Proposed rule changes for 2024

[biscoe]

isn't the clearing the runup thing "better" now?

Not IMO, flies in the face of the fundamental tenet "play it as it lies." Also randomizes obstacles on a course when the goal should be for the course to be the same for everyone.

 

[krupicka]

Not IMO, flies in the face of the fundamental tenet "play it as it lies." Also randomizes obstacles on a course when the goal should be for the course to be the same for everyone.

I completely agree, but was out voted.

 

[glassila]

1.05 G of the Competition Manual reads: "The Tournament Director must provide a scorecard to each player in the group. These scorecards may be digital or physical, so long as they meet the requirements in 808, Scoring."

What is a digital scorecard?
A phone?

 

[Dcinmd]

What is a digital scorecard?
A phone?

My understanding is that would have PDGA live set up, ready to go and having distributed the access code to participants. Or having it set up on U-disc since that is primarily what DGPT uses. The use of both is likely why they where not more specific in the rule.

 

[krupicka]

My understanding is that would have PDGA live set up, ready to go and having distributed the access code to participants. Or having it set up on U-disc since that is primarily what DGPT uses. The use of both is likely why they where not more specific in the rule.

DGPT use the PDGA digital scorecard. Udisc is just for stats.

 

[Steve West]

Not IMO, flies in the face of the fundamental tenet "play it as it lies." Also randomizes obstacles on a course when the goal should be for the course to be the same for everyone.

*** Sound of an eraser getting rid of the rules for casual water, out of bounds, relief from harmful animals, disc above the playing surface, oh! and definition of playing surface, relief from solid obstacles, drop zones, mandos, and the rule that lets you start your throw from above the ground using another disc (or maybe while touching the thrown disc - not sure exactly how a strict "play it as it lies" would work for a disc on the ground unless we add those Japanese Frisbee-hitting clubs)., allowing some movement of foliage while taking a stance, hazard penalty, provisional throws, lost disc, abandoned throw.***



The point is, while "play it as it lies" is an important tenet of disc golf, it cannot be applied absolutely.

And yes, most of the time a rule that moves away from that principle will be a worse rule. Maybe even in this case. But there are other principles involved.

One is that the round needs to be completed. Somehow, in some fashion. Many of the exceptions above simply let the players continue to play.

The second is that the rules need to be follow-able. If players are subconsciously clearing their run-up, or would never enter another sanctioned event for fear of pine cones or distaste at stand-and-deliver, then the rules need to bend or they will become irrelevant.

Departing from "play it as it lies" is a big negative for a proposed rule. However, it should not cause an automatic veto.





As to the other objection: Would players be willing to replace the casual obstacles they moved? Or, since the other players can also move them, hasn't the course really remained the same for everyone?

 

[BryanC]

Or, since the other players can also move them, hasn't the course really remained the same for everyone?

I don't think so, unless they replace the casual obstacle after throwing. The other players can only move the casual obstacles if they are further from the basket than the front edge of their lie. Example: Say a player on the first card is 30' short of the basket and moves a big branch from behind his lie to another location roughly the same distance from the basket. Then it would be possible for a player on the second card (or any later card) to be 40' short of the basket and directly behind this big obstacle that someone on an earlier card had just relocated to that position. Since the obstacle is closer to the basket than their lie, they are not allowed to move it.

 

[biscoe]

*** Sound of an eraser getting rid of the rules for casual water, out of bounds, relief from harmful animals, disc above the playing surface, oh! and definition of playing surface, relief from solid obstacles, drop zones, mandos, and the rule that lets you start your throw from above the ground using another disc (or maybe while touching the thrown disc - not sure exactly how a strict "play it as it lies" would work for a disc on the ground unless we add those Japanese Frisbee-hitting clubs)., allowing some movement of foliage while taking a stance, hazard penalty, provisional throws, lost disc, abandoned throw.***

The point is, while "play it as it lies" is an important tenet of disc golf, it cannot be applied absolutely.

Of course "play it as it lies" cannot be universally applied. That doesn't mean it should be discarded indiscriminately either. What specifically is improved by allowing players to clear their run up other than some misplaced concept that players ALWAYS have a right to a run up? Presumably the areas where one would need to do this are areas where you did not want to throw in the first place- it won't come into play on the fairway all that much. Stand and deliver is just another skill to potentially be mastered.

And yes, most of the time a rule that moves away from that principle will be a worse rule. Maybe even in this case. But there are other principles involved.

One is that the round needs to be completed. Somehow, in some fashion. Many of the exceptions above simply let the players continue to play.

