A Fun List of Odd Rule Uses

[Cgkdisc]

I've looked the rule over carefully. I think, by the letter of the law you may be right, which means that this is probably an extremely poorly written rule. The point is supposed to be that in the throwing motion that you need to keep balance. If falling on your ass, standing up and pausing for a moment then proceeding is enough to satisfy demonstrating full control of balance before advancing to the target, then the rule is asinine. That is absolutely NOT what they were trying to do here, and we all know this. But I think poor wording may allow for it.

No, that's not the case. The rule is written so you cannot lunge forward upon putting. As long as you stay behind the line with any kind of contact including shenanigans before regaining balance and moving forward of your mark is perfectly fine. For example, you can fall on your face or butt upon releasing a bowling ball as long as none of you crosses the foul line. Same concept with putting.

 

[JeremyKShort]

No, that's not the case. The rule is written so you cannot lunge forward upon putting. As long as you stay behind the line with any kind of contact and shenanigans before regaining balance and moving forward is perfectly fine. For example, you can fall on your face or butt upon releasing a bowling ball as long as none of you crosses the foul line. Same concept with putting.

But that's not regaining balance, it's completely and absolutely loosing balance. Falling down is the result of complete balance lost. You have failed at this point. The idea that getting back up somehow showing that you've regained balance seems absurd to me.

 

[Cgkdisc]

But that's not regaining balance, it's completely and absolutely loosing balance. Falling down is the result of complete balance lost. You have failed at this point. The idea that getting back up somehow showing that you've regained balance seems absurd to me.

I'm afraid you're missing the point of the rule. It's not about balance at all but simply preventing a fault by making contact in front of the lie during the throwing motion. "Demonstrating balance" is a way to prove you didn't foot fault on the release. No one cares what you do behind the line as long as you're balanced when moving past it.

 

[JC17393]

But that's not regaining balance, it's completely and absolutely loosing balance. Falling down is the result of complete balance lost. You have failed at this point. The idea that getting back up somehow showing that you've regained balance seems absurd to me.

Nothing in the rule says anything about maintaining or regaining balance at all. The words "maintain" and "regain" don't appear anywhere in the rule, and maintaining balance is not the intent of the rule at all.

The rule is to prevent players from jumping, lunging or in any other way following through past the marker while within the putting circle. Players are expected to do that by demonstrating balance before advancing toward the target. Note there is no time frame set for when that demonstration must take place other than before advancing closer to the target than the rear edge of the marker. If the player never advances forward past his marker, he never actually has to show balance at all.

 

[paulw]

. . .
Most underutilized rule in the book.



. .

I disagree -- the optional rethrow rule can be used effectively in very few situations -- Chuck describes the most obvious example, other than that it's difficult to find an application for the rule. The time rule is never used, the foot fault rule is rarely used, if a "provisional" is a rule it's way more underutilized than the rethrow rule. Re-throwing is difficult to rationalize since you can almost always make more ground throwing the disc than taking a penalty. Without OB or a lost disc in the biggest mess of swamp/trees/etc., rethrowing just makes no sense competitively.

 

[coupe]

But that's not regaining balance, it's completely and absolutely loosing balance. Falling down is the result of complete balance lost. You have failed at this point. The idea that getting back up somehow showing that you've regained balance seems absurd to me.

You're not required to maintain balance while putting. [T]he ONLY thing that matters is that you demonstrate full control of balance before advancing toward the hole. As long as you don't make any supporting point contact closer to the hole than the rear edge of the mini marker disc before demonstrating full control of balance, you can release the putt and fall sideways while the disc is in the air; you can face away from the hole and snap the putt between your legs like football center and fall forward onto your face while the disc is still in motion; you can make an MTA (boomerang-style) throw with a 95g Fastback, run to the basket, climb on top and be doing a tap dance on it when the disc crashes in, provided that you demonstrate full control of balance before advancing toward the hole.

Rule Question: Maintaining balance while putting
Question
"I have a good rules question for you involving the stance rules. A player uses an object (in this case a branch) behind him to maintain balance for a putt. First, would this be considered "full control of balance"? Second, could you argue, if the branch is not so large that the players body weight will not move it, that it is a violation of 803.03 D and or 803.04 A because they could have moved the branch less by not hanging on it? Thanks for any input."

Response
The question can be boiled down to: Can a player hold on to an object behind his lie to maintain balance while throwing/putting?

