2018 DGPT Tour Championship Oct 18-21

[DiscFifty]

Just because there is a gap in the objects defining the physical line doesn't mean the OB line suddenly ceases to exist. If you define OB with string tied to stakes, and the string between two stakes gets broken, you haven't suddenly created more IB playing surface.

The problem is, "interpretation" of a rule in the event something isn't clearly defined. You're stating "everyone knew", "if", "gaps", etc, etc. That line of thinking imop, sure it's ok for weekend warrior C tiers, or casual rounds. But when 1000'$ is on the line, any rule that's going to potentially penalyze the player in any capacity... should be clearly documented and if there's a situation where there is no clear definition of the rule, benefit should go the player.

"you define OB with string tied to stakes, and the string between two stakes gets broken"

If that occurs, then the string should be replaced before the next card throws. Period. We have to be more accountable for the sport, especially at the larger events. The money is going to grow, the gravity of these situations if/when they occur is only going to get stronger.

 

[Consult20]

If the railroad tie was moved in order to mow the island, where is that missing tie? I mean it's not like they're going to move it any significant distance just mow the grass, so where was the missing tie physically located? Did anyone see it? Is there video evidence of the missing tie location? I'm asking because I tuned in just after that hole was completed and the ruling was being sorted out.

In any case, if the tie was missing during the entire event, then all of the players were aware it and the possible consequences of flirting with that gap.

 

[cheesethin]

The problem is, "interpretation" of a rule in the event something isn't clearly defined. You're stating "everyone knew", "if", "gaps", etc, etc. That line of thinking imop, sure it's ok for weekend warrior C tiers, or casual rounds. But when 1000'$ is on the line, any rule that's going to potentially penalyze the player in any capacity... should be clearly documented and if there's a situation where there is no clear definition of the rule, benefit should go the player.

I think you are mis-characterizing the situation as more ambiguous or complex than it was.

I have just watched the live footage of the card discussing Nate's disc. The discussion between the card members is ONLY about WHERE the OB line is. Nobody at any point questions whether there should be an OB line at all. No one. All of the discussion is about where the OB line is, and Nate, rightfully, complains about no line being painted. No one on the card tries to argue that therefore there is no line and no OB. Everyone behaves and acts on the basis that there is OB, but they just don't know where exactly the line is. Awkward but 'where is OB' discussions happen.

And also very importantly NOBODY discusses whether the gap should or shouldn't be there. Nobody. It never comes up. The whole missing railway tie drama is just that. A drama created after the fact on the internet.

if there's a situation where there is no clear definition of the rule, benefit should go the player.

No, the rule book has a clear process for what to do when things are unclear - you refer it up to the TD, who then rules on it. You don't throw your hands in the air, say it's all a big mess, and give the guy a free shot.

Frustrating when the lack of clarity is down to the TD/organising. But still not grounds for letting someone off a penalty stroke. Yes the TD should have specified beforehand whether the OB line was the inside or outside edge of the ties, or painted a line. It is unfortunate that it wasn't done, but the TD was consulted (also bad that he was not on hand quickly but that shouldn't change the outcome), he gave his ruling. That is how it is supposed to work. Giving a player as IB and not OB just because something was unclear for a bit, and emotional frustrating isn't OK.

The lack of a painted OB line did not affect how Nate played his tee shot in anyway.

Have a watch https://youtu.be/MjFojDGjSEE?t=22124

 

[Steve West]

I heard some talk about more verbage about what was or was not OB on that hole. It seems the phrase "banners trump everything" was tossed out. Can anyone point me to the official source?

Now for a general comment. I don't like wide OB lines. They take away part of the meter the player is supposed to get when the disc is in bounds but near OB.

My preference would be that when OB is defined by objects with more than an inch or two of width, the TD would specify in writing that the OB line is the inside edge of the ties or hay bales.

Actually, my real preference would be that all OB lines are In bounds. It's more natural. No one marks the lake IN the water or the road ON the pavement. Artificial OB should work the same.

 

[DavidSauls]

Now for a general comment. I don't like wide OB lines. They take away part of the meter the player is supposed to get when the disc is in bounds but near OB.

If the line itself is OB, how does it affect the meter relief when inbounds, but near it?

