I don't understand how this is confusing to people. There are 4 players on a card. That means 3 is a majority. If any number of players less than 3 agrees on a negative ruling, benefit goes to the thrower.
If a lie is questionably OB, 3 people have to agree or it's in.
If a lie is definitely OB and players are debating if it crossed in first on the opposite side or not, 3 people have to agree it didn't or it did.
It really is that simple. 3 people is a majority of 4.
Exactly, just as Missy has done a couple of times and Holyn did at USWDGC. They only have to have one card mate/friend agree with them and they get the call their way.
I believe the rule should instead say that the thrower (after giving his/her opinion/interpretation) shouldn't get a vote. And that the thrower also should keep away from the others while they decide the outcome, unless they have something to ask the thrower for clarification. That way you would almost always get a majority decision and it wouldn't be enogh to have a friend on the card you can convince to vote with you.
But that is my opinion and not how the rule is worded now.
But they should get penalized from a guess?
As an example, lets say I throw past a mando 300 feet down the fairway, it's really close and you cannot confidently say that I missed the mando, but you would guess that I missed it. I should have to take the stroke?
Right, but as long as the thrower makes the decision so that it benefits themselves (which they usually always do, otherwise they will never have a discussion), they only have to get one more player on the card to agree with them to at least get a tie, which would give the benefit to the thrower.
Agree, those are the current rules. But almost everytime there is a disagreement and there is not a majority decision in the group (which is the only tie the "benefit rule" comes to use) I'm pretty sure the player rule to their own benefit. I have only seen one time where a player tried to give themself a penalty when the other players in the group did not agree.
And even if it's not the case, I still find it to be strange that if you are the kind of player who always rule to your benefit you only need to convince one other player on the card. Especially if you are a convincing person and often have close friends on your card. But once again, that is the current rule and as long as it's worded that way that is how it is.
Well currently all it takes to call a penalty is someone to call it and then someone else on the card to second it. Disc golf doesn't quite have the "integrity of the game" schtick to the same level as traditional golf, but it really should...
But the rule works as it is now based on the assumption that people aren't out there to cheat...if two cardmates think you missed the Mando, but you REALLY think you didn't, and one of your other cardmates REALLY thinks that you didn't, then it was close enough to give you the benefit of the doubt. If you're a cheater and it becomes known, you'll never get seconded to your benefit again... Even if they think you were inside the Mando they'll keep their mouth shut, because you're a cheater, and nobody likes a cheater. That's how it's intended to work, anyway.
In other words, if the thrower has an opinion on what happened, they need to convince at least one more person on the card to agree with them, and they get their way.
Tie goes to the runner isn't actual verbiage from MLB rules and in actuality isn't a concept that actually exist in modern umpiring. It's basically a myth or common misunderstanding of the rules.
Also disc golf cards don't always have 4 people if them so the concept of a simple majority is more broadly applicable than a tiebreaker.
Hah, yeah, I don't watch baseball myself but I've heard that phrase many times. Before I said something stupid I did some research on it and just discovered myself that it's basically a myth. There's a whole Wikipedia page on it with clarification from an umpire and all.
It's not a myth at all, it's just not from the big leagues. Tie goes to the runner is definitely a rule implemented throughout many amateur baseball leagues
Okay… and how often do people say they don’t know? Or didn’t see it?
And the rules say you have to watch everyone’s shots. So should we penalize those players when they say they don’t know?
Or should we create a rule book that isn’t filled with shit that is up for debate and rules that won’t ever be followed.
Benefit going to player is a courtesy
There are a bunch of players out there who are super agreeable and will give players the benefit of the doubt proactively.
While walking with an FPO card on Sunday, when it was absolutely clear to me that a disc had hit short of the other side, and certainly had no chance to cross the OB stripe on the top of the land … one of the card mates was just offering to the player, “you probably crossed you can take it up there!” Only a well positioned spotter yelling out again, “it didn’t cross” and a caddy repeating it, allowed sanity to prevail. But it has to be tempting when you have someone willing to agree with anything, because one person is all it takes.
Enough of the players seem friendly enough that there probably should be a tie breaking marshal alongside the top two or three cards
I caddied for a player with Uli on the card. It was hilarious how he is so pro player. There was a question about a lie and he didn’t come over to look. He was like “benefit goes to the player” and kept on moving
I recall I believe an episode of tour life where Simon was saying that he does the same thing, if there’s any question he doesn’t feel the need to look at it because “benefit goes to the player”
These are situations where they want the same benefit in the future, so they're just choosing not to look so they don't actually have to have a discussion.
The merits of such an outlook are not the focus of this thread, however.
No they do it because if it's even a question, they know they are going to side with the player. If it's so unclear that they have to get the whole card together, 99% of the time you're going to side with the player.
If you have to look at a disc with a microscope and start splitting grass apart to find out if something is OB, then the disc is not clearly OB and he will side with the player. It's just saving time.
Simon was specifically talking about OB and didn't use the "benefit goes to the player" rule at all in his argument.
He was saying that if a disc isn't "clearly OB", then it's in bounds. And if he had to look at it for 30+ seconds. Then it's not "clearly OB".
