#21  
Old 06-15-2013, 01:36 PM
Dan Ensor's Avatar
Dan Ensor Dan Ensor is offline
Sophomore
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Paris, MO
Years Playing: 9.1
Courses Played: 62
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 4,456
Niced 82 Times in 59 Posts
Default

If you mark with a mini, you no longer have a disc to mark. If you take 3' from ob, you're no longer less than 3' from ob. If you take relief from casual water, you're not necessarily relieved from casual water. Not the same.
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-15-2013, 01:49 PM
Dan Ensor's Avatar
Dan Ensor Dan Ensor is offline
Sophomore
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Paris, MO
Years Playing: 9.1
Courses Played: 62
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 4,456
Niced 82 Times in 59 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
The RC has covered your scenario by defining a disc's "position" separate from lie. Your disc only has a 'position' until you declare it as your lie, meaning the place where you will take your stance, or legally relocate it to another position and declare it as your lie. So when you move back up to 5m, you don't have a lie yet since you still don't wish to take a stance there, just a position. I think the RC might need to improve the wording in the Obstacle Relief rule to use the words 'disc position' rather than 'lie' to be consistent with its position/lie definitions.
Once again, I'm being slightly fececious, but I do wish to take a stance there. Otherwise i wouldn't know/be able to show that my stance is in casual water.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-20-2013, 01:38 PM
Thumber's Avatar
Thumber Thumber is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Years Playing: 11.8
Posts: 1,693
Niced 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Take your shoes and socks off and get in there buttercup.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-20-2013, 01:45 PM
Dan Ensor's Avatar
Dan Ensor Dan Ensor is offline
Sophomore
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Paris, MO
Years Playing: 9.1
Courses Played: 62
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 4,456
Niced 82 Times in 59 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thumber View Post
Take your shoes and socks off and get in there buttercup.
Not legal. If the dress code is being enforced anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-20-2013, 02:00 PM
JC17393 JC17393 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Years Playing: 21.2
Courses Played: 144
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 7,047
Niced 2,543 Times in 1,065 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Ensor View Post
Not legal. If the dress code is being enforced anyway.
Not true. A player would be allowed to remove a shoe/sock temporarily to play a shot out of water. I would expect the time factor (30 seconds) would be more of a issue than the dress code in such a situation.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-21-2013, 02:15 AM
HawaiiJack HawaiiJack is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Courses Played: 19
Posts: 13
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Thanks to everyone who responded and I appreciate that some have a great deal of experience.
The hole in question was replayed today and again was found to be a long, linear bog along the right side of the fairway. After reviewing the rules and the discussions given above my group came to the following conclusions. I note that my play group includes a doctor, a lawyer, and an engineer. These guys make their living by interpreting specifications and intent.
1) Any rule has to be interpreted in light of what was intended. In the sport of folf it is intended that you play the designed obstacles of the course. Water not in a water hazard you are intended to get relief from. Getting relief implies not being penalized. Therefore the amount, degree, position, etc of water cannot incur a penalty at some times and not at others. Therefore landing in casual water never incurs a penalty, there are no exceptions to this rule.
2) Just as there is no clear and unambiguous way to correctly determine the distance of a hole there is similarly no clear and unambiguous way to determine line of play, consider a blind hole. Since it cannot be unambiguously determined it cannot be a primary determinant. Therefore the primary determinant in relocating a lie is nearest no closer to the hole.
3) When a player chooses to relocate a lie a change in altitude can occur. This change in altitude produces a Pythagorean change in distance to the hole, which in extreme cases could result in a shortening of the distance to the hole. Changes of this nature are too small to be practically considered relevant to the playing of folf. Pythagorean changes can similarly be considered too small to be relevant in a lateral direction.
With the applicable rules interpreted consideration was given to the particular case:
4) Relocation directly backwards to a dry lie would require a distance of 100 yards and move the lie from the 8th fairway all the way to the 6th green. This is absurd and not required. Relocation to the tee without a penalty stroke is still a penalty and therefore also absurd and unrequired. Therefore the best interpretation is a lateral relocation, nearest and no closer to the hole.
5) Since it is correct in the specific case to relocate laterally no closer to the hole it can be considered in other cases if relocating laterally is the most correct.

