2018 Sula Open

[mgamache8]

True, but the scores in relation to par for the winner and the top card were a lot higher than we're used to seeing on many U.S. DGPT courses by top card players. It was a tough course.

Having said that, Hole #4 reached the point where "tough" becomes "not a fair test". Reminds me of the USGA going way overboard on the U.S. Open courses.

I agree. Some of those holes seemed unfair from the video. Par ended up around 980 golf.
Also keep in mind that barsby won by playing 1030s golf, not the 1060s golf that we're used to seeing out of the winner.

I think it was a hard course, but nowhere near how hard the averages made it seem

Then again, I wasn't there. This is just from looking at the video and the stats

 

[DiscJunkie]

Right, so it was actually a foot fault?

Yes, foot fault.
There is nothing in the PDGA Rules about "falling"/stepping forward inside the circle when the disc is at rest in the basket.
The rule is that inside the 10m circle, after the disc release (putt) you must demonstrate complete balance behind the marker/lie before you can step forward over your marker/lie to retrieve the disc.
Anything less than complete balance is a foot fault.
See Below:

806.01 Putting Area

Last updated: Sunday, December 31, 2017 - 18:17
A.Any throw made from within 10 meters of the target, as measured from the rear of the marker disc to the base of the target, is a putt.
B.After having released a putt, the player must demonstrate full control of balance behind the marker disc before advancing toward the target. A player who fails to do so has committed a stance violation and receives one penalty throw.
Nothing about it coming to rest in the basket. That's from a different rule.

 

[pauldst]

If you stay upright long enough for the disc to come to rest in the basket, then that is arguably long enough to have demonstrated balance.

 

[JC17393]

If you stay upright long enough for the disc to come to rest in the basket, then that is arguably long enough to have demonstrated balance.

If we assume one is putting a disc at least 10 mph (probably faster the further one is from the target), the disc is going at least 14.6 feet per second, so most putts in the circle are getting from release to the basket in under 2 seconds. Even tacking on another second for the disc to settle out of the chains and into the basket proper, that's still not a lot of time.

The process of demonstrating balance doesn't really begin at the instant of release either. Typically one's putting motion includes a follow through (with the hand/arm) and a ceasing of forward momentum after the disc is released but before balance can be established. That's all overlapping with the time the disc is in the air, reducing that 2-3 seconds of potential "balanced" time even more.

Waiting for the disc to come to rest before advancing is a reasonable rule of thumb, but it can never really be a definitive part of determining whether balance was established before a player stepped/fell past their marker toward the target.

 

[SD86]

If you stay upright long enough for the disc to come to rest in the basket, then that is arguably long enough to have demonstrated balance.

No, and that is because they're separate things. The disc in the basket and the thrower being balanced are not and should not be related in any way, and the wording of the rules support that. The comment on the video was dead wrong, unintentionally wrong, but still wrong.

 

[ToddL]

I don't mind hole 4 too much. If the soccer field was a lake, we'd all think it was the best damn hole on tour. Instead, it's a field that makes the hole even easier.

Hole #4 was an island hole with barriers on the near side to prevent rollers making the green, and no barriers on the far side to increase difficulty (I'm guessing here). it was also said that the course was not designed with wind in mind.........but it is right next to the ocean so that is just poor planning. also on hole#4, if you don't make it inbounds you must retee. So no drop zone, which means they needed to get approval from a PDGA Tour manager to make it legal.

I think you have a minor misunderstanding of the rules. As far as I can tell, the rules are that you play normal OB rules from the tee and along the fairway. You are restricted from the last-spot-IB play on the green until you have come to rest on the green. You are not forced to retee at any point, and you're not forced to play from your previous lie at any point.

The fact that the TD has restricted the last-spot-IB from the island does indeed require a waiver from the PDGA, but that waiver doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the lack of a drop zone. The far end of the fairway is about 50' away from the island, which is absolutely close enough *if* you play it smart. If you try to throw it on the island from 300' away, I have no sympathy.

Play *golf*. Quit trying to be a hero. You can get a tap-in 4 with three 150' throws with a Roc. If you choose to try to get the birdie, you deserve your punishment when you fail.

 

[Cgkdisc]

It appeared that the design "failure" on that hole might have been the barrier in front of the green instead of the back, especially with the rain. Give players a chance to slide onto the green and potentially stop skip and sliders on the backside versus having to keep a long throw elevated just enough to make the green and subsequently slide off. That level of precision was too much to expect even the highest level players to consistently execute and the penalty was essentially 2 throws versus 1.

 

[ToddL]

It appeared that the design "failure" on that hole might have been the barrier in front of the green instead of the back, especially with the rain. Give players a chance to slide onto the green and potentially stop skip and sliders on the backside versus having to keep a long throw elevated just enough to make the green and subsequently slide off. That level of precision was too much to expect even the highest level players to consistently execute and the penalty was essentially 2 throws versus 1.

I'll grant that.

But on the other hand, if you played 2 shots down the fairway and then went for the island, I don't think the wall would have been a problem. The wall was an issue for the guys who went for the island on their 2nd shot. It's hard to stick a landing like that with a 250' throw. It's a lot easier to stick that landing with a 100-150' throw.

 

[Cgkdisc]

I'll grant that.

But on the other hand, if you played 2 shots down the fairway and then went for the island, I don't think the wall would have been a problem. The wall was an issue for the guys who went for the island on their 2nd shot. It's hard to stick a landing like that with a 250' throw. It's a lot easier to stick that landing with a 100-150' throw.

The parallel is how ball golf greens tend to be tilted toward the tee to give players at least a chance to land long range shots. Although sometimes you see false fronts, you don't see very many greens that are tilted away from the tee. I think a similar "approach" is needed in DG design, especially when a penalty is the consequence for failure versus just a throw landing farther from the pin.

 

[SD86]

It appeared that the design "failure" on that hole might have been the barrier in front of the green instead of the back, especially with the rain. Give players a chance to slide onto the green and potentially stop skip and sliders on the backside versus having to keep a long throw elevated just enough to make the green and subsequently slide off. That level of precision was too much to expect even the highest level players to consistently execute and the penalty was essentially 2 throws versus 1.

I'd have put a barrier wall around the entire green, front and back. They have to accurately throw onto the green, but they'd have the backstop. That would be a fair test. The front wall and no back wall was IMHO 'not a fair test'.