Applicable rules:


803.04 (Stance)
803.05 (Obstacles and Relief)
804.05 (Disqualification and Suspension)

Discussion:

The rules do not require that you maintain your balance while putting. You can have a grand mal seizure as long as you don't step ahead of your lie. At the time you decide to step ahead of your lie is when you have to demonstrate balance. This is simply to prove that you are not committing a falling putt, such that you would not be able to stop yourself from falling forward due to the motion of your putt. Grabbing a branch is merely acquiring another support point, which is perfectly legal, as long as it is not ahead of your lie.

Holding on to something BEHIND your lie is not prohibited by the rules, provided that the tree that the golfer is using as a supporting point is in-bounds (803.03.A (3)).

The branch must not be moved, or else the player would be in violation of one or both of 803.04.D and 803.05.A, which require you to take the stance that results in the least movement of objects that are part of the course and which prohibit you from moving a branch to "make room for a throwing motion".

Conclusion:

A player can hold on to something behind her lie, in certain circumstances, without violating the PDGA rules. In general that which is not prohibited by the PDGA rules is allowed, provided of course, that the action done by the player is not considered "a willful attempt to circumvent the rules of play". (This, of course, is cheating!)

Other Comments:

Many members of the committee have actually tried to hold on to some object behind their lie, while leaning forward to throw or putt. In our opinion this action makes the ensuing throw/putt MORE difficult to accomplish.

The PDGA Rules Committee

Carlton Howard, Chair
John Chapman
Conrad Damon
Harold Duvall
Joe Garcia
Jim Garnett
Rick Voakes

 

[KniceZ]

I disagree -- the optional rethrow rule can be used effectively in very few situations.

You must not play a lot of courses with dense brush just off the fairway. I've used the optional rethrow several times in situations where I've landed so deep in the underbrush (either a horrible throw or deflection off a tree) that I didn't have any way to make a throw toward the basket or even out to the fairway. It was better to just retee than take my chances trying to get back out into the open.

 

[JeremyKShort]

You're not required to maintain balance while putting. [T]he ONLY thing that matters is that you demonstrate full control of balance before advancing toward the hole. As long as you don't make any supporting point contact closer to the hole than the rear edge of the mini marker disc before demonstrating full control of balance, you can release the putt and fall sideways while the disc is in the air; you can face away from the hole and snap the putt between your legs like football center and fall forward onto your face while the disc is still in motion; you can make an MTA (boomerang-style) throw with a 95g Fastback, run to the basket, climb on top and be doing a tap dance on it when the disc crashes in, provided that you demonstrate full control of balance before advancing toward the hole.

After reading that it's clear I was wrong, but I've never gotten that reading the rules, and still don't see that by the way it's worded. I know that the Q &A's have the effect of law, so that must be what they meant when writing it. But I seriously can't get that out of the way it's worded.

 

[DavidSauls]

I've looked the rule over carefully. I think, by the letter of the law you may be right, which means that this is probably an extremely poorly written rule. The point is supposed to be that in the throwing motion that you need to keep balance. If falling on your ass, standing up and pausing for a moment then proceeding is enough to satisfy demonstrating full control of balance before advancing to the target, then the rule is asinine. That is absolutely NOT what they were trying to do here, and we all know this. But I think poor wording may allow for it.

This is the assumption that's leading you astray. That's not the point of the rule. It never was.

The whole reason for the "falling putt" rule is to keep people from lunging forward, falling forward, leaning in, using walking or running momentum, etc., to make putting easier. (I think this is silly, and will abolish it when appointed Rules Czar, but many disagree).

It might help you if we'd quit calling it a "falling putt".

 

[JC17393]

This is the assumption that's leading you astray. That's not the point of the rule. It never was.

The whole reason for the "falling putt" rule is to keep people from lunging forward, falling forward, leaning in, using walking or running momentum, etc., to make putting easier. (I think this is silly, and will abolish it when appointed Rules Czar, but many disagree).

It might help you if we'd quit calling it a "falling putt".

Or got more specific/accurate and called it a "falling forward putt". I imagine that will catch on as much as "putt jump" has as an accurate description of the action more commonly referred to as a "jump putt".

 

[paulw]

You must not play a lot of courses with dense brush just off the fairway. I've used the optional rethrow several times in situations where I've landed so deep in the underbrush (either a horrible throw or deflection off a tree) that I didn't have any way to make a throw toward the basket or even out to the fairway. It was better to just retee than take my chances trying to get back out into the open.

