2011 Rules Comments: Holing Out

[RonTheWhip]

Originally Posted by snap7times

here's my $100 ace on #2 at Cascade. 222 footer. Glo Stalker in 15 mph left to right winds

Just took a look at that picture, no that is notttt my tag! I tagged my disc, had 4-5 people sign it and it's being dyed now. Took a picture of the ace obviously too... but that is not my tag lol...

Great park job Snap! Don't forget to let of the disc as you drop in that deuce . Making birdies look easy...

[LJ Jubner]

Boooooooooooo and no it's BO'urns
Yet another example of a rule being adopted or changed for no good reason. I saw a disc stick in the cage on Sun. It was a really sss summit.
I find this confusing that a disc being supported by the device designed to catch the disc is not in. Maybe the cages need to be redesigned and then every course needs to address that retro upgrade. I see $$$$$$$$ for the manufactures. I predict the yellow bands now around the cages too.
Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooo

I guess some open player got beat by one of these and has enough individual pull to make it uncomfortable for the powers that be. But after 30 years had no protocol for sanctioned"Series" events being were ancillary games.

[Vector_2008]

I find it kinda odd that the PDGA issued the paper version of the 2011 rules before putting it on the internet.
The internet is the cheapest and fastest way to disseminate information to the masses.

How many people aren't going to know about the rules changes until they update their membership?

How many update their membership at the first tournament they attend in the spring?

[Chuck Kennedy]

One of the main reasons for tightening up the holing out requirements wasn't as much to kill wedgies observed to come from the outside but to be more consistent with the constant whining about "discs resting on top" (DROT) not counting and wedgies counting. Rather than allowing DROTs (which have always been perceived as 'bad' throws) to count, the RC felt it was important to finally minimize the chances wedgies from the outside (also 'bad' throws) would count.

The updated target specs in 2009 reduced the allowable maximum opening on the sides and bottoms of baskets to 18cm in new target models approved as a nod toward reducing wedgies in the future (minimum diameter of a disc is 21cm). But unless the minimum flexibility of discs was increased retroactively, eliminating thousands of player's favorite discs, we'll still have some wedgies 20 years from now.

[Chuck Kennedy]

I find it kinda odd that the PDGA issued the paper version of the 2011 rules before putting it on the internet. The internet is the cheapest and fastest way to disseminate information to the masses.

Getting copy ready for the printing deadline came before the info was really needed for display on the Internet which isn't until just before Jan 1st. Just a matter of priorities for all of the things the Tour Manager has to get done to prepare for the new year. And all of the approved (Passed) and potential future changes being discussed (Closed) have actually been online here since September although not on the PDGA site yet: http://pellucid.com/conrad/pdga/rules2011.html

[TreeLove]

I still say I don't want to try and debate what someone "saw" or "didn't see". Heck, that's why the basket was INVENTED - it is too easy to argue "I didn't see you hit the target" in object golf! Therefore, I strongly disagree with a rule that says my putt, resting in the basket, on a legal target, does not count - I find that preposterous. Hence, the part about not coming through the top, which can be done on certain Innova baskets (see Champoeg), should be stricken.

[Vector_2008]

Originally Posted by Chuck Kennedy

potential future changes being discussed (Closed) have actually been online here since September although not on the PDGA site yet: http://pellucid.com/conrad/pdga/rules2011.html

I read part of that site before, but that is far from official looking. It looks like someone personal website. You know what they say about stuff you read on the internet. "It has to be true if you read it on the internet."

I would prefer a listing of rule changes for 2011 on the PDGA site where the masses would actually read them.

[Chuck Kennedy]

We require visual judgment calls by the group or officials in many places in our self-officiated sport. So it's consistent with other judgment calls required such as making/missing a mando, foot faults, last point IB, etc. Wedgie calls will occur significantly less often than those examples mentioned.

[Chuck Kennedy]

I would prefer a listing of rule changes for 2011 on the PDGA site where the masses would actually read them.

...and I indicated they would be, just before needed.

[Uhlman]

Originally Posted by Chuck Kennedy

One of the main reasons for tightening up the holing out requirements wasn't as much to kill wedgies observed to come from the outside but to be more consistent with the constant whining about "discs resting on top" (DROT) not counting and wedgies counting. Rather than allowing DROTs (which have always been perceived as 'bad' throws) to count, the RC felt it was important to finally minimize the chances wedgies from the outside (also 'bad' throws) would count.