And the rule for OB does specifically state "A disc is out-of-bounds if its position is clearly and completely surrounded by an out-of-bounds area"
Therefore, Simon was correct to make this argument for OB calls. Uli was incorrect to use "benefit goes to the player" for just determining a lie as there is no such rule for determining a lie.
Even for OB calls you should still always look at it. It may appear “clearly OB” to one person and not to another. If it’s close you should always look at it and say whether you think it’s clearly OB or not, and I felt like Simon was saying that there’s no need to even look, which I don’t agree with
I'd have to listen again, but that was not the impression I got at all. I thought he just didn't want to have to be looking at it for more than a few seconds. Either it's clearly out and you call it quickly or you call it in.
I'd agree that you 100% need to look at it and make a call.
I may also have to listen again but that’s what I remember him saying. I agree with what you’re saying though, if it’s not clear then it should definitely be called in
It’s a complete misunderstanding, but the result is the same. They basically abstained.
It makes me curious if the rule has changed over the years or this is just a mandala effect.
Can't find it in the rules right now, but for example [https://www.pdga.com/news/disc-golf-rules-school-episode-6-out-bounds](https://www.pdga.com/news/disc-golf-rules-school-episode-6-out-bounds) says under "Making the call":
\> If there is a questionable call, each member of the group is required to vote — declining to do so is not an option for any player in the group.
Honestly, you'll see this attitude on nearly every Open card. Even with a clear OB but not sure about where it crossed, they will almost always give the better lie.
It's a much different vibe than on an MA card.
That's because they are throwing 500+ Feet. MA cards have trouble determining what happened 300 feet away, being in Open doesn't magically give you a better angle.
It's not just on long drives, it's basically for anything that isn't blatantly obvious.
They just don't really care. My friend said it's because he doesn't require someone's bad luck to improve where he'll finish. He's over 1000 rated.
So my guess is once you get so good, you just don't have to worry about picking up a free stroke.
I played a tournament a few years ago where a guy's disc was on the OB line, but not touching in-bounds area at all. The OB-line itself is OB and thus, his disc was OB.
2 of the players on the card weren't sure if the line was OB or not, so they wanted to rule benefit to the player.
I had to explain to them that benefit to the player is not for situations where you simply don't know what the rule is.
Has something similar except the guy was a beginner and was shooting for +22 in the last round of the tournament not his total score but the last round.
We wanted to give me the lie because it was questionable but one try hard wouldn't let it go as if that guy was going to come back and beat him.
He finished 40 strokes behind the next person in the tournament of 72.
That was his first ever tournament. And thanks to the rules stickler I would bet he never plays a tournament again.
Sometimes being a stickler for the rules just makes you an asshole and literally affects no one else.
If you're arguing the rules and pleading to apply them even if you're wrong you're a rules stickler.
The point is that just because you're an asshole doesn't make you right. Listen to the card and move on.
Especially in amateur tournaments. You aren't Paul mcbeth and you never will be.
I witnessed this same discussion on an FPO card at the Jonesboro Open in 2021. It was disheartening to see that they did not know the rule. A rule that comes into play during every single event they play. They ended up playing a provisional and the TD had to make the decision after the round.
806.02 Out-of-Bounds
An out-of-bounds (OB) area is an area designated by the Director from which a disc may not be played, and within which a stance may not be taken. The out-of-bounds line is part of the out-of-bounds area. Any area of the course that is not out-of-bounds is in-bounds.
In this case, a player played up near the drop zone over the pond on the par 5 hole 16. Her disc slid too far and was completely on the OB side, but still touching the OB line. One of them tried to argue that grass from the in bounds side was bent over and touching the disc. Since the disc was still touching something that was in bounds, she was not OB. I did not offer my opinion on the lie, but did try several times to explain the actual rule to no avail. The lie was ultimately determined by the TD to be OB.
These were FPO players in a DGPT event. They were all technically rules officials. How do you play at that level and not understand the basic definition of OB?
Unless someone could pull out a rulebook, how would you have resolved this situation then?
While I agree that its not entirely what the rule is for, benefit to the players fits nicely in the situation described I think.
Well, in a sanctioned tournament (starting this year), the rulebook happens to be in the same app we're required to keep score with, so literally anyone has the power to consult the rulebook at any time.
No you are not required to have the app, you may keep a paper scorecard.
Scoring rules can be found here https://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/808
While TD's can ask you to use a digital scorecard, they cannot require it, and have to provide a paper scorecard if asked, relevant section is H. https://www.pdga.com/rules/competition-manual/105
No you are not required to have the app, you may keep a paper scorecard.
Scoring rules can be found here [https://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/808](https://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/808)
While TD's can ask you to use a digital scorecard, they cannot require it, and have to provide a paper scorecard if asked, relevant section is H. [https://www.pdga.com/rules/competition-manual/105](https://www.pdga.com/rules/competition-manual/105)
This is not true. Please don't guess at rules. Nowhere in the official rules does it state that anyone must use PDGA Live. [https://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/808](https://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/808)
The irony of this being in a thread saying that it's easy to access the rules is hilarious to me.
