Koda it could all be done behind the disc as rules already are written. You could run a mile b4 getting up to your disc.
Problem becomes stepping past the lie ala follow thru
Problem becomes stepping past the lie ala follow thru
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
The Disc Golf Guy - Vlog #364 - Step Putt Analysis for Ulibarri and Feldberg
- Thread starter Aim For The Chains
- Start date
HyzerUniBomber
* Ace Member *
No call. No fault.
Kodachrome
* Ace Member *
No, the problem stems from the definition of a putt combined with the supporting point bs. Because someone's supporting point would be a good 3 feet behind their lie if they were permitted to step putt and land behind their lie. It's basically the same step putt/jump putt bull**** but now we have changed the rules to make it Clearly legal, and also satisfies those who hate the idea of flouting the rules to get an extra 2-3 feet closer to the basket.
Sorry for not being clear, but the provision about extending the area behind the disc was meant to mean where your supporting point can be/land at release on a putt. But for both ideas, nobody would be permitted to move beyond the lie.
I think we need separate throws from putts, basically, and not base it off of the circle at all. But if we aren't going to do that then we need to change the rule for supporting points and area behind the lie on putts.
Sorry for not being clear, but the provision about extending the area behind the disc was meant to mean where your supporting point can be/land at release on a putt. But for both ideas, nobody would be permitted to move beyond the lie.
I think we need separate throws from putts, basically, and not base it off of the circle at all. But if we aren't going to do that then we need to change the rule for supporting points and area behind the lie on putts.
Last edited:
Kodachrome
* Ace Member *
Let me just clarify my thoughts instead of rambling more - we could just not allow parts to touch the ground beyond the lie, ever. But I don't think that's fair for drives, and I'm not a fan of stand and deliver. So I think there would have to be some give on how far back your supporting points can be.
If not that, then the definition of a putt based on other criteria would be best, so the new definition of the putt can work within the existing rules for a putt.
If not that, then the definition of a putt based on other criteria would be best, so the new definition of the putt can work within the existing rules for a putt.
rocthecourse
* Ace Member *
Kodachrome
* Ace Member *
I think 30 meters would be an okay solution, but not closer.
Any perceived gains from a step putt at that range would be negligible, but you still have the issue and now it just got 10x harder to judge where you are. "Am I out?" Lol
Any perceived gains from a step putt at that range would be negligible, but you still have the issue and now it just got 10x harder to judge where you are. "Am I out?" Lol
Any change in the rules would just lead to similar arguments about the new rule. Due to the nature of competition, some players will always be pushing the threshold of what's legal/illegal if they think they can gain an advantage. For example:
We would have the same discussion about similar throws from outside the larger circle.
You could still perform a legal step putt, but you'd have to release the disc before your "stepping" foot moved ahead of your mark. We would wind up having a similar discussion wherein people looked through film frame-by-frame to see if the foot was ahead of the marker at the moment of release.
Also, as long as we're nit-picking possible stance violations, I'm still not aware of any formal definition of what constitutes a "supporting point".
We would have the same discussion about similar throws from outside the larger circle.
You could still perform a legal step putt, but you'd have to release the disc before your "stepping" foot moved ahead of your mark. We would wind up having a similar discussion wherein people looked through film frame-by-frame to see if the foot was ahead of the marker at the moment of release.
Also, as long as we're nit-picking possible stance violations, I'm still not aware of any formal definition of what constitutes a "supporting point".
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
While I know Kodachrome hates Stand and Deliver, it does solve the problem. Basically, anywhere outside the tee box, you're not allowed to step past your disc solves the problem. Again, the PDGA is going to feel this is less exciting, and thus, not good for the sport.
As pointed out above, putting difficult calls, or calls that require players to focus more on their opponent's game, than their own, in the hands of players, is a problem for the sport. It's unfair, unrealistic, and will not result in equitable violation calls. I will always refer to this situation, but it was clear at worlds that Climo and Brown had it in for Stokely when they went after him. I've seen both Brown and Climo foot fault plenty. I admit, they clearly look like they are trying to get it right, whereas Stokely clearly wasn't, but I don't think anyone can say the foot fault calls in that round, or in any round, are equitable.
