Q: I just read the new lost disc rule. My only question is WHY?

A: The new lost disc rule changes the penalty for a lost disc from stroke to stroke and distance. It now reads, "A player whose disc is declared lost shall receive one penalty throw. If the throw was made from the tee, the player will re-tee for the next shot. If not made from the tee, the group will determine the approximate lie from which the throw was made, and the player will throw again from that lie. In all cases the original throw plus one penalty throw shall be counted in the player’s score."

My first throughts: this will slow the game down, and in tournament play it is already plenty slow; this will penalize a lost disc much more than an out of bounds (OB) disc, which is arguably a worse shot; and this could encourage players to not really look for a potentially lost disc - sure, they might get a courtesy violation, but their opponent gets what amounts to a 2 stroke penalty.

I took my concerns to Carlton Howard, a well thinking fellow on the rules committee (RC). He pointed out to me that this rule is a half-step. The RC is thinking about making OB throws stroke and distance too, which is the rule in ball golf. Bearing in mind that this is a radical change (stroke vs. stroke and distance), the RC decided to create the OB rule as a test to see how it would go over. They are also hoping that it results in more consistent rulings, with the belief that it is easier to find where you last threw vs. where the disc was last seen. And in this they are probably correct.

This caused my thinking to change. Increasing the penalty for OB and lost discs, like they did in ball golf, might be a good idea. And if it is, shouldn't they just make the change? Taking this half step will cause some players (those with lost discs) to be harshly penalized so that it can be determined if this is a good idea. While other players (those with OB discs) will not be penalized as much, on arguably worse throws. The reason lost discs were chosen over OB discs to test the penalty is because lost discs occur much less often. This is true, unless you are playing in an ice bowl with a foot of snow!

And then I talked with Jason about disc golf and OB and lost discs and this rule and where the RC is hoping to go, and my perspective changed for what is currently the final time. Ball golf and disc golf have similarities, and many rules overlap. They also have many differences. In ball golf, going OB is a disastrous shot. The fairways are 40 yards wide, well groomed, and the OB line is usually protected by a 10 yard wide swath of trees. In disc golf, the fairways are 20 feet wide and the OB is a walking path or a stone wall or a creek that defines the edge of the fairway. OB in disc golf occurs much more often, and is in no way an equally bad shot as OB in ball golf. Therefore, in my opinion, OB (and lost discs) should not be penalized as harshly as they are in ball golf. Which makes me glad that the new rule only affects lost discs (which occur less often). If the RC had changed the rule for both lost discs and OB, it would have been much more difficult to retract. So now I am glad they took this half step, and I see the wisdom of this decision.

Hopefully in future revisions of the rules, the RC will find a less harsh, more fair solution to deal with OB shots and lost discs. I would vote to make the penalty just distance, without the stroke. Determining the spot of the next throw would be easier (where you threw from vs. where the disc went OB / was last seen) and thus more fair. Plus the penalty is not excessively harsh. Also, from a spectator's point of view, this would encourage aggressive, risky play, and make the sport more fun to watch. AND more fun to play.

Sincerely,

Torque Novitski, Marshall Street

Our mission is simple: Grow the sport, grow the sport, keep growing the sport.