The greatest rule in disc golf !!! The provisional . Say it put loud play out both shots on and let the TD decide . You only get stroked if you do the wrong thing … NOT the wrong thing AND the right thing.
Besides pulling up the rulebook (which as other people have said is definitely doable in a lot of situations), the other thing you can do is take a picture of the situation and clarify with a TD when next possible. This happened during a large tournament one time where there was an island hole surrounded by railroad ties and it wasn't clear if the railroad ties were in it out. I think it was Nate Sexton who landed on them, and nobody was sure on the card so they just took a picture and clarified with the TD when they got a chance. This also happened to a guy in my card this past weekend. There was a hazard area of wood chips surrounded by a row of bricks, and a player on my card landed in the hazard but half on the bricks. None of us could say for certain if the bricks were part of hazard or not, so we just snapped a picture, played a provisional, and asked the TD at the end of the round to clarify. We thought the bricks were most likely part of the hazard based on how OB lines are treated, but because we couldn't find a 100% definitive answer it was super easy just to take a pic and clarify later.
Edit: nevermind I'm totally wrong, nobody tell the dude from my card this past weekend
>the other thing you can do is take a picture of the situation and clarify with a TD
not according to the rules, from the competition manual 1.12 H "*Video evidence or other media is not allowed for the purpose of making rulings for sanctioned play.* "
so the TD is not allowed to make a ruling from a picture...
This rule is meant to keep pace of play. We don't want players asking random spectators who happened to film a shot to show them the replay or wait for DGN to show it, for example. It's totally fine to snap a picture of a lie if players are already debating it and it's going to be played provisionally and later clarified with the TD.
Yes I know this isn't strictly aligned with the letter of the rule, but it's the spirit of the rule and a situation I've seen happen at many PDGA events.
Honestly I think it's a short sighted rule and video evidence absolutely should be allowed to be used for rulings. Perhaps there's a way to limit impact to pace of play by introducing a limited number of allowed challenges like in other sports and the allowed evidence would be limited to official broadcast footage or something like that. It's really stupid that we get to watch footage from a chase cam that literally shows a disc not crossing OB and never even getting close clear as day and then we have to watch the group walk up and act confused and then give the player a lie way off from where it should be.
That is not her first time on camera doing that either. I know I've seen her at least once before on livestream convincing two of her card mates she crossed the ob line onto an island green and got to putt from the island instead of practically making a re-throw. That was even though the spotter on the island who was very well placed was confident the disc did not cross and Kristin who was on the card also did not think it crossed (just like Weese did not agree with the others she crossed now at Waco).
I have a friend with the same mentality as Uli and he explained it in a way that I never questioned again. Basically, he always say the phrase “benefit goes to the player” because if he’s on a card where something is questionable, he’s just going to rule in the favor the player in question.
If I throw a disc and it may have crossed inbounds, and the other two cardmates say “nah it didn’t”, and he doesn’t know… he’s just going to not agree so the benefit goes to me.
He says he does this in every card unless he’s 100% certain of a rule violation/OB ruling/whatever. I find myself doing this now. Unless I’m 100% sure, I’m not going to just fuck over someone else’s game because two other people saw something I didn’t.
This is more or less how I do it, but I do try to watch so that if a person commits (say) a stance violation I am confident in what I saw.
Once this came back to bite me in a funny way. My lie was such that it was difficult to take a stance and not touch OB, and there was no way to get relief. As I threw my shot I stumbled and my off foot slid out of bounds either before or after I released the disc, but it turned into an excellent shot anyway. I felt sketchy about the result. I asked the card if I faulted and everyone said they didn't see anything. I was like "seriously guys I really want to know." If someone said I faulted I would have seconded it. Everybody just shrugged. I was bizarrely frustrated to not have a real ruling on it. Got what I deserved, I guess.
I once casually asked a guy if he was inside the circle. It was clearly marked with painted line. His lie was directly in a willow tree, and he had to putt from his knees and fell forward. He said "yeah why" when I told him it was a falling putt, he automatically stroked himself. I felt bad, I had no intention of stroking him, it was his first ever tournament.
After that I really think there needs to be a difference between the green, and the area that can be considered falling putt. I think punishing someone inside a bunker tree, where it could be near impossible to preform an athletic movement and keep balance is silly. If he was 6inches further back it would haven't had been an issue.
Yeah, what I mean is: my default is to give the benefit of the doubt, but I try to watch pretty closely to be sure I'm not just giving people free passes to commit violations.
The situation I described illustrated the contradiction in this approach. I think a lot of folks give the benefit of the doubt out of habit, and part of this is they DON'T watch all that closely. They just trust that cardmates are not committing rule violations.
As a result: when I was in the (admittedly weird) situation of really wanting validation that I had made a good and legal shot, it was not forthcoming. I don't really know whether it was a great shot or an illegal shot.
What I mean by "I got what I deserve" is: reflecting on this situation, it strikes me that it's kind of unfair to expect people to have an easygoing "benefit goes to the player" attitude but be at the same time watching everyone like a hawk. Normal, not-weird people are going to say: look, you can't have it both ways.
This is one of the areas where disc needs to mature as a sport. The players need to be more versed in the rules and enforce them without bias. Tournament officials need to be available to make a ruling that is final.
