On any other course the roots and stumps and hardpan and thick brambles inside the circle would be viewed as negatives. At Dela it's "awwwww you just got DeLa'd, bro!!" and everyone claps about it.
-
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)
2018 Master Cup Santa Cruz, CA
- Thread starter brutalbrutus
- Start date
On any other course the roots and stumps and hardpan and thick brambles inside the circle would be viewed as negatives. At Dela it's "awwwww you just got DeLa'd, bro!!" and everyone claps about it.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2009
- Messages
- 6,855
Throwing two or three?
I believe in discarding the result of the illegal stance no matter what, so if you foot fault on the tee, you'd re-tee throwing two.
Major Tomahawk
Eagle Member
My interpretation of the new rules has me believing that there are no more re-tees. It's a one-throw penalty from wherever your disc lands. So Ricky had two separate penalties on one throw.
A miss-tee is the same as a foot-fault. Beueller???
A miss-tee is the same as a foot-fault. Beueller???
Yes, the new rules are that there are no more re-throws. It is a one-throw penalty and you play the disc as is. I was only expressing my opinion that I don't like that particular aspect of the rule change.
So Ricky foot faulted and the throw landed in a hazard (one where you play it as it lies with a penalty). He took two separate penalties for it, but by rule he should have only taken one.
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
As a cross check, you can see Ricky indicated two penalties on hole 15 in the UDisc stats.
krupicka
Double Eagle Member
QA-OB-6: A player in my group foot-faulted and was called on it (and seconded). His throw went OB. Does he get a warning, a penalty, or two penalties?
A player's first stance violation results in a penalty throw. In this case, there were multiple violations. Normally, the first violation to occur is the one that counts. In this case, that's the foot fault (though it doesn't really matter as it's one penalty throw either way). There's no re-throw, so the disc is played as OB. Since a player cannot receive penalty throws for multiple violations on a single throw, there's just one penalty throw.
A player's first stance violation results in a penalty throw. In this case, there were multiple violations. Normally, the first violation to occur is the one that counts. In this case, that's the foot fault (though it doesn't really matter as it's one penalty throw either way). There's no re-throw, so the disc is played as OB. Since a player cannot receive penalty throws for multiple violations on a single throw, there's just one penalty throw.
Royalhghnss
Double Eagle Member
I realize this is 100% ridiculous. But couldn't you start your runup behind your disc, and just keep running until you're next to the basket, drop it in, and then be assessed a one stroke penalty, but your make counts?
I'm clearly overlooking something. Help me out here internet.
Royalhghnss
Double Eagle Member
In non-rules news. Round 2 part 2 will be out when youtube gets its **** together. Round 3 later this evening (Zoe stepped in for Kona who had to travel early).
Last edited:
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
I think Misplay 811-B applies here. You would technically be playing from the wrong lie since you didn't really take the stance prior to releasing the disc until right at the basket even though you started your run-up on your lie. If your group corrected you before continuing to next hole, you could come back and make a correct throw from your lie and get a one shot penalty. If your group thought that was a legit move and an official later discovered you did this misplay then you get the 2-shot penalty.
Last edited:
I'd call that a deliberate misplay and disqualify the player (811.E).
"Types of misplay: b. Thrown from a lie other than that established by the thrown disc"
I don't know what the hell lie you were playing from when you ran 100' past your marker, but it sure as hell was the lie that was established by the thrown disc.
Also competition manual 3.03: "Cheating: a willful attempt to circumvent the rules of play"
DQ for circumventing the rules of play?
I'd say if you're that far from your lie when you release, it's simply a practice throw rather than a stance violation.
brutalbrutus
* Ace Member *
Putt for D'oh
Double Eagle Member
Its kinda funny that I think DeLa has obviously been the inspiration for many of the Northern California courses and a lot of these steep hillside greens, blind drives where it can feel like a coin flip if it is parked or worse trouble than you can get into on the worst shank on many courses roots and stumps and brambles... all typical of 3 of my 5 closest courses and one of those its not typical would be if the property allowed it, instead just 4 of the holes. For me DeLa is just the epitome of that design.
Something I have said many times about my home course and then repeated about one of the other courses close by that is even more so this way then when I played Dela it is 100% true it isn't about getting lucky, but throwing good shots and avoiding bad luck. It still rewards good play and very much punishes bad play, and sometimes $#!t happens but that unlucky stuff is potential for everyone and how you react and recover is really what can make or break a round.... oh and sometimes you do get good luck to make up for it, like hitting chains and getting a drop in birdie when I shanked a drive on 8b and got TWO!! tree kicks to the good rather than a lost disc. Shots like that can have you shrug off the weird things.
I don't know about that: while 801.02.H does stipulate that only one penalty should apply to a throw or action subject to multiple penalties (in this instance, it would be the foot fault since it occurred first), given the nature of hazard as defined in 806.05 and given that the subsequent throw is made from within a hazard area, I think that the case can be made that the penalty for hazard is to be applied prospectively rather than retrospectively, i.e., to the subsequent throw from within the hazard, rather than to the throw that established a position in the hazard.
Alternatively, the case can be made that 806.5 penalizes the position established by the thrown disc rather than the throw per se.
I think that this circumstance illustrates the propensity of the RC to tweak rules in isolation, i.e., without considering how those tweaks affect other rules.
FTFY.
I do concur on rethrow + penalty.
We're talking about stance violations here, aren't we? That's all I'm referring to, not the whole rule book.
brutalbrutus
* Ace Member *
Ricky actually had 2 foot faults in the final round. Both were on cart path tees where you couldn't cross over a seem in the concrete. The first one, Philo called but nobody seconded it. I looked at it a couple times, I think it was a foot fault but it was close enough I can see where the other two guys didn't call it, if they didn't have a good look at it. You would think after the first one that he would have paid more attention to his footwork on the next one...
All in all, i'd say Ricky and Josh are lucky someone didn't shoot hot on the second card or that Paul was that far back starting the day. Nobody on the lead card played well. Ricky made a couple putts or would have had a 1000 rated round. Anthon had his chance to take it multiple times and shanked a few drives and/or had a couple bad bounces...
All in all, i'd say Ricky and Josh are lucky someone didn't shoot hot on the second card or that Paul was that far back starting the day. Nobody on the lead card played well. Ricky made a couple putts or would have had a 1000 rated round. Anthon had his chance to take it multiple times and shanked a few drives and/or had a couple bad bounces...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2011
- Messages
- 34
That's spelled seam.
OK, that's just silly. Of course he made a couple putts. He always makes a couple putts, that's why he's rated 1049!
SD86
Banned
Reminds me of an old "Peanuts" cartoon, where Schroeder says "if I'm good, Santa will bring me presents, and if I'm bad, Santa will still bring me presents. Right?"
And Charlie Brown says "Wrong!... but I'm not sure where."
(I think the point the others made about intentionally misplaying are correct)
Last edited:
