take their opponent's "power" away...also they think THEY are the only person with power!

Karl

Standing still doesn't sound like a lot of fun... If I couldn't use an approach I would rather use a stick and ball...

I admit that, when it comes to power, my game is limited enough that I can throw almost as far standing still as I can with an approach. Limiting run ups to tee shots only would DEFINITELY level the playing field for me, but I do not want to win just because the strong point of my opponent's game is taken away. I think the wrong issue is being discussed. The real issue is the fact that too many people are wanting to complain about rule infractions rather than inforce them. If you think somebody is getting an unfair advantage because they are foot falting, then call the infraction. If you think they are getting an unfair advantage because they are getting more 'D' on their fairway throws because of the approach, then you need to get out there and practice more.

Standing still doesn't sound like a lot of fun...


For those who enjoy wooded courses, there's already a lot of stand and deliver as it is. I think the change for those courses would be minor.

Standing still doesn't sound like a lot of fun...


For those who enjoy wooded courses, there's already a lot of stand and deliver as it is. I think the change for those courses would be minor.



Wooded courses don't have fairways :confused:

"How would you define this stand and deliver shot?"


We already have. I think if you use the putting rules with no stepping past the mini, it would still allow players to take a few steps or a rocking step, even from an angle, and allow others to see whether they had a foot fault like the way a falling putt can be called now.

Wooded courses don't have fairways

Should have guessed you'd be from Texas. ;)

I would like to see the stand and deliver fairway shot tried in a tournament. I see disadvantages and advantages.

The disadvantages would be the change, (people have a tough time with change), the wow factor (distance) on the second shot would be reduced and the difficulty increased.

The advantages would be: safety, (especially on uneven loose terrain) , no more hitting (missing) your mark, increased necessity for additional skills, (also a disadvantage from another point of view), less land use for multiple shot holes.

How would you define this stand and deliver shot? Do you have to start with both feet on the ground and complete the throw without lifting either foot? Can you step past your mini after your throw?

Last summer Krupicka, my wife and some other Am4 players went round and round on this issue on the course. Some of the Am4s were getting an unfair advantage by taking a run-up when they were incapable of hitting their mark, relying on the expectation that no one was going to call the infraction. So they had to start calling it. Some of them had to practice hitting their mark. The people who couldn't hit their mark had to find other rules to call! :D



My version would be to step to the lie with your plant foot on mark, and your other foot touching the plant foot as an address. After this establishing your "stand", without taking your plant foot from the mark or off the ground, you deliver. You would be able to step back with your other foot, and follow through after the disc is released.

One thing to consider would be to have the stand and deliver rule only for Pros as another way to differentiate between skills of Ams versus Pros which is pretty murky in the 940-980 ratings range. It's hard to guess but I think the pros might favor this change more than ams because more skill is involved.

Are you guys serious or just board like I am? A poor shot forces you to take a stand &amp; deliver type throw currently. Now that essentially makes the obstacles on a course significantly less relevant. If everyone is forced into standing throws, poor placement off the tee potentially will not put you any worse than someone in the middle of the fairway.

To me it sounds like we are just trying to put a bandaid on a gunshot wound. This discussion is not to level the playing field, but to enforce rules. (To think this all started because somebody wanted to kneel on a towel to throw a shot.) LOL!!!!!!!!!

If everyone is forced into standing throws, poor placement off the tee potentially will not put you any worse than someone in the middle of the fairway.


I think the trees might have some bearing on that statement.

To me it sounds like we are just trying to put a bandaid on a gunshot wound. This discussion is not to level the playing field, but to enforce rules. (To think this all started because somebody wanted to kneel on a towel to throw a shot.) LOL!!!!!!!!!



Actually it started with purchasing a disc during a round. It's amazing the tangents we go off on.

I guess anything to occupy the time in between rounds.

Re: Stand and deliver



Adam Ant?

Re: Stand and deliver



Adam Ant?



More like Edward James Olmos...

