Hazards

[oldmandiscer]

How much snow did you all get? We got more here than total for last 2 years. Which only shows how little we got the last 2 years.

Why do you troll?

 

[DavidSauls]

I know what it is. My point is that it is unnatural, illogical, nonsensical and gimmicky. I think you should be able to play it where it lies without penalty. It's bad enough you threw it 50 feet offline and are in deep rough, why take it back to the fairway and drop it? The OB and Hazard rules need to be changed IMO.

That was a spectacular misunderstanding of what I wrote.

 

[ReinZ_96]

The USDGC switched to a largely 'play it where it lies' rule set for the ropes in 2020 and it was absolutely terrible. I think Paul Ulibarri's take from the "Distance Dystopia" episode of The Flight Diary with Brian Earhart is the best take I've heard (or rather the one I agree with most, but not entirely) that's related to this topic. But, I also feel like I'm in the minority that I think 'artificial OB' can be really good and fun as long as it's designed well.

Also, I agree with basically everyone else in the thread that you are trying to solve a problem that doesn't need solving...or at least solving it in a completely unnecessary way.

This completes my first and last post in this thread.

 

[dmoore1998]

I think the answer in terms of hazards is also the answer to most questions in life...money. In ball golf, if I am designing a course and I don't want players to be able to go long without a big consequence, I can put a lake behind it. Yes you have the option to "play it where it lies" but good luck hitting your golf ball out from 3 feet underwater.

In disc golf, with much smaller budgets for course design...if I want to stop players from going long on a hole without consequences, I probably can't afford to create a lake. If I DID create a lake, and still give players the option to "play it as it lies", most people will have no trouble standing in 3 feet of water and still playing the shot just fine.

It's about course design, and the way the designer envisions the hole being played and where they envision risk/reward shots. "Play it where it lies" is drastically different when you're talking about hitting a ball off of the ground vs being able to pick up a disc...picking it up to throw it means you are inherently NOT "playing it as it lies". If you ball lands directly behind a tree, you don't have the option to move the ball over to where you can reach your foot and put the ball there...you basically can in disc golf by moving your body and the position of your arm to throw.

Course designers/planners want to be able to create risk/reward scenarios...without having the massive cost of putting in huge physical hazards.

 

[Jay Dub]

Way to go, newbie. :wall:

 

[biscoe]

DRUGS! RELIGION! POLITICS! BARBECUE!

 

[oldmandiscer]

I think the answer in terms of hazards is also the answer to most questions in life...money. In ball golf, if I am designing a course and I don't want players to be able to go long without a big consequence, I can put a lake behind it. Yes you have the option to "play it where it lies" but good luck hitting your golf ball out from 3 feet underwater.

In disc golf, with much smaller budgets for course design...if I want to stop players from going long on a hole without consequences, I probably can't afford to create a lake. If I DID create a lake, and still give players the option to "play it as it lies", most people will have no trouble standing in 3 feet of water and still playing the shot just fine.

It's about course design, and the way the designer envisions the hole being played and where they envision risk/reward shots. "Play it where it lies" is drastically different when you're talking about hitting a ball off of the ground vs being able to pick up a disc...picking it up to throw it means you are inherently NOT "playing it as it lies". If you ball lands directly behind a tree, you don't have the option to move the ball over to where you can reach your foot and put the ball there...you basically can in disc golf by moving your body and the position of your arm to throw.

Course designers/planners want to be able to create risk/reward scenarios...without having the massive cost of putting in huge physical hazards.

As far as your disc is underwater that would be considered unplayable or OB. Then a shot penalty incurs.

I guess I'm just not good with imagining lakes everywhere OB is which goes to why it feels gimmicky to me. How else do you make the game tougher for the pro's?

 

[oldmandiscer]

The USDGC switched to a largely 'play it where it lies' rule set for the ropes in 2020 and it was absolutely terrible. I think Paul Ulibarri's take from the "Distance Dystopia" episode of The Flight Diary with Brian Earhart is the best take I've heard (or rather the one I agree with most, but not entirely) that's related to this topic. But, I also feel like I'm in the minority that I think 'artificial OB' can be really good and fun as long as it's designed well.

Also, I agree with basically everyone else in the thread that you are trying to solve a problem that doesn't need solving...or at least solving it in a completely unnecessary way.