You must not be good at throwing it out of dense brush just off the fairway or you must not be good at reading the list of courses that I've played. To throw a drive and have it kick to a place that I can't go to where I threw it and then not be able to then throw it to a place that's better than the tee is next to impossible. It has to be OB or inevitably I can get it to where it's better. Yes, I am very good out of tough spots, but to give up a throw? Can't remember in a competitive round where it made sense to rethrow. Now, casually do I watch the disc flying into the bushes and say "F-that, I'm re-teeing", duh. But not when money's at stake.

 

[coupe]

You must not be good at throwing it out of dense brush just off the fairway or you must not be good at reading the list of courses that I've played. To throw a drive and have it kick to a place that I can't go to where I threw it and then not be able to then throw it to a place that's better than the tee is next to impossible. It has to be OB or inevitably I can get it to where it's better. Yes, I am very good out of tough spots, but to give up a throw? Can't remember in a competitive round where it made sense to rethrow. Now, casually do I watch the disc flying into the bushes and say "F-that, I'm re-teeing", duh. But not when money's at stake.

Yeah, but you're not a chucker like this guy.

 

[ToddL]

You must not be good at throwing it out of dense brush just off the fairway or you must not be good at reading the list of courses that I've played. To throw a drive and have it kick to a place that I can't go to where I threw it and then not be able to then throw it to a place that's better than the tee is next to impossible. It has to be OB or inevitably I can get it to where it's better. Yes, I am very good out of tough spots, but to give up a throw? Can't remember in a competitive round where it made sense to rethrow. Now, casually do I watch the disc flying into the bushes and say "F-that, I'm re-teeing", duh. But not when money's at stake.

I've done it twice in competition this year, and both times worked out to my advantage.

Hole 7, North Georgia Canopy Tours - 35' downhill putt. Skip off the edge of the rim, pick up, roll 85' downhill through some extremely thick woods. There was a 0.00% chance of making it back through the woods on my comeback, and a pretty good chance that I'd leave myself with more than 50'. Penalty stroke, reputted, made the putt, took a 4. Could very easily have been a 5 or 6 from the woods.

Hole 15, Ashe County Park - 320' valley shot. Drive hits a tree, sails way off to the left, down the hill to the bottom of the valley. 150' uphill through a lot of trees to get back to the fairway, then another 150' uphill to the pin. Best case scenario 4, probably a 5 on a hole that I typically like to birdie. Penalty stroke, retee, ace it, took a 3. I would not have been upset at all about taking a 5 off my retee.

 

[sjberry2017]

Big Jerm has actually used the rethrow in competition on Ashe County hole 15; starts around the 29:50 mark

 

[threej21]

I've done it twice in competition this year, and both times worked out to my advantage.

Hole 7, North Georgia Canopy Tours - 35' downhill putt. Skip off the edge of the rim, pick up, roll 85' downhill through some extremely thick woods. There was a 0.00% chance of making it back through the woods on my comeback, and a pretty good chance that I'd leave myself with more than 50'. Penalty stroke, reputted, made the putt, took a 4. Could very easily have been a 5 or 6 from the woods.

Hole 7 Todd?? Maybe hole 6, or hole 8. But 7 is pretty flat without many surround big hills.

 

[Declarkus]

Failing to Hole Out - If your disc is not touching the basket because it is resting on top of another disc, you are not yet holed out.

What if the disc is hanging in the chains?

 

[JC17393]

What if the disc is hanging in the chains?

Can't tell if you're being serious, but read the rule.

802.05
A. Basket Targets: In order to hole out, the thrower must release the disc and it must come to rest supported by the chains and/or the inner cylinder (bottom and inside wall) of the tray. It may be additionally supported by the pole. A disc that enters the target below the top of the tray or above the bottom of the chain support is not holed out.
​

 

[paulw]

I've done it twice in competition this year, and both times worked out to my advantage.

Hole 7, North Georgia Canopy Tours - 35' downhill putt. Skip off the edge of the rim, pick up, roll 85' downhill through some extremely thick woods. There was a 0.00% chance of making it back through the woods on my comeback, and a pretty good chance that I'd leave myself with more than 50'. Penalty stroke, reputted, made the putt, took a 4. Could very easily have been a 5 or 6 from the woods.

