Who all should talk a penalty here, if anyone?

[araytx]

You clearly value hard work over skill, ability, or intelligence. Why is that? Do you feel like you were not born with enough skills and need to work harder to survive?

Nice.[sarc] The way you like to have a discussion is to go on the attack. Even though your "question" was rhetorical I will provide this response: I believe both -- one is not OVER the other, I value them WITH each other. I do feel a need to work harder than others; that's due to my life experiences. And although I was endowed with considerable skills, both athletically and intelligently, I never will feel as though it's enough and will work to improve every day.

My statement really doesn't involve the "hard working" schlubs. It is about two varieties of flawed individuals. The ones born with ability and the ones born with privilege. I would agree with you that the naturally skilled usually don't think the rules apply to them, but they also don't seek to apply the rules to anyone else.

Thanks. Props to you for seeing that and for clarifying.

 

[numbernine]

I just want to know how you typed all of this out while nailed to a cross. Congrats on that.

How about the rules being part of the skill? Part of being able to play skillfully is the ability to perform within the confines of the rules. Paul McBeth crushes everyone else because he is the most well rounded player in the game.
But hey, why should he count an out of bounds if it's only inches? He's clearly better than everyone else. No chance that being out of bounds on one stroke could change the momentum and therefore change the entire face of the tournament. No sir. I've never seen that happen.

Get over yourself.

The rules nazi crowd is correct in this instance, but still incredibly annoying and petty in the grand scheme. Looking at you
JC17393.

There are two general kinds of rules. There are rules of play and etiquette rules. One dictates the parameters for success within the activity. The other penalizes unwanted conduct. Rule nazis treat both types of rules exactly the same. To them wearing black at Wimbledon is the same level offense as faulting on a serve. The rest of us can make a clear distinction between these two things and generally allow violations of etiquette rules until they become vexing. When a rule nazi attempts to enforce slight violations of etiquette rules the rest of us correctly see this as petty and trying to win without any display of skill.

In this exact instance the rule was a rule of play. The competitors received a very small but still measurable boost to their chances by not having to put away their tap ins. The rule should have been observed. But now let's move on to the level of outrage.

Reasonable people want the game of skill to be decided on skill and skill alone. Rule nazis couldn't care less. They want people to lose if they break the rules, even if they displayed demonstrably more skill in their game. I think most reasonable people disagree with this. Nikko and co. broke the rules, they should not have, but in the end the results were not significantly impacted. The level of outrage should be directly proportional to the net impact of the rule violation.

In dealing with many people in all walks of life, I often find that rules nazis are usually very entitled individuals. They do not like the idea of skill trumping "the rules" as in life their main advantage is not skill but birthright to a higher social status. On the contrary people with a lax viewpoint towards rules have usually succeeded based on skill and aptitude, and are maybe a bit arrogant in feeling above the law.

 

[DanJon]

What if someone doesn't care if a rule applies to YOU? Are they an entitled whiner?

I would've bother worrying about that person.

But generally speaking that person who is lax on the rules applying to other people would be the first to whine when others try to apply those same rules to them.

 

[SonicGuy]

I just want to know how you typed all of this out while nailed to a cross. Congrats on that.

How about the rules being part of the skill? Part of being able to play skillfully is the ability to perform within the confines of the rules. Paul McBeth crushes everyone else because he is the most well rounded player in the game.
But hey, why should he count an out of bounds if it's only inches? He's clearly better than everyone else. No chance that being out of bounds on one stroke could change the momentum and therefore change the entire face of the tournament. No sir. I've never seen that happen.

I think your reading comprehension is poor, I didn't make any religious statements at all, and this thread has nothing to do with McPants or OB rules. But you clearly work hard, good for you!

 

[ru4por]

The rules nazi crowd is correct in this instance, but still incredibly annoying and petty in the grand scheme. Looking at you
JC17393.

There are two general kinds of rules. There are rules of play and etiquette rules. One dictates the parameters for success within the activity. The other penalizes unwanted conduct. Rule nazis treat both types of rules exactly the same. To them wearing black at Wimbledon is the same level offense as faulting on a serve. The rest of us can make a clear distinction between these two things and generally allow violations of etiquette rules until they become vexing. When a rule nazi attempts to enforce slight violations of etiquette rules the rest of us correctly see this as petty and trying to win without any display of skill.

But, wearing black is not overlooked. In fact, the penalty of disqualification can be enforced for dress code violations at Wimbledon, service faults do not carry such a penalty.

In this exact instance the rule was a rule of play. The competitors received a very small but still measurable boost to their chances by not having to put away their tap ins. The rule should have been observed. But now let's move on to the level of outrage.

Reasonable people want the game of skill to be decided on skill and skill alone. Rule nazis couldn't care less. They want people to lose if they break the rules, even if they displayed demonstrably more skill in their game. I think most reasonable people disagree with this. Nikko and co. broke the rules, they should not have, but in the end the results were not significantly impacted. The level of outrage should be directly proportional to the net impact of the rule violation.

So rules should be set by your definition of skilled, and the level of potential impact of rules should be subjective based on your perception of their impact to the outcome?

In dealing with many people in all walks of life, I often find that rules nazis are usually very entitled individuals. They do not like the idea of skill trumping "the rules" as in life their main advantage is not skill but birthright to a higher social status. On the contrary people with a lax viewpoint towards rules have usually succeeded based on skill and aptitude, and are maybe a bit arrogant in feeling above the law.

This rant makes little sense to me. I get that many are hesitant to call violations, few have a perceived impact on the contest. But to condemn the idea and spirit of playing by rules, is kind of silly.
The entire last paragraph is simply mind numbing. I would be inclined to say just the opposite, but hesitate to lay out such stereotypes. I would venture a guess that entitled people do not always fit into such easy categories.