A couple of things to think about. Giles, if you're really arguing that making everyone stand in and throw will increase the quality of average play, isn't that a good thing?

The concept of stand and deliver is probably pretty old but it first came to my attention after reading Dave D's tips on throwing. He was pointing out that he could deliver almost as far standing in as with a run up (he was arguing that hard run ups and lots of steps weren't necessarily good things and weren't necessary for good distance). I think he's right. The loss of distance will not be prohibitive.

Stand and deliver would actually be a good thing for the sport. The opinion of the RC is that the rule as it is isn't really enforceable. Without going into the details of those communications, I agree with them. As a past poster said, it's the most abused rule in the sport. Human nature is such that you're never going to modify the behavior on this rule IMO. Stand and deliver is a logical resolution that almost eliminates any real need for enforcement. And, it gives me an immediate advantage... :)

I think Chuck's comment is one of the more interesting, how would Pro's respond to this change? My guess is they like it. If you watch the available video footage, you will see that even some Pros on occasion foot fault in this situation. There are even some documented cases where one Pro has called it on another. What it does is level the playing field for the Pros; that is, it's one less thing for them to worry about in terms of competing head to head with the next guy.

I agree with Dave Dunipace. I'd like to see this tried in a tournament and then have an opportunity to listen to the comments and opinions about it afterwards. It could be informative and maybe even surprising.

Now, where was that towel? I need to smack an ant with it.

Dave would have the power to test it at a high level just by requiring it at the USDGC with approval from the Tour Director. The pros will come no matter what for the kind of payouts involved. Oh, and it would finally put some teeth in that course design. :D

A couple of things to think about. Giles, if you're really arguing that making everyone stand in and throw will increase the quality of average play, isn't that a good thing?




I don't believe it will increase quality. I believe it wouldn't be as enjoyable for me to play the game. I think it would make a potentially bad lie into just another lie. It may not take away power on a RHBH shot but how about a thumber (I honestly don't know)? What is potentially more fun to watch?

Just so nobody gets the wrong idea. Off the Tee I have one of the shortest approaches I've seen. A slow, smooth(I hope) 4 step X-step for RHBH. I have a fair forehand shot and I do it from a stand still.

Dave would have the power to test it at a high level just by requiring it at the USDGC with approval from the Tour Director. The pros will come no matter what for the kind of payouts involved. Oh, and it would finally put some teeth in that course design. :D



Chuck swings for the fences!

A couple of things to think about. Giles, if you're really arguing that making everyone stand in and throw will increase the quality of average play, isn't that a good thing?






I don't believe it will increase quality. I believe it wouldn't be as enjoyable for me to play the game. I think it would make a potentially bad lie into just another lie. It may not take away power on a RHBH shot but how about a thumber (I honestly don't know)? What is potentially more fun to watch?

Just so nobody gets the wrong idea. Off the Tee I have one of the shortest approaches I've seen. A slow, smooth(I hope) 4 step X-step for RHBH. I have a fair forehand shot and I do it from a stand still.



I disagree with you. I'm pretty confident it will increase quality. I base that on watching lot of video and a lot of players. I also base it on my experience having used the stand in extensively on all kinds of shots including drives off the Tee.

The concept that it will turn a potentially bad lie into just another lie is exactly the point. Beyond the possibility that it won't turn a potentially bad lie into just another lie, if it increased overall accuracy, it allows course designers to design for a more accurate game. Tighter fairways are exciting and challenging IMO. Even more so, do we really think that the run up is what makes this sport exciting? Or that a 400 foot throw is significantly less exciting that a 450 foot throw? There's no question that a 250 foot throw through the trees that threads the gauntlet is way more exciting than a 50 foot throw that nails a tree.

IMO, this change would, relatively speaking, be a minor one in terms of excitement of play and over all quality. At the same time it would add legitimacy by eliminating a rule that for the most part is ignored and taken advantage of in cases where it should not be (like second shots in the shule).