Hole 15, Ashe County Park - 320' valley shot. Drive hits a tree, sails way off to the left, down the hill to the bottom of the valley. 150' uphill through a lot of trees to get back to the fairway, then another 150' uphill to the pin. Best case scenario 4, probably a 5 on a hole that I typically like to birdie. Penalty stroke, retee, ace it, took a 3. I would not have been upset at all about taking a 5 off my retee.

You argue well on the internet, we'll agree to disagree on how often this rule gets overlooked -- it just doesn't make any sense in most cases to even consider using it. I see your examples and contend they're exaggerations -- 0% chance you can't get up and down from 85' after your disc rolled there? Really -- 0%? Not one throw in a million could've possibly gotten through!?! Wow! You're a rules genius!!

Made a circle 3 from 320' after macking off a tree and kicking over 300' from the basket on a 320' basket?? It's extremely difficult to just do THAT part of the story to say nothing of then throwing in your third throw . . . .but of course you'll now disagree and magically another story of how 5 times today your 25' putt was blown 5 miles across the entire park by freak gusts of wind and each time it landed on an island surrounded by gnome infested quick sand although you could easily make out it was yours, the evil gnomes refused to let you pass so each time you re-putted and took your circle 4 . . . been there!! opcorn:

Or, I disagree.

 

[paulw]

My contention isn't that optional rethrow is never used, I've used it -- I'm contending that it's not even close to the most underemployed rule in disc golf. It's just not that easy to run into a situation to use it unlike say:

How often golfers don't move sticks/rocks/etc. that are obstructing their stance.

How often golfers don't pivot correctly to avoid an obstacle.

How often golfers don't use the meter from out of bounds correctly.

etc., etc. And forget foot faults that should be the "ignore everything about them because it's just a non-fit between players and rules, it only leads to bad feelings and bad golf.

The thirty second rule is like foot faults lite -- don't go there either, although I'm all the rules zealots will appear to tell me how holier than thou they are -- have at it, doesn't make you right.

 

[ToddL]

Hole 7 Todd?? Maybe hole 6, or hole 8. But 7 is pretty flat without many surround big hills.

Definitely hole 7 (click the link in my post for an image of the green, which you're definitely familiar with). The hill certainly wasn't as steep as 6 or 8, but the trees are definitely denser. It just took off on a slow roll and miraculously missed everything.

You argue well on the internet, we'll agree to disagree on how often this rule gets overlooked -- it just doesn't make any sense in most cases to even consider using it. I see your examples and contend they're exaggerations -- 0% chance you can't get up and down from 85' after your disc rolled there? Really -- 0%? Not one throw in a million could've possibly gotten through!?! Wow! You're a rules genius!!

Well, I only specified that not one throw in 10,000 would have gotten through.

Another example: Hole 18, Winthrop Gold, USDGC four or five years ago. I witnessed a competitor miss a putt from around 20' and roll 50' down the hill into the lake. As he was picking up his mini to go down to the bottom of the hill, cardmate Ken Climo told him, "whoa whoa whoa, put your mini back down. You can redo your putt from right there." The dude didn't know the rule and was surprised by Climo's advice. IIRC, he made his reputt, but that was a long time ago...

Made a circle 3 from 320' after macking off a tree and kicking over 300' from the basket on a 320' basket?? It's extremely difficult to just do THAT part of the story to say nothing of then throwing in your third throw . . . .but of course you'll now disagree and magically another story of how 5 times today your 25' putt was blown 5 miles across the entire park by freak gusts of wind and each time it landed on an island surrounded by gnome infested quick sand although you could easily make out it was yours, the evil gnomes refused to let you pass so each time you re-putted and took your circle 4 . . . been there!! opcorn:

Or, I disagree.

It was a pretty awesome retee. I probably have a ~40% birdie rate on that hole, so I was hoping to take a 4 with my penalty stroke with a very likely 5. What if I hit another tree and flew into the valley again? Well, let's not worry about that.

And I made a snide comment about "why, twice this year!" Yea, I was being snide. I've indeed used it twice this year, and both to very good outcomes, but I doubt if I've used it more than once or twice in the last five years. It's not very common. I throw a few thousand tournament throws every year, and probably average less than 1 optional retee a year. So I'm somewhere under 0.1% for how often I use it.

PGA also has that rule. Kevin Na in 2011 used it (and wishes he used it twice): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiyEyDwuq_Q