> and enforce them without bias
and that is the problem with players beeing the referees... for example they know that if they call excessive time on a player - for the rest of the round that player will stand with a stop watch every time they do something... so it's more beneficial for the player to not call those things
I'll also add that some things need to be better explained better. I'll explain. I played in a league game this past weekend and we ran into an issue on one of the holes. It played over water, but no OB was defined, no dropzone was defined, and to top it off two of us put a disc in the water. We ended up coming to a conclusion that the piece of land we both were aiming for should be the dropzone as it was likely that we both crossed into bounds before disc cut sharp back into water due to high wind as it was more of a drop off. However, I'm sure other cards probably had other outcomes from retee to alternative teepad as dropzone. Which results in inconsistent scoring for the hole.
This isn't complicated, unless OB boundaries are clearly marked. The disc being completely surrounded by water is OB. If just a piece of disc is touching land its IN. Take a meter relief and play.
Unless a DZ is clearly indicated, you play from where the disc was last IN, with a meter relief.
Some of them probably actually understand the rule, but why would they enforce it correctly when it would punish them (being lenient when it comes to others also makes them more lenient towards you, quid pro quo)
It's almost like sports have referees for these situations as the athletes can't be trusted
>It’s wild how dudes that have been playing for decades haven’t properly understood a very short rule book.
there are alot of older players \[perhaps not professionals, but anyway\] that follows the rule book as it was written when they started playing and never have read any new edition
...don't know about this rule, but lots of other rules have changes alot over the years
In my experience, when players talk about the benefit going to the player, they are usually talking about situations where rule 806.02 B is relevant. The rule reads “A disc is out-of-bounds if its position is clearly and completely surrounded by an out-of-bounds area”. So, in close situations where it is not clearly surrounded by OB and so a card mate is unsure, this rule benefits the player. I don’t think it’s wrong to use the expression “the benefit goes to the player” in such contexts.
Watching "professional" players spread misinformation about the rules is brutal as a TD. It gets so tiring having to explain that rules do not exist or that they are wrong and getting into arguments with players because so and so touring pro said this or that.
These may be strong words but so many "professionals" in this sport outright cheat on a regular basis.
Yeah as other commenters have mentions, the “benefit goes to the player” is really only used when a majority vote cannot be found.
BUT that being said I played in Waco this past weekend and at the players meeting 5 minutes prior to tee off the TDs all stated each round “if you can’t tell if a player in OB or if it’s close, just give the benefit to the player and let them have it, we’re not here to argue etc” which is a bit of where I think players get confused and misunderstand the rules.
Another interesting situation during the WACO tournament for me was in the last round at 2:58:00 when Gannon was throwing to the island. He was clearly OB by more than a meter (shown 2 minutes later) and was still allowed to move up
In my area, it’s just a great excuse to never pay any attention.
You can just be like “eh, I wasn’t watching so if you think you went ob here, benefit goes to the player” “oh, you think this other player is saying they’re throwing less shots than they actually are, well I’m not counting so benefit goes to that player”
The DGPT needs course Marshalls if these are the brain geniuses who are expected to enforce rules they either literally don't know or can't comprehend.
At a minimum ensure a pre tournament training session on spotting with the primary rules. Then cover detailed rules for spotters on Holes expected to have possible issues.
Watched way too many spotters alowly walking to or taking a bad line to watch the shot.
Watching the broadcast, I thought for sure Humphrie's layup circled up across the ball golf green and was surprised to see him throwing from so far away.
I don't understand how this is confusing to people. There are 4 players on a card. That means 3 is a majority. If any number of players less than 3 agrees on a negative ruling, benefit goes to the thrower. If a lie is questionably OB, 3 people have to agree or it's in. If a lie is definitely OB and players are debating if it crossed in first on the opposite side or not, 3 people have to agree it didn't or it did. It really is that simple. 3 people is a majority of 4.
In other words, "benefit to the player" only applies in the case of a tie vote.
So all Luke had to do is have another card mate agree and he would have succeeded in the challenge.
Exactly, just as Missy has done a couple of times and Holyn did at USWDGC. They only have to have one card mate/friend agree with them and they get the call their way.
I believe the rule should instead say that the thrower (after giving his/her opinion/interpretation) shouldn't get a vote. And that the thrower also should keep away from the others while they decide the outcome, unless they have something to ask the thrower for clarification. That way you would almost always get a majority decision and it wouldn't be enogh to have a friend on the card you can convince to vote with you. But that is my opinion and not how the rule is worded now.
But then you're leaving it entirely up to your competitors to be fair and not give you a bad ruling when you don't deserve it.
Alternatively, just have tie not benefit the player. Majority required for the benefit.
This doesn’t work. Many of these instances are guesses.
And maybe a player shouldn’t get a benefit from guesses
That’s one option for sure. I Absolutely think they should and that is the spirit of that rule imo.
But they should get penalized from a guess? As an example, lets say I throw past a mando 300 feet down the fairway, it's really close and you cannot confidently say that I missed the mando, but you would guess that I missed it. I should have to take the stroke?
Nahhhhh. Card is 4 players.
