Clarification on base of the target - 806.01 A (Putting Area)

[Rastnav]

The proposal covers all of your concerns. If you have a point of contact on the lie at the time of release, it counts as being on the lie immediately after release. No need to jump. In a falling or lunging putt from your knees, no hand can touch the ground in front of the lie. At least one has to land on the lie after releasing the disc and the other has to touch the ground no closer to the hole if it touches the ground at all.

Here's a summary of the idea for every throw but tee shots: "After releasing their throw, a player's next contact points with the playing surface must occur farther from the target than their mark with at least one contacting the lie. A contact point on the lie at the time of release meets the requirement for contacting the lie after release."

The only "loophole" I can see would be a player crouching to do a single foot hop with their right foot starting on the lie. As they come up from their crouch, they release the throw before leaving the ground, hopping in the air with their right foot landing in front of the lie. Their left foot and any other body part if they fell would still have to first tap behind the mark. That contorted throw would be legal under the proposal, but the point is the disc would have been released while on the lie.

You seem to be contradicting yourself here. If a contacting point counts atvrelease counts as after the release, and you have no rules about any subsequent contacts, then your statements about lunge putts (and jump putts and step putts) make no sense.

Your example of jumping forward, releasing, toe tapping, and then landing forward of the lie is exactly functionally equivalent to a step putt under your proposed rule. The step putt contact at release counts for after the release. Then your next foot lands in front of the lie.

Massively confused.

 

[Cgkdisc]

You seem to be contradicting yourself here. If a contacting point counts atvrelease counts as after the release, and you have no rules about any subsequent contacts, then your statements about lunge putts (and jump putts and step putts) make no sense.

Your example of jumping forward, releasing, toe tapping, and then landing forward of the lie is exactly functionally equivalent to a step putt under your proposed rule. The step putt contact at release counts for after the release. Then your next foot lands in front of the lie.

Massively confused.

If your contact point (foot) is on the lie at the time of release, you still have to have your other foot touch farther from the basket AFTER that release. There's no way you can step through as is done today or it would be a foot fault under the proposal. Step putting would have to be done and completed behind your mark. I'm not sure why the concept of "doing all of your throwing motions and points of contact behind your mark after releasing and before moving forward" is so hard to comprehend?

 

[sisyphus]

If only the first contact AFTER release has to be on the lie, then an athletic player whose disc wedged in behind a wall of shrubbery would be allowed to leap 10-15' from the side, or even from inside the lie (but with a clear shot), release the disc while in the air, and come crashing into the brush. As long as the first part of them to touch the ground contacts the lie, it's all good. Or they might climb to a tree branch above the lie, hang by one arm, let go, release the disc over the shrubbery, and drop onto their lie from above. All good by this definition?




...it does sound exciting!

 

[Cgkdisc]

If only the first contact AFTER release has to be on the lie, then an athletic player whose disc wedged in behind a wall of shrubbery would be allowed to leap 10-15' from the side, or even from inside the lie (but with a clear shot), release the disc while in the air, and come crashing into the brush. As long as the first part of them to touch the ground contacts the lie, it's all good. Or they might climb to a tree branch above the lie, hang by one arm, let go, release the disc over the shrubbery, and drop onto their lie from above. All good by this definition?
...it does sound exciting!

Yes, that would be allowed as long as first or simultaneous contact after release was made on the lie by at least one body part and the rest of any contact was all behind the mark. They could then pick themselves up and proceed to their new lie. Cool athletic move with high entertainment value if perhaps not advisable from a scoring standpoint (Simon?).

Might see a move like a few QBs who quickly jump after receiving the hike to throw over the lineman to score on a goal line play.

 

[Rastnav]

If your contact point (foot) is on the lie at the time of release, you still have to have your other foot touch farther from the basket AFTER that release. There's no way you can step through as is done today or it would be a foot fault under the proposal. Step putting would have to be done and completed behind your mark. I'm not sure why the concept of "doing all of your throwing motions and points of contact behind your mark after releasing and before moving forward" is so hard to comprehend?