That would make it so boring if all you ever did on the tee was stand. Boo to that idea!! Yes it may be accurate, but I cannot say it would be more accurate. Plus you lose power when standing.

A couple of things to think about. Giles, if you're really arguing that making everyone stand in and throw will increase the quality of average play, isn't that a good thing?






I don't believe it will increase quality. I believe it wouldn't be as enjoyable for me to play the game. I think it would make a potentially bad lie into just another lie. It may not take away power on a RHBH shot but how about a thumber (I honestly don't know)? What is potentially more fun to watch?

Just so nobody gets the wrong idea. Off the Tee I have one of the shortest approaches I've seen. A slow, smooth(I hope) 4 step X-step for RHBH. I have a fair forehand shot and I do it from a stand still.



I disagree with you. I'm pretty confident it will increase quality. I base that on watching lot of video and a lot of players. I also base it on my experience having used the stand in extensively on all kinds of shots including drives off the Tee.

The concept that it will turn a potentially bad lie into just another lie is exactly the point. Beyond the possibility that it won't turn a potentially bad lie into just another lie, if it increased overall accuracy, it allows course designers to design for a more accurate game. Tighter fairways are exciting and challenging IMO. Even more so, do we really think that the run up is what makes this sport exciting? Or that a 400 foot throw is significantly less exciting that a 450 foot throw? There's no question that a 250 foot throw through the trees that threads the gauntlet is way more exciting than a 50 foot throw that nails a tree.

IMO, this change would, relatively speaking, be a minor one in terms of excitement of play and over all quality. At the same time it would add legitimacy by eliminating a rule that for the most part is ignored and taken advantage of in cases where it should not be (like second shots in the shule).



Where do you propose we get tighter fairways from? What is stopping them now? I've seen some very tight fairways (yes, even in north TX, a private course)

I've also still got my youth and enjoy the small physical aspect of an approach.

It isn't the length of the shot I was referring to, more the aesthetics of a run up versus a stand still. Frankly, you look silly throwing standing still IMO.

"I've also still got my youth and enjoy the small physical aspect of an approach."

BURN :eek:

"It isn't the length of the shot I was referring to, more the aesthetics of a run up versus a stand still. Frankly, you look silly throwing standing still IMO."

[/QUOTE]
I concur :D

Frankly, you look silly throwing standing still IMO.

Those who look silly throwing do so regardless whether running up or not... :eek:
My favorite is watching the 250+ pounders do a wide straddle putt like a Sumo wrestler!

My version would be to step to the lie with your plant foot on mark, and your other foot touching the plant foot as an address. After this establishing your "stand", without taking your plant foot from the mark or off the ground, you deliver. You would be able to step back with your other foot, and follow through after the disc is released.



That definition works fine until you are throwing out from under a cedar with your knee being the supporting point behind the mark (or a foot stretched into some weird spot where it is inconceivable to get your other foot). I'm kind of inclined to state that your supporting point behind the mark needs to be in contact with the playing surface for one second both before and after the throw.

Stand and deliver is one of those things that you know when you see it, but describing it is tough.

are you guys seriously talking about disallowing runups, or are you just doing message board back-and-forth?

are you guys seriously talking about disallowing runups, or are you just doing message board back-and-forth?



I'm waiting for the work day to be over. I think they are messing with me.

are you guys seriously talking about disallowing runups, or are you just doing message board back-and-forth?


Disallowing runups is not far enough. Every shot should be required to be executed with the thrower's back to the target (Ron Russell putting style).

are you guys seriously talking about disallowing runups, or are you just doing message board back-and-forth?



All message board discussions are simply MB bandf. We have no ability to disallow such, only the RC could do such.

Ah yes, lookin' good. That's why I play disc golf. :D El-muy-macho!

Somehow, when I was in high school, I never envisioned that I'd define lookin' good, by a disc golf run up. As for the physical aspects of a run up; I'm guessing that the physical exercise involved in walking the course is significantly more than the 18 four to 5 steps and torque involved in driving off the tee, plus the extra 1-18 open fairway drives.