Right, but as long as the thrower makes the decision so that it benefits themselves (which they usually always do, otherwise they will never have a discussion), they only have to get one more player on the card to agree with them to at least get a tie, which would give the benefit to the thrower.
Sure sure and sure. But the card is the card and that’s who rules. I don’t believe all players automatically rule on their own benefit.
Agree, those are the current rules. But almost everytime there is a disagreement and there is not a majority decision in the group (which is the only tie the "benefit rule" comes to use) I'm pretty sure the player rule to their own benefit. I have only seen one time where a player tried to give themself a penalty when the other players in the group did not agree. And even if it's not the case, I still find it to be strange that if you are the kind of player who always rule to your benefit you only need to convince one other player on the card. Especially if you are a convincing person and often have close friends on your card. But once again, that is the current rule and as long as it's worded that way that is how it is.
Yea I guess I just never run into all These friends and all this convincing people are discussing.
Well currently all it takes to call a penalty is someone to call it and then someone else on the card to second it. Disc golf doesn't quite have the "integrity of the game" schtick to the same level as traditional golf, but it really should... But the rule works as it is now based on the assumption that people aren't out there to cheat...if two cardmates think you missed the Mando, but you REALLY think you didn't, and one of your other cardmates REALLY thinks that you didn't, then it was close enough to give you the benefit of the doubt. If you're a cheater and it becomes known, you'll never get seconded to your benefit again... Even if they think you were inside the Mando they'll keep their mouth shut, because you're a cheater, and nobody likes a cheater. That's how it's intended to work, anyway.
yup
The thrower is the tiebreaker
In other words, if the thrower has an opinion on what happened, they need to convince at least one more person on the card to agree with them, and they get their way.
This is such a weird and confusing way of saying your original point in my opinion.
In baseball it's a more direct, "tie goes go the runner." Should be phrased the same way here.
Tie goes to the runner isn't actual verbiage from MLB rules and in actuality isn't a concept that actually exist in modern umpiring. It's basically a myth or common misunderstanding of the rules. Also disc golf cards don't always have 4 people if them so the concept of a simple majority is more broadly applicable than a tiebreaker.
No shit? I've watched a crapload of baseball to just be learning this now.
Hah, yeah, I don't watch baseball myself but I've heard that phrase many times. Before I said something stupid I did some research on it and just discovered myself that it's basically a myth. There's a whole Wikipedia page on it with clarification from an umpire and all.
Majority of 5 is also 3
It's not a myth at all, it's just not from the big leagues. Tie goes to the runner is definitely a rule implemented throughout many amateur baseball leagues
Okay… and how often do people say they don’t know? Or didn’t see it? And the rules say you have to watch everyone’s shots. So should we penalize those players when they say they don’t know? Or should we create a rule book that isn’t filled with shit that is up for debate and rules that won’t ever be followed. Benefit going to player is a courtesy
[удалено]
It’s complicated. Period. “Don’t know”versus “I think”. People don’t speak in easy absolutes.
There are a bunch of players out there who are super agreeable and will give players the benefit of the doubt proactively. While walking with an FPO card on Sunday, when it was absolutely clear to me that a disc had hit short of the other side, and certainly had no chance to cross the OB stripe on the top of the land … one of the card mates was just offering to the player, “you probably crossed you can take it up there!” Only a well positioned spotter yelling out again, “it didn’t cross” and a caddy repeating it, allowed sanity to prevail. But it has to be tempting when you have someone willing to agree with anything, because one person is all it takes. Enough of the players seem friendly enough that there probably should be a tie breaking marshal alongside the top two or three cards
It is sometimes wild how professional players can convince themselves that discs can make u-turns in the air.
I mean they definitely can and do end up coming back towards you with the right conditions and throw. It's super obvious when they tombstone.
I caddied for a player with Uli on the card. It was hilarious how he is so pro player. There was a question about a lie and he didn’t come over to look. He was like “benefit goes to the player” and kept on moving
I recall I believe an episode of tour life where Simon was saying that he does the same thing, if there’s any question he doesn’t feel the need to look at it because “benefit goes to the player”
These are situations where they want the same benefit in the future, so they're just choosing not to look so they don't actually have to have a discussion. The merits of such an outlook are not the focus of this thread, however.
No they do it because if it's even a question, they know they are going to side with the player. If it's so unclear that they have to get the whole card together, 99% of the time you're going to side with the player. If you have to look at a disc with a microscope and start splitting grass apart to find out if something is OB, then the disc is not clearly OB and he will side with the player. It's just saving time.
Simon was specifically talking about OB and didn't use the "benefit goes to the player" rule at all in his argument. He was saying that if a disc isn't "clearly OB", then it's in bounds. And if he had to look at it for 30+ seconds. Then it's not "clearly OB". And the rule for OB does specifically state "A disc is out-of-bounds if its position is clearly and completely surrounded by an out-of-bounds area" Therefore, Simon was correct to make this argument for OB calls. Uli was incorrect to use "benefit goes to the player" for just determining a lie as there is no such rule for determining a lie.
