Rules Questions Here are two scenarios that have recently occurred: 1. Disc comes to rest in a tree above a ditch. The water in the ditch has been ruled by the Director to be OB. The disc is clearly, directly and completely above the water. Is the disc OB? 2. Same ditch with water that is considered OB now has water outside it's banks due to recent rain. Disc lands in water a significant distance from the banks of the ditch (40-50 feet away from what was considered OB) but the water is contiguous with the water in the ditch. Is the disc OB? Would it help to know that the ditch itself is not considered to be OB, just the water in it. FWIW, I wouldn't consider the disc in the second scenario to be OB when playing a non-tournament round since much of the course can be under water in such a scenario. I just consider it to be casual water. I think the disc in the first scenario is clearly OB, but after looking at the 2013 rules revisions, the only thing to hint at that outcome is the verticality of the OB line. http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236228#msg-236228 Wed, 19 Jun 2013 19:06:51 -0500 Phorum 5.2.15a http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236393#msg-236393 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236393#msg-236393
Quote
therefore if only the water is OB, then the tree above the water is technically not OB, because by that rule if you hit a dry patch in the ditch, it's not OB

No OB for the tournaments is probably the best way to go. But if the water is OB, a disc that is in the tree above the water is also OB - technically and otherwise.

BTW, I'm betting on some water for at least 4 months. We're working on two already and had a drought year last year.]]> Jazzcaster General Discussion Thu, 14 Feb 2013 18:56:57 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236387#msg-236387 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236387#msg-236387 I can tell you as the TD for the next
> 2 tournaments out there, I am marking no OB's
> whatsoever on this hole.


Yes! :cheers:]]> AlxTgr General Discussion Thu, 14 Feb 2013 14:16:00 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236386#msg-236386 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236386#msg-236386 niklpenny General Discussion Thu, 14 Feb 2013 14:01:41 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236380#msg-236380 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236380#msg-236380 -------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe Oregon. If I'm gonna spend a week with the
> pDGA cult I need some better scenery!


Now that's funny right there Bluff!!!!!

JABBA]]> frzbman General Discussion Thu, 14 Feb 2013 13:32:35 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236366#msg-236366 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236366#msg-236366 Bluff Magee General Discussion Thu, 14 Feb 2013 06:24:42 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236359#msg-236359 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236359#msg-236359 -------------------------------------------------------
> Chuck for being such a good sport I'll buy you a
> beer the next time I'm at Worlds.

Lemon Lake this year? It's my debut in Sr GM, turning 60 next month.]]> cgkdisc General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 21:11:17 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236357#msg-236357 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236357#msg-236357 -------------------------------------------------------

> Please tell me those rules are not posted at Fort
> Buhlow...did I read that wrong?


No, you read it right. This is a shot of the rules sign at the first tee:

]]> Jazzcaster General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 19:35:40 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236356#msg-236356 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236356#msg-236356
Chuck for being such a good sport I'll buy you a beer the next time I'm at Worlds.]]> Bluff Magee General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:56:40 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236354#msg-236354 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236354#msg-236354
I just had a flashback to 1979!



It was a good year to be 11 years old LOL

Please tell me those rules are not posted at Fort Buhlow...did I read that wrong?]]> Bluff Magee General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:44:31 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236351#msg-236351 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236351#msg-236351 -------------------------------------------------------
> Jazzcaster, I hope that is an old sign from the
> DGA that you have and not the one posted at the
> new course at Ft. Buhlow. It is an interesting
> look into past rules.
>
> You said I only partly answered your questions but
> you didn't tell me what didn't get answered. Let
> us know what else you'd like clarified.

Yep, it's the sign at the Ft. Buhlow course.

You've been very helpful. I said "partly" only because I was mostly referring to non-tournament rounds where I expected the rules to apply - thus my lament about their apparent inapplicability to such rounds. An experienced TD will probably anticipate and make declarations for trouble spots which was done well at the last tourney at Buhlow.]]> Jazzcaster General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:02:25 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236349#msg-236349 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236349#msg-236349 -------------------------------------------------------
> . Therefore if for some
> reason, say an earthquake perhaps that drained the
> ditch at lunch occurred, then if there was no
> water in the ditch, a disc that lands in the ditch
> would be in-bounds. I can't really speak to what
> happens during any other day of the year other
> than tournament day,


Not sure it it matters, but this ditch is more often bone dry than wet. It's one that must be crossed at some point no matter what. Discs in the ditch are very, very common, as the openings in the tree lines to cross are very small, and there's only so many good places to go over the trees. For my little arm anyway.]]> AlxTgr General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 17:16:22 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236348#msg-236348 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236348#msg-236348 cgkdisc General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:55:14 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236347#msg-236347 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236347#msg-236347
Quote