If we want macho moves and exercise, perhaps we should consider Ulti-golf? :D

Lyle has posted before that he thinks that no one should be able to run up on shots other than tee shots to prevent foot faults but he also thinks that all courses should be par 60 minimum which then in my eyes makes the first argument seem even worse than it is.

are you guys seriously talking about disallowing runups, or are you just doing message board back-and-forth?


Disallowing runups is not far enough. Every shot should be required to be executed with the thrower's back to the target (Ron Russell putting style).



I thought this was already in-force. I've stroked three players on it... :o

Lyle has posted before that he thinks that no one should be able to run up on shots other than tee shots to prevent foot faults but he also thinks that all courses should be par 60 minimum which then in my eyes makes the first argument seem even worse than it is.



Why would that be MTL? In fact it would drive courses in that direction by limiting drive length.

you may "accidentally" get a disc to the head if you did that to me during a tournament.





whut?

Ah yes, lookin' good. That's why I play disc golf. :D El-muy-macho!

Somehow, when I was in high school, I never envisioned that I'd define lookin' good, by a disc golf run up. As for the physical aspects of a run up; I'm guessing that the physical exercise involved in walking the course is significantly more than the 18 four to 5 steps and torque involved in driving off the tee, plus the extra 1-18 open fairway drives.

If we want macho moves and exercise, perhaps we should consider Ulti-golf? :D



My drives are nothing but sexy. Just ask Krzyputts. :cool:

That's an understatement..Drive it home baby, drive it home!

Don't be hatin cuz you ain't got mad skilz like my man Giles!

Lyle has posted before that he thinks that no one should be able to run up on shots other than tee shots to prevent foot faults but he also thinks that all courses should be par 60 minimum which then in my eyes makes the first argument seem even worse than it is.



Why would that be MTL? In fact it would drive courses in that direction by limiting drive length.



Distance does not matter. Does it help? Of course.

But it doesn't matter.

The biggest arms this sport has seen - Stokely, Voigt, Sandstrom, Brinster, Kallstrom, Jenkings, just to name a few - a total of 0 world titles.

Not allowing people to run up on shots is silly, flat out.

My guess is the reason you are in favor of it is b/c you can't throw as far as most people and you want to make it fair for the playing field *coughs* meaning you *coughs*.

Learn to putt better and throw straighter. I can't throw too far at all, but I am one of the best putters I know and I can throw straight and hit gaps. With that alone, I can keep up with any golfer who can throw a lot further than me.

Lyle, you don't appear to be a competitive golfer. You opinion on rules isn't very relevant. If you don't compete, why do you care?

So far a plea for divine intervention on one's shots is not against the rules therefore when kneeling maybe we should pray or chant instead of using a towel. or break out a prayer mat and say we are pointed in the direction of Mecca.

MTL -

Did you even read back through the posts here? On more than one occasion I've tongue in cheek commented on my desire to help my game. That said, the reason for this discussion is that the rule is regularly abused. It takes credibility away from the sport. I guarantee if people started calling it we'd have a significant change in the dynamics of the sport at every level, including a lot of hostility. Ask Rhett and others the treatment they've received when they call this rules infraction. It becomes ugly but quick. A rule that is easier to conform to goes a long way towards solving the problem.

I've seen this rule broken in almost every tournament I've played, and I've seen it broken in every DVD I've ever watched of the top players. That means there's an issue and that's reason enough to consider the rule Giles.

Do you watch Pro basketball? Do you care when the player on the away team is given an extra step or when your guys are called for fouls that aren't called on the other team? One doesn't have to be a top Pro to understand fairness or consistency, at least I don't think they do.

Whether you play competitively or semi-competitively or simply care about the sport, it's rules should be a reflection of the reality of the sport. Right now this rule is not. When I watch Pros play, I can tell they are obeying this rule for the most part. I also know that if it was called consistently it would shake out the results in our top tournaments and lead to very different outcomes. That, to me, is a concern. Should it not be?