Again I appreciate that some of the responders have been playing folf a long time. However these guys have given reasoning to back up their interpretation and placement of the disc that seems a lot more clear-eyed and common sense based on the intent of the rule.
If someone wants to disagree I hope it will be along the lines of discussing where they think the logic is off rather than "I've been playing this game for forty years and it's right 'cause I said it was right and this is how I've always played it since back when some other dork told me this was how to play it and it'd be waaaay too hard for me to actually think about it and yer a f*king newb so yer a POS." You know what Methuselah, sometimes new ideas and interpretations come along that are better than old interpretations and actual progress occurs.
For everyone else I'd just say use this interpretation and increase your fun playing the game, which is why you're playing after all. On my course we'd probably push somebody into the bog if after fishing out your disc with a stick he told you to go back about as far as you can see to play your second shot or else go back to the tee and throw your third shot (with a good chance it goes back in the bog again). If the rules have been changed to speed up play they surely don't want you after good distance off the tee walking all the way back and throwing another tee shot.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-21-2013, 02:48 AM
allinpflop's Avatar
allinpflop allinpflop is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Years Playing: 11.5
Courses Played: 275
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 572
Niced 7 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Therefore the best interpretation is a lateral relocation, nearest and no closer to the hole.
5) Since it is correct in the specific case to relocate laterally no closer to the hole it can be considered in other cases if relocating laterally is the most correct.


This is not correct....the correct answer has been provided.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-21-2013, 02:50 AM
allinpflop's Avatar
allinpflop allinpflop is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Years Playing: 11.5
Courses Played: 275
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 572
Niced 7 Times in 2 Posts
Default

So, if your disc lands in standing water, and there's no dry spot within 5.0 m going back along the LOP from the basket through your disc, you're choices boil down to:

a) throw from the water: penalty is wet feet for the rest of the round, but no strokes
b) throw from more than 5m back along LOP: + 1 stroke penalty
c) rethrow from previous lie: + 1 stroke penalty

this is the correct ruling
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-21-2013, 03:48 AM
HawaiiJack HawaiiJack is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Courses Played: 19
Posts: 13
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by allinpflop View Post
So, if your disc lands in standing water, and there's no dry spot within 5.0 m going back along the LOP from the basket through your disc, you're choices boil down to:

a) throw from the water: penalty is wet feet for the rest of the round, but no strokes
b) throw from more than 5m back along LOP: + 1 stroke penalty
c) rethrow from previous lie: + 1 stroke penalty

this is the correct ruling
You're only saying "this is correct". It doesn't seem correct. And the guys have explained why their answer is much more logical. Can you take it any further?
Reply With Quote
 

  #30  
Old 06-21-2013, 04:49 AM
Mrlastway Mrlastway is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Sweden
Courses Played: 29
Posts: 42
Niced 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Imagine this scenario.

Player A lands in casual water.
Player A says that the casual water stretches too far back/is unplayable to go that way.
Player B disagrees an thinks that it is fairly dry a few meters back.
Player A says that he wants to relocate laterally because both can agree that spot is dry.

Sounds fair this far.

Only Player A's lie in the casual water is behind a Huge dense tree designed to be an obstacle.

Relocating laterally will give Player A a huge benefit compared to no casual water on that day. Therefore laterally isn't just relief but also a boon.


Giving the options of laterally relocating your lie all manner of moist spots will be argued to be casual water in order to laterally relocating the lie. The only fair thing in this scenario would be to follow the rules as they are today giving player A no benefit from having landed in casual water which doesn't, if the course isn't badly designed, cover the whole fairway and thus can be avoided.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OB Vs Casual Relief Zanguini Rules Questions & Discussion 4 07-08-2018 01:23 PM
Casual water relief interpretation geoloseth Rules Questions & Discussion 17 05-02-2017 03:57 PM
Casual Water ? Van1 Rules Questions & Discussion 7 07-23-2012 01:23 AM
casual water tribute Jar-El General Disc Golf Chat 3 02-24-2012 01:07 PM
Casual Water RickBrierly Technique & Strategy 6 06-17-2011 01:01 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.