But Chuck, you just admitted that "area" and "surface" are synonymous.
I really appreciate the laughs...it's hilarious to see you sway back and forth on what is defined and what isn't.
If area and surface are the same as you just claimed, then by that claim an OB area is an OB surface! Which is what I have said all along and never wavered from. Thank you for eventually reaching the correct interpretation, even if you have no idea how you reached it.
I apologize if you always agreed that an OB Surface is not a Playing Surface per the Definitions. What we have in disc golf is Surfaces, Playing Surfaces and OB Surfaces. QA 2 uses the phrase: "...regardless whether a Playing Surface above it or below it is OB." All I suggest is simply removing the word "playing from that phrase for proper wording.

As was pointed out, besides being over an OB Surface, the bridge is also going to be partly over another Playing Surface where it's over land not the watery OB Surface. The bridge is also likely over just a Surface where the bridge emerges over the ground. Usually there's such a low clearance at that point where a stance cannot be taken and the player may need to take relief to mark their lie elsewhere sometimes with penalty. So it's not uncommon for a bridge to be over all three types of surfaces at various points along its length.]]> cgkdisc General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:52:20 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236346#msg-236346 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236346#msg-236346
You said I only partly answered your questions but you didn't tell me what didn't get answered. Let us know what else you'd like clarified.]]> Bluff Magee General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:44:00 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236344#msg-236344 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236344#msg-236344 dustin morris General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:48:43 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236343#msg-236343 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236343#msg-236343 -------------------------------------------------------

> Did that answer your questions?


Partly. What this is helping with most is prompting me to make sure that I ask such questions of the TD on tournament days. Incidentally, I think that the water was declared OB instead of the ditch because the border of the ditch is ill-defined. Better to call the water OB and not worry about where the ditch begins and ends. I didn't mention this earlier but could see a rain event during the tournament causing problems due to the lack of a certain border to the ditch.

It's just my opinion, but I'd definitely rather see rules that are applied universally for both recreational and tournament play. One comprehensive set of rules, like in golf, but with TD declarations and local rules regarding hazards and OB still allowed. Another example is ground rules in baseball. The rules of baseball do not change but certain features of the ball park (like the powerline overhanging Cheatam Park that cost my team the State Championship my sophmore year) can be declared in or out of play.

In looking again at the rules sign obtained from the DGA, I noticed some interesting items:

The "flipping rule":

"LIE ................................... The spot where the previous throw landed, mark with
a mini disc or tum over the thrown disc, directly towards the hole or dogleg."

The ground as the only playing surface (which would make the bridge and any tree an unplayable lie):

"UNPLAYABLE LIE ............ Any disc that comes to rest above the ground is
considered an unplayable lie. The disc must be thrown from the new lie on
the ground, directly underneath the unplayable lie. (RELOCATE TO AVOID
DAMAGE TO VEGETATION.)"

The "point" to where the lie locates when disc is OB (and no optional rethrow):

"OUT OF BOUNDS ............ If O.B. is visible between the disc and O.B. line. A
throw that lands out of bounds, must be played from a point 3' in bounds from
where the disc went out of bounds. Permanent water hazards and public
roads are always out of bounds."

And the best one:

"PENAL TIES ..................... RECREATIONAL PLAYERS WILL NOT BE PENALIZED
FOR RULE INFRACTIONS. Other players will keep you honest."

I could see this one starting fights (or at least causing hard feelings) in a competitive, non-tournament round. One person cites a PDGA rule and the other indicates that the rule doesn't apply. One day I'm going to make someone throw from under the bridge when the ditch is dry!]]> Jazzcaster General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:23:52 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236340#msg-236340 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236340#msg-236340 -------------------------------------------------------
> My only beef with QA2 is simply that it
> identifies an OB Surface as a Playing Surface.
> Otherwise, the content of the QA is fine.


I do not think QA 2 "identifies an OB Surface as a Playing Surface". The bridge is a default "playing surface" because it meets the two (2) definition criteria, support and reasonable stance, just like ground. It is default IB because everything is. It is "stacked" because it is at least partly over IB ground. It is not just over OB, it "spans" OB. That makes the bridge a stacked IB "playing surface". QA 2 means a bridge does not lose those characteristics just because it also has OB under it. QA 2 resolves the verticality rule conflict in favor of default IB. Its use of the term "playing surface" is therefore not erroneous, or inconsistent with any 2013 rule other than verticality.]]> Discjazz General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:08:44 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236333#msg-236333 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236333#msg-236333
Talking about scenario #2, my answer was indeed predicated on the TD saying the water in the ditch was OB, and not what the course rules say. The only way the posted course rules would ever be in effect during a tournament would be if the TD announced that the course rules on the sign are in effect. You indicated that the TD declared the water in the ditch OB, not that the TD said "what is on this course sign is OB." Again I ask that you remember that the rules specify that the TD must declare what is OB, and if nothing is declared OB then even your course sign can be ignored.