 

[SonicGuy]

I get that many are hesitant to call violations, few have a perceived impact on the contest. But to condemn the idea and spirit of playing by rules, is kind of silly.

I never condemned playing by the rules, I commented on the personality type that gets bent out of shape when an inconsequential rule violation occurs. By all means, follow the rules!!

 

[Lazerface]

WOW

OK, this may be my first post on this site. The rules were obviously broken here, and Nikko should have had better judgment being the TD and all, but if I'm in his shoes and playing with a group of buddies, sanctioned or not, I may have made the same misjudgment of allowing it to happen. Give the guy a break.

I have always been a proponent for a gimme circle in disc golf for drop ins - based on the arm length of an average woman.

For the rest of the underhanded insults to Nikko because he gets emotional on the course - shut up already. Everyone that judges Nikko does not know Nikko. I live in Saint Louis and know him well enough to say he is a pretty damn good guy. Sure, you may have a story when Nikko was a dick, but I bet there is someone out there that has a similar story about you. I have certainly made mistakes in my 30 years of life. Or maybe all you guys are perfect, who knows. The point is if your judging another's character from internet videos or some far off observations at a tournament you attended then you need to put your ego in check and maybe take some of that dude/bruh/chill vibe that is referenced and try it out. We are all flawed, and we all grow. I would much rather hang out with captain emotional Nikko than one of you judgey douche bags.

I'm not condoning rule breaking, but this **** was pretty meh, and you all got way to serious about it.

 

[DanJon]

I can understand wanting to stick up for your buddy, but the fact is that he's a public figure in our little world.

 

[Lazerface]

I can understand wanting to stick up for your buddy, but the fact is that he's a public figure in our little world.

I get it, and with that comes petty judgement.

We are not buddies for the record. I just actually know the guy to some degree.

 

[thatdirtykid]

If you're using my event fees to pay the pros, by God they better follow the rules.

Only entries to the open division should be paid to open, I would love with AM trophy only that we could pad Opens purse (only benifits me personally) but thats not how it should work.

 

[DamtheMan]

If someone on that card (besides Nikko or Jere) had called Jere on it, would there have been anyone backing that call up or would they just shrugged and moved on, regardless of it being a tournament? What if another card saw the incident?

I don't play tourneys, I only play casual, but I play sticking to the rules regardless. I mark my lie by the book; incidentally my friend doesn't, during winter he draws a line in the snow for example and yes, it irks me. I also throw from my lie, not within 5 or 20 feet of it.

If a sport/game has rules, my assumption is always to stick to them, period. I don't really label myself a rules lawyer (since at least in gaming terms that is a person nitpicking the rules to his advantage), more about rules adherence.

 

[Star Shark]

Let me just make a statement here.

If you're not interested in playing by all the rules, DON'T FREAKIN' PLAY ORGANIZED DISC GOLF. Keep it casual if that's your thing. Just don't blithely wander into a tournament and get all in a twist when someone calls you on a foot fault or not marking your lie.

 

[adlacro]

At around 15:10 of the video you'll see Nikko's epic punch disc into basket fail.

If someone can properly embed this for me, I can't seem to get this to work. Just like trying to a punch a disc into a basket.

 

[ranger]

Let me just make a statement here.

If you're not interested in playing by all the rules, DON'T FREAKIN' PLAY ORGANIZED DISC GOLF. Keep it casual if that's your thing. Just don't blithely wander into a tournament and get all in a twist when someone calls you on a foot fault or not marking your lie.

Yeah but we still have casual round dudes getting worked up by minor rules.


I see the argument for being strict in organized play, but I personally couldn't care less what my buds do in fun rounds.

 

[araytx]

Yeah but we still have casual round dudes getting worked up by minor rules.


I see the argument for being strict in organized play, but I personally couldn't care less what my buds do in fun rounds.

Of course. Most everybody feels this way. But the OP question was, "who all should take a penalty here, if anyone?" "Here" was a PDGA sanctioned B-tier, and a recorded event. Any other discussion is off-topic.

At around 15:10 of the video you'll see Nikko's epic punch disc into basket fail.

If someone can properly embed this for me, I can't seem to get this to work. Just like trying to a punch a disc into a basket.

try this:

 

[araytx]

Also (starting at 45:31), it looks to me like Jere wasn't going to pick those up until someone said something to him. Anybody else notice that?

 

[ranger]

The thread evolved

 

[paulw]

in response to the op -- the editor of the video.

 

[lyleoross]

I haven't read every bit of this thread, but putting out is a core rule, it isn't a clothing violation. There is a classic case where Barry Schultz picked up his disc from under the basket, went to drop it in, hit the edge, and missed. Cost him a position if I recall correctly. This is why ball golfers putt out from three inches away, it's a gimme, but players do miss.

Frankly, if they did it more than a few times, in any tournament, it should have been a DQ, at the TD's discretion, and I'm pretty sure the PDGA would stand behind that.

There are logical reasons for the PDGA rules. In many cases, it is to avoid arguments and issues at the end of play. At times in the past, in some states, what we do has been considered gambling, yep. Given that, it is essential that there not be a question about fairness, and outcomes. If I lose to Nikko by two strokes, and he didn't putt out on three or four holes, then there is a problem. Is the tournament fair? Or is Nikko being given an unfair advantage? Is the tournament fixed? Lawyers and others think this way. We may not like it, but we have to be in line with the rules so that these questions don't get asked.

BTW - Nikko, of all people should know better.

 

[ohtobediscing]

^^^The only ones not getting this are a couple of guys who think they are omnipotent, and if so, then by Gawd Nikko should be too.
Playing for money? Play by the rules.