Finally, the argument that one's opinion on the rules structure are invalid unless they are a Pro (Oh excuse me, competitive) player is an old one. I've heard it in a number of forms. The "because I play competitively, I know more than you do" argument isn't a valid one. Some of the best contributers in almost any sport you can name never played a day or in many cases were pathetically bad at the sport. Most of the guys who developed this sport and wrote the rules are a pale shadow of the top players of today. Yet no one would say we should ignore their opinions.

I agree with everything you said about foot fualting, except how to fix it.

Forcing the players to stand still as the result alters the game much more than it is being altered now by players foot faulting.

How about everyone has a mini that electricutes them when they step on it..problem fixed.

MTL -

Did you even read back through the posts here? On more than one occasion I've tongue in cheek commented on my desire to help my game. That said, the reason for this discussion is that the rule is regularly abused. It takes credibility away from the sport. I guarantee if people started calling it we'd have a significant change in the dynamics of the sport at every level, including a lot of hostility. Ask Rhett and others the treatment they've received when they call this rules infraction. It becomes ugly but quick. A rule that is easier to conform to goes a long way towards solving the problem.

I've seen this rule broken in almost every tournament I've played, and I've seen it broken in every DVD I've ever watched of the top players. That means there's an issue and that's reason enough to consider the rule Giles.

Do you watch Pro basketball? Do you care when the player on the away team is given an extra step or when your guys are called for fouls that aren't called on the other team? One doesn't have to be a top Pro to understand fairness or consistency, at least I don't think they do.

Whether you play competitively or semi-competitively or simply care about the sport, it's rules should be a reflection of the reality of the sport. Right now this rule is not. When I watch Pros play, I can tell they are obeying this rule for the most part. I also know that if it was called consistently it would shake out the results in our top tournaments and lead to very different outcomes. That, to me, is a concern. Should it not be?

Finally, the argument that one's opinion on the rules structure are invalid unless they are a Pro (Oh excuse me, competitive) player is an old one. I've heard it in a number of forms. The "because I play competitively, I know more than you do" argument isn't a valid one. Some of the best contributers in almost any sport you can name never played a day or in many cases were pathetically bad at the sport. Most of the guys who developed this sport and wrote the rules are a pale shadow of the top players of today. Yet no one would say we should ignore their opinions.



I never ment to question the validity of you opinion on rules. Just your motivation.

How about everyone has a mini that electricutes them when they step on it..problem fixed.



Nope. They'd be conditioned to miss their mark by even more... Most of the foot faults I see aren't stepping on the mini... they're landing 8 inches left or right of it.

Plant one foot on the mark. It has to stay there until you release the disc.

There are twice as many ultimate players as there are disc golfers, and they only travel half as much as disc golfers foot fault... :D

Or how about you have an electrical device you place behind your mini and if you do not step on it you get shocked.

You can join Dave and I with the same opinion Lyle... ;)

Most of the missed lies that I see are usually off to a side. We have a couple of players that are notorious for this, but since the advantage gained is minimal (if any) in all but the rare occasion when they are near an obstacle, it isn't called.

Given that, I could see a rule change where a fixed stance is required when not teeing to better reinforce the 'play it where it lies' concept and make for a rule that can be enforced without getting your head ripped off. Either that, or make an unobstructed fairway lie rule that states that the lead foot has to be close (a meter?) to the mark as long as you are not past your lie.

Most of the missed lies that I see are usually off to a side. We have a couple of players that are notorious for this, but since the advantage gained is minimal (if any) in all but the rare occasion when they are near an obstacle, it isn't called.

Given that, I could see a rule change where a fixed stance is required when not teeing to better reinforce the 'play it where it lies' concept and make for a rule that can be enforced without getting your head ripped off. Either that, or make an unobstructed fairway lie rule that states that the lead foot has to be close (a meter?) to the mark as long as you are not past your lie.



