Ledgestone Insurance Open

[lyleoross]

Good to know all those details, now. Thanks.

It's too bad (perhaps, even a little irksome ) that the 2500 live viewers were left guessing about all of those and many other relevant details, as the rules scrum was happening at the #6 DZ. But it's all good. Terry was doing the best he could, I'm sure, with all the chaos going on.

I'm still curious why Steve Dodge was the only named voice of authority ringing loud and clear during the situation, if he wasn't the one authorized to make the ruling.

I'm also curious why Dodge kept calling McBeth's throw from the DZ a "provisional." I thought that was funny.

I also haven't heard an explanation how rule 803.06 could ever be ignored. I'm assuming a waiver was obtained. How do waivers get granted? Is it on a case-by-case basis? If a waiver was granted to discard rule 803.06 for #6, I find that irksome by itself. Rule 803.06 seems like a pretty important rule - it has its own entry in the book, after all, with no qualifications or expansions.

It's also too bad there wasn't a TD proxy accompanying the card, on the tee in the first place, to tell McBeth to not re-tee and go straight to the DZ, thus avoiding any of the irksome confusion that followed.

In fact, I'm sure there's a good reason, but I wonder why TD's of big tournaments don't assign a TD proxy to follow any card that's being televised, so these situations don't happen in front of so many viewers and to avoid any unwanted irking. If one's interested in growing an audience, it's not a good look.

Actually, maybe these kind of chaotic, irksome situations do build audiences - a lot of people seem to be talking about it and it was a source of much heated discussion on the chat room during the broadcast for a solid hour after it happened. Who knows.

Anyway, sorry for irking you with my criticism.

Perhaps my standards are too low, but I never thought in DG that the job of TDs or anyone was to tell viewers what is going on? I realize in big sports with lots o money they can put someone near officials and in lots of places to get lots o info, but that doesn't seem practical at this stage in our sport. As long as the TD communicates with players and officials on the field, that would seem to be enough.

From the time when Paul reteed, to the time the TD provided an answer via Dana seemed to be about five minutes or less. At no time did the whole thing seem confusing or out of control. Paul wanted a rethrow, was told he couldn't, took a provisional as per the rules. Someone had the foresight to contact the TD to get a ruling. Five minutes later, you had a ruling. The fact that Steve likes to talk means he'd fit right in on this site. But his opinion matters not.

I watch a lot of WRC and a lot of football, soccer so to speak, and the number of times I'm left guessing, or completely disagree with a referee's decision (I'm a grade 7 certified referee, hardly expert, but knowledgeable) is pretty much at every event. I'm not alone in this by postings on soccer boards, and rally boards. Heck, I've even gotten into it with national sports writers who don't understand calls made by top professionals that were clearly right on. None of this surprises me. The high standards set by our members is amazing though. Makes me proud.

 

[JoakimBL]

OK, I see. But my question is (remains), are you talking about what's right or what happened? I'll agree with you that according to what happened here your response might be on target, but what both JC and I have been contending all along is that whoever ruled in that case ruled incorrectly. We believe that the rules clearly state in 803.02 B that optional re-throw maybe used at any time.

I agree that unless there is a waiver from the PDGA Tour Director, then the call is incorrect. I also agree that if there was such a waiver, that is problematic. The rule should be that you ALWAYS, whit out exception should be allowed a rethrow with penalty. However, we live in the real world, not the ideal world. You have to account for that. And in reality the TD often will mandate the use of the DZ. Right or wrong, that is the reality that the players also have to deal with, which is why they might have doubts, even though we feel they shouldn't.

Also, how do you reconcile "a player CAN throw an optional re-throw provisionally" with a player who might want to do that after every hole? He says, I get to throw a provisional any time I want to (at least according to some people on this thread), and his cardmates say, "but the disc isn't lost, it's in the middle of the fairway, and there's no OB or special rules on this hole." And he says, but I can call a provisional optional re-throw any time I want to. We've contended all along, that the issue was the "provisional" optional re-throw. I believe it's a slippery slope and will open a can of worms if that's continued to be allowed. I guarantee that if I start off slow in a tournament and don't feel "warmed-up", I could get around the practice throw rule by calling for "a provisional optional re-throw" when I know for sure that my disc will be found inbounds.