The updated target specs in 2009 reduced the allowable maximum opening on the sides and bottoms of baskets to 18cm in new target models approved as a nod toward reducing wedgies in the future (minimum diameter of a disc is 21cm). But unless the minimum flexibility of discs was increased retroactively, eliminating thousands of player's favorite discs, we'll still have some wedgies 20 years from now.

well that makes sence...

This rule will not take effect until Jan 1st and will not cancel anyone’s previous “wedgies” is that correct?

[Chuck Kennedy]

Correct

[runnaman]

I like the rule.

I don't mean to always compare disc golf to ball golf, but a "wedgie" in ball golf would be like the ball right on the edge of the hole. It's not in yet, even though some if it is in the hole area. That was a really bad description, but hopefully you get the idea.

[LJ Jubner]

Originally Posted by runnaman

I like the rule.

I don't mean to always compare disc golf to ball golf, but a "wedgie" in ball golf would be like the ball right on the edge of the hole. It's not in yet, even though some if it is in the hole area. That was a really bad description, but hopefully you get the idea.

I would think of more like the "Rub of the Green" cliche`It's more like hitting the flag itself (or the stick for that matter) and then did it go in or not situation.

[Scott]

I always had a hard time understanding why a DROT didn't count as in, but a wedgie did. This rule makes more sense to me.

[DMajor]

Originally Posted by Scott

That's funny, I've never seen a putt stick in the side of the cage. I've seen a few aces stick in the side of the cage and have heard of several more.

I used to putt with soft magnets in the summer time. Seemed like one out of ten putts into the side of the cage would stick.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by DMajor

I used to putt with soft magnets in the summer time. Seemed like one out of ten putts into the side of the cage would stick.

Aim higher.

[Kenny B]

Well, I think I like the consistency this rule brings. I consider both DROTs and wedgies to be "bad" putts.

My concern is for shots that enter above the top of the tray and then wedge in the side. They can be supported in the same fashion as a wedgie entering below the top of the tray. (I've always called these inner and outer wedgies .) It may be that most inner wedgies have a majority of the disc on the inside and that most outer wedgies have a majority of the disc on the outside, but in both cases, the disc is supported by the same surface of the tray: the part of the tray bars that make up neither the inside "wall" nor outside "wall" of the tray.

As written now, I'm not sure the rules give any room for an inside wedgie to count as "in", even if witnessed. And, if the rules can be interpereted such that inner wedgies count. Than also outer wedgies should count as "in" for blind shots where there were no witness as to how the disc became wedged.

Any thoughts on this....

[Uhlman]

Originally Posted by Kenny B

Well, I think I like the consistency this rule brings. I consider both DROTs and wedgies to be "bad" putts.

My concern is for shots that enter above the top of the tray and then wedge in the side. They can be supported in the same fashion as a wedgie entering below the top of the tray. (I've always called these inner and outer wedgies .) It may be that most inner wedgies have a majority of the disc on the inside and that most outer wedgies have a majority of the disc on the outside, but in both cases, the disc is supported by the same surface of the tray: the part of the tray bars that make up neither the inside "wall" nor outside "wall" of the tray.

As written now, I'm not sure the rules give any room for an inside wedgie to count as "in", even if witnessed. And, if the rules can be interpereted such that inner wedgies count. Than also outer wedgies should count as "in" for blind shots where there were no witness as to how the disc became wedged.

Any thoughts on this....

that is a good question... my wife got an inner-wedgie once with a stiff DX cobra would this still count (if it happened again) under the new rule as it was clearly inside the basket and met all the other requirements?

[Chuck Kennedy]

Inner wedgies will still count whether witnessed or not. The ruling I'm not sure is "right" is a disc hanging on the nub but outside the basket will not be good even if it was observed to get there from maybe bouncing back from hitting the pole. It brings into question whether the rare putt balancing level on the basket rim is good or not since a disc hanging from the nub but inside the basket will be good.

[Matt B.]

Originally Posted by Uhlman

that is a good question... my wife got an inner-wedgie once with a stiff DX cobra

HEY NOW!!!!!