Here's a summary of the idea for every throw but tee shots: "After releasing their throw, a player's next contact points with the playing surface must occur farther from the target than their mark with at least one contacting the lie. A contact point on the lie at the time of release meets the requirement for contacting the lie after release."

Note how the rule that you described doesn't state what you are now saying. I still don't know specifically what rule you are proposing. I have ideas on what that rule might be, but it's not what you actually stated. What is your "next point of contact" if you throw a standstill shot? Do you have to display balance after a standstill shot before contacting past the lie? Is it simply that their are two contact points at time of release, that every throw now must include two contact points?

If I understand what you are proposing correctly any existing runups would be illegal if the player follows through and lands past the lie. Existing lunge putts/scrambles would also be illegal. These are fairly drastic changes to the game, and things I specified at the beginning would have to be illegal if I understood you correctly. That's when you said that they would be legal, resulting in much confusion.

If the existing runups would somehow be legal, please explain how. I believe that the only way to do that under what you seem to be proposing would be to plant well behind the lie and attempt to follow through to then step onto the lie. If that is true, can you agree that this would be a very large change to throws involving runups?

 

[Cgkdisc]

The bolded statements are not in conflict. Running up, jumping and lunging would all be legal as long as they are completed behind the mark. Think of what each of these shots look like under current rules. Even step them out. Now just move those throw types back so they finish behind the mark per the summary idea posted above.

If both of the player's feet are on the playing surface at the time of release (like a straddle) AND the player is not jumping as part of their follow-through, i.e. stand and deliver, they can step forward with either foot after throwing although they are likely to first pick up their marker or disc before proceeding and possibly head back to their bag first. Which brings up an interesting addendum to the idea which is to require the player to pick up their marker before proceeding past their lie.

 

[Rastnav]

I see that when you say "contacting the lie after release" you apparently don't mean that this necessarily qualifies as the "next" contact. So, unless they are airborne at release, you mean that there are always two contact points that matter. Not one. The contact point at release and one that begins contact after release, yes?

But existing runups with follow through would be made illegal, yes? And existing lunge putts would also be illegal? Yes?

 

[Cgkdisc]

I see that when you say "contacting the lie after release" you apparently don't mean that this necessarily qualifies as the "next" contact. So, unless they are airborne at release, you mean that there are always two contact points that matter. Not one. The contact point at release and one that begins contact after release, yes?

But existing runups with follow through would be made illegal, yes? And existing lunge putts would also be illegal? Yes?

What about landing behind your lie is not clear? Your follow-through and lunge simply have to land on your lie not in front of it.

No, you don't need two contact points when throwing. You don't even need one during release since you can be in the air. It's just that both feet or any other contact points have to make contact behind your mark before picking up your marker.

I'd make a video of the possible moves but only if the RC would seriously consider this concept.

 

[Rastnav]

What about landing behind your lie is not clear? Your follow-through and lunge simply have to land on your lie not in front of it.

No, you don't need two contact points when throwing. You don't even need one during release since you can be in the air. It's just that both feet or any other contact points have to make contact behind your mark before picking up your marker.

I'd make a video of the possible moves but only if the RC would seriously consider this concept.

So, before you remove your mark you can't have any contact at all beyond the lie? That basically doesn't remove the green, it extends it to everywhere (while adding the rule that you can, if you wish, make contact with the lie with your first new contact point after release).

Having to hit your mark while engaging in a motion where you aren't fully in balance, as is frequently the case on follow throughs, is a big change. Think of all the people who end up following through and finishing to the back side of their plant foot. You'd want to be able to mark both your lie and also your plant location, because you will want to make sure that your follow through will hit your mark. You will need to remove your concentration after release from the flight of the disc to hitting your mark. That's hardly trivial. It's also an issue just from a "where did the disc go" perspective.

Think about throwing from awkward lies with not great footing, or wet/slick lies . Not being able to fall forward is another large change. If it's a heavily downhill or uphill lie, you may have to greatly reduce your power to ensure you you don't follow through or slip past your lie.