The second is that the rules need to be follow-able. If players are subconsciously clearing their run-up, or would never enter another sanctioned event for fear of pine cones or distaste at stand-and-deliver, then the rules need to bend or they will become irrelevant.

Not all that long ago this rule was much more stringent and there was no mass player exodus from the sport. I don't want stand and deliver forced on players where their lie does not dictate it. I just don't feel players are entitled to a run up in all situations.

Departing from "play it as it lies" is a big negative for a proposed rule. However, it should not cause an automatic veto.

As to the other objection: Would players be willing to replace the casual obstacles they moved? Or, since the other players can also move them, hasn't the course really remained the same for everyone?

Let's say Player A and Player B have both practiced the course and there is a large pile of brush well off the fairway on Hole 8 (next to the hole on hole 8 ). The rest of the ground is clear. Player B has decided that the best course of action if off the fairway to that side is a roller. Player A throws a terrible shot into the brushpile and then avails himself of his newfound right to move any and all of the brush pile and tosses stuff all over the place. Player B is on the next card through and is off the fairway to that side. He throws his roller where he knew the ground was clear during practice but hits the crap Player A has strewn about. How has the course remained the same for both players?

 

[Steve West]

Of course "play it as it lies" cannot be universally applied. That doesn't mean it should be discarded indiscriminately either. What specifically is improved by allowing players to clear their run up other than some misplaced concept that players ALWAYS have a right to a run up? Presumably the areas where one would need to do this are areas where you did not want to throw in the first place- it won't come into play on the fairway all that much. Stand and deliver is just another skill to potentially be mastered.

Not all that long ago this rule was much more stringent and there was no mass player exodus from the sport. I don't want stand and deliver forced on players where their lie does not dictate it. I just don't feel players are entitled to a run up in all situations.


Let's say Player A and Player B have both practiced the course and there is a large pile of brush well off the fairway on Hole 8 (next to the hole on hole 8 ). The rest of the ground is clear. Player B has decided that the best course of action if off the fairway to that side is a roller. Player A throws a terrible shot into the brushpile and then avails himself of his newfound right to move any and all of the brush pile and tosses stuff all over the place. Player B is on the next card through and is off the fairway to that side. He throws his roller where he knew the ground was clear during practice but hits the crap Player A has strewn about. How has the course remained the same for both players?

All excellent points, and all these points (and more) were brought up during the discussions. Ultimately, it is the Board who makes the final choice, but many people have their fingers in the clay.

As for that entire brush pile, note that players don't get any extension of the 30 seconds to do their clearing. (See QA-OBS-2)

 

[biscoe]

All excellent points, and all these points (and more) were brought up during the discussions. Ultimately, it is the Board who makes the final choice, but many people have their fingers in the clay.

As for that entire brush pile, note that players don't get any extension of the 30 seconds to do their clearing. (See QA-OBS-2)

How did it get to be under consideration in the first place? proposed by the Board and then evaluated by the RC?

 

[Steve West]

How did it get to be under consideration in the first place? proposed by the Board and then evaluated by the RC?

Every idea ever is under consideration all the time.

 

[biscoe]

Every idea ever is under consideration all the time.

Eye roll emoji thingy...

 

[TheOtherBill]

Including clothing-optional events

 

[robdeforge]

Let's say Player A and Player B have both practiced the course and there is a large pile of brush well off the fairway on Hole 8 (next to the hole on hole 8 ). The rest of the ground is clear. Player B has decided that the best course of action if off the fairway to that side is a roller. Player A throws a terrible shot into the brushpile and then avails himself of his newfound right to move any and all of the brush pile and tosses stuff all over the place. Player B is on the next card through and is off the fairway to that side. He throws his roller where he knew the ground was clear during practice but hits the crap Player A has strewn about. How has the course remained the same for both players?

Just to clarify - this possibility of a changing course in this way existed before this rule change, correct?

 

[biscoe]

Just to clarify - this possibility of a changing course in this way existed before this rule change, correct?

In a lesser fashion. Many years ago it was "dead and unattached and behind the lie". A couple years ago you were limited to moving stuff actually in contact with your lie. Then it went to anything touching the playing surface anywhere you could reach from your lie.. Now it is the entire world behind your lie. Rule has gotten worse every single time it has gotten more liberal imo.

 

[_MTL_]

Literally walking down the fairway to your lie changes the course.

If you wanted to get super technical, the previous rule was bascially broken every hole by every player.

 

[biscoe]

Literally walking down the fairway to your lie changes the course.

If you wanted to get super technical, the previous rule was bascially broken every hole by every player.

See Logical Fallacies- Appeal to Extremes.

 

[coupe]

Robert, stop making a bigger ass of yourself than you already have.