Obviously you cannot do what you are sugesting, and I have never suggested that. As I wrote before, if you want to be pedantic about it, McBeths optional rethrow shouldn't have been labeled as the provisional, as that was his "main" next shot. The throw from the DZ was the real provisional, as that was "in case the rethrow is not allowed". But in reality, it isn't an issue, as everyone knows what is meant, and this situation is an exception to how this is usually handled, because of special circumstance rules, that should have been clearer on the tee sign and/or caddie book. Expecting the players, playing several courses at this event, coming directly from Worlds to remember every special rule from the players meeting, at a course like this is not reasonable. If a TD cannot be arsed to write out the special rules for that hole, maybe they should not have made that hole in the first place. Especially for an event this size, which this amount of exposure. But that is another issue completely.

 

[Mocheez]

McBeth's 4th round is now rated 1100. Round 3 ratings are still way off.

 

[Cgkdisc]

R3 and R4 scores likely added together to calculate official ratings so it doesn't really matter if they get the assignments right for unofficial ratings.

 

[BionicRib]

R3 and R4 scores likely added together to calculate official ratings so it doesn't really matter if they get the assignments right for unofficial ratings.

Even with the wind being so drastically different between those 2 rounds?

 

[Cgkdisc]

I said "likely". The calculations will be made separately for each round and not combined if the difference is more than the statistical tolerance calculated for each round pair on the same course.

 

[araytx]

Might help if you quoted the correct rulebook. No 803.06 in current rules.

:doh:
Beat me to it! :clap:

I agree that unless there is a waiver from the PDGA Tour Director, then the call is incorrect. I also agree that if there was such a waiver, that is problematic. The rule should be that you ALWAYS, whit out exception should be allowed a rethrow with penalty. However, we live in the real world, not the ideal world. You have to account for that. And in reality the TD often will mandate the use of the DZ. Right or wrong, that is the reality that the players also have to deal with, which is why they might have doubts, even though we feel they shouldn't.

Same issue. Are you speaking to what actually happened, or what was right according to the rules? I'm not saying anything sinister happened here; I believe the TDs made an honest mistake. They weren't trying to advantage anyone or help anyone or hurt anyone or disadvantage anyone. They ruled on what they thought was correct. I just think it was an honest mistake because of the far-reaching ramifications. I do not believe that the PDGA has stated that a TD can get a waiver to disallow optional re-throw. It's not that the rule "should" be that you can always use optional re-throw; it's that IT IS that you can always use optional re-throw. I am sticking to my same claim all along -- not changing the argument. IN this case I contend and saw that THE CARD had no doubts and no one ON THE CARD was unsure. They said Player A could opt to use optional re-throw and not proceed to the drop zone. The "chatter" didn't come from the card.

Obviously you cannot do what you are sugesting, and I have never suggested that. As I wrote before, if you want to be pedantic about it, McBeths optional rethrow shouldn't have been labeled as the provisional, as that was his "main" next shot. The throw from the DZ was the real provisional, as that was "in case the rethrow is not allowed". But in reality, it isn't an issue, as everyone knows what is meant, and this situation is an exception to how this is usually handled, because of special circumstance rules, that should have been clearer on the tee sign and/or caddie book. Expecting the players, playing several courses at this event, coming directly from Worlds to remember every special rule from the players meeting, at a course like this is not reasonable. If a TD cannot be arsed to write out the special rules for that hole, maybe they should not have made that hole in the first place. Especially for an event this size, which this amount of exposure. But that is another issue completely.

Everyone who claims/asserts that a player can call a "provisional optional re-throw" if the player wants is allowing us down that slippery slope. How can you reconcile the two situations otherwise?

 

[araytx]

Am I reading this right? Holly Finley tossed a 1016-rated round? Way to go!

If a 55 on that day was rated 967, sounds like her 50 should be right about there. congrats

 

[krupicka]

I've reuploaded the scores and I think ratings should now be accurate.