-This

and Chuck, Can you old guys even run? :p

I think those thinking that reducing foot faults should be the lead reason for changing to stand and deliver are missing just as important issues mentioned by Dave earlier. The way it is now, players can use the same discs on the tee as the fairway. And with good footing in say Texas, it can basically be making another driving range throw on long holes. In BG, you don't see drivers being used on the fairway since they can't tee it up. They use woods or the pros, irons, from the fairway. I think the stand and deliver option is another way to differentiate the types of shots (and related disc choices) being made.

In addition, Dave mentions the footing issue. We don't get nicely groomed terrain in most cases. Reducing the chance for injury is also a benefit although I would agree less significant than the others. The last item is perhaps most relevant and that is land cost. It's already hard enough to get enough land to have even a handful of true par 4s on new courses today. The slight reduction in distance would reduce land costs and/or increase the number of par 4s and 5s possible for designers on a fixed piece of land. That could be the largest payoff in the long run as this sport expands and takes up most public land that's available. When private developers can justify developments, the amount of land needed will be that much less and maybe sufficient to make them invest versus not.

and Chuck, Can you old guys even run?


Dave's knees might not be up to it but I just beat my tall, athletic 9-year old niece in a timed sprint at the science museum over Christmas holidays (much to her chagrin). :D You want to tackle Dave or I on the course I guarantee we'll hang with you on a big open Texas course even if we spot you by doing 'stand and deliver' while you can follow current rules with as much running up as you want.

Actually in ball golf they have these clubs called "hybrid" you can use them anywhere. Off the tee, in the fairway...yada yada. I prefer to tee off with a hybrid or a 3 wood.

... and hence if you are going to allow for additional drives as we currently do, the stance rule should be changed as too many people 'miss the mark' when using a run-up. Either that or eliminate the tee (run-up).

Of course a third option would be the to keep the currrent practice of calling it only when it is grossly obvious, it is giving someone an advantage such as when an obstacle would obstruct the stance/shot selection, or when putting.

I'm with you regarding that for most of us the main consideration is coming up with a rule that can more easily be complied with. The other points are valid and make sense to me, but may be a hard sell to current disc golfers. Especially those who have developed a particular footwork style (two step, one step, full run-up, etc.) when beyond putting but in the clear on a fairway.

A different way to approach the foot fault issue by promoting stand and deliver,
(tweak to the rules in italics):



(1) Have at least one supporting point that
is in contact with the playing surface on
the line of play and within 30 centimeters
directly behind the marker disc (except as
specified in 803.04 E) and maintain that
point of contact until balance is demonstrated; and,




This is a little different than the falling putt rule in that one can still follow through (or fall down), they just have to leave the foot behind the mark where it is until they stop. This would allow small steps approaching the lie, probably knock out a full run up, but would make it easy to call a foot fault.

I think an unintentional result of the tweak would be to eliminate full follow-throughs and jump putts.

As an alternative tweak, you could specify that the stance for all shots (except when teeing off) has to be established and maintained for a given time before throwing, Two seconds would be sufficient to stop all run-ups. Stance in this case would refer to the foot that is on the established lie, with no other supporting point closer to the basket as the current rules specify.

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating a change. Just throwing out a rule that could eliminate the fairway run-up and be enforceable without causing all sorts of other problems.

A different way to approach the foot fault issue by promoting stand and deliver,
(tweak to the rules in italics):



(1) Have at least one supporting point that
is in contact with the playing surface on
the line of play and within 30 centimeters
directly behind the marker disc (except as
specified in 803.04 E) and maintain that
point of contact until balance is demonstrated; and,




This is a little different than the falling putt rule in that one can still follow through (or fall down), they just have to leave the foot behind the mark where it is until they stop. This would allow small steps approaching the lie, probably knock out a full run up, but would make it easy to call a foot fault.



Again the problem seems to lie in people NOT calling foot faults, so does anyone think a change in the wording will change peoples preference on calling another person on it?