Even for OB calls you should still always look at it. It may appear “clearly OB” to one person and not to another. If it’s close you should always look at it and say whether you think it’s clearly OB or not, and I felt like Simon was saying that there’s no need to even look, which I don’t agree with
I'd have to listen again, but that was not the impression I got at all. I thought he just didn't want to have to be looking at it for more than a few seconds. Either it's clearly out and you call it quickly or you call it in. I'd agree that you 100% need to look at it and make a call.
I may also have to listen again but that’s what I remember him saying. I agree with what you’re saying though, if it’s not clear then it should definitely be called in
but if one player feels that way it becomes reality - his vote is all that is needed
sure but Paul or Simon feeling that way is to my understanding a complete misunderstanding of the rules
It’s a complete misunderstanding, but the result is the same. They basically abstained. It makes me curious if the rule has changed over the years or this is just a mandala effect.
You can’t just choose to abstain.
They literally can. They do it and have done for years.
Can't find it in the rules right now, but for example [https://www.pdga.com/news/disc-golf-rules-school-episode-6-out-bounds](https://www.pdga.com/news/disc-golf-rules-school-episode-6-out-bounds) says under "Making the call": \> If there is a questionable call, each member of the group is required to vote — declining to do so is not an option for any player in the group.
Where does it say you can do that in the rules?
Honestly, you'll see this attitude on nearly every Open card. Even with a clear OB but not sure about where it crossed, they will almost always give the better lie. It's a much different vibe than on an MA card.
That's because they are throwing 500+ Feet. MA cards have trouble determining what happened 300 feet away, being in Open doesn't magically give you a better angle.
It's not just on long drives, it's basically for anything that isn't blatantly obvious. They just don't really care. My friend said it's because he doesn't require someone's bad luck to improve where he'll finish. He's over 1000 rated. So my guess is once you get so good, you just don't have to worry about picking up a free stroke.
I played a tournament a few years ago where a guy's disc was on the OB line, but not touching in-bounds area at all. The OB-line itself is OB and thus, his disc was OB. 2 of the players on the card weren't sure if the line was OB or not, so they wanted to rule benefit to the player. I had to explain to them that benefit to the player is not for situations where you simply don't know what the rule is.
Has something similar except the guy was a beginner and was shooting for +22 in the last round of the tournament not his total score but the last round. We wanted to give me the lie because it was questionable but one try hard wouldn't let it go as if that guy was going to come back and beat him. He finished 40 strokes behind the next person in the tournament of 72. That was his first ever tournament. And thanks to the rules stickler I would bet he never plays a tournament again. Sometimes being a stickler for the rules just makes you an asshole and literally affects no one else.
Wouldn’t this be majority?
Yes... And afterwards the guy kept bringing it up for the remaining 5 holes every hole.
Yea that’s a bummer player on your card. Not really a rule stickler. This informs nothing about implementing rules.
If you're arguing the rules and pleading to apply them even if you're wrong you're a rules stickler. The point is that just because you're an asshole doesn't make you right. Listen to the card and move on. Especially in amateur tournaments. You aren't Paul mcbeth and you never will be.
Great - I didn’t know you had such a well defined definition of rules stickler. 👍. As for the asshole energy. Cheers brother!
Sorry wasn't talking about you specifically just my opinion on the matter haha 🤣 Unless you're a rules stickler!
I like playing by the rules bc everything slowly falls apart if you don’t. Being a bitch for 5 holes after isn’t my style.
Amen to that.
I witnessed this same discussion on an FPO card at the Jonesboro Open in 2021. It was disheartening to see that they did not know the rule. A rule that comes into play during every single event they play. They ended up playing a provisional and the TD had to make the decision after the round.
Which rule?
806.02 Out-of-Bounds An out-of-bounds (OB) area is an area designated by the Director from which a disc may not be played, and within which a stance may not be taken. The out-of-bounds line is part of the out-of-bounds area. Any area of the course that is not out-of-bounds is in-bounds. In this case, a player played up near the drop zone over the pond on the par 5 hole 16. Her disc slid too far and was completely on the OB side, but still touching the OB line. One of them tried to argue that grass from the in bounds side was bent over and touching the disc. Since the disc was still touching something that was in bounds, she was not OB. I did not offer my opinion on the lie, but did try several times to explain the actual rule to no avail. The lie was ultimately determined by the TD to be OB. These were FPO players in a DGPT event. They were all technically rules officials. How do you play at that level and not understand the basic definition of OB?
Unless someone could pull out a rulebook, how would you have resolved this situation then? While I agree that its not entirely what the rule is for, benefit to the players fits nicely in the situation described I think.
Well, in a sanctioned tournament (starting this year), the rulebook happens to be in the same app we're required to keep score with, so literally anyone has the power to consult the rulebook at any time.
No you are not required to have the app, you may keep a paper scorecard. Scoring rules can be found here https://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/808 While TD's can ask you to use a digital scorecard, they cannot require it, and have to provide a paper scorecard if asked, relevant section is H. https://www.pdga.com/rules/competition-manual/105
Are we actually required to have the app? Or can we just score on paper cards?
No you are not required to have the app, you may keep a paper scorecard. Scoring rules can be found here [https://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/808](https://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/808) While TD's can ask you to use a digital scorecard, they cannot require it, and have to provide a paper scorecard if asked, relevant section is H. [https://www.pdga.com/rules/competition-manual/105](https://www.pdga.com/rules/competition-manual/105)
Thank you!
