Dynamic Casual Relief

[DiscFifty]

@#$%.. can't change the thread title. Should be "Dynamic Casual Area" lol....

Continuing just this topic taken from this thread... (didn't want to cause more thread drift.)

https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138797

For a "dynamic casual area" rule to be equitable all players must have the option of declaring an "unsafe lie," regardless of any change in course conditions during the round. Otherwise you're creating a condition in which players who played a hole prior to the "change" in conditions are forced to play under a different set of rules than players who played it after those "changes."

Lightning is a dynamic condition that could happen anywhere on the course and play is stopped until the condition goes away. Just stating there is precedent for recognizing and acting upon a dynamic condition that could be unsafe. And in this case if hours go by, you've just changed conditions on the course for earlier players compared to later players finishing after the rain, so the point of players playing under a different set of course conditions is already accepted. The rule I am contemplating would certainly be available to anyone who may find themselves in similar situations.

"Dynamic Casual Area" - To be clear... the flow would go something like...

a) Player hits his line off the tee, lands on the fairway.

b) Upon arrival to his lie he notices his disc in a very wet, muddy, slippery area. The TD did not know about this area and has not declared relief. The player chooses to declare "Dynamic Casual Area".

c) The card then has to agree that: 1) The player's disc is truly in an area that is not safe to throw from. 2) The player's disc is on the fairway, not the rough, etc. If the card agrees the player takes relief.

The player's disc landed in an area that is usually safe. Now this area has become an unsafe part of the fairway. This is not a permanent addition to the course, it's a dynamic entity that comes and goes based on uncontrollable events. The TD was not made aware of this location so there was no way to declare the area as relief before the tournament starts.

I'm not saying we should give someone a break for a bad shot (in the rough, briers, etc). I'm saying we may need to consider giving someone a break for a good shot that ends up in a unsafe area due to dynamic events.

Since it has to be voted on, I don't see how this can be taken advantage of unless the guys on the card are cheaters to begin with.

But I digress, let's be real here... who here really thinks a pro slipping somewhere (due to dynamic conditions) and breaking a leg, busting his head open, etc, wouldn't cause an immediate call of action (especially from social media, fans, etc) to add something to the rules providing safety guidelines in place so it never happens again?

 

[Discette]

This rule is not necessary for top pros.

Relief is already available (at the cost of one throw) to all you Amateur Old guys that might actually break a leg slipping in the mud. Adding a throw to your score is probably a better idea than taking a risk.

 

[Steve West]

...very wet, muddy, slippery area....

It starts with a very wet, muddy, slippery area. Then merely wet, muddy, slippery. Then damp, or kind of muddy, or a little slippery.

Then, I decide I might fall because the hill is so steep (it has happened, after all). Then, someone else is "afraid of" a slightly tilted lie. Or they say they don't want to break their wrist on the tree next to the lie. Or might get their arms sliced up by the eye-high grass.

And, since no one reads the rules, word-of-mouth will transmute the idea into "you don't have to throw from any lie you don't like".


I've been in groups where someone tried the "unsafe lie" thing. It's amazing how quickly it becomes "safe enough" when they learn it would cost a penalty throw.

But, whenever there truly was an unsafe place to play, the player was thankful to hear they actually could move the lie and did not hesitate to spend the penalty.

Sure, there is a little tension when the group is learning the rule. "You're making me play there?" "No, we're telling you that you don't have to; and explaining how to invoke your rights legally." The result is three more players who are more comfortable with tournament play, now that they have the confidence which comes from knowing how to deal with situations.

 

[Jay Dub]

It starts with a very wet, muddy, slippery area. Then merely wet, muddy, slippery. Then damp, or kind of muddy, or a little slippery.

Then, I decide I might fall because the hill is so steep (it has happened, after all). Then, someone else is "afraid of" a slightly tilted lie. Or they say they don't want to break their wrist on the tree next to the lie. Or might get their arms sliced up by the eye-high grass.