On a stand and deliver shot, your pivot foot doesn't leave the ground even with a strong follow-through. The result on jump putts was not unintentional. Jump putts are just a casual bystander which some might think is a good idea to get rid of, while others would complain profusely.

A different way to approach the foot fault issue by promoting stand and deliver,
(tweak to the rules in italics):



(1) Have at least one supporting point that
is in contact with the playing surface on
the line of play and within 30 centimeters
directly behind the marker disc (except as
specified in 803.04 E) and maintain that
point of contact until balance is demonstrated; and,




This is a little different than the falling putt rule in that one can still follow through (or fall down), they just have to leave the foot behind the mark where it is until they stop. This would allow small steps approaching the lie, probably knock out a full run up, but would make it easy to call a foot fault.



Again the problem seems to lie in people NOT calling foot faults, so does anyone think a change in the wording will change peoples preference on calling another person on it?



My thought is that if it's easier to verify, it might more likely be called when necessary. When a player does a full run up it's hard for him to see where he hit, and two others on the card must be paying attention for that brief moment when he is or isn't on his mark. If you have to demonstrate that you are still there, it's a lot easier.

My thought is that if it's easier to verify, it might more likely be called when necessary. When a player does a full run up it's hard for him to see where he hit, and two others on the card must be paying attention for that brief moment when he is or isn't on his mark. If you have to demonstrate that you are still there, it's a lot easier.



I do agree however it is up to us as players to identify such things. Most of the time we're more concerned with thinking about our next shot than what our opponent has done until their disc has been thrown.

Some people step through after a stand and deliver as part of the follow through. Especially those who throw Tomahawks or other overhand type shots. For myself, the disc is out of hand well before, but balance is never really maintained until the back foot lands in front of the pivot and the pivot itself usually comes up and is placed next to the other foot. A result of not allowing a follow through could be increased injuries as the body couldn't unwind from the force, placing all the stress on the arm.

and Chuck, Can you old guys even run?


You want to tackle Dave or I on the course I guarantee we'll hang with you on a big open Texas course even if we spot you by doing 'stand and deliver' while you can follow current rules with as much running up as you want.



I'd love to do it Chuck. Don't think I stand much of a chance though. Possibly if you were blindfolded.
You do our courses a disservice though, I'd like to think I don't spend my days playing in open feilds. I though we have a few trees in Dallas, I know I seem to find them. Truth of the matter is I wouldn't play your game of no run-ups (not that I think you would miss me). If I had to stand still, I would rather do it with a stick and a ball.

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

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

they move around like the ones in wizard of oz...

just say no to stand and deliver...

That said, the reason for this discussion is that the rule is regularly abused. It takes credibility away from the sport.



Yeah....we'd probably be on network television every Sunday afternoon if it wasn't for those darn foot faults....and kneeling on towels.

I think those thinking that reducing foot faults should be the lead reason for changing to stand and deliver are missing just as important issues mentioned by Dave earlier. The way it is now, players can use the same discs on the tee as the fairway. And with good footing in say Texas, it can basically be making another driving range throw on long holes. In BG, you don't see drivers being used on the fairway since they can't tee it up. They use woods or the pros, irons, from the fairway. I think the stand and deliver option is another way to differentiate the types of shots (and related disc choices) being made.

In addition, Dave mentions the footing issue. We don't get nicely groomed terrain in most cases. Reducing the chance for injury is also a benefit although I would agree less significant than the others. The last item is perhaps most relevant and that is land cost. It's already hard enough to get enough land to have even a handful of true par 4s on new courses today. The slight reduction in distance would reduce land costs and/or increase the number of par 4s and 5s possible for designers on a fixed piece of land. That could be the largest payoff in the long run as this sport expands and takes up most public land that's available. When private developers can justify developments, the amount of land needed will be that much less and maybe sufficient to make them invest versus not.



