A Fun List of Odd Rule Uses

[coupe]

Not if you're invoking optional relief and taking a penalty to throw from behind or beside (depending on where the target is to determine line of play) the tee pad, which is what I think Steve was getting at in bringing the topic up in the first place.

Except he raised it in relation to a discussion of casual relief:

Originally Posted by JC17393 View Post

I don't know. Most people are aware that they don't have to stand in a puddle to make a throw, and if they aren't aware, they certainly ask if the situation arises because no one wants to stand in a puddle if they can avoid it. And a puddle (or other casual water) is the most frequent casual obstacle that is impractical to move.

Not many people know you can take relief when your lie is the teeing area, just like if your lie is behind a marker.

If he meant optional relief, he should have specified it.

 

[JC17393]

Except he raised it in relation to a discussion of casual relief:



If he meant optional relief, he should have specified it.

Well, if a tee is under water, and the water isn't designated as OB (how can it be if it's on the tee?), then it's casual and wouldn't a player be able to take relief from it so as to not stand in it? How is a big puddle of water on the tee different than a big puddle of water on the fairway? Casual water is casual water.

But you wouldn't necessarily be able to take enough relief to do as krupicka was suggesting and use the rule to get yourself an angle on an otherwise unthrow-able line. You'd take the nearest lie that gets you out of the casual water. It could be two inches off the back of the pad or it could be six feet in back of the pad depending on the depth and size of the puddle.

Of course, if a tee is under water like that, it probably didn't happen suddenly and the TD should be aware of it and can/should designate an alternative teeing area, which is why you'd likely never have to take casual relief from a tee. But the rule does allow for it if the situation arises.

 

[DavidSauls]

What if I want to mark my disc, with a mini, before attempting a jump, because I don't want to step on/or land on a disc?

Troublemaker.

Carry an old disc that you don't throw, to use as a "marker" disc in replacement of the disc on the ground. (The Czar will have to amend the rule to allow replacement discs anytime, not just when re-throwing a disc).

 

[krupicka]

So if there is a puddle on the rear portion of the tee pad but the front of the tee pad is dry, would you allow casual relief behind the tee box?

 

[teemkey]

I find the entire existence and use of mini markers to be strange, and a bit silly. No longer mandated, of course, except when relocating the lie. It looks like we're pretending to be golfers, overlooking the fact that unlike golf balls on a green, our disc on the ground is hardly an obstacle to other discs being thrown. Why not dispense with the whole thing and throw from behind our disc as it lies---or replace it if we want to throw that disc again?

What's really strange is that the mini is placed in front of the disc.

 

[JC17393]

So if there is a puddle on the rear portion of the tee pad but the front of the tee pad is dry, would you allow casual relief behind the tee box?

No. I'd say the entirety of the box would have to be flooded in order to allow relief off of it. If that means the player has to cram himself into the front corner or a back corner or stand still directly in the center of the pad, that's what he should do.

It's an unlikely scenario, especially if it exists prior to a round and can be accounted for by the TD, but that doesn't mean casual relief wouldn't apply if it were to happen.

 

[threej21]

Im not seeing where a lost disc is worse than OB....

If I threw my drive OB, my next shot would be shooting 3. Original throw, penalty, now shooting 3rd shot.

If my drive is lost, I would have to retee and I would be shooting 3. Original throw, penalty, now shooting 3rd shot.

I guess it could be considered worse based on that I have to retee when my disc is lost and if its OB I can take my next shot from the last place it was in bounds....is that what ya meant by lost disc is worse than OB?

 

[Cgkdisc]

Plus, you definitely lost your disc with a Lost Disc penalty and you might not lose it with an OB penalty.

 

[Steve West]

No. I'd say the entirety of the box would have to be flooded in order to allow relief off of it. If that means the player has to cram himself into the front corner or a back corner or stand still directly in the center of the pad, that's what he should do.