And, since no one reads the rules, word-of-mouth will transmute the idea into "you don't have to throw from any lie you don't like".


I've been in groups where someone tried the "unsafe lie" thing. It's amazing how quickly it becomes "safe enough" when they learn it would cost a penalty throw.

But, whenever there truly was an unsafe place to play, the player was thankful to hear they actually could move the lie and did not hesitate to spend the penalty.

Sure, there is a little tension when the group is learning the rule. "You're making me play there?" "No, we're telling you that you don't have to; and explaining how to invoke your rights legally." The result is three more players who are more comfortable with tournament play, now that they have the confidence which comes from knowing how to deal with situations.

This is how it goes! :thmbup:

 

[coupe]

What Steve West said.

It's like the evolution of 801.01 Fairness morphing into an automatic invocation of "benefit of the doubt to the thrower" without even the pretense of the group making a decision.

Lightning is a dynamic condition that could happen anywhere on the course and play is stopped until the condition goes away. Just stating there is precedent for recognizing and acting upon a dynamic condition that could be unsafe. And in this case if hours go by, you've just changed conditions on the course for earlier players compared to later players finishing after the rain, so the point of players playing under a different set of course conditions is already accepted. The rule I am contemplating would certainly be available to anyone who may find themselves in similar situations.

Playing under different course conditions is not the same as playing under different rules.
Nowhere in the Rules does it provide for players to play a hole under the same, or even largely similar, conditions. By mandating that players to play the course "as they find it," the Rules already presume and provide for the possibility of players facing differing course conditions during around.

Again, for a rule to be equitable, it must provide EVERY player the opportunity to avail him- or herself of its provision anywhere on the course from the time a round starts until the round is completed, irrespective of any possible changes to the course conditions and without need for consent from one's card mates. The "choose to throw behind or beside the provided teepad" option (where provided) IS equitable, even if it is only applicable to a subset of holes, because the decision of where to throw from on those holes is made solely by the thrower. A group determination of whether the current conditions have changed sufficiently to invoke "dynamic conditions" inherently puts the thrower at the mercy of matters that have no place in the determination, such as the strictness or laxness of the other players in the group, the competitive situation that pertains in the moment (e.g. last or second to last hole with thrower and two cardmates all tied or within a stroke of last cash), the group vibe, and/or the "history" between the thrower and one or more players in the group.

Again, the current rules already provide a mechanism for play under changed "dynamic conditions" via the optional relief and abandoned throw rules, which a player may invoke at his or her discretion. If a player deems the cost of those invoking one of those options greater than the risk of injury by not invoking them, so be it.

 

[brutalbrutus]

@#$%.. can't change the thread title. Should be "Dynamic Casual Area" lol....
n?

For future reference, you can change thread titles as long as you are still in the edit window. Once you hit edit, then click Go Advanced and you can edit the title there.

 

[DiscFifty]

Good dialog, much appreciated. :thmbup: I sincerely hope we don't have to revisit this thread anytime soon, but I think it's inevitable at some point. The Kevin Jones slip could have been much worse and probably would have resulted in some dialog about enhanced safety concerns.

 

[R-Ogre]

Good dialog, much appreciated. :thmbup: I sincerely hope we don't have to revisit this thread anytime soon, but I think it's inevitable at some point. The Kevin Jones slip could have been much worse and probably would have resulted in some dialog about enhanced safety concerns.

How does a slip off the tee relate to people who can't put on they big boy pants and throw a standstill from a mud puddle? I mean if we want to talk about standardizing the tees for the pros that's valid but doesn't seem like it's super related to the original post.

 

[DiscFifty]

How does a slip off the tee relate to people who can't put on they big boy pants and throw a standstill from a mud puddle? I mean if we want to talk about standardizing the tees for the pros that's valid but doesn't seem like it's super related to the original post.