This completes my first and last post in this thread.

I guess I fall into the non gimmick type of person. I would rather have natural rough, deep woods and play it where it lies. Natural obstacles versus fictional.

 

[dmoore1998]

I guess I fall into the non gimmick type of person. I would rather have natural rough, deep woods and play it where it lies. Natural obstacles versus fictional.

I have to assume MOST people would prefer natural obstacles. At minimum it provides a better aesthetic. But in your comparison to ball golf, who is going to want to pay for grass tall enough for a human being that it's comparable to grass height for a golf ball? If a golf ball lands behind a tree, it's just behind a tree...how long are you going to wait to grow trees a dozen feet in diameter or more so that people can't reach out beyond it to throw?

Creating realistic, natural hazards is incredibly difficult in disc golf because nobody plays it as it lies...they lift it up into the air, and then move it side to side several feet if they care to.

I'm struggling to think of a natural cost-effective hazard that could be employed to recreate something like a golf bunker, behind behind a tree, or the sloping that is used to create flow.

It would be easier if you actually believed in "play it as it lies", but I've never seen someone get down on the ground and start their throw from the actual spot their disc lands. If they did maybe we could just add a bunker and let people deal with their disc being 1/4 buried in sand and trying to throw it out.

 

[aphilso1]

As a spectator, I do find OB flags in wide open fields to be rather annoying. Ledgestone in particular is unwatchable, although I will caveat that by saying that I haven't watched Ledgestone in a couple of years for this very reason...so perhaps it has been improved since then.

As a player, I gravitate toward courses that have natural intrigue rather than artificial OB. If I am stuck playing a course that is naturally boring, then I guess I would rather have artificial OB added to spice things up. But really I would just be likely to avoid that type of course altogether.

 

[Steve West]

Good point. Golf needs the option to move the lie for a stroke because there are places they can't ever get out of. Disc golfers can pitch out of trouble from three foot deep water, or grass up to their eyes.

 

[davetherocketguy]

We could do OMD bingo with these threads he starts. The different squares could be things like, "OMD calls someone a troll" or "OMD completely misunderstands a post" or "ru4or gets annoyed" etc. etc.

 

[ballgolfconvert]

I have to assume MOST people would prefer natural obstacles. At minimum it provides a better aesthetic. But in your comparison to ball golf, who is going to want to pay for grass tall enough for a human being that it's comparable to grass height for a golf ball? If a golf ball lands behind a tree, it's just behind a tree...how long are you going to wait to grow trees a dozen feet in diameter or more so that people can't reach out beyond it to throw?

Creating realistic, natural hazards is incredibly difficult in disc golf because nobody plays it as it lies...they lift it up into the air, and then move it side to side several feet if they care to.

I'm struggling to think of a natural cost-effective hazard that could be employed to recreate something like a golf bunker, behind behind a tree, or the sloping that is used to create flow.

It would be easier if you actually believed in "play it as it lies", but I've never seen someone get down on the ground and start their throw from the actual spot their disc lands. If they did maybe we could just add a bunker and let people deal with their disc being 1/4 buried in sand and trying to throw it out.

I personally agree with the Old man that the hazard / ob rules suck in disc golf. If you throw in a difficult area you should have the choice of taking a stroke and playing it where it crossed into that area or actually going in to play it. Watching people throw or hit from these situations is always the most entertaining watch imo. If Seve Ballesteros had to take drops when he went astray, no one would have ever heard of him.

Water should always be considered a hazard, always. With a drop allowed where it last crossed land. None of the advance to the next pad stuff, unless there is no other choice for a drop.

Throw it off the course boundaries it should be re-tee or re-throw with a stroke. This should be the only instance where it is considered OB. If you want to go to where it crossed OB it should be two strokes, which is now the option in ball golf, so you would be throwing 4. Artificial hazards should require a drop at no penalty to a much more difficult lie. in ball golf you have the opportunity to escape from the hazard with no strokes. On the PGA tour a players get up and down from green side bunkers about 60% of the time, so disc golf penalizes much more severely for something that isn't an integral part of the course to begin with.