 

[DavidSauls]

The only issue I see with this tempest-in-a-teapot is something that didn't happen: It wasn't so close to where the line would be (as an extension of the inner edge of the railroad ties) that there was uncertainty.

It's a best practice to make OB lines clear, and to avoid any line-of-sight markers. Not always practical or possible, but should be done where it can, particularly in bigger events, and this spot seemed to be a prime candidate for a length of string to complete the circle.

 

[perklc]

Re: was the tie moved during the tournament:

 

[Steve West]

If the line itself is OB, how does it affect the meter relief when inbounds, but near it?

The meter is the same, but you have a railroad tie or hay bale within your meter to deal with.

(Unless my geometry is wrong. Check it for me please, I haven't finished my coffee.)

 

[Streets]

didn't watch...but congrats to Chris for a pretty signature win. Maybe a bigger/better sponsor will sweep him up now.

 

[Steve West]

The meter is the same, but you have a railroad tie or hay bale within your meter to deal with.

(Unless my geometry is wrong. Check it for me please, I haven't finished my coffee.)

OK, there's the caffeine rush. Ignore everything I've posted this morning.

 

[Jouni]

The meter is the same, but you have a railroad tie or hay bale within your meter to deal with.

(Unless my geometry is wrong. Check it for me please, I haven't finished my coffee.)

If the tie or bale is OB, you take meter from the inner side of them so it doesn't matter how wide they are.

 

[gammaxgoblin]

Re: was the tie moved during the tournament:

I dont see how this would be any different from a storm, or natural aging, resulting in a largish branch falling off a tree which could slightly open a line between rounds. Or said branch could fall a become tangled in other branches slightly closing off a line between rounds. Only in this case the storm was a human. Except by this photo we see it was missing for everyone, which makes each player experience the same course.

Does Sexton not through the forehand because the tie was missing? Not likely.

 

[DavidSauls]

OK, there's the caffeine rush. Ignore everything I've posted this morning.

You had me wondering if I needed a refill, myself.

 

[Steve West]

You had me wondering if I needed a refill, myself.

Don't forget the doughnut. You need the elevated blood sugar levels, too.

Actually I was thrown off by Nate taking his provisional from the outside of the missing tie - which was the correct thing to do! That was a provisional in case it was in bounds, and the only way it could have been in bounds was if the outside edge of the ties was the line.

The (incorrect) thought formed in my mind that Nate was getting a better meter of real estate by not having to deal with a physical tie.

 

[teemkey]

This was an instance where the phrase "bad break" is both figurative and literal.

 

[2naphish]

i would feel a lot better about the entire situation if the TD had hopped on a golf cart and resolved the issue in person. a phone call with the codicil "as it was explained to me" seems lacking. IMHO

 

[lyleoross]

I just want to point out that Nate - MY FAVORITE PLAYER - Sexton, lost. Shame on us for focusing on that instead of Dickerson's first win at what should be a major, under full competition. Friggin' amazing scores, focus and control under pressure.

****e happens, even to the best. As my Da always said, focus on the positives.

 

[parboiled]

Who's was more brutal?

Dickerson's rollaway OB on hole 18 at Ledgestone this summer, which allowed Sexton to walk the win in, or this railroad tie kerfluffle, which cost Nate 2 strokes? Either way, it's good that they each ended up the beneficiary once.

 

[lyleoross]

Dickerson's rollaway OB on hole 18 at Ledgestone this summer, which allowed Sexton to walk the win in, or this railroad tie kerfluffle, which cost Nate 2 strokes? Either way, it's good that they each ended up the beneficiary once.

I'm not sure they're the same. What I am sure of is that Chris' margins this week were phenomenal. Very few players shoot ten down, for three rounds, on those courses.

 

[ru4por]

Dickerson's rollaway OB on hole 18 at Ledgestone this summer, which allowed Sexton to walk the win in, or this railroad tie kerfluffle, which cost Nate 2 strokes? Either way, it's good that they each ended up the beneficiary once.

Going out of bounds cost Sexton one stroke, not a railroad tie (kerfuffle or not). He knew the gap was there. It has been demonstrated that the tie was missing all tournament. Arguments that the tie would have kept him inbounds or the call was incorrect are interwebz fodder, nothing more. This out of bounds, was no more or less fair, than any of the abundant OB all over the course.