Rules question pertaining to O.B. and bridges

[ChrisWoj]

Be sure to marry the woman before someone else who had found her does.

The numbers come from my Throw Simulator spreadsheet. Any early model is available here.

Very nice! I'll be taking advantage of having it now! Appreciated, Steve. I'm sorry if others here do know you, I don't - what is your course design experience? My extent is just playing a lot (I try to stick around 1 new course played per month of disc golf played), and working closely for one summer with Chuck's courses at Highbridge while he was still tinkering on them, and picking his brain as I helped with keeping things trimmed and doing some leg work. (which is to say none lol)

 

[JoakimBL]

ChrisWoj, i Think Your estimation of how players estimates risk/reward is way off. Any decent player at least. A 3 foot wide OB in the landing zone would not influence my decision one bit, unless that experience proved to me that I would land in it way more often than One would expect.
Your argument that you as a designer has to utilize what is there because you are not allowed to change it, might be correct. But using a 3 foot wide creek crossing the fairway is not a good way to utilize that creek. The creek could be used as an OB line along the fairway or behind a basket. Or just leave it casual. There is no rule that water needs to be OB, even though many players seem to think that.

 

[Cgkdisc]

The creek could be used as an OB line along the fairway or behind a basket. Or just leave it casual. There is no rule that water needs to be OB, even though many players seem to think that.

Just not close behind it. If you have OB closer than say 40 feet to a basket, it should ideally be in front of or one side of the basket.

 

[ChrisWoj]

Just not close behind it. If you have OB closer than say 40 feet to a basket, it should ideally be in front of or one side of the basket.

Chuck - any comment on what you think of the way OB creeks played at the Old Course at St Andrews? You commented on pot bunkers, but I wasn't asking about that.

 

[geoblime]

Hey everyone! Thanks for the discussion and all the twists and turns it's gone in. There's some really good points and observations...but no one has been able to answer my original question pertaining to what the PDGA ruling would be.

My feelings are it doesn't matter if the creek is to narrow or shouldn't extend across the fairway. It doesn't matter if it's 120 ft in front of the basket or 50 ft behind. The PDGA should clearly state if a disc is leaning against a bridge in the middle of OB is in bounds or not. Saying it shouldn't be there, it's a poorly designed hole, or the TD needs to clarify is not an answer.

If you look at the USGA there is no "discussion" portion of the rule book. It clearly states what is or isn't part of the rules. The Q&A portion of the PDGA rules seems to muddy the waters because the PDGA has not been clear on numerous aspects of our sport in the actual rules section. Something as simple as a leaning disc on an inbounds bridge should be clearly addressed in the rule book.

 

[Cgkdisc]

It's unclear in your example if you are talking about a bridge support coming down into the middle of the water or a bridge support that marks the edge of the water. If the former, a disc leaning against it is OB just like touching an exposed rock surrounded by water. If the support marks the edge of the water/ground edge with water not completely surrounding it, then the disc would be touching IB and be inbounds. Not sure what isn't clear about the rule?

 

[Steve West]

The rules really can't address what is or is not out of bounds, only what to do when a disc lands there.

The TD is the one who needs to tell you what is and is not out of bounds.

 

[JoakimBL]

OB is NOT defined by bridges or water. The rules don't distinguish the status of a disc by surface material or structures. So the rules don't care what a disc is leaning against. The TD decides where the OB line is. If he says it's the edge of the bridge, you should ask him. Your question isn't a rules question.

 

[Cgkdisc]

I think he's asking for the default ruling if the TD simply says the water is OB. If that's the case, then my answer above would be the default ruling.

 

[araytx]

Hey all. Had a situation the other day which I'm not totally clear on (and the rule book only partially speaks to, go figure ).

We have multiple creeks running thru our course...all designated OB. One creek is 3ft wide with a 4" thick foot bridge running across the water, maybe 1ft above the water's surface at most. A disc came to rest in the creek leaning on the edge of the bridge with water all around it. Some people said it was OB due to being completely surrounded by water and others said it was IB due to a supporting point being on the side of the bridge. The rules book only talks about a disc which lands ON a bridge.

Thoughts?

Hey everyone! Thanks for the discussion and all the twists and turns it's gone in. There's some really good points and observations...but no one has been able to answer my original question pertaining to what the PDGA ruling would be.

My feelings are it doesn't matter if the creek is to narrow or shouldn't extend across the fairway. It doesn't matter if it's 120 ft in front of the basket or 50 ft behind. The PDGA should clearly state if a disc is leaning against a bridge in the middle of OB is in bounds or not. Saying it shouldn't be there, it's a poorly designed hole, or the TD needs to clarify is not an answer.

If you look at the USGA there is no "discussion" portion of the rule book. It clearly states what is or isn't part of the rules. The Q&A portion of the PDGA rules seems to muddy the waters because the PDGA has not been clear on numerous aspects of our sport in the actual rules section. Something as simple as a leaning disc on an inbounds bridge should be clearly addressed in the rule book.

