Markers - Round - discs - Why?

[BillFleming]

why wasn't it set at 21cm instead of 20cm?

My guess would be to match other measurements. Metric is used in disc golf and certain numbers make sense.

10 Meters = circle 1
20 Meters = circle 2
1 meter in from OB
5 Meters = Rule 809.03 any throw more than 5 meters and not not made as a competitive attempt to change the lie, is a practice throw with a penalty.

Except for the 1 meter rule for OB relief, everything else seems to be multiples of 5. So, I guess that is the reasoning behind 20 centimeters.

 

[Agricolae]

Do you ever feel like you're sitting on the bench outside the Mayberry barber shop listening to Floyd talk about disc golf? :|

 

[rhatton1]

Lay down another disc, a bottle of water, any other object on hand, or just take a stance and throw with no mark.

I.....Don't believe you.

 

[rhatton1]

The mini marker emerged for that reason when a particular player was seen taking multiple flips of his disc back in the 70s.

Not "That guy" again?

It's probably worth looking at all the rules that were created to stop "that guy" and see if in a more professional sport in 2021 they are needed anymore. With this I'm now up to 3 queries of different things on this forum that IMO are unnecessary now but were written in for "that guy" I'm sure there are many more.

What a legacy to leave the sport.

"Hey kids, sit down by the fire and let Grandad tell you about the time I made them rewrite the whole rulebook through cheating like a legend!"

 

[Armus Patheticus]

I.....Don't believe you.

I'm not hurt. I know it's hard to accept that anyone should illegally disregard a mindless ritual.

Want to hear something even more shocking? In one area with small but steady female representation at tournaments, the ladies have a habit of folding cash into origami markers. The winner takes them all.

 

[notapro]

Not "That guy" again?

It's probably worth looking at all the rules that were created to stop "that guy" and see if in a more professional sport in 2021 they are needed anymore. With this I'm now up to 3 queries of different things on this forum that IMO are unnecessary now but were written in for "that guy" I'm sure there are many more.

What a legacy to leave the sport.

"Hey kids, sit down by the fire and let Grandad tell you about the time I made them rewrite the whole rulebook through cheating like a legend!"

Are you suggesting that people won't/don't cheat anymore?

 

[biscoe]

Are you suggesting that people won't/don't cheat anymore?

I would think it has to be worse now than ever...

 

[Armus Patheticus]

I'd guess it's a lot easier to get away with tossing a mini down off the mark, or to kick your disc to a better lie, than to flip a disc multiple times.

 

[BillFleming]

I'd guess it's a lot easier to get away with tossing a mini down off the mark, or to kick your disc to a better lie, than to flip a disc multiple times.

Let's not go down that rabbit hole....someone may eventually want a rule change that "a cardmate must mark your lie and the marker must be staked into the ground to ensure it doesn't move".

 

[uncle pennybags]

Let's not go down that rabbit hole....someone may eventually want a rule change that "a cardmate must mark your lie and the marker must be staked into the ground to ensure it doesn't move".

opcorn:

 

[rhatton1]

Are you suggesting that people won't/don't cheat anymore?

No not at all. But they should be written with an expectation of players playing fairly not with an expectation of cheating which the rules that have developed because of "that Guy" have been.

 

[Rastnav]

No not at all. But they should be written with an expectation of players playing fairly not with an expectation of cheating which the rules that have developed because of "that Guy" have been.

Honestly, "you need to be able to place something down to mark a lie" seems like it's an obvious rule to me. Once you establish that, round things that are clearly not discs to be thrown seems like the obvious choice. It just solves a bunch of potential issues, at very little cost. It's not that you are preventing people from cheating so much as it becomes very clear to everyone that you didn't misapply the rules (by flipping more than once, by marking again when you had already marked, etc.)

I'm really not understanding what the specific objection is? What exactly is wrong with the rule as it is?

 

[BillFleming]

Honestly, "you need to be able to place something down to mark a lie" seems like it's an obvious rule to me. Once you establish that, round things that are clearly not discs to be thrown seems like the obvious choice. It just solves a bunch of potential issues, at very little cost. It's not that you are preventing people from cheating so much as it becomes very clear to everyone that you didn't misapply the rules (by flipping more than once, by marking again when you had already marked, etc.)

I'm really not understanding what the specific objection is? What exactly is wrong with the rule as it is?

There's really nothing wrong with the rule as is, in my opinion. But I think the argument is that it only allows the disc that had been thrown or a mini - which you (usually) must buy to have one. It could have been written to allow objects as long as they were within a specific size - then a playing card, soda can (I believe alcohol isn't allowed in sanctioned tournaments), or something else that is easy for a player to carry. I wouldn't allow rocks or anything else that are part of the landscape as it would be too difficult to tell the marker apart from the surrounding area.

 

[Deej]

If you smash a beer can, it should be a legal marker. Right?

 

[notapro]

If you smash a beer can, it should be a legal marker. Right?

I bet if you smash a beer can, it's about the size of a mini. Coincidence???????

 

[rhatton1]

Honestly, "you need to be able to place something down to mark a lie" seems like it's an obvious rule to me. Once you establish that, round things that are clearly not discs to be thrown seems like the obvious choice. It just solves a bunch of potential issues, at very little cost. It's not that you are preventing people from cheating so much as it becomes very clear to everyone that you didn't misapply the rules (by flipping more than once, by marking again when you had already marked, etc.)

I'm really not understanding what the specific objection is? What exactly is wrong with the rule as it is?

Original op doesn't have an issue with the rule, I was just wanting to find out if there was a good historic reason for markers to be round and minidiscs instead of say square/rectangular etc.

"That Guy" being the reason triggers me a bit as other rules in the book that are written for "That Guy" are not really necessary anymore and situations can be dealt with other rules existing in the book - eg. 806.02 - If the thrower moves the disc before a determination regarding its out-of-bounds status has been made, the disc is considered to be out-of-bounds.

Which sets the default position as everyone is cheating until they're proven by the group as not. Rules should be written IMO as though everyone is playing fairly as the default.

I think this rule (written for "that guy" kicking his disc in bounds) can be dealt with by the Misplay rules and is superfluous. Using Misplay to deal with this situation loses the assumption of everyone is guilty until proven otherwise.

It's totally unrelated to the original Op, in the OP I was just curious as to where and why a marker had to be a mini and if there was something that would make it pointless to develop a couple of product ideas we have had.

 

[rhatton1]

I wouldn't allow rocks or anything else that are part of the landscape as it would be too difficult to tell the marker apart from the surrounding area.

This is actually a good reason for standardising on a marker shape that I hadn't thought of TBF. Someone could use a leaf for example that fit in the parameters and call it their marker but it would be difficult on a fall day to be sure which was which, so thank you this is the first good reason!

 

[chevis]

This is actually a good reason for standardising on a marker shape that I hadn't thought of TBF. Someone could use a leaf for example that fit in the parameters and call it their marker but it would be difficult on a fall day to be sure which was which, so thank you this is the first good reason!

funny, cuz the rule doesn't prohibit a right sized roundish rock.

 

[Cgkdisc]

A hockey puck is a legal marker and doubles as a projectile you can throw to knock your disc out of a tree. Maybe a color other than black could be seen more easily.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Perhaps I'm just obtuse, but...

Other than a 20x30 cm rectangle (which would clearly define the area for a legal lie, and could be tough to use when near certain objects), what advantage would there be in allowing other shapes?

Convenience? It's not as if minis are difficult/costly to obtain, or use. They can be as nice/personal as the player desires, or simplistic (just check out Martin's work). And they get the job done.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this feels a bit like fixing something that isn't broken.