The Community of Disc Golfers and About All Things Disc Golf

Can someone please explain to me in what circumstance this is a good addition to a tournament?


Views: 987

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

the logic has to be height off the ground and to establish that some arbitrary height must be established...no way around that...what I don't want to see, and what the 2-meter rule serves to temper, is golfers throwing high into a tree that sits right above the pin and having their disc get stuck 40-50 feet directly over the pin and NOT getting a penalty for that...


if you get your disc stuck in a tree over a certain height (height to be established by the ruling body by whatever criteria they determine) you should get a penalty for that...

Disc golfers have different experiences.  I have NEVER seen a disc stuck over 2 meters high near the basket, and I've played and seen an awful lot of disc golf.  I'm sure it happens on courses somewhere.  But I've seen plenty of discs stuck in trees away from the green.


There are other solutions to penalize someone purposely throwing into trees over the basket, if that's what you want to do, other than apply the rule broadly to the other 99% of discs stuck in trees.

Why shouldn't you get a penalty for laying up under the basket rather than going for the chains on every throw? It's a strategy choice. If the designer doesn't want shots over the top to be allowed then design it so it's not a feasible shot from the tee or have some risk involved that's consistent and not lucky like the 2-meter penalty.

For example, mark an OB area on the ground that's 30-40 feet away from the pin that any throw might reach whether the throw comes from a low height down the fairway or over the top. Each route has similar risk/reward in terms of the overall accuracy of the throw but it's possible the straight route becomes more predictable than over the top due to pinball dispersion leading to more OB. If the disc ends up in the tree over the OB area, the shot is OB no matter what height and you don't need a measuring stick.

I agree that a poke and hope hole as you put it (never heard that saying refering to disc golf) IS a poor design.


But on holes where the fairway/flyway is 10-20 ft wide and 200-300 ft long. people take the over the top route not because its the only way, but because its the easy way.So why should there not be a 2m rule to protect the design of the hole from being circumvented? In this instance it gives the over the top route more risk if you want the reward of the drop in 2 or the other option with less risk down the middle (prob with putter or mid, ending up 30 or 40 short) you end up with a longer putt for 2, less reward, agree?

Seems like the only way to keep some people honest and in the fairway, not to mention spike hyzers on a short/compact course can be hazardous to others.

"The game has changed with the technological advances in discs.  Now holes can play a 1000 feet long and some holes are designed where the only route to the basket is a blind shot over the top.  I would prefer a narrow tunnel to crashing down into a group of trees and praying it filters through but if the only route is high and blind then we all will take it.  Now that shot is not a mistake deserving of penalty (if it sticks) but the smartest choice presented."


if there is a 2-meter rule in effect that high shot that comes crashing down through the trees is not necessarily the "smartest choice presented" anymore...it now becomes a risky shot on par w/ the narrow tunnel shot b/c of the element of a penalty if you're stuck in a tree...so w/o the rule you have one risky shot, and one shot that has very little element of risk to it, score wise...no brainer which shot you're going to/should throw...w/ the rule, both shots have an element of risk and you as a player must make a choice between the two, understanding that success on one shot might require a bit more "luck" than success on the other...


I agree that we should be looking to increase the skill factor and lessen the luck element, but luck or bad luck will always be a part of the game and it will never be eliminated entirely...personally, taking a risky shot at times when I know my skill will only help me so much and that luck can/will play a factor into where my disc will end up is one of the most appealing decisions that I get to make on the golf course...I don't want to see that eliminated, and I don't think it ever will be eliminated...if it is we can all go play disc golf on the computer b/c it will be just like doing that...


and I don't see anything arbitrary about electing to accept the risk that if I throw into a tree my disc might get