Geo, I am going to try and tackle your answer, but I will first give make a big point about OB declarations, even if known. The declaration "the creek is designated OB" is where your problem lies. That's not an OB line definition. You're assuming that the players understand that it means "between the line defined by the water's edge on each side is the defined OB area" but not everyone gets that.

So, IF that is what you mean by "there are several creeks running through our course, and all are designated out of bounds," then I can give you this answer. Such being the case your question in the OP would be out of bounds. What it is leaning against would not matter unless it was somehow supported by that "other" playing surface, in an area designated as IB. However, I am not interpreting the area where it was "leaning on the edge of the bridge" as a playing surface because it sounds like a bridge support that could not be defined as a playing surface. Now if you tell me the opposite (the spot it was leaning against COULD support a player and is thus a playing surface," my response is changed to IB. I think the rulebook correctly only mentions a disc landing ON a bridge, because it has to be "ON", partially "ON", or above "ON", to be considered in the playing surface part of the bridge.

 

[roggenb3]

Random question - didn't want to make a whole new thread, so I just found one related to bridges.

Lets say you have a tee shot that follows a river for 250' or so, where a good shot is over the water the whole way.

Landing in the water is OB, but if you happen to land on one of the 2 or 3 bridges, you are safe.

My question is, if you go in the water, can you take your lie from the last bridge you crossed? I mean, if the bridges are IB, then that's technically the last place you were in, correct?

 

[biscoe]

Random question - didn't want to make a whole new thread, so I just found one related to bridges.

Lets say you have a tee shot that follows a river for 250' or so, where a good shot is over the water the whole way.

Landing in the water is OB, but if you happen to land on one of the 2 or 3 bridges, you are safe.

My question is, if you go in the water, can you take your lie from the last bridge you crossed? I mean, if the bridges are IB, then that's technically the last place you were in, correct?

sure- why wouldn't it be?

 

[Cgkdisc]

Random question - didn't want to make a whole new thread, so I just found one related to bridges.

Lets say you have a tee shot that follows a river for 250' or so, where a good shot is over the water the whole way.

Landing in the water is OB, but if you happen to land on one of the 2 or 3 bridges, you are safe.

My question is, if you go in the water, can you take your lie from the last bridge you crossed? I mean, if the bridges are IB, then that's technically the last place you were in, correct?

Yes. A good example is the last hole at Sandy Point where you throw over the lake to the pin on a peninsula while flying over a dock extending into the lake. If you land in the lake past the dock, you can play from the dock or re-throw.

 

[roggenb3]

sure- why wouldn't it be?

I don't know, I assumed it would be. But I have definitely seen people not realize this and take a lie on ground way further back than they could have on a bridge.

When you know a creek or river is OB, I think folks tend to think of everything between the shorelines as OB.

 

[JC17393]

I don't know, I assumed it would be. But I have definitely seen people not realize this and take a lie on ground way further back than they could have on a bridge.

When you know a creek or river is OB, I think folks tend to think of everything between the shorelines as OB.

That's because everything between the shorelines, including bridges, can be OB depending on how the OB area is described or delineated.

For example, if OB is described as "in the river/water" then it's easy to say that a bridge over the water would be in-bounds as it was not designated as part of the OB. But if, rather than using the water line, the river is marked with paint or rope and OB is defined as within the marked area, then I'd argue that a bridge within the roped/painted area is a part of the OB area.

There should be no assumption either way, IMO. That's why it's so important for TDs and course designers to be absolutely clear about what is and isn't OB rather than give vague or generalized descriptions. And players, if they have any doubts, should ask for clarification rather than assume something based on a past experience, likely on a different course with different people in charge of making rulings.

 

[araytx]

That's because everything between the shorelines, including bridges, can be OB depending on how the OB area is described or delineated.

For example, if OB is described as "in the river/water" then it's easy to say that a bridge over the water would be in-bounds as it was not designated as part of the OB. But if, rather than using the water line, the river is marked with paint or rope and OB is defined as within the marked area, then I'd argue that a bridge within the roped/painted area is a part of the OB area.

There should be no assumption either way, IMO. That's why it's so important for TDs and course designers to be absolutely clear about what is and isn't OB rather than give vague or generalized descriptions. And players, if they have any doubts, should ask for clarification rather than assume something based on a past experience, likely on a different course with different people in charge of making rulings.

True. Exactly why the expression "water is OB" without further definition/explanation is usually a poor definition of OB line(s). When it's roped or painted, it's much clearer as to what's OB.

 

[DavidSauls]

At our course we declared all bridges I.B., specifically for this "throwing over the bridge" scenario. There's a water carry hole that isn't too long, but if you throw wrong just right, you can cross a bridge and continue OB for quite a ways. We made the bridge IB so you wouldn't have to re-tee if that happened. (I don't know if I've ever seen anyone actually land on a bridge here).