Abandon lost disc throw and provisional?

[Doofenshmirtz]

This came up in a round yesterday. Player throws disc that might be OB. Player chooses to throw a provisional in the event that the disc is OB. Provisional throw (from drop zone) also goes B. When we search, we cannot find the first disc. Player then chooses to declare the first disc lost, abandon the first throw and re-tee. Two player, including me, suggest that it would be best to play out both discs due to the possibility that the player may have to choose between abandonment and the provisional. In the end, either way resulted in the same score so it didn't really matter. But can the first throw be abandoned after a provisional is taken?

 

[Cgkdisc]

809.02 Provisional throws are used:
1. To save time. A player may declare a provisional throw any time:
a. The status of a disc cannot be readily determined because it may be lost, out-of-bounds, or have missed a mandatory; and,

The key point is whether the wording for the provisional (a) allows the player to specify the only condition when the provisional would be used, i.e., OB only, or (b) if the wording indicates that the provisional must be used when "the status of a disc cannot be readily determined" regardless of how that happened.

I believe (b) is the correct interpretation meaning that the provisional throw had to be used in this example since the status of the disc could not be determined. In essence, the player's choice to throw a provisional precluded the ability to later abandon the first throw in the event the provisional had to be used. However, if the disc were found, the provisional isn't used. So, if the player wanted to abandon that lie for some reason they could do so and throw their third from the tee.

Note that if losing a disc or landing OB are relatively common off the tee, it makes sense to simply specify that players play from the drop zone if disc is lost (805.03D) or OB.

 

[dmoore1998]

I tend to be of the belief that if you throw a shot that looks likely enough to be OB that you need to throw a provisional, that you can't declare a lost disc. You don't have to find discs that go OB, you were reasonably sure enough it was OB that you threw a provisional, if you can't find it in bounds then we can assume it went OB.

 

[Doofenshmirtz]

I tend to be of the belief that if you throw a shot that looks likely enough to be OB that you need to throw a provisional, that you can't declare a lost disc. You don't have to find discs that go OB, you were reasonably sure enough it was OB that you threw a provisional, if you can't find it in bounds then we can assume it went OB.

Well, I have to disagree with this. In this particular case, the disc hit a tree near the OB line. So, although there was a distinct possibility that the disc went OB, there was also the possibility that it hadn't. A provisional was thrown from the drop zone to save time. Then we couldn't find the first disc.

I do think that you have to choose whether to throw a provisional or abandon the throw. But I can definitely see the argument that, because the provisional is really just a courtesy to everyone, that if the purpose of the provisional is made moot (potential OB in this case), then the first throw could be abandoned. I guess my technical question would be whether the "or" in the rule is necessarily inclusive or whether the player can limit the purpose of the provisional to his/her intended purpose, i.e., to only an OB disc and not a lost disc if the status is not readily determinable from the tee.

One potential complicating factor in this case is that if the disc was lost and not presumed OB, then the next throw should be from the tee anyway. The drop zone is for OB throws, not lost ones. But, if the call is to abandon the throw instead of declaring it lost and re-teeing, would that change the analysis. I can see where abandoning the first throw could also be a courtesy to keep the group from having to continue searching for a disc and waste more time.

 

[Steve West]

809.02 Provisional throws are used:
1. To save time. A player may declare a provisional throw any time:
a. The status of a disc cannot be readily determined because it may be lost, out-of-bounds, or have missed a mandatory; and,

The key point is whether the wording for the provisional (a) allows the player to specify the only condition when the provisional would be used, i.e., OB only, or (b) if the wording indicates that the provisional must be used when "the status of a disc cannot be readily determined" regardless of how that happened.

I believe (b) is the correct interpretation meaning that the provisional throw had to be used in this example since the status of the disc could not be determined. In essence, the player's choice to throw a provisional precluded the ability to later abandon the first throw in the event the provisional had to be used. However, if the disc were found, the provisional isn't used. So, if the player wanted to abandon that lie for some reason they could do so and throw their third from the tee.

Note that if losing a disc or landing OB are relatively common off the tee, it makes sense to simply specify that players play from the drop zone if disc is lost (805.03D) or OB.

The status of the disc was determined. It is a Lost Disc.

Besides, 1.a.tells you when you can declare a provisional. It is not the part that says when you must play from that provisional. That is covered by the part after 1.b. which says: "The thrower then continues play from whichever of the two throws is deemed by the group or an Official to have resulted in the correct lie."

If a player wants to say: "This will be my re-tee if we can't find that disc", and the disc is lost, then the correct lie was the re-tee and the player continues from where that throw landed.

It would not be fair, nor encourage provisional throws, if the rule forced the player to play from the re-tee if the disc was found OB.

As to the original question, in this case first throw cannot be abandoned after the provisional because that first throw was no longer the correct lie to play from. When the first throw was declared lost, the provisional (in case of lost disc) became the correct lie - just as if the player had made the first throw, gone to look, declared it lost, then went back to re-tee. That re-tee went OB and the player should have proceeded from there.