It's an unlikely scenario, especially if it exists prior to a round and can be accounted for by the TD, but that doesn't mean casual relief wouldn't apply if it were to happen.

I was referring to casual relief (the first part of QA30), but optional relief is also available, covered by the same question, and also not known to a lot of players.

QA 30: Unplayable or Unsafe Tees
Q:

What can I do about an unplayable, unsafe, or poorly marked tee?
A:

If the problem with the tee is a casual obstacle that cannot be easily removed (such as standing water), you can take casual relief up to 5m behind the tee. No relief is provided for other adverse tee conditions, though you can place a towel down to provide traction if the tee is slippery. If you're desperate, you can use the Optional Relief rule to move back along the line of play as far as you like, at the cost of one penalty throw. If the tee is poorly marked, locate an official or a local player in other groups if possible to help identify the tee area boundaries. Applicable Rules: 803.01 Obstacles and Relief; 801.03 Artificial Devices.

As for having all your supporting points on the teeing area, that's a good point to explore. I think if you have taken relief, since you must mark it, then your lie is now the lie marked by the marker, and no longer the teeing area. Therefore, you play it as any other non-teeing area lie.

I don't know that the entire tee pad needs to be covered with water. A broken branch does not need to cover ALL of your lie for you to get relief from it.

 

[coupe]

As for having all your supporting points on the teeing area, that's a good point to explore. I think if you have taken relief, since you must mark it, then your lie is now the lie marked by the marker, and no longer the teeing area. Therefore, you play it as any other non-teeing area lie.

The problem being, how do you determine where the lie is to be marked, since, except within the teeing area or designated drop zone, the lie is determined by the position of the thrown disc on the playing surface (802.03)?

 

[DavidSauls]

I guess it could be considered worse based on that I have to retee when my disc is lost and if its OB I can take my next shot from the last place it was in bounds....is that what ya meant by lost disc is worse than OB?

Yes. If it was your drive, the lost disc could have you backing up 300 feet (600 feet on the internet).

O.B. gives you your choice of where it was last inbounds, or re-throw. 99% of the time, players choose where it was land inbounds, a sure indication that a re-throw is a worse option.

 

[coupe]

O.B. gives you your choice of where it was last inbounds, or re-throw. 99% of the time, players choose where it was land inbounds, a sure indication that a re-throw is a worse option.

Assuming that those players are even aware that they have an option other than throwing from where it was last in bounds, which, may not be a safe assumption.

 

[DavidSauls]

Assuming that those players are even aware that they have an option other than throwing from where it was last in bounds, which, may not be a safe assumption.

True, but if they were I doubt it would make much difference. Maybe 98% would throw from where they last went out.

I routinely play courses with LOTS of O.B., reachable with drives, putts, and everything in between. Re-throws are pretty rare.

 

[JC17393]

I don't know that the entire tee pad needs to be covered with water. A broken branch does not need to cover ALL of your lie for you to get relief from it.

I believe it does in order to merit relief off the designated teeing area. If there is a place to legally take a stance on the pad that isn't obscured by an unmovable casual obstacle, I believe the player is obligated to take the stance there without relief.

But let's grant that you can take relief from a puddle at the front of the pad (assume a straight hole), the rules dictate that the player must take the nearest available lie on the LOP no closer to the target. If that nearest lie on the LOP is still on the teeing surface, why would the player be granted any further relief? Therefore if the player wants to relocate his lie via casual relief to a location not on the designated tee, the entire tee would have to be obscured by the unmovable casual obstacle.

 

[Steve West]

I believe it does in order to merit relief off the designated teeing area. If there is a place to legally take a stance on the pad that isn't obscured by an unmovable casual obstacle, I believe the player is obligated to take the stance there without relief.

But let's grant that you can take relief from a puddle at the front of the pad (assume a straight hole), the rules dictate that the player must take the nearest available lie on the LOP no closer to the target. If that nearest lie on the LOP is still on the teeing surface, why would the player be granted any further relief? Therefore if the player wants to relocate his lie via casual relief to a location not on the designated tee, the entire tee would have to be obscured by the unmovable casual obstacle.