Because a slippery tee can also be caused by dynamic changes, so if the TD did not provide extra safety measures put in place off the tee, the suggested rule could apply.

If you play enough tournaments you will see players slip / fall from a stand still as well. So even players wearing big boy pants can have a career / season ending injury. Look...I get it, we're a reactive society, let's wait it out.

 

[coupe]

Because a slippery tee can also be caused by dynamic changes, so if the TD did not provide extra safety measures put in place off the tee, the suggested rule could apply.

If you play enough tournaments you will see players slip / fall from a stand still as well. So even players wearing big boy pants can have a career / season ending injury. Look...I get it, we're a reactive society, let's wait it out.

So TDs are required to ensure that players have the opportunity to throw a full power shot without risk or regard to the course conditions?

The Rules mandate that player "play the course as they find it"; the Rules DO NOT mandate that TDs adapt the course to player's preferences. That puts the onus to adapt squarely and solely on players. Furthemore, the Rules entitle players to a legal stance; they DO NOT entitle players to their preferred stance or even their preferred mode of throwing. If a player suffers a season or career ending injury because he or she is too stubborn or to stupid to adapt to conditions on the teepad, fairway, or green, be it by slowing down, powering down, shortening their runup/reach back/followthrough, standing-and-delivering, or any other means, that's on the player.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Fortunately, course owners haven't been forced to soften their playing surfaces to make sure players who smack the ground after unlucky throws don't hurt their wrists...

 

[Martin Dewgarita]

Fortunately, course owners haven't been forced to soften their playing surfaces to make sure players who smack the ground after unlucky throws don't hurt their wrists...

If I had been forced to do that, maybe today I would be able to walk without a limp and pain free :\ now I'm pissed that this isn't a rule. :|

 

[ThrowBot]

Anyone else see the thread title, and think "Casual Relief is a really dumb mold name, even for Dynamic!"

 

[DiscFifty]

Redacted...will visit later.

 

[DiscFifty]

Redacted...will visit later.

 

[araytx]

@#$%.. can't change the thread title. Should be "Dynamic Casual Area" lol....

Continuing just this topic taken from this thread... (didn't want to cause more thread drift.)

https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138797



Lightning is a dynamic condition that could happen anywhere on the course and play is stopped until the condition goes away. Just stating there is precedent for recognizing and acting upon a dynamic condition that could be unsafe. And in this case if hours go by, you've just changed conditions on the course for earlier players compared to later players finishing after the rain, so the point of players playing under a different set of course conditions is already accepted. The rule I am contemplating would certainly be available to anyone who may find themselves in similar situations.

"Dynamic Casual Area" - To be clear... the flow would go something like...

a) Player hits his line off the tee, lands on the fairway.

b) Upon arrival to his lie he notices his disc in a very wet, muddy, slippery area. The TD did not know about this area and has not declared relief. The player chooses to declare "Dynamic Casual Area".

c) The card then has to agree that: 1) The player's disc is truly in an area that is not safe to throw from. 2) The player's disc is on the fairway, not the rough, etc. If the card agrees the player takes relief.

The player's disc landed in an area that is usually safe. Now this area has become an unsafe part of the fairway. This is not a permanent addition to the course, it's a dynamic entity that comes and goes based on uncontrollable events. The TD was not made aware of this location so there was no way to declare the area as relief before the tournament starts.

I'm not saying we should give someone a break for a bad shot (in the rough, briers, etc). I'm saying we may need to consider giving someone a break for a good shot that ends up in a unsafe area due to dynamic events.

Since it has to be voted on, I don't see how this can be taken advantage of unless the guys on the card are cheaters to begin with.

But I digress, let's be real here... who here really thinks a pro slipping somewhere (due to dynamic conditions) and breaking a leg, busting his head open, etc, wouldn't cause an immediate call of action (especially from social media, fans, etc) to add something to the rules providing safety guidelines in place so it never happens again?

