Casual Water

[Dan Ensor]

Did some one in here really use the term "new original lie" referring to a disc that has been moved from it's only possible original lie? :wall:

You can not change the meaning of words when talking about golf. I see it happen here way too much. :\

Not every lie is the result of a stroke. But after you throw your next shot, you have a "new original lie" anyway ... not sure what your argument is.

For instance: if you throw a disc and it comes to rest, it has an "original lie". If that lie is OB, you must move your lie in bounds. Which one is now the "original lie"? Can I take relief if the in bounds lie is in casual water?

If I place a marker in relief of casual water, and then pick up my disc, can I then move my marker to another spot because my original lie has not moved?

Is the original lie the rear edge of my disc, or the rear edge of my marker disc I placed?

There is no PDGA approved definition of "original lie". I feel like they probably used it to make it sound like what they want it to be interpreted as, but then did not define it because the definition would have been unuseable.

According to the rules, a lie is the spot I take a stance from. Under that logic, where my disc came to rest was never a lie at all, because I never took a stance there. How can it be an original of something it never was?

 

[JC17393]

Not every lie is the result of a stroke. But after you throw your next shot, you have a "new original lie" anyway ... not sure what your argument is.

For instance: if you throw a disc and it comes to rest, it has an "original lie". If that lie is OB, you must move your lie in bounds. Which one is now the "original lie"? Can I take relief if the in bounds lie is in casual water?

If I place a marker in relief of casual water, and then pick up my disc, can I then move my marker to another spot because my original lie has not moved?

Is the original lie the rear edge of my disc, or the rear edge of my marker disc I placed?

There is no PDGA approved definition of "original lie". I feel like they probably used it to make it sound like what they want it to be interpreted as, but then did not define it because the definition would have been unuseable.

According to the rules, a lie is the spot I take a stance from. Under that logic, where my disc came to rest was never a lie at all, because I never took a stance there. How can it be an original of something it never was?

According to the newest edition of the rule book, a disc has a position but not necessarily a lie based on where it comes to rest. It isn't until the player determines to use the disc as a marker or marks with a mini that a lie is established. So there isn't really an "original lie" at all. The disc's position is its position until the lie is established. Sometimes its position is OB, or suspended, or in a casual relief area, but it's not a lie in those cases until the marker is put down. Once it's put down, that's THE lie. Not the "original" lie, but the lie from which the next throw is to be made. Further relief from that spot could only be taken through optional relief or optional re-throw.

 

[Dan Ensor]

So ... they already have a word defined as what they want "original lie" to mean, yet they chose to use "original lie" which has no definition???

 

[JC17393]

So ... they already have a word defined as what they want "original lie" to mean, yet they chose to use "original lie" which has no definition???

The authors of the PDGA Rules of Play have never been well known for their wordsmithship (did i just make up a word myself?) or their editing skills.

"Original lie" was in the wording of the rule prior to the latest edition. This new edition introduces "position" into the lexicon. Clearly, they didn't edit "position" into every rule for which it should be replacing mentions of "lie" and "original lie", the obstacle rule being one of them.

 

[BrotherDave]

Sort of related because of casual water,

My drive landed in a large puddle near the basket. I didn't want to get my shoes soaked so I put my mini down and stood on my previously thrown disc to putt from. Did I build a lie by not picking up my last thrown disc?

 

[bradharris]

Sort of related because of casual water,

My drive landed in a large puddle near the basket. I didn't want to get my shoes soaked so I put my mini down and stood on my previously thrown disc to putt from. Did I build a lie by not picking up my last thrown disc?

Not necessarily building a lie, but you did not have a supporting point on the playing surface within 30 cm of your lie. The thrown disc is not a part of the playing surface.

 

[BrotherDave]

Not necessarily building a lie, but you did not have a supporting point on the playing surface within 30 cm of your lie. The thrown disc is not a part of the playing surface.

Where is this in the rule book?

 

[bradharris]

Where is this in the rule book?

802.04B says you must have a supporting point in contact with the lie. The lie is defined as a 30cm line on the playing surface.

 

[Cgkdisc]

There are some interesting ramifications in this question. If the disc is 1cm or less in height, then it would qualify as a pad under rule 801.03 for Artificial Devices and the Rules Q&A 808.QA12. However, the lowest height disc is 1.3cm so it would not qualify as a pad. It's unclear whether the disc could be used as a pad when upside down since the primary knee contact area would be less than 1cm thick. In addition, other players could ask you to move "your equipment" because it's interfering with the throw. Since the disc is now not your marker, you would have to move it on their request. You definitely could not place a disc or other than item on your lie per 808.QA3 that disallows building a lie.

 

[Cgkdisc]

802.04B says you must have a supporting point in contact with the lie. The lie is defined as a 30cm line on the playing surface.

Not relevant in this example compared with the other rules cited. Let's say there's a random disc on the ground not in play or owned by another player in the group. Your disc lands on it covering roughly the back half of it. You could place your mini in front of your disc, pick up your disc and not necessarily have to move the half of the disc that was partly in the 30cm behind your mini. Not that you would necessarily want to but you could actually stand on it. In this case, the random disc acts like a flat rock that's an extension of the playing surface.

 

[BrotherDave]

There are some interesting ramifications in this question. If the disc is 1cm or less in height, then it would qualify as a pad under rule 801.03 for Artificial Devices and the Rules Q&A 808.QA12. However, the lowest height disc is 1.3cm so it would not qualify as a pad. It's unclear whether the disc could be used as a pad when upside down since the primary knee contact area would be less than 1cm thick. In addition, other players could ask you to move "your equipment" because it's interfering with the throw. Since the disc is now not your marker, you would have to move it on their request. You definitely could not place a disc or other than item on your lie per 808.QA3 that disallows building a lie.

Wait a sec, other players could ask me to move my equipment b/c it's interfering with my throw? I thought that rule was for having players move their bags and such if it was distracting other players from their throws?

 

[Cgkdisc]

The rule is not specific to bags or carts related to rollaways. Essentially, your disc would be directly impacting play on your lie. So this is one of the more legit reasons for players to ask you to move it, not that they would, but they could. Standing on the disc could also be seen as violating the spirit of the Artificial Devices rule which disallows certain elements that you might use to help your throw.