 

[Doofenshmirtz]

As to the original question, in this case first throw cannot be abandoned after the provisional because that first throw was no longer the correct lie to play from. When the first throw was declared lost, the provisional (in case of lost disc) became the correct lie - just as if the player had made the first throw, gone to look, declared it lost, then went back to re-tee. That re-tee went OB and the player should have proceeded from there.

This is obviously wrong. The provisional was taken from the drop zone for OB and was not a "re-tee." If the disc is lost, the player must re-tee because the disc was not determined to be OB and therefore the drop zone was not the correct lie from which to throw the second shot.

Interestingly, the purpose of the rule would be thwarted in this case if the player had to include both the possibility of a lost disc and an OB disc in throwing a provisional, because, in that event, two provisionals would need to have been thrown in this case. It looks like the definition of a drop zone gives me a way to address this by making it apply to both lost discs and OB discs.

 

[Cgkdisc]

The status of the disc was determined. It is a Lost Disc.

Besides, 1.a.tells you when you can declare a provisional. It is not the part that says when you must play from that provisional. That is covered by the part after 1.b. which says: "The thrower then continues play from whichever of the two throws is deemed by the group or an Official to have resulted in the correct lie."

If a player wants to say: "This will be my re-tee if we can't find that disc", and the disc is lost, then the correct lie was the re-tee and the player continues from where that throw landed.

It would not be fair, nor encourage provisional throws, if the rule forced the player to play from the re-tee if the disc was found OB.

As to the original question, in this case first throw cannot be abandoned after the provisional because that first throw was no longer the correct lie to play from. When the first throw was declared lost, the provisional (in case of lost disc) became the correct lie - just as if the player had made the first throw, gone to look, declared it lost, then went back to re-tee. That re-tee went OB and the player should have proceeded from there.

The rule needs to clarify that a provisional can be thrown that is only applicable if a specific condition occurs since using the OR logic in the "status not determined" statement implies that the provisional is used if any one of those conditions is true. Part of the problem is that "lost disc" is a general condition that might result any time a specific condition is the reason for throwing a provisional whether OB, missed mando or disc above 2m when invoked.

 

[PMantle]

This is obviously wrong. The provisional was taken from the drop zone for OB and was not a "re-tee." If the disc is lost, the player must re-tee because the disc was not determined to be OB and therefore the drop zone was not the correct lie from which to throw the second shot.

Interestingly, the purpose of the rule would be thwarted in this case if the player had to include both the possibility of a lost disc and an OB disc in throwing a provisional, because, in that event, two provisionals would need to have been thrown in this case. It looks like the definition of a drop zone gives me a way to address this by making it apply to both lost discs and OB discs.

I was going to agree with Steve, but as you pointed out, the drop zone is only for OB.

Is there a presumption rule for this? I mean, I know we never found the disc, but my belief is that we did not find it because it was actually OB.

 

[biscoe]

I was going to agree with Steve, but as you pointed out, the drop zone is only for OB.

Is there a presumption rule for this? I mean, I know we never found the disc, but my belief is that we did not find it because it was actually OB.

Need "compelling evidence" it was OB for OB to trump lost which of course means different things to different people. IMO thinking it is likely OB and then not finding it in bounds would be sufficient. Is the OB in this case a water feature?

 

[BillFleming]

My understanding of the provisional rule is:

1. You must state you are throwing a provisional and why.
2. If the original disc meets the requirement (OB, lost, whatever), then you MUST play the provisional (you basically said, I'm playing this provisional in case my disc did <whatever>)
3. If the original disc does not meet the criteria that you declared for the provisional, you must ignore the provisional and play your next shot based on the rules for the new occurance.

So, if you declare you are playing a provisional in case your disc went OB (#1), and you find your disc OB, then you have to play the provisional (#2 - you said you would play it if your disc was OB). If the disc is lost or something else, you have to ignore the provisional (#3) and play according to the rules for how your disc actually was.

 

[PMantle]

Need "compelling evidence" it was OB for OB to trump lost which of course means different things to different people. IMO thinking it is likely OB and then not finding it in bounds would be sufficient. Is the OB in this case a water feature?

It's a creek(small) with water, then the other side is private property with very thick briars. The water fluctuates from areas where a disc would be obvious to areas where one would not be. The property is fairly clean leading up to the creek which makes me believe it was lost, but lost OB.

 

[PMantle]

My understanding of the provisional rule is:

1. You must state you are throwing a provisional and why.
2. If the original disc meets the requirement (OB, lost, whatever), then you MUST play the provisional (you basically said, I'm playing this provisional in case my disc did <whatever>)
3. If the original disc does not meet the criteria that you declared for the provisional, you must ignore the provisional and play your next shot based on the rules for the new occurance.

So, if you declare you are playing a provisional in case your disc went OB (#1), and you find your disc OB, then you have to play the provisional (#2 - you said you would play it if your disc was OB). If the disc is lost or something else, you have to ignore the provisional (#3) and play according to the rules for how your disc actually was.

I get what you're saying, but I do not see that in the rule. The conditions are listed with an "or".

