Size of the Lie

[Cgkdisc]

I suspect that any one of us would not play as well if an official was assigned to specifically watch our foot placement on every shot in our game. That's the level of compliance expected by the rules. I'm certain it would increase scores just from the additional effort players would make to comply and/or the foot faults that would be called.

 

[Steve West]

Where does a one-throw advantage come into play? A player missing a mark by a couple of inches gets to subtract a throw off the score or something?...

A player missing a mark who does not have it called avoids a penalty throw relative to a player missing a mark who does have it called.

 

[ejvogie]

The reason for requiring players to hit their mark is not so much whether there is an advantage gained by missing a little bit, but the required attention a player must make to actually hit their mark properly. In some cases, missing your mark by three inches will provide an advantage when located in a blocked lie whether 60 feet or 250 feet away.

You're probably using S&D at 60', obstructed or not. No excuse in that situation for a foot fault.

 

[jeremyhilss]

I voted to extend the length. Not by much though. Yes practice helps, but when I do it on long hole sometimes my toe barely knicks the mini and that could be called - its difficult to get that perfect spot.

BUT all together if it was just stay the same OR stand and deliver, I'd pick keep it the same. Try having fun on hole 8 at Highbridge Gold with that SnD rule.

 

[TAFL]

A player missing a mark who does not have it called avoids a penalty throw relative to a player missing a mark who does have it called.

So there is no advantage gained simply by missing the mark by a couple of inches. Any "advantage" is due only to possible inconsistent calling.

Again, if there's no actual advantage gained by missing the mark by a couple of inches, it shouldn't be called. Or the rules should be adjusted to allow for a larger mark to be hit, eliminating the possibility of violations that don't actually affect play.

 

[JC17393]

So there is no advantage gained simply by missing the mark by a couple of inches. Any "advantage" is due only to possible inconsistent calling.

Again, if there's no actual advantage gained by missing the mark by a couple of inches, it shouldn't be called. Or the rules should be adjusted to allow for a larger mark to be hit, eliminating the possibility of violations that don't actually affect play.

The rule isn't in place to provide/prevent advantage. It's there to keep everyone playing the same game. Players aren't supposed to be making calls on violations based on degree of advantage gained, they're supposed to be calling violations because they're violations.

I can buy the "it's too close to call" argument for not making a ticky-tack call. If in doubt, let it go. After all, the rule explicitly states "[p]layers are expected to call a violation when one has clearly occurred." But if you can see that a player is clearly off the mark, even if it's only "a couple inches" then it's a violation and should be called every time.

 

[jeremyhilss]

I have never seen a foot fault called, or even questioned. I mean, seriously, how often do you really look at a mans shoes?

"You know what this is?? This is all ONE, BIG, CONSPIRACY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND YOU'RE ALL IN ON IT!!!! INCLUDING HER!!!!!"

*THROWS MINI MARKER THROUGH POSTER*

 

[grodney]

Oh my gosh, good one. I totally missed that from thrembo. Full marks, boys.

 

[ToddL]

The rule isn't in place to provide/prevent advantage. It's there to keep everyone playing the same game. Players aren't supposed to be making calls on violations based on degree of advantage gained, they're supposed to be calling violations because they're violations.

Kind of like at your casual doubles league. I'm more than happy to give you a pick-up on that 3' gimme. Some other guys might give you a pick-up on that 10' gimme. We all know that we should actually make you putt out, because some other group might actually miss that 10' putt. The rules aren't there to punish you or make life difficult for you. The rules are there to make sure everyone is playing the same game.

We can all agree that you shouldn't get an extra 6 inches away from your lie when you're trying to stretch out to get around a tree from a reverse cowgirl stance. But what about in an open field? If the exact line of my lie is a little slippery, should I be allowed to casually miss my lie by 6 inches and get my plant foot on more solid footing? If my lie is leaning on the edge of a root or rock which would give me a tricky stance, should I be allowed to miss my spot by 6 inches there? If my lie is completely fine, but I just don't feel like paying attention to my feet when I throw, should I be allowed to miss my spot by 6 inches?

 

[PhattD]

So there is no advantage gained simply by missing the mark by a couple of inches. Any "advantage" is due only to possible inconsistent calling.

Again, if there's no actual advantage gained by missing the mark by a couple of inches, it shouldn't be called. Or the rules should be adjusted to allow for a larger mark to be hit, eliminating the possibility of violations that don't actually affect play.

Would you agree that it's harder to execute a shot While making sure you hit your mark than it is to execute it while not worrying at all if you hit your mark?

 

[BrotherDave]

Would you agree that it's harder to execute a shot While making sure you hit your mark than it is to execute it while not worrying at all if you hit your mark?

No, just more anal.

 

[BrotherDave]

Alternate idea to S&D or expanding the plant area:

You can stand wherever you'd like and do whatchalike BUT your throwing hand has to pass over your lie.

Why: This is a bit more in the spirit of traditional golf where the ball is the lie, golfers don't get to stick a foot down behind their lie, pick up their ball and straddle out to the side to hit it. B/c DG combines the ball and club into a disc, the hand is essentially the club head. Therefore, in keeping with the strictest purpose of the lie the club head (hand) should be in close proximity with where the previous throw landed. Basically, players would address the ball (disc).

Benefits:
*Greater premium on shot placement which increases effectiveness of course design and rough.
*Competitors only have to watch the hand of the thrower instead of simultaneously watching plant foot and hand (for release).
*Probably less capacity for gamesmanship.
*More relatable to non-disc golf watchers that are familiar with the vastly more understood ball golf.
*Scoring separation?

Negatives:
*Might complicate putting if traditional format is observed inside the circle.
*Still some room for interpretation in terms of proximity of hand to lie at release.
???

 

[JoakimBL]

In that case, you should also have your hand no more than 2 cm. over the thrown disc. Then we are talking about playing it where it lies. It does complicate throwing mechanics, and enforcement might take som getting used to.Maybe we should exhange the discs for balls, that would make it more golf like too. And maybe the bakets could be holes in the ground instead.

 

[Star Shark]

I voted to extend the length. Not by much though. Yes practice helps, but when I do it on long hole sometimes my toe barely knicks the mini and that could be called - its difficult to get that perfect spot.

BUT all together if it was just stay the same OR stand and deliver, I'd pick keep it the same. Try having fun on hole 8 at Highbridge Gold with that SnD rule.

This is what I was saying earlier in the thread. It's possible to have a completely legal plant, but tap the mini/disc on your heel pivot. Giving say 15" behind the lie would take care of that for most people.

 

[BrotherDave]

In that case, you should also have your hand no more than 2 cm. over the thrown disc. Then we are talking about playing it where it lies. It does complicate throwing mechanics, and enforcement might take som getting used to.Maybe we should exhange the discs for balls, that would make it more golf like too. And maybe the bakets could be holes in the ground instead.

This isn't very constructive criticism.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

It's not the size, but how well you use your lie that matters.