Casual water rule has you drop on a straight line from basket to closest relief. In some cases you can be parked and the only drop is 200' away. makes zero sense. Should be the nearest point of relief, no closer to the hole. this rule is the most ridiculous.

It's like someone said, lets model our game on ball golf, but let's not use the same rules or terminologies, so that we can be special. It is special all right, like the little bus to school special. If disc golf wants to be taken seriously they need to come up with rules that make sense, not that make them different.

 

[dmoore1998]

I personally agree with the Old man that the hazard / ob rules suck in disc golf. If you throw in a difficult area you should have the choice of taking a stroke and playing it where it crossed into that area or actually going in to play it. Watching people throw or hit from these situations is always the most entertaining watch imo. If Seve Ballesteros had to take drops when he went astray, no one would have ever heard of him.

Speaking specifically to this part though, this is where ball golf and disc golf differ dramatically. It's common and rather simple in ball golf to say "I don't want people to try this super long shot without consequences of missing it...so let me put in some bunkers they might land in. And if you land in that fairway bunker...your next shot is more difficult if you want to take it. In disc golf, if you "land in" a painted out hazard and just throw out of it...there's really no consequence...you're just closer. It's not like you have to stand in quicksand and it impacts your throw.

The difference is if Seve Bassesteros goes astray and has to hit his golf ball out of 24inch grass...that's hard. If you go into 24inch grass in disc golf, who cares? The only really good natural hazard in disc golf are lots of trees in a small space, I want course designers to have more flexibility than waiting 30+ years for trees to fill in.

In terms of not letting people out of difficult spots, I'm in total agreement. You toss it into a grove of trees that isn't OB...throw your way out.

For the record though, there are also ball golf courses with OB in the middle of a course, they're just marked out because they don't want people taking a free shot at something. In many cases it's an older dogleg hole that new technology has allowed people to just cut right through the dogleg. To me, that's similar to taking a can of spray paint on a disc golf course and saying "ok, if you go in here, it's a penalty of some sort".

Maybe it's really 2 distinct conversations. 1. Should we call "hazard" on something and have you move position when you could just throw out of a difficult spot? 2. Should we have staked off hazards that penalize players when the shot from the hazard is something every player would take every time (typically because it's closer).

 

[davetherocketguy]

lets model our game on ball golf,

You mean that sport that is dying a slow painful death as golf courses close and go bankrupt?

Hard pass.

I don't care if we want to take ideas from golf but we need to look at what is best for our sport as a priority. If taking ideas from elsewhere fits within that priority then great if not, forget it. Doing things in disc golf just because it works in golf is not smart and whether or not it worked in golf for a hundred years is irrelevant. Why? Because disc golf is not golf. Period.

How's that course of yours coming along you promised us? Pictures?

 

[oldmandiscer]

As a spectator, I do find OB flags in wide open fields to be rather annoying. Ledgestone in particular is unwatchable, although I will caveat that by saying that I haven't watched Ledgestone in a couple of years for this very reason...so perhaps it has been improved since then.

As a player, I gravitate toward courses that have natural intrigue rather than artificial OB. If I am stuck playing a course that is naturally boring, then I guess I would rather have artificial OB added to spice things up. But really I would just be likely to avoid that type of course altogether.

Yeah Ledgstone has a few holes which are wide open and flagged from tee to basket. Not entertaining to watch.

 

[oldmandiscer]

Speaking specifically to this part though, this is where ball golf and disc golf differ dramatically. It's common and rather simple in ball golf to say "I don't want people to try this super long shot without consequences of missing it...so let me put in some bunkers they might land in. And if you land in that fairway bunker...your next shot is more difficult if you want to take it. In disc golf, if you "land in" a painted out hazard and just throw out of it...there's really no consequence...you're just closer. It's not like you have to stand in quicksand and it impacts your throw.

The difference is if Seve Bassesteros goes astray and has to hit his golf ball out of 24inch grass...that's hard. If you go into 24inch grass in disc golf, who cares? The only really good natural hazard in disc golf are lots of trees in a small space, I want course designers to have more flexibility than waiting 30+ years for trees to fill in.

In terms of not letting people out of difficult spots, I'm in total agreement. You toss it into a grove of trees that isn't OB...throw your way out.