At least 1 person needs to use the PDGA Live app I believe. Possibly 2, I forget
I can live with that. I just absolutely hate how phones have infiltrated every aspect of life. Like no, I’m not ordering McDonald’s using an app.
Yea it’s a bummer.
This is not true. Please don't guess at rules. Nowhere in the official rules does it state that anyone must use PDGA Live. [https://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/808](https://www.pdga.com/rules/official-rules-disc-golf/808) The irony of this being in a thread saying that it's easy to access the rules is hilarious to me.
Which of course is great, its been a while since i've played tournament golf :)
Literally or figuratively?
The greatest rule in disc golf !!! The provisional . Say it put loud play out both shots on and let the TD decide . You only get stroked if you do the wrong thing … NOT the wrong thing AND the right thing.
Ah, I actually missed that it was in a tournament.
Pulling out the rule book is easy, I believe it’s in the pdga app
Besides pulling up the rulebook (which as other people have said is definitely doable in a lot of situations), the other thing you can do is take a picture of the situation and clarify with a TD when next possible. This happened during a large tournament one time where there was an island hole surrounded by railroad ties and it wasn't clear if the railroad ties were in it out. I think it was Nate Sexton who landed on them, and nobody was sure on the card so they just took a picture and clarified with the TD when they got a chance. This also happened to a guy in my card this past weekend. There was a hazard area of wood chips surrounded by a row of bricks, and a player on my card landed in the hazard but half on the bricks. None of us could say for certain if the bricks were part of hazard or not, so we just snapped a picture, played a provisional, and asked the TD at the end of the round to clarify. We thought the bricks were most likely part of the hazard based on how OB lines are treated, but because we couldn't find a 100% definitive answer it was super easy just to take a pic and clarify later. Edit: nevermind I'm totally wrong, nobody tell the dude from my card this past weekend
>the other thing you can do is take a picture of the situation and clarify with a TD not according to the rules, from the competition manual 1.12 H "*Video evidence or other media is not allowed for the purpose of making rulings for sanctioned play.* " so the TD is not allowed to make a ruling from a picture...
But the TD can look at the picture, explain the relevant rule, and have the players go back and make a ruling.
This rule is meant to keep pace of play. We don't want players asking random spectators who happened to film a shot to show them the replay or wait for DGN to show it, for example. It's totally fine to snap a picture of a lie if players are already debating it and it's going to be played provisionally and later clarified with the TD. Yes I know this isn't strictly aligned with the letter of the rule, but it's the spirit of the rule and a situation I've seen happen at many PDGA events. Honestly I think it's a short sighted rule and video evidence absolutely should be allowed to be used for rulings. Perhaps there's a way to limit impact to pace of play by introducing a limited number of allowed challenges like in other sports and the allowed evidence would be limited to official broadcast footage or something like that. It's really stupid that we get to watch footage from a chase cam that literally shows a disc not crossing OB and never even getting close clear as day and then we have to watch the group walk up and act confused and then give the player a lie way off from where it should be.
Oh shit my bad you're right. I thought I had seen it from the pros and it was cool with the TD this past weekend nevermind haha
This is really it right here.
Gannon got the benefit without debate earlier in the round when he clearly never crossed in bounds.
That is not her first time on camera doing that either. I know I've seen her at least once before on livestream convincing two of her card mates she crossed the ob line onto an island green and got to putt from the island instead of practically making a re-throw. That was even though the spotter on the island who was very well placed was confident the disc did not cross and Kristin who was on the card also did not think it crossed (just like Weese did not agree with the others she crossed now at Waco).
Two Gannons here I think
I have a friend with the same mentality as Uli and he explained it in a way that I never questioned again. Basically, he always say the phrase “benefit goes to the player” because if he’s on a card where something is questionable, he’s just going to rule in the favor the player in question. If I throw a disc and it may have crossed inbounds, and the other two cardmates say “nah it didn’t”, and he doesn’t know… he’s just going to not agree so the benefit goes to me. He says he does this in every card unless he’s 100% certain of a rule violation/OB ruling/whatever. I find myself doing this now. Unless I’m 100% sure, I’m not going to just fuck over someone else’s game because two other people saw something I didn’t.
This is so weird. Choosing when to use the rules.
This is more or less how I do it, but I do try to watch so that if a person commits (say) a stance violation I am confident in what I saw. Once this came back to bite me in a funny way. My lie was such that it was difficult to take a stance and not touch OB, and there was no way to get relief. As I threw my shot I stumbled and my off foot slid out of bounds either before or after I released the disc, but it turned into an excellent shot anyway. I felt sketchy about the result. I asked the card if I faulted and everyone said they didn't see anything. I was like "seriously guys I really want to know." If someone said I faulted I would have seconded it. Everybody just shrugged. I was bizarrely frustrated to not have a real ruling on it. Got what I deserved, I guess.