The rules need to be structured such that the calls are obvious and can easily be called, like a foot fault in the box where every player is in the same place, looking at the same thing.
As pointed out above, putting difficult calls, or calls that require players to focus more on their opponent's game, than their own, in the hands of players, is a problem for the sport. It's unfair, unrealistic, and will not result in equitable violation calls. I will always refer to this situation, but it was clear at worlds that Climo and Brown had it in for Stokely when they went after him. I've seen both Brown and Climo foot fault plenty. I admit, they clearly look like they are trying to get it right, whereas Stokely clearly wasn't, but I don't think anyone can say the foot fault calls in that round, or in any round, are equitable.
The rules need to be structured such that the calls are obvious and can easily be called, like a foot fault in the box where every player is in the same place, looking at the same thing.
At least then we're talking about a matter of inches, instead of feet, advantage.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
I think the argument, not that I'm supporting it, is that if you get the circle far enough out, the step doesn't really do anything for you. You want to put it far enough out that no one would really be putting anyway, it's just a layup, no matter what the motion. If you hit it, it's mostly an application of luck.
As was pointed out, you lose the ability to determine what the "circle" is at that distance.
Kodachrome
* Ace Member *
I don't hate stand and deliver, I just think it's a waste of potential in other aspects of the game, kind of cutting off our nose to spite our face. I throw from a standstill frequently myself, I would just prefer to do all we can to fix the issue by dealing with the real problem - the definition of a putt and the loophole creating by supporting points - before we resort to such a sweeping limitation to all aspects of the game.
Last edited:
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
Instead of stand and deliver, it should be "on all shots outside the box, the lead foot must be placed in a firm position behind the marker prior to the throwing motion, and the follow foot shall not cross a line that is perpendicular to the basket, and crosses the edge of the marker on the player's side of the marker. A run up would be considered as part of the throwing motion."
That way you can move your back foot, lift it up, step it to the side as you're throwing, but not break the line so to speak.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
Corrected.
I'm not sure that S & D is as sweeping as you feel it is. By my experience, I can get 80% of the distance of a run up throw from a S & D throw. And in my experience, there is no difference in the distance I can putt. I understand that accuracy goes up on putts, but that is simply the elimination of four feet in distance on the putt.
I'm willing to bet that over 50% of fairway drives (taking into account drives behind obstacles) are S & D. The only time they really come into play are on very long holes in fairly open fairways. In my average round, even on the big courses here in Houston, Inwood, the number of fairway drives I have that aren't S & D are two to three a round. You're just not changing the game that much.
The formal definition, according to the PDGA, is: "At the time of release, any part of a player's body that is in contact with the playing surface or some other object that provides support."
A playing surface is: "A surface, generally the ground, which is capable of supporting the player and from which a stance can reasonably be taken."
http://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/800-introduction/80002-definitions
Maybe for your style. Totally a matter of choice.
@iDiscGolf
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2013
- Messages
- 3,805
No call. No fault.
I watched the first few minutes of this footage.
I believe they said this guy was on some part of the PDGA Rules Committee too
He also had a fault in a straddle not squared to the basket too lulz
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
I don't disagree that it is a matter of choice, but based on many observations, I'm pretty comfortable with my higher than 50% number. Clearly, for me, it's much higher. In general tournament play, live and on line, I rarely see more. You have to be on a fairly long hole for such things to come into play. Are there players that take a run up on every drive, even approaches, maybe, but given the overall impact of the situation on outcomes, it is an important issue.
That really came home at worlds. Climo and Brown zorched Stokely's game and round in all of ten seconds. Conceding the point that he had a foot fault, the issue becomes equity. I'm pretty confident we have an equity problem on this issue.
When the primary reason for a foot fault being called is, "I'm annoyed with that guy," you have an issue.
Thanks! Somehow I never found that definitions page. Just more proof that I shouldn't be allowed to operate a computer
Didn'tSeeThatTree
Bogey Member
If it really gave an advantage then why do so few players use a step putt?
It seems more complicated and looks awkward IMO. As uncoordinated as I am I'd trip all over myself trying to get the timing just right!
It seems more complicated and looks awkward IMO. As uncoordinated as I am I'd trip all over myself trying to get the timing just right!
Similar threads