Dave, I am gonna request you discontinue using that last part as your justification -- the player slips and gets injured. (In fact I'll challenge your entire argument therein.) I've said many times -- he/she doesn't have to throw from there. Take the penalty if YOU think it's dangerous to YOU. It's just like walking into the woods and getting bitten by an animal. You didn't have to go in there. Once I was at a tourney at Lorch Park and accidentally stepped in ground hornets where my disc was. Dead center fairway, 50 feet clear of the water which was up on hole #9. No one (including the TD) knew before the round that they were there. I didn't cry or complain. I moved back to a safe distance and took the optional relief penalty. If I had, instead, chosen to throw from where the hornets were..., well then any accident or injury is of my own causation -- not the rules'.

 

[Jimb]

Dave, I am gonna request you discontinue using that last part as your justification -- the player slips and gets injured. (In fact I'll challenge your entire argument therein.) I've said many times -- he/she doesn't have to throw from there. Take the penalty if YOU think it's dangerous to YOU. It's just like walking into the woods and getting bitten by an animal. You didn't have to go in there. Once I was at a tourney at Lorch Park and accidentally stepped in ground hornets where my disc was. Dead center fairway, 50 feet clear of the water which was up on hole #9. No one (including the TD) knew before the round that they were there. I didn't cry or complain. I moved back to a safe distance and took the optional relief penalty. If I had, instead, chosen to throw from where the hornets were..., well then any accident or injury is of my own causation -- not the rules'.

Why did you take a penalty? See A and C below. You shouldn't have been penalized for avoiding dangerous insects.

803.02
A. A player may obtain relief from the following obstacles that are on or behind the lie: motor vehicles, harmful insects or animals, people, or any item or area as designated by the Director. To obtain relief, the player may mark a new lie that is on the line of play, farther from the target, at the nearest point that provides relief.

B. If a large solid obstacle prevents the player from taking a legal stance behind the marker disc, or from marking a disc above or below the playing surface, the player may mark a new lie immediately behind that obstacle on the line of play.

C. A player who takes relief other than as allowed above receives one penalty throw.

 

[txmxer]

Why did you take a penalty? See A and C below. You shouldn't have been penalized for avoiding dangerous insects.

803.02
A. A player may obtain relief from the following obstacles that are on or behind the lie: motor vehicles, harmful insects or animals, people, or any item or area as designated by the Director. To obtain relief, the player may mark a new lie that is on the line of play, farther from the target, at the nearest point that provides relief.

B. If a large solid obstacle prevents the player from taking a legal stance behind the marker disc, or from marking a disc above or below the playing surface, the player may mark a new lie immediately behind that obstacle on the line of play.

C. A player who takes relief other than as allowed above receives one penalty throw.

:hfive:

 

[araytx]

Why did you take a penalty? See A and C below. You shouldn't have been penalized for avoiding dangerous insects.

803.02
A. A player may obtain relief from the following obstacles that are on or behind the lie: motor vehicles, harmful insects or animals, people, or any item or area as designated by the Director. To obtain relief, the player may mark a new lie that is on the line of play, farther from the target, at the nearest point that provides relief.

B. If a large solid obstacle prevents the player from taking a legal stance behind the marker disc, or from marking a disc above or below the playing surface, the player may mark a new lie immediately behind that obstacle on the line of play.

C. A player who takes relief other than as allowed above receives one penalty throw.

You are correct. I made a mistake. And here I thought I was being all noble until now...

 

[Halbrust]

803.02 B. If a large solid obstacle prevents the player from taking a legal stance behind the marker disc, or from marking a disc above or below the playing surface, the player may mark a new lie immediately behind that obstacle on the line of play.

I have a question about the term "immediately". If the solid object is a building, do you need to stand right behind the building and throw at a potential 90 degree angle from the basket? Or can you play it a few feet back from the object and have the potential to throw over or around it? Can you take a stroke penalty and move in a straight line back to where a better shot is possible?