How about if only the back half were covered? Do you think the player could take relief back off the end of the tee pad to the nearest dry spot?

 

[JC17393]

How about if only the back half were covered? Do you think the player could take relief back off the end of the tee pad to the nearest dry spot?

Already answered.

I believe it does in order to merit relief off the designated teeing area. If there is a place to legally take a stance on the pad that isn't obscured by an unmovable casual obstacle, I believe the player is obligated to take the stance there without relief.

 

[JeremyKShort]

OB Relief - If you are less than a meter from OB, you are given (perp.) relief up to one meter away, which you can instead use to move your disc some distance CLOSER to the OB to result in a more favorable lie.

This seems correct. There is another thread where this has been argued extensively.

2 Meter Penalty - Even when the two meter rule is in effect, you can land much higher up and still be safe.... provided the top of the basket (a legal playing surface) is less than two meters directly below your disc.

When you land on top of the basket your lie is marked beneath the basket. It is not a legal playing surface, it is an obstacle you must mark under.

Disc Selection - If you want to use another disc, no rule prevents you from adding to your bag mid-round. You could find a disc, borrow a disc, or even have an Amazon drone deliver it to you during your round (assuming you did it without distracting other players and marked distinguishingly prior to throwing it).

True

The Crane Putt - This one, you gotta see to believe... 3:05 in THIS VIDEO.

This seems true as well. I disagree with example c-1. You can balance on an object behind the lie, but you have to demonstrate balance, which falling over does not do.

The Optional Rethrow - At any time, for any reason, you can rethrow from the same spot with a 1 throw penalty. If your 10' putt rolled 150' down a huge hill and into a lake, this rule is for you.

Most underutilized rule in the book.

Using the Terrain - If something (tree, fence, etc) is behind your lie and your weight doesn't make it move, you could legally use it to hang forwards over your lie and gain a very small distance.

True

Failing to Hole Out - If your disc is not touching the basket because it is resting on top of another disc, you are not yet holed out.

The wording of the rule makes this true. But if you ever call this, you are a grade A douche of the highest magnitude, and you deserve every second of the sad pathetic lonely life you live.

Double Mandos - While the 'missed line' for a single mando is perpendicular to the line of play to the basket, the rule for a double mando is very different: it connects the two double mando markers and extends to infinity. Theoretically, if the two markers were 'nearly' in line with the basket, you could have legally (i.e. not passed the imaginary line) parked your shot 10' from the pin and still have to backtrack to go through the markers before trying to hole out.

But why would anyone do this?

 

[Cgkdisc]

I forgot to use the OB rethrow option at Worlds today. Doinked a 17' putt which rolled 35 ft down the hill into the park road, rolled down the road 20 ft before coming back IB then squirted back OB. I threw from last point IB with a 50' uphill putt rather than retrying the 17 footer. Doh!

 

[PhattD]

This seems true as well. I disagree with example c-1. You can balance on an object behind the lie, but you have to demonstrate balance, which falling over does not do.

The rule isn't "demonstrate balance" The rule is "Demonstrate balance before proceeding beyond your mark." You can flop around all you want, behind your mark, as long as you at some point demonstrate balance before proceeding past it.

 

[JeremyKShort]

The rule isn't "demonstrate balance" The rule is "Demonstrate balance before proceeding beyond your mark." You can flop around all you want, behind your mark, as long as you at some point demonstrate balance before proceeding past it.

I've looked the rule over carefully. I think, by the letter of the law you may be right, which means that this is probably an extremely poorly written rule. The point is supposed to be that in the throwing motion that you need to keep balance. If falling on your ass, standing up and pausing for a moment then proceeding is enough to satisfy demonstrating full control of balance before advancing to the target, then the rule is asinine. That is absolutely NOT what they were trying to do here, and we all know this. But I think poor wording may allow for it.