 

[Cgkdisc]

So, before you remove your mark you can't have any contact at all beyond the lie? That basically doesn't remove the green, it extends it to everywhere (while adding the rule that you can, if you wish, make contact with the lie with your first new contact point after release).

Having to hit your mark while engaging in a motion where you aren't fully in balance, as is frequently the case on follow throughs, is a big change. Think of all the people who end up following through and finishing to the back side of their plant foot. You'd want to be able to mark both your lie and also your plant location, because you will want to make sure that your follow through will hit your mark. You will need to remove your concentration after release from the flight of the disc to hitting your mark. That's hardly trivial. It's also an issue just from a "where did the disc go" perspective.

Think about throwing from awkward lies with not great footing, or wet/slick lies . Not being able to fall forward is another large change. If it's a heavily downhill or uphill lie, you may have to greatly reduce your power to ensure you you don't follow through or slip past your lie.

You already have to pay attention to hit your lie on run-ups under current rules. You would just have to hit your lie after release rather than during release. Consider that on fairway throws, other players would not likely call foot faults any more often than they do now for missing your lie as long as you're close. Take a look at the rules for shotput or discus throwing. They have to land behind the front edge of the throwing circle after release or the throw is disqualified.

No, it would not be like the current inside 10m green rule everywhere because you would be able to release your throw while in the air or off a plant foot as far away as your stride from your lie. You could even start your throwing motion from as far back or to the side as you can lunge forward to tap your lie. Those types of throws aren't allowed today even outside the circle.

 

[@CD-]

Getting back to my original question, which measurement is it? the ' measurements are on the right side just to show the area of the target they denote.
Z1 & Z3 are 'to the pole & bottom/top of the cage'
Z2 & Z4 are 'to the bottom/top of the outer edge of the basket'
Z5 is 'to the place below the target that meets the ground'
X is the horizontal radius from the target

IMO, the target for a player is the area that the disc has a reasonable chance to count as a finished hole (usually the chain height and above the cage). In the picture, Z4 is the minimum distance from the lie to have a reasonably good chance at finishing the hole.

I like the idea of TDs having the option to mark the C1 green for competition, allowing them to shorten or extend beyond 10 meters for unique greens.

 

[araytx]

If your contact point (foot) is on the lie at the time of release, you still have to have your other foot touch farther from the basket AFTER that release. There's no way you can step through as is done today or it would be a foot fault under the proposal. Step putting would have to be done and completed behind your mark. I'm not sure why the concept of "doing all of your throwing motions and points of contact behind your mark after releasing and before moving forward" is so hard to comprehend?

Chuck, you need to make a video for Rastnav to explain the confusion in your proposal. I often believe that videos can clear up intent of word confusion

 

[@CD-]

Getting back to my original question, which measurement is it? the ' measurements are on the right side just to show the area of the target they denote.
Z1 & Z3 are 'to the pole & bottom/top of the cage'
Z2 & Z4 are 'to the bottom/top of the outer edge of the basket'
Z5 is 'to the place below the target that meets the ground'
X is the horizontal radius from the target

IMO, the target for a player is the area that the disc has a reasonable chance to count as a finished hole (usually the chain height and above the cage). In the picture, Z4 is the minimum distance from the lie to have a reasonably good chance at finishing the hole.

reupload my MS Paint pics to DGCR
No PDGA rule committee updates since the original question was asked so was curious if anything was coming down the pipe for next year.

The topic of using a range finder to measure C1 came up in a couple MPO tournament rounds recently and lead me back to this question. Understanding the limitations of (+/- 1m) for those devices makes me and other players question every use when the cardmates came up with 33-37 feet as their 'measurement'. Were they measuring off the pole base or the target level pole/basket/chains/band?

 

[jupiterboy]

Obv gotta be the base. Need to give up the add rev of the boxes or mark circle prior to install

 

[uncle pennybags]

I feel like there should be a joke about an imaginary plane to use as a measure point in here somewhere.