When declaring OBs, it is important that the TD make OB areas that are clearly defined. It is always best to draw a line marking the boundary of an OB water hazard. But in scenario #2 you did say that the TD said that the water in the ditch, and not the ditch itself was OB. Therefore if for some reason, say an earthquake perhaps that drained the ditch at lunch occurred, then if there was no water in the ditch, a disc that lands in the ditch would be in-bounds. I can't really speak to what happens during any other day of the year other than tournament day, except to say that on non-tournament days players should follow the sign.

You alluded to the ditch having a permanent border. It would be wiser for the TD to declare anything inside the ditch borders as OB rather than declaring the water in the ditch to be OB. That would make landing in the ditch OB whether it was dry or wet. But again, you said the TD specifically said the water was OB and not the ditch. This is why it's important that a TD think carefully about what is declared OB and how the OB is described.

Did that answer your questions?]]> Bluff Magee General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:29:04 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236332#msg-236332 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236332#msg-236332
I really appreciate the laughs...it's hilarious to see you sway back and forth on what is defined and what isn't.

If area and surface are the same as you just claimed, then by that claim an OB area is an OB surface! Which is what I have said all along and never wavered from. Thank you for eventually reaching the correct interpretation, even if you have no idea how you reached it.

Like I've said before Chuck you are correct 90% of the time. Fortunately I am here for the other 10%. You're going to have to step up your rules game Chuck...I know the RC is often baffled by your circular logic but not I. But again, thanks for the comedy and thanks for your illusions which do help keep the experts sharp rebutting them.]]> Bluff Magee General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:47:24 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236330#msg-236330 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236330#msg-236330 -------------------------------------------------------
> All water on a course is considered casual unless
> declared OB by the TD. It appears that the TD
> declared that the water in the ditch to be OB. The
> water outside the ditch would still be casual
> then, even if it is touching the water that is in
> the ditch.
>
> It is a fuzzy area of the rules that could use a
> little attention. Rules about water should be
> added to the rules, or at the least a Q&A.
>
> There's other examples of fuzzy water rules, such
> as what if the course was next to a lake with
> waves, and a disc lands where it is submerged by a
> wave for a moment and then on dry ground the next
> moment? The rules don't specifically address these
> situations, as the rules never state that water is
> OB. It is always up to a TD to declare a certain
> body of water OB. If a TD does not declare a lake
> OB, and a player lands 100 feet out from the shore
> but can find his disc on the bottom of the lake,
> he can actually play from his submerged lie
> without a penalty. You can deduce from the rules
> that a disc in this wave scenario is in-bounds,
> but it takes a while to get there. That's why a Q
> & A about water would be a great addition to the
> rules. Of course it takes the Rules Committee
> typically about 3-4 years for them to agree with
> my correct version of the rules, so look for that
> Q & A in the 2017 edition.
>
> The earliest versions of the rules actually named
> certain bodies of water as OB. It's instinctive to
> think of lakes and ponds as OB, but the rules
> don't actually make them OB, it is up to the TD to
> do so. That's why the actual "Kernan Rule" in
> regard to City Park's lagoon is allowed under the
> pDGA rules, as it is a special condition defined
> in rule 805.03.A. The "Kernan Rule" states that a
> disc thrown in the lagoon must be 100% submerged
> to be declared OB. This rule eliminates the
> judgment call sometimes made of "if you push the
> disc down, is it OB?" The Kernan Rule also allows
> the TD to skip the task of painting an OB line for
> the lagoon, since there is a 100% fool-proof way
> to determine if a disc is OB...it must be 100%
> submerged. If any part of the disc sticks out of
> the water for any reason, it is in-bounds.

Your comments reminded me to check the course rules which state:

"OUT OF BOUNDS ............ If O.B. is visible between the disc and O.B. line. A
throw that lands out of bounds, must be played from a point 3' in bounds from
where the disc went out of bounds. Permanent water hazards and public
roads are always out of bounds."

Obviously, you were not talking about the course rules and so I don't offer this course rule as rebuttal. However, if we accept the hypothetical that all "permanent water hazards" are always out of bounds, would you reach the same conclusion about scenario #2 assuming also that the ditch is a "permanent water hazard" for the purposes of this question, and so declared by the TD? What if the "permanent" water hazard" is suffering from an unusual drought? Would a disc that lands in the now-dry lake bed or temporarily dry ditch be OB? What if a ditch routinely has water during half the year and is dry for the rest?