 

[Doofenshmirtz]

I was going to agree with Steve, but as you pointed out, the drop zone is only for OB.

Is there a presumption rule for this? I mean, I know we never found the disc, but my belief is that we did not find it because it was actually OB.

I think that is probably true.

806.02(c) holds that a disc is OB if it cannot be found and there is "compelling evidence" that the disc came to rest in an OB area. Whether evidence is "compelling" would be up to the group or TD. So it isn't much help.

A partial solution going forward is to make the drop zone apply to both lost and OB discs. But I don't know if that solves the abandonment issue of the player only throwing the provisional if it is OB, but not if it is lost.

 

[Steve West]

The rule needs to clarify that a provisional can be thrown that is only applicable if a specific condition occurs since using the OR logic in the "status not determined" statement implies that the provisional is used if any one of those conditions is true. Part of the problem is that "lost disc" is a general condition that might result any time a specific condition is the reason for throwing a provisional whether OB, missed mando or disc above 2m when invoked.

the OR logic in the "status not determined" statement implies that the provisional may be called if any one of those conditions is true.

 

[Steve West]

This is obviously wrong. The provisional was taken from the drop zone for OB and was not a "re-tee." If the disc is lost, the player must re-tee because the disc was not determined to be OB and therefore the drop zone was not the correct lie from which to throw the second shot.

Yes, I missread that.

 

[_MTL_]

This came up in a round yesterday. Player throws disc that might be OB. Player chooses to throw a provisional in the event that the disc is OB. Provisional throw (from drop zone) also goes B. When we search, we cannot find the first disc. Player then chooses to declare the first disc lost, abandon the first throw and re-tee. Two player, including me, suggest that it would be best to play out both discs due to the possibility that the player may have to choose between abandonment and the provisional. In the end, either way resulted in the same score so it didn't really matter. But can the first throw be abandoned after a provisional is taken?

First off, you cannot take a provisional for an abandoned throw . Imagine if you every time you hit first available you said "provisional in case I want to abandon that." this sets up basically a free ace run. Imagine then acing on the re-throw and scoring now a 3. It doesn't matter where your original drive us - best case scenario is a 3. You screw up the provisional and oh well, I'll play the original. That doesn't save time whatsoever.

Now, the point at hand.

I agree with everything that happened until a certain point.
Provisional from drop zone in case OB = good.
Lost disc and return to the previous lie (tee) = correct.

What I don't get is why abandonment comes up here. The disc is lost. Abandoned throw and lost disc are the exact same outcome - one throw penalty, return to previous lie.

Can you clear up what I'm missing?

 

[PMantle]

What I don't get is why abandonment comes up here.

We didn't either.

 

[BillFleming]

First off, you cannot take a provisional for an abandoned throw . Imagine if you every time you hit first available you said "provisional in case I want to abandon that."this sets up basically a free ace run. Imagine then acing on the re-throw and scoring now a 3. It doesn't matter where your original drive us - best case scenario is a 3. You screw up the provisional and oh well, I'll play the original. That doesn't save time whatsoever.

Now, the point at hand.

I agree with everything that happened until a certain point.
Provisional from drop zone in case OB = good.
Lost disc and return to the previous lie (tee) = correct.

What I don't get is why abandonment comes up here. The disc is lost. Abandoned throw and lost disc are the exact same outcome - one throw penalty, return to previous lie.

Can you clear up what I'm missing?

It really wouldn't be an ace run. Every abandoned throw is a one stroke penalty, so if you throw it in after abandoning the throw, it's a three. Doesn't matter where you are throwing from....it's still your second throw with a one stroke penalty.

I've had player's think abandoning the throw is like a mulligan....it doesn't count. But that isn't true...the throw that was abandoned did count. It's just that you aren't playing from there with your next throw.

In the situation given, the player may have abandoned their throw because they believe it is OB (or lost) and don't want to spend time looking for it.

 

[dmoore1998]

The status of the disc was determined. It is a Lost Disc.

Who determines that? Specifically in the case of a disc that probably went OB? If you don't find the disc is it just up to the player to decide if they want to play OB rules or lost disc rules?

Seems...tricky...to let a player throw a provisional for one of the two situations, determine they don't like the outcome of that provisional throw anyways, then pick the other situation.

 

[dmoore1998]

First off, you cannot take a provisional for an abandoned throw . Imagine if you every time you hit first available you said "provisional in case I want to abandon that." this sets up basically a free ace run. Imagine then acing on the re-throw and scoring now a 3. It doesn't matter where your original drive us - best case scenario is a 3. You screw up the provisional and oh well, I'll play the original. That doesn't save time whatsoever.

Now, the point at hand.

I agree with everything that happened until a certain point.
Provisional from drop zone in case OB = good.
Lost disc and return to the previous lie (tee) = correct.

What I don't get is why abandonment comes up here. The disc is lost. Abandoned throw and lost disc are the exact same outcome - one throw penalty, return to previous lie.

Can you clear up what I'm missing?

What's the criteria for determining that a disc that probably went OB but can't be found is a lost disc instead of OB? Does each player get to pick whichever is most advantageous each time?