803.01 Moving Obstacles

[krupicka]

Again, this is first time I have heard this. Maybe this is a regional thing?

I started playing in 1998 in Rochester, NY, with a bunch of the old school 3 and 4 digit OGers.

I was taught you could back into your lie, but not hold anything with your arms once you established a lie, and this is how the rule is written now.

And by precedent, since I afforded him this interpretation on hole 10, and he accepted it, professional courtesy dictates that he is not allowed to change the interpretation of the rule when it is my turn to play. That is super shady.

"Professional courtesy" is why so many don't actually enforce the rules these days. I'll cut you slack so you can cut me slack later.
Just because someone taught you a rule, does not mean it is a rule. There is nothing in the rules mentioning arms. As someone else posted earlier, the big booty back-up is most likely is holding back parts of the bush. Approaching the bush from the side or behind is most likely going to move the obstacle a lot less than backing into it. And if that is the case, then backing into bush and holding branches back with your body is not legal.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Chuck, 803.04 A is the same as 803.01 A now.

again, maybe yours is a regional interpretation?

It says nothing about backing, or fronting into a lie, and seems to favor backing into a lie, as long as it is the least movement of any part of the bush.

Where I played the old schoolers were fine with backing into a lie, as long as "Once a legal stance is taken, a player may not move an obstacle (or hold it back or bend it) in order to make room for a throwing motion"

Again, I would love to hear stories about when and where YOU actually applied the rule the way you are saying you did. Because I don't believe for a second that anyone would purposely put a player at a disadvantage as long as what he is doing matches precedent AND wording of the rules.

Problem with PDGA half the time is they don't even know what their own rules actually say.

The 1997 803.04B rule about not moving anything between your lie and the hole is what made backing in illegal although it would have been better to have that paragraph before 803.04 A to make that clearer.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Like 803.02.B?

A multi-branched bush is exactly why this was updated a few years ago and "solid obstacle" was replaced with "obstacle that physically prevents..."

Yes. Although it's not really clear about bushes and moving back enough so player can take their stance on the playing surface. Maybe that could be discussed in a QA?

 

[foxdawg10]

"Professional courtesy" is why so many don't actually enforce the rules these days. I'll cut you slack so you can cut me slack later.
Just because someone taught you a rule, does not mean it is a rule. There is nothing in the rules mentioning arms. As someone else posted earlier, the big booty back-up is most likely is holding back parts of the bush. Approaching the bush from the side or behind is most likely going to move the obstacle a lot less than backing into it. And if that is the case, then backing into bush and holding branches back with your body is not legal.

I am glad this conversation is happening. I disagree that approaching from front or side results in less movement, in this case. A picture speaks a thousand words and we could keep going in circles. Which I dint think is productive, lol.

However I still stand by my statement that since he took the exact same approach in hole 10, he should not have made an issue on hole 16. If he was so adamant, he should have called it on himself.

 

[foxdawg10]

"Professional courtesy" is why so many don't actually enforce the rules these days. I'll cut you slack so you can cut me slack later.
Just because someone taught you a rule, does not mean it is a rule. There is nothing in the rules mentioning arms. As someone else posted earlier, the big booty back-up is most likely is holding back parts of the bush. Approaching the bush from the side or behind is most likely going to move the obstacle a lot less than backing into it. And if that is the case, then backing into bush and holding branches back with your body is not legal.

Also, if there is any gray area at all, and card can not come to agreement, benefit of doubt goes to the player. We did everything we could to get a 3rd opinion and no one was willing to get involved.

The TD confirmed my stance on it, so I believe I was correct in this situation. He knows the course and the exact bush.

The fact that I had just given him a courtesy warning moments before for starting to be super obnoxious earlier in hole leads me to believe he only made his stance as retaliation.

 

[krupicka]

We did everything we could to get a 3rd opinion and no one was willing to get involved.

Which is the other problem with rules enforcement. Players not willing to actually enforce the rules...