Worst idea ever! The rules do not need to be changed, just enforced. If you're too scared to call or second a rule violation you shouldn't compete. Changing the rules because you're scared of confrontation is not appropriate, neither is using the argument that run ups are dangerous.

Re: Stand and deliver



Adam Ant?



Your money or your life!

Worst idea ever! The rules do not need to be changed, just enforced. If you're too scared to call or second a rule violation you shouldn't compete. Changing the rules because you're scared of confrontation is not appropriate, neither is using the argument that run ups are dangerous.

[/QUOTE]

Second, third, fourth...

Worst idea ever! The rules do not need to be changed, just enforced. If you're too scared to call or second a rule violation you shouldn't compete. Changing the rules because you're scared of confrontation is not appropriate, neither is using the argument that run ups are dangerous.



Second, third, fourth...

[/QUOTE]

Fifth, sixth, seventh...

Worst idea ever! The rules do not need to be changed, just enforced. If you're too scared to call or second a rule violation you shouldn't compete. Changing the rules because you're scared of confrontation is not appropriate, neither is using the argument that run ups are dangerous.



Second, third, fourth...



Fifth, sixth, seventh...

[/QUOTE]

Don't make me... :D;) :D

Stand and Deliver would result in the best sidearmers kicking arse. Personally I can throw a lot farther forehand than backhand when there's no runup available.

I would stop playing sanctioned golf if the rules disallowed runups. Yawn.

we have no clause that requires professional play during sanctioned events....I don't think there is anything to worry about.

the "maintain balance" thing is Injuries-R-Us.

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

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

I would stop playing sanctioned golf if the rules disallowed runups. Yawn.



A lot of players would...The only people interested in S&amp;D are declining players trying to retain their glory by limiting the skills of others. I have played many sanctioned and non-sanctioned tournaments and missing the mark on run ups almost never happens; definitely not often enough to warrant a rule change. The injury argument is a red herring...

The only people interested in S&amp;D are declining players trying to retain their glory by limiting the skills of others.


Testing their skills, not limiting. What skill is there in not hitting the mark, especially when the same people lobbying to retain runups won't make the footfault calls? As Nicklaus, one of the longest hitters of his time puts it, "Golf is a game of skill and accuracy, not power." Our game will become more like a driving range as longer par 4 and 5 holes get installed and there continues to be little difference between drives off the tee versus throws from the fairway.

The only people interested in S&amp;D are declining players trying to retain their glory by limiting the skills of others.


Testing their skills, not limiting. What skill is there in not hitting the mark, especially when the same people lobbying to retain runups won't make the footfault calls? As Nicklaus, one of the longest hitters of his time puts it, "Golf is a game of skill and accuracy, not power." Our game will become more like a driving range as longer par 4 and 5 holes get installed and there continues to be little difference between drives off the tee versus throws from the fairway.



RED HERRING! The missing the mark argument does not carry weight, it is not a major issue. Taking the run up away is not testing skill, its taking the better one away and replacing it with a lesser one. In essence, its a handicapping tool. Ever read Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut?

I'm not using the 'missing the mark' as the only argument. That's just a bonus. Same is Dunipace commented, having fairway throw rules be different from tee shots makes the game more like golf and not a driving range, regardless whether players currently hit the mark. It's just a better game with a wider range of skills being tested. It hasn't been important for a long time since so few courses have true par 4s &amp; 5s for pros and many are wooded where pros are less likely to use a run up anyway.

I'm simply saying that as courses get longer, adding this element to the "pro game only" (not ams), would help differentiate skills more than they will without the difference. You can see how lame the pro BG game has become for the top players where you rarely see anyone use long irons. Many holes have become the wrong length for that level and/or the drivers have destroyed the challenge for needing shots in that range.

Just enforce the run up rule as is. Those who want to stand and deliver can do that, and those that want to use the run up legally can do that. Should we get rid of the jump putt, or the thumber, or the roller because some cannot execute those shots? NO. Do not water down the sport, enhance it with variety.

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

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

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

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



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