For the record though, there are also ball golf courses with OB in the middle of a course, they're just marked out because they don't want people taking a free shot at something. In many cases it's an older dogleg hole that new technology has allowed people to just cut right through the dogleg. To me, that's similar to taking a can of spray paint on a disc golf course and saying "ok, if you go in here, it's a penalty of some sort".

Maybe it's really 2 distinct conversations. 1. Should we call "hazard" on something and have you move position when you could just throw out of a difficult spot? 2. Should we have staked off hazards that penalize players when the shot from the hazard is something every player would take every time (typically because it's closer).

The last part is pace of play if you lose your disc during a tournament. Deeply weedy areas which are 2-6 feet tall you are going to lose a disc or two. So it makes sense to mark the area hazard, if you find the disc you have the option to play it which most would. The other option is you don't find it you take a penalty and drop back in play where it last crossed. No need to throw provisionals or walk back to the tee.

 

[davetherocketguy]

And as I've explained in other threads to OMD...

On my home course there are OB rules that are dictated to us by the municipality. So for example we cannot be throwing over roadways. They understand that a disc may go over a park road off the tee but they have explained that we may not throw back over the road from where the tee shot lands. So regardless of how OMD feels about the OB rule everything over and beyond the park road is OB. Same thing with the local pond. The municipality has put up "NO SWIMMING" signs so regardless of how BGC feels about whether water should be OB - the pond is definitely OB. You are not getting your plastic back from there unless you have a retriever of some sort. Sorry BGC but water cannot always be a hazard. And it's not just my home course either where these situations occur. There are a lot of courses I've been on where OB occurs not because some TD dictates it but because the course owners mandate it.

 

[Cgkdisc]

At their core, ball golf is about successfully handling the challenges of the surface where your ball lies; disc golf is about (or should be about) successfully dealing with the challenges of vertical obstacles, primarily trees. Statistically, surface challenges for PGA players such as rough and sand traps result in the loss of close to half a stroke on average, i.e. 50% save rate, when encountering those challenges.

Trees are our own true "sand trap" where depending on your landing spot, you'll have a range of difficulty shaping your next shot to not lose a stroke, i.e., tree "hazards" are analogous to sand traps in their variable chance of losing a stroke, perhaps close to the 50% level in ball golf, but significantly less than 1 stroke on average for our top pros.

Unfortunately, inbounds landing areas off the designed "fairway," without any vertical obstacles in the LOP, or at least waist high foliage, provide minimal challenges for the next throw. Slapping on a 1-throw penalty has not been ideal but perceived as a necessary evil by our course designers as a simple, albeit excessive, solution for the lack of vertical challenges in front of your lie.

There are at least two ways that might be more appropriate and fairer to handle the lack of vertical challenges remaining. A preferred way would be lie relocation to a drop zone with no stroke penalty where the player is faced with vertical challenges on their next throw where they might fail to save a stroke some percentage of the time. The second way, which is now viable with electronic scoring, is directly applying a half stroke rather than a 1-stroke penalty as a way of indicating your disc landed in a less desirable spot similar to sand traps and rough in ball golf. These two ways would score more like ball golf if the desire is to emulate their play dynamics more precisely.

 

[oldmandiscer]

And as I've explained in other threads to OMD...

On my home course there are OB rules that are dictated to us by the municipality. So for example we cannot be throwing over roadways. They understand that a disc may go over a park road off the tee but they have explained that we may not throw back over the road from where the tee shot lands. So regardless of how OMD feels about the OB rule everything over and beyond the park road is OB. Same thing with the local pond. The municipality has put up "NO SWIMMING" signs so regardless of how BGC feels about whether water should be OB - the pond is definitely OB. You are not getting your plastic back from there unless you have a retriever of some sort. Sorry BGC but water cannot always be a hazard. And it's not just my home course either where these situations occur. There are a lot of courses I've been on where OB occurs not because some TD dictates it but because the course owners mandate it.

I never said play from a road or throw over roads, etc....

The annoyance is that natural areas which can be challenging for stance, footing and power are not being used anymore. The TD "designers" are just making it OB and go drop from the fairway. I would prefer to see players play from where they land if possible. Like I said before with a caveat that certain areas can be highly prone to losing a disc, it does make sense then to use hazard rule where you have an option of playing where it last crossed with a penalty or finding your disc and playing from there.