 

[Consult20]

So I watched a little live coverage and some of the other recorded Round 3. I have to say it doesn't really look like the players are enjoying it. It seems to me Ledgestone is going for a USDGC feel with the ropes and all but the balance doesn't seem to be quite right. If I was a top pro the purse would be the main thing bringing me here, not the course. I'm probably in the minority but I don't hate that Jake guy for his 40 protest hole.

I would love to get some genuine reactions from some of the players.

Go to the 4 minute mark for Eagle's opinion about the courses...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc_T9Tv0DDw

 

[hellbound]

Go to the 4 minute mark for Eagle's opinion about the courses...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dc_T9Tv0DDw

Im at work and don't have speakers. care to clue me in on what he had to say?

 

[lyleoross]

Well who wouldn't rather be in the mountains in Colorado? The fact that Eagle hates it because of the OB is a testament to its rigour. I'm sure you get the same from some about USCGC.

 

[lyleoross]

Im at work and don't have speakers. care to clue me in on what he had to say?

There's a little event out east called the Ledgstone, I hate that event. Then a write over - I'm just kidding, too much OB.

 

[DiscLoser1]

Well who wouldn't rather be in the mountains in Colorado? The fact that Eagle hates it because of the OB is a testament to its rigour. I'm sure you get the same from some about USCGC.

Comparing the USDGC course to Ledgestone because they both use some OB ropes is pretty off the mark.

USDGC is an actual challenge from an excellent design; Ledgestone is gimmick after gimmick from an amateur design.

Glad you decided what we should all think about the Ledgestone, though. Such a relief I (or Eagle) don't have to have an opinion. Thank god the oracle of Disc Golf hath spoken.

 

[AWallen90]

So I count 109 "999's", yikes! Even with over 1,000 players that seems like a big number.

Players that could not make the event were given the option: Half money back or receiver the players pack. Full refunds were not an option so most chose to receive the players back rather than a 50% refund.

 

[corin_brown]

Might help if you quoted the correct rulebook. No 803.06 in current rules.

Lol. Yeah, I made a mistake. You're correct, there's no such thing as rule 803.06. I don't know where I got that rule from. I must have conjured it from the ether or something. I guess there's no such thing as an "optional re-throw rule." Bummer. Seemed like a good rule.

Anyway, thanks for settling my hash.

 

[@iDiscGolf]

What was the players pack exactly?

 

[da Crippler]

What was the players pack exactly?

Basically 7 discs, a mini Buzzz, 2 shirts and a hat, along with low cost swag (stickers, water bottle, small towel etc.). I guess it was worth the entry fee. Most of mine will be donated to league for ctp prizes.

 

[lyleoross]

Comparing the USDGC course to Ledgestone because they both use some OB ropes is pretty off the mark.

USDGC is an actual challenge from an excellent design; Ledgestone is gimmick after gimmick from an amateur design.

Glad you decided what we should all think about the Ledgestone, though. Such a relief I (or Eagle) don't have to have an opinion. Thank god the oracle of Disc Golf hath spoken.

This is the second time you've gone after me personally. The first time I ignored it. It's kind of bad form. I understand you disagree with my ideas, and the the way I deliver them. I'm quite happy to have you take them on, see Araytx for an example, but I don't call you out personally and I'd appreciate the same courtesy.

 

[lyleoross]

Comparing the USDGC course to Ledgestone because they both use some OB ropes is pretty off the mark.

USDGC is an actual challenge from an excellent design; Ledgestone is gimmick after gimmick from an amateur design.

Glad you decided what we should all think about the Ledgestone, though. Such a relief I (or Eagle) don't have to have an opinion. Thank god the oracle of Disc Golf hath spoken.

A couple of things. If you talk to a ball golfer, they might tell you that everything we do is "gimmicky.". I got the following from one in the gym one day. Trees in the fairway? Five foot gaps to throw through? Rollers?

One person's gimmick is another person's, hey that's cool.

I compared USDGC to Ledgstone exactly because the complaint about OB. I know I didn't nuance it the same way, but many players have commented exactly on that issue and how Harold keeps tightening the OB every year using the same kinds of things Eagle said about OB.

You say the courses are gimmicky. Great, I'm not seeing it, possibly it doesn't come through to me. Will you take the time to give some hole specifics?