Pet Peeve: foot fault run ups

[_MTL_]

Originally Posted by grodney

I heard that USDGC was using S&D this year. Not surprising -- they've gotten rules variances approved almost every year, i.e they seem to be on the cutting edge of competitive philosophy.

85% of what they do is generally frowned upon by the players. The only thing they were innovators on that players really liked were elevated baskets, artificial OB and the no 2 meter rule. But for those three good things, there have been tons of bad ideas. Like Bunc'rs and Stroke and distance and handicap scoring. And then there have been rumors or rings around baskets that you can't putt from and now this?

If it wasn't for the money and the prestigue of the event, no one would want to play it. It's the most gimmicky and dumb stuff our sport has to offer and why it happens at the biggest event of the year and not some small XC tier is beyond me.

I've had a few chances to play USDGC and could technically go this year if I wanted. I'm a SC and all I have to say is "My state rep is me" but I'm not gonna play under rules that only apply one weekend a year.

[DavidSauls]

Originally Posted by Cgkdisc

Yesterday I was talking with another designer about this and hatched the idea that maybe we should allow run-ups but your follow thru stance had to finish behind the marker. That way it would be much easier to make the foot fault call because the player could see where they landed. If you were kneeling and lunging, the same thing applies, you land behind your mark. I would consider extending the line back to maybe 50 centimeters versus the current 30cm and maybe making the width equal to your disc 21-22cm. You could use a mini but then your width is only the width of your marker. You would allow players to either leave their thrown disc as the marker like current rules or actually use another full size disc as the marker.

Wouldn't that just magnify the problems with the vague "demonstrate balance" rule wording? Or have you better way to define "finish"?

[DavidSauls]

Originally Posted by grodney

By the way, those of you opposed to S&D just don't get it. Someday you will. It has very little to do with foot faults, and has everything to do with making it a better game.

My old knees have strongly-felt opinions about S&D.

[grodney]

Originally Posted by _MTL_

85% of what they do is generally frowned upon by the players.

Good stat. Whatever, I said they were innovators, so it's not surprising to see them experiment with the rules. Of course not all of their stuff has worked. I certainly haven't agreed with all of the concepts -- I'm sure nobody has. I just happen to agree with this one.

[giles]

Never been a fan of the stand and deliver idea. I know we don't attract spectators as it is but I think the run up makes for better viewing and looks more athletic. I also believe it compromises some of the reward for a good shot on two drive holes. You lose a bit of competitive advantage that you have if you put your drive in an open level area vs a player who ends up on the edge of the rough, against a tree or on a hard slope. Stand and deliver should be considered punitive from failure to set yourself up with a good placement. On that note, I'd be ok with designated S&D roped off bunkers on some two drive holes.


/sorry if I'm being redundant, I didn't look through the thread.

//my forehand S&D is as good as my run up forehand.

[grodney]

Originally Posted by giles

I also believe it compromises some of the reward for a good shot on two drive holes. You lose a bit of competitive advantage that you have if you put your drive in an open level area vs a player who ends up on the edge of the rough, against a tree or on a hard slope.

That's a pretty good argument.

[Cgkdisc]

David Sauls - Wouldn't that just magnify the problems with the vague "demonstrate balance" rule wording? Or have you better way to define "finish"?

Demonstrate Balance has been clarified already if you watched the Demonstrate Balance Putting video and read the updated Q&A. I don't think you need to be balanced on your follow thru but you would still have to land behind your mark even if you were flat out on the ground. Otherwise, foot fault.