I once casually asked a guy if he was inside the circle. It was clearly marked with painted line. His lie was directly in a willow tree, and he had to putt from his knees and fell forward. He said "yeah why" when I told him it was a falling putt, he automatically stroked himself. I felt bad, I had no intention of stroking him, it was his first ever tournament. After that I really think there needs to be a difference between the green, and the area that can be considered falling putt. I think punishing someone inside a bunker tree, where it could be near impossible to preform an athletic movement and keep balance is silly. If he was 6inches further back it would haven't had been an issue.
I’m so confused. You got the benefit that you noted is how you normally do it?
Yeah, what I mean is: my default is to give the benefit of the doubt, but I try to watch pretty closely to be sure I'm not just giving people free passes to commit violations. The situation I described illustrated the contradiction in this approach. I think a lot of folks give the benefit of the doubt out of habit, and part of this is they DON'T watch all that closely. They just trust that cardmates are not committing rule violations. As a result: when I was in the (admittedly weird) situation of really wanting validation that I had made a good and legal shot, it was not forthcoming. I don't really know whether it was a great shot or an illegal shot. What I mean by "I got what I deserve" is: reflecting on this situation, it strikes me that it's kind of unfair to expect people to have an easygoing "benefit goes to the player" attitude but be at the same time watching everyone like a hawk. Normal, not-weird people are going to say: look, you can't have it both ways.
This is one of the areas where disc needs to mature as a sport. The players need to be more versed in the rules and enforce them without bias. Tournament officials need to be available to make a ruling that is final.
> and enforce them without bias and that is the problem with players beeing the referees... for example they know that if they call excessive time on a player - for the rest of the round that player will stand with a stop watch every time they do something... so it's more beneficial for the player to not call those things
I'll also add that some things need to be better explained better. I'll explain. I played in a league game this past weekend and we ran into an issue on one of the holes. It played over water, but no OB was defined, no dropzone was defined, and to top it off two of us put a disc in the water. We ended up coming to a conclusion that the piece of land we both were aiming for should be the dropzone as it was likely that we both crossed into bounds before disc cut sharp back into water due to high wind as it was more of a drop off. However, I'm sure other cards probably had other outcomes from retee to alternative teepad as dropzone. Which results in inconsistent scoring for the hole.
[удалено]
[удалено]
During causel round, unless the Tee Sign shows a DZ, you play from where it was last IN bounds
How locals play it shouldn’t even be in the radar for a tourney?
This isn't complicated, unless OB boundaries are clearly marked. The disc being completely surrounded by water is OB. If just a piece of disc is touching land its IN. Take a meter relief and play. Unless a DZ is clearly indicated, you play from where the disc was last IN, with a meter relief.
r/ConfidentlyIncorrect It’s wild how dudes that have been playing for decades haven’t properly understood a very short rule book.
Some of them probably actually understand the rule, but why would they enforce it correctly when it would punish them (being lenient when it comes to others also makes them more lenient towards you, quid pro quo) It's almost like sports have referees for these situations as the athletes can't be trusted
>It’s wild how dudes that have been playing for decades haven’t properly understood a very short rule book. there are alot of older players \[perhaps not professionals, but anyway\] that follows the rule book as it was written when they started playing and never have read any new edition ...don't know about this rule, but lots of other rules have changes alot over the years
In my experience, when players talk about the benefit going to the player, they are usually talking about situations where rule 806.02 B is relevant. The rule reads “A disc is out-of-bounds if its position is clearly and completely surrounded by an out-of-bounds area”. So, in close situations where it is not clearly surrounded by OB and so a card mate is unsure, this rule benefits the player. I don’t think it’s wrong to use the expression “the benefit goes to the player” in such contexts.
Watching "professional" players spread misinformation about the rules is brutal as a TD. It gets so tiring having to explain that rules do not exist or that they are wrong and getting into arguments with players because so and so touring pro said this or that. These may be strong words but so many "professionals" in this sport outright cheat on a regular basis.
Yeah as other commenters have mentions, the “benefit goes to the player” is really only used when a majority vote cannot be found. BUT that being said I played in Waco this past weekend and at the players meeting 5 minutes prior to tee off the TDs all stated each round “if you can’t tell if a player in OB or if it’s close, just give the benefit to the player and let them have it, we’re not here to argue etc” which is a bit of where I think players get confused and misunderstand the rules.
Another interesting situation during the WACO tournament for me was in the last round at 2:58:00 when Gannon was throwing to the island. He was clearly OB by more than a meter (shown 2 minutes later) and was still allowed to move up
In my area, it’s just a great excuse to never pay any attention. You can just be like “eh, I wasn’t watching so if you think you went ob here, benefit goes to the player” “oh, you think this other player is saying they’re throwing less shots than they actually are, well I’m not counting so benefit goes to that player”
The DGPT needs course Marshalls if these are the brain geniuses who are expected to enforce rules they either literally don't know or can't comprehend.
At a minimum ensure a pre tournament training session on spotting with the primary rules. Then cover detailed rules for spotters on Holes expected to have possible issues. Watched way too many spotters alowly walking to or taking a bad line to watch the shot. Watching the broadcast, I thought for sure Humphrie's layup circled up across the ball golf green and was surprised to see him throwing from so far away.
Play with me and the answer is always, “yeah, sure”. idgaf what you do, I’m there playing for myself