-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
2011 Rules Change! NO WEDGIES!
- Thread starter OJnBasquits
- Start date
biscoe
* Ace Member *
i once saw a local pro make 2 wedgies in the same round in a pdga event- boy was i pissed at dga...
imo the changing of the rule just muddies the waters on this one. the real change which needed to be made needed to be made 20+ years ago which would've been requiring basket manufacturers to produce product that didn't allow the damn wedgies... of course that cat is way too far out of the bag for it to matter at this point.
despite the fact that it would reward more bad shots i believe the rule should be that any disc supported above the ground by any part of the target should be good, DROTs and all. simplicity is good.
It's boo because it's wishy washy and now places added value on blind holes where it it goes in through the top or side it is ok.
It also opens up the possibility of poor sportsmanship where counting a wedgie could come down to whether or not your card likes you.
jcf5083
Double Eagle Member
^This! More options=better score :thmbup:
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2008
- Messages
- 4,783
I also agree with several of the points made above.
When I start explaining all the variations of allowed and disallowed putts to a noob, it makes their head spin.
The best rule is often the simplest and most intuitive.
"If it is supported by the basket, in the basket or above the basket, it counts." Would simplify the rules and make it more intuitive.
The new rule is an improvement in simplicity, but does not go far enough.
jcf5083
Double Eagle Member
Now let's march to PDGA HQ and give them hell!
Not sure if I agree with that Bill, that makes things more subjective not less. It's really hard to tell if the disc grazes the edge of that zone or not, and hard to tell if you hit above or below that mid line at the top. I agree with biscoe, supported by the basket, chains, or top should be in.
Ummm no Bill, it shouldn't be that simple. That's like saying if the basketball or golf ball breaks the plane of the rim (or the cup) it should count as good. Can't buy it.
I think it's long overdue that wedgies are NOT GOOD. The simplicity of our target is that you are "SUPPOSED" to enter the target between the bottom of the chain assembly, and the top of the basket. And it's only an anomaly that sticks in the side or falls through the top.
In 30 years I have seen a total of one wedgie ace - it was obvious the disc stuck in the outside of the basket even though we didn't see it - it didn't bounce off the pole and come back through the front (we would have heard something other than "thunk". The whole notion that it's difficult to tell whether or not a disc enterred the target correctly is pretty lame if you ask me.
In that same 30 years - I have seen countless discs stuck in the side of the basket that were plainly just low putts that stuck because the disc was soft enough to bend.
Completing a hole should be about hitting the target. between two points. and with sufficient touch that it doesn't bounce out. In is in, on is not in. simple enough?
I think it's long overdue that wedgies are NOT GOOD. The simplicity of our target is that you are "SUPPOSED" to enter the target between the bottom of the chain assembly, and the top of the basket. And it's only an anomaly that sticks in the side or falls through the top.
In 30 years I have seen a total of one wedgie ace - it was obvious the disc stuck in the outside of the basket even though we didn't see it - it didn't bounce off the pole and come back through the front (we would have heard something other than "thunk". The whole notion that it's difficult to tell whether or not a disc enterred the target correctly is pretty lame if you ask me.
In that same 30 years - I have seen countless discs stuck in the side of the basket that were plainly just low putts that stuck because the disc was soft enough to bend.
Completing a hole should be about hitting the target. between two points. and with sufficient touch that it doesn't bounce out. In is in, on is not in. simple enough?
grodney
* Ace Member *
Exactly.
The SMALL number of DROTs and wedgies allowed is far outbalanced by the simplicity that would be achieved.
Sad, yet mockingly amusing, to see them go the other way with this rule and actually make it worse and more complicated at the same time.
joshmo65
Eagle Member
I had a wedgie putt once from about 25' out. Didn't throw it hard at all, but I used a super soft magnet and the disc was wet on the rim. The disc didn't stick in the basket, it actually went through it and stayed on the inside. It was so weird because it didn't even really slow down and I had to ask the other people on the card if it actually went in through the basket.
That should be breaks the plane and stays.
I agree about wedgies but the current rule just allows them in certain situations which is no good. In my version the disc has to have a part touching the catching zone to count, that is the best any of us can do without installing cameras or having officials on every blind hole.
The real solution is to have smooth sided solid baskets and no entry from the top but the organization does not have enough clout to mandate it.
There I fixed that for ya.
Your version doesn't change anything. Bad shots are still rewarded.
Not to mention every disc golf course would then be out of regulation until they replace baskets.
I do agree with your assessment though Bill. Anything "held" within that plane would be acceptable.
That would be great, but it would also greatly increase the cost of baskets, having solid metal rather than the current set up would mean a lot more weight too. Newer baskets are starting to have smaller gaps at least, and if that happens the wedgie problem will take care of itself eventually.
Chicken wire would "retrofit" all bottoms and I am sure some entrapenural type could make a plastic or fiberglass dome that could affix to the top.
Yes it would cost money and yes it is probably too far gone to do so but obviously manufacturers do not care about the legitimacy of the sport or they could have done this a couple decades ago....like...oh say when the rules were written?
Yes it would cost money and yes it is probably too far gone to do so but obviously manufacturers do not care about the legitimacy of the sport or they could have done this a couple decades ago....like...oh say when the rules were written?
gcr_russell
* Ace Member *
There's no way this quip about the manufacturers has any grain of truth to it. Take how passionate you are about DG ( and clearly with all you've done, especially for women, that's a lot) and multiply it by 20-30 years of dedication to the advancement of the sport. Cmon, I expect better out of you then his sort of comment.
Similar threads
