Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
Note that it's not always a vertical plane because prohibited routes can be defined over or under a mando horizontal. diagonal or odd shaped bar.
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)
Note that it's not always a vertical plane because prohibited routes can be defined over or under a mando horizontal. diagonal or odd shaped bar.
B is exactly one question I have. Also consider there is no requirement to use a mini here so the stance area would be on the Tee side of the plane. I can play it however it's defined, just unsure. I'll anxiously await an official clarification.
We are working on that clarification.
Are you saying the new rules do not allow TDs to also specify the space above a crossbeam between double mando poles as a restricted space to create a triple mando or are you saying you can't define a restricted space above or below just a single crossbeam as a mando? How about requiring throws thru an arch or large diameter sewer pipe? Seems like there are a few temporary triple mandos placed just past the number 1 tee in some elite events including a few in Europe along with the famous bamboo lined "doorway" on 7 at USDGC.So yes, Chuck, the restricted space is a vertical plane. The rules do not allow specifying the restricted space with a horizontal plane for example. Having a missed mandatory defined by a flat two-dimensional shape which is not perpendicular to the earth is not really allowed either as judging missing such a mandatory would be difficult in most circumstances.
Are you saying the new rules do not allow TDs to also specify the space above a crossbeam between double mando poles as a restricted space to create a triple mando or are you saying you can't define a restricted space above or below just a single crossbeam as a mando? How about requiring throws thru an arch or large diameter sewer pipe? Seems like there are a few temporary triple mandos placed just past the number 1 tee in some elite events including a few in Europe along with the famous bamboo lined "doorway" on 7 at USDGC.
The new rules appear silent on special marking or stance rules when a disc lands touching the missed mando line (unless I missed seeing a new Q&A). Since both sides of the line are inbounds by default, the player presumably either (A) leaves the thrown disc on the line as their marker, or marks toward the mando with a mini, and has to throw around the correct side of the mando if their disc landed there coming from the tee side, or (B) they mark with a mini on the basket side if that's how the disc got there, then take a normal stance to throw. In theory, their release should be considered to have occurred on the basket side of the missed mando line such that their "throw" once losing contact with their hand did not illegally cross the missed mando line.
If that's not how the RC sees it, they need to add instructions for marking relief in that situation such as getting a meter from the MM Line and having your stance completely on the basket side of it upon release.
I am picturing a slew of mando holes I have seen across the country. If I read the new rule and its application correctly. If I said. Then does this line marking the restricted space (from tee area through the mando marker and beyond and beyond and beyond) create restricted space on some holes that includes the target. Asking for a friend. My drawing may or may not be sufficient.
Ron D
application?
it's much easier for the group to make a decision than the current which has them trying to work out where a roll might have gone on it's way to rest (see diagram here for what I mean, good luck group working out whether that disc rolled across the plane or not from 80 meters away - https://www.reddit.com/r/discgolf/comments/rwvoz8/i_have_a_question_about_the_new_mando_rules/ ) and is just more intuitive and fits better with the wording of 804.01.A?
I am picturing a slew of mando holes I have seen across the country. If I read the new rule and its application correctly. If I said. Then does this line marking the restricted space (from tee area through the mando marker and beyond and beyond and beyond) create restricted space on some holes that includes the target. Asking for a friend. My drawing may or may not be sufficient.
Ron D
Your diagram would be an extremely unusual way to define the restricted plane. Most often, when TD wants the disc to go left of the tree, the restricted plane would start at the tree and go to the right, perpendicular to the line you drew.
Why does this mando plane need to be omni directional? Why can't it just be one way which in my mind at least solves most of the issues people (me) inherently have with the rule, I can't see the problem it creates either in wording or application?
I've seen some of the RC try to argue (Todd on Reddit thread above) that a disc rolling back through should be penalised in the same way as a disc flying through the wrong way as both have broken the unthrowable plane but this just seems inherently wrong and also at odds with A. A mandatory route restricts the path the disc may take to the target. Rolling away from isn't to.
It feels like the RC missed this possibility of discs coming back through the mando plane from the target side when writing the rule and are now scrambling to justify rather than backtrack?
With the old mando rule there was also a section describing it as the line of play/target until passed at which point the next mando or basket would be "D. The nearest mandatory whose mandatory line is crossed by the line between the
lie and the target is considered to be the target for all rules related to marking
the lie, stance, obstacles, and relief, with one exception: 806.01 Putting Area."
What is the Line of Play/target now, is it always to the basket target and your stance will line up to this or has this been covered somewhere else I've missed?
Going back to Bill's drawing, seems to me that a mando parallel to the flight path is more appropriately defined as OB.
Directionality can actually be difficult to codify in some scenarios.
Nope. It's purpose is different than OB. The road to the left of the mando is OB. The purpose of the 'double mando' between the fairway and the OB road is to stop players from intentionally throwing over the road (only OB if you land in it) and having their disc come back into the field of play close to the basket. Without the mando, players were throwing over the road and even over the adjacent field....so cars and people in the park's field were in danger of being hit. I would have made the OB/Mando reason clearer, but my question was based on the play of the mando.