Out of bounds shot crosses bridge on island green

[Joe Yaskis]

Can you play an out of bounds shot from the top of bridge if it crosses over it? The green is located on an island, a small one, with a bridge that can get you there. Is the bridge in bounds? The hole I am talking about is hole 9 blue at Maple Hill.

Sounds like you can. Hope I did not word this weirdly.

[Chuck Kennedy]

The Rules Committee has a Q&A on this topic:
http://www.pdga.com/faq/rules-questions ... erticality

If the TD doesn't say the bridge is OB, the presumption is that OB only extends vertically until it hits another playing surface such as the bridge which would then be inbounds.

[Jeff Prendergast]

Are you asking: Is the disc still in bounds if it rests on the bridge?
Or are you asking: Can I take my next shot from the bridge after it goes in the water?

Here's the spot he's referring to:

[Chuck Kennedy]

If the shot flew under the bridge into the water, then the bank or drop zone would be where the next shot is played from unless the course rules specified otherwise. If the disc flew over the bridge or struck it before landing OB then the disc would have touched or flown over IB on the bridge and could be played from there as last point IB.

[James Lane]

There is normally rope on that hole we use as the OB line, not the water. The rope runs under the bridge.
I'd say the bridge is OB

[Chuck Kennedy]

I'd say the default is the bridge is IB if the OB rope runs under it (versus over it maybe with a paint line to prevent tripping) based on the Rules Q&A. But this is a private course and I would think the scorecard would have rules on things like this.

[Joe Yaskis]

I head a famous disc golfer putted from this bridge one year when his shot went OB, because it crossed over the bridge.

[Craig Cutler]

Call a provisional, take both putts, have the TD rule after. unless it says otherwise on he score card.

[Bill Newman]

good thinking CC, provisional is def. the way to go when ever an issue like this comes up. Just tell the group what you are doing, keep score both ways...plop the issue on the TDs lap when the round is over

[Joe Yaskis]

Good thought, Cuts

[Steve Dodge]

good thinking CC, provisional is def. the way to go when ever an issue like this comes up. Just tell the group what you are doing, keep score both ways...plop the issue on the TDs lap when the round is over

Yikes! I should think about my answer for the next three months so I am ready. IMO, the bridge is OB, but I have never specified that anywhere before.

Chuck, would we just need to run the rope over the bridge and then we don't need to clarify it?

[Chuck Kennedy]

Chuck, would we just need to run the rope over the bridge and then we don't need to clarify it?

Much better to simply say all parts of the bridge are OB even the walkway sections that are on the inbounds sides of the ropes. Then, no matter whether a disc hits the bridge and falls in between the ropes OB or lands completely on the bridge, the player gets the OB penalty. If parts of the bridge are IB outside the ropes and some parts OB between the ropes, that would likely lead to some controversies and a variety of funky rulings depending on what or where people saw a disc hit on or near the bridge. Not only that, I would think the ropes on the bridge surface might be a tripping hazard.

[Mark Valis]

Make the bridge in bounds!

[Scooter Feely]

Is there precedent elsewhere that may be considered? Particularly at courses where other NT tournaments are played?

[Chuck Kennedy]

The precedent is to make clear what is OB and what isn't as needed in the player guide and/or signage. But bridges can be IB, OB or partially each as the TD desires as long as it's identified and marked properly.

[Steve Dodge]

I remember discussing it with Dave Gentry before last year's Vibram Open. I've got no clue what we decided, but I did make an announcement at the player's meeting. Hmm, I wonder where I put the notes from that ...

[Jeff Prendergast]

Is it allowed to paint an OB line near each end of the bridge, directly above the OB rope that lies along the water line? A disc that lands on the bridge, vertically above the water, is OB. A disc that slides to a stop and rests on the foot of the bridge (still about 5' from the water) doesn't get penalized.
The water should be the hazard, not the bridge. IMHO

[Steve Dodge]

I agree. And no matter what, that is a classy bridge built by Joel Brown. Check out the pic above again, it really is a way cool bridge.

[Chuck Kennedy]

Either all IB or OB is better. Half IB/half OB is potentially half baked and begging for trouble on rulings for last point IB on shots ending up OB.

[Jeff Prendergast]

Remove the bridge. Everyone can walk around. No bridge, no issue. (except for a slower pace of play)

Why did Joel have to build such a high-quality bridge? Didn't he know it could cause problems?

[Craig Cutler]

Allowing players to putt from the bridge, based on where the group thinks it crossed, leaves a lot of room for error. If the bridge is OB, the putt has to be taken from the bank. No room for the player to argue that he saw it cross closer, and, eliminates spotter error. How can anyone really tell where it crossed the bridge if you all are standing at the top of that hill?

[David Gipson]

Bridge=OB just my $0.02 like chuck said either all or nothing but it's a tough call if your throwing from atop of the hill, as to where it crossed the bridge. You would need a spotter right @ the bridge to not have problems amongst the group, but could still be an issue.

Call it OB Steve

[Mike Dussault]

Drop zone.

[Chuck Kennedy]

Drop zone doesn't work because no matter where you located it, it wouldn't be appropriate for some situations: If DZ is on bank on other side from pin, if player is putting on basket side, disc hits basket and rolls OB, that wouldn't be fair to go to DZ. How far down the creek would going to the DZ be valid? Not sure what the hole looks like but if someone goes OB back up the creek and gets to move to the DZ near the basket, that would not be fair.

[Steve Dodge]

This discussion is unneeded in this case, just so everyone understands.

There will be a line above the bridge. The land and the bridge on land is in bounds. The water, and the bridge above the water, is out of bounds - as it was always intended. We don't need to get into silly minutiae here.

From this point forward, all discussion should be about some hypothetical hole.