• 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)

USDGC 2023 - 25th edition

They never seem to have discussed the possibility to ask the spotter, who is actually there to spot and help out in situations like this if possible. Even though they themselves didn't see if the disc crossed or not (or where).
They never asked the spotter about his opinion.
I do agree that no rule was broken and that we can't for sure say someone willfully cheated/bent the spirit of the rules.
This pretty much covers all of it.
 
Seems nonsensical from a competition rules standpoint to not allow a spotter or sometimes videographer who actually see or record what happened in any situation like this to confirm a call but require players in the group, some who may not have seen it, to make a call from hundreds of feet away.

Remember when using rangefinders during the round wasn't legal? Once it was legal, we got Bushnell as a sponsor. Maybe making video and photo evidence legal would lead to Canon, Panasonic or Nikon sponsorships. ;)
 
What purpose does that OB line serve? It isn't protecting anyone, nor does a player gain any advantage by landing beneath that tree. Why penalize a player for having thrown an obviously bad shot, and one where the lie itself will likely cost the player a stroke? I blame this little controversy entirely on the course designer.
 
SMH. This is all nothing more than internet fodder. There are FOUR people responsible for making this call. There are specific rules that cover making this call. The spotter, the TD, Nate Heinold, tweeters nor anyone else get a vote. The rule is not broken, there was no violation. The call was made by the card, in accordance to the rules.
 
What purpose does that OB line serve? It isn't protecting anyone, nor does a player gain any advantage by landing beneath that tree. Why penalize a player for having thrown an obviously bad shot, and one where the lie itself will likely cost the player a stroke? I blame this little controversy entirely on the course designer.
My guess is that that is a high-water line, maybe at the maximum that they could expect to see this time of year, creating a defined OB line no matter how much rain comes in during the preceding days/weeks (barring some 500 year event or something crazy like that)? I had a similar thought to you - why is there a line, when the woods and foliage are going to be worth a stroke of play anyway? And the potential high water line is the only thought that makes sense to me.
 
Question for the group: It appears that Holyn's tee shot on 17 was last seen rolling towards the water. Based on the DGPT coverage I saw, it doesn't appear that anyone in the group, or her caddy, made an attempt to find or retrieve the disc. If the disc ended up sinking in the water, would this be considered a lost disc? Or does the OB call/no-call take precedence and the disc does not need to be found?
 
Question for the group: It appears that Holyn's tee shot on 17 was last seen rolling towards the water. Based on the DGPT coverage I saw, it doesn't appear that anyone in the group, or her caddy, made an attempt to find or retrieve the disc. If the disc ended up sinking in the water, would this be considered a lost disc? Or does the OB call/no-call take precedence and the disc does not need to be found?
Correct, no need to ascertain whether a disc is "lost"' if it's OB.
 
SMH. This is all nothing more than internet fodder. There are FOUR people responsible for making this call. There are specific rules that cover making this call. The spotter, the TD, Nate Heinold, tweeters nor anyone else get a vote. The rule is not broken, there was no violation. The call was made by the card, in accordance to the rules.
Just because a call was made by the card does not mean the call was correct. Are we not allowed to discuss how they arrived at the call?
 
Just because a call was made by the card does not mean the call was correct. Are we not allowed to discuss how they arrived at the call?
But I think it does. You may certainly discuss, ad nauseam, any call. It is what makes this exclusively internet fodder, lol. Yet, the call becomes correct, the moment a decision is reached by the four people, exclusively in charge of making it. By all means....carry on. :)
 
But I think it does. You may certainly discuss, ad nauseam, any call. It is what makes this exclusively internet fodder, lol. Yet, the call becomes correct, the moment a decision is reached by the four people, exclusively in charge of making it. By all means....carry on. :)
I would like to argue they shouldn't be making the call at this level of competition without calling into question the call or its verdict.
 
But I think it does. You may certainly discuss, ad nauseam, any call. It is what makes this exclusively internet fodder, lol. Yet, the call becomes correct, the moment a decision is reached by the four people, exclusively in charge of making it. By all means....carry on. :)
I haven't participated in any sport where this is the case. I know that some professional sport leagues produce reports after games highlighting correct and incorrect calls, the NBA refers to it as its 2-minute report as they only focus on missed calls made at the end of games. A call can go through the correct protocols to be made, and still be an incorrect call.
 
Question for the group: It appears that Holyn's tee shot on 17 was last seen rolling towards the water. Based on the DGPT coverage I saw, it doesn't appear that anyone in the group, or her caddy, made an attempt to find or retrieve the disc. If the disc ended up sinking in the water, would this be considered a lost disc? Or does the OB call/no-call take precedence and the disc does not need to be found?
In general, the call of OB takes precedence where you have a reasonable ability to ascertain that the disc did go out of bounds and where it went out of bounds. This was a situation that came up some time ago (last year?) where Cat put a drive into tall grass OB on a hole, the spotter marked where it went out, and then the card could not find the disc in the tall grass. She played it from where it went out of bounds, and there was a minor uproar as people debated if she should have gone back to the tee. She played it correctly.

As for this hole in particular, keep in mind that Winthrop Gold 17 has a protocol in place, that the tournament petitions the PDGA to be able to use, for any shot that fails to land in the in-bound area, whether it is OB or not, that is different from traditional Lost/OB disc rules. This hole's specialized rules take precedence over what is in the rulebook regarding those specific situations.
 
But I think it does. You may certainly discuss, ad nauseam, any call. It is what makes this exclusively internet fodder, lol. Yet, the call becomes correct, the moment a decision is reached by the four people, exclusively in charge of making it. By all means....carry on. :)
I don't understand this. You don't think it's possible for a card of players to reach an incorrect decision? Just because they make a decision does not instantly make that the right decision. It makes it the decision that was made.
 
Question for the group: It appears that Holyn's tee shot on 17 was last seen rolling towards the water. Based on the DGPT coverage I saw, it doesn't appear that anyone in the group, or her caddy, made an attempt to find or retrieve the disc. If the disc ended up sinking in the water, would this be considered a lost disc? Or does the OB call/no-call take precedence and the disc does not need to be found?
806.02C A disc that cannot be found is considered to be out-of-bounds if there is compelling evidence that the disc came to rest within an out-of-bounds area.
 
Holyn went out of bounds for real later on no. 18. On her final approach. If she was OB on the drive and was spared that penalty, the no-question later OB might be the universe's way of evening things out and giving Kristin a chance at the playoff. Unfortunately, Kristin was too amped up and overdrove her drive on the first playoff hole.

I hope Holyn looks at it this way and embraces her win, as she should. She played her eyes out! If the disc spiked on the correct side of the line and that is what she saw, then no need to be stressed about it any further. Seems to me she's possibly the best person in the conversation to know what actually happened. I also imagine Kristin says to herself, "I had the chance [in the playoff]. and I blew it. That's on me. Nobody else."

Spotter raised the big red flag at first, didn't he? But true, he never put down a small red marker flag.

Life gets a bit messy sometimes...
 
One thing Holyn said in her interview highlights an area she needs to improve in her game, like many other players.

She didn't realize she was in the lead until she was on the 18th tee. That is when she learned this. Until then she was in the flow state, just throwing her plastic and nailing putts without a worry in the world.

She then proceeds to throw three bad shots in a row, before she cans the 27 footer on the 18th green. Good on her for putting everything that happened on hole 18 behind her and nailing the putt.

I hope she is able to work on playing in those situations when she has a lead, because I suspect she will be in the lead on final day many times in her career. If she had been able to stay in that flow state and make her shots, none of this would have happened and no one would have anything to say.
 

Latest posts

Top