It would be nice to have water rules that take situations like this into account, including a definition of a "water hazard." The rule posted at the course comes pre-printed from DGA for posting at the first hole so I am guessing that this is a very common course rule. Without this rule, as I understand the rule book, even roadways are not OB absent a declaration by the TD.

I still wouldn't call the disc in scenario #2 OB, but would understand an argument that permanent water hazard was just bigger just as the disc landing on dry edge of a lake bed isn't in the now smaller water hazard. But if the temporary nature of water outside the permanent hazard isn't OB, it would also seem that the temporary lack of water inside the hazard would would not make the disc IB, assuming that there was a well-defined border to the permanent water hazard that could be located in the absence of the water and that the disc was unequivocally and completely inside that border.]]> Jazzcaster General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:40:23 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236320#msg-236320 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236320#msg-236320 cgkdisc General Discussion Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:22:38 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236314#msg-236314 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236314#msg-236314 -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Do we now agree that OB is not a "playing surface"
> but simply just a "surface" or a separate category
> called OB surface per the 800 Definition?"

No, we don't agree. I have explained that there is no actual definition of "OB surface" or "surface" in the rules and all we have to work with are playing surfaces. Until the RC defines these other surfaces, we must use "playing surface" as applying to both actual playing surfaces and all other surfaces (as the logical extension of the closest rule). It's intuitive; even you Chuck referred in your previous post to the playing surface under the disc in the tree over OB. I'm glad that you have backed off your previous position that held that OB areas had no rules that could be applied to them.

So, 808. QA 2 has no errors.]]> Bluff Magee General Discussion Tue, 12 Feb 2013 22:05:30 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236313#msg-236313 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236313#msg-236313
Do we now agree that OB is not a "playing surface" but simply just a "surface" or a separate category called OB surface per the 800 Definition?"]]> cgkdisc General Discussion Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:48:46 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236311#msg-236311 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236311#msg-236311 Bluff Magee General Discussion Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:23:01 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236310#msg-236310 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236310#msg-236310 cgkdisc General Discussion Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:03:36 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236305#msg-236305 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236305#msg-236305
It should be obvious to someone as familiar with the rules as Mr. Kennedy that absent a definition or rule describing a surface other than a playing surface, the only definition provided, that of "playing surface", must be used when determining correct rules calls.

I remind Mr. Kennedy of Rule 801.01.A:

"801.01 Application of the Rules

These rules have been designed to promote fair play for all disc golfers. In using these rules, players shall apply the rule that most directly addresses the situation at hand. If any point in dispute is not covered by the rules, the decision shall be made in accordance with fairness. Often a logical extension of the closest existing rule or the principles embodied in these rules will provide guidance for determining fairness."


Until the RC defines "OB surface" we must use the characteristics of playing surfaces and apply them to OB surfaces. The two surfaces are identical with only one difference, that a player can not take a stance in OB and make a throw from an OB surface.]]> Bluff Magee General Discussion Tue, 12 Feb 2013 19:50:34 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236282#msg-236282 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236282#msg-236282
"Play" in DG is a sequence of three components, the stance, the throw and the landing. Then it starts over again. The throw starts in our hand, may continue in the air and the landing spot can also be incapable of supporting a player. Maybe the air is a surface but really 2/3 of the "playing components" do not typically occur on the "playing surface" under these rules. The way the term "playing surface" is used in these rules it should be renamed "stance surface". That would make it more descriptively accurate. In practice OB is a playing surface because we do play through and on it, just not with a stance.]]> Discjazz General Discussion Tue, 12 Feb 2013 10:17:32 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236280#msg-236280 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236280#msg-236280
]]> AlxTgr General Discussion Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:33:07 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236273#msg-236273 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236273#msg-236273 cgkdisc General Discussion Tue, 12 Feb 2013 07:41:45 -0600 http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236272#msg-236272 Re: Rules Questions http://www.sndg.org/forum/read.php?2,236228,236272#msg-236272
You were doing so well in your previous post Chuck. You even said "The 2013 rules use the new term 'position' to indicate a disc's location before its lie is marked on the playing surface. A 'position' is anywhere the disc stops whether up/down/IB/OB/target/playing surface. Thus, in 804.03C the new Interference rule that replaced 803.07B, the word 'position' replaced 'playing surface' and 'target'. Now it all ties together."

I know you're getting excited and you want to go off on some tangent, and I have no idea where your wild imagination is running, so I'll wait for you to try to explain your interesting but flawed logic. Why do you say QA2 has an error? You're the one who just said once determining a position, the "lie is marked on the playing surface"! I didn't see you mention anything about "surface" rather than "playing surface" Chuck. This "error" you speak of exists only in your mind.]]> Bluff Magee General Discussion Tue, 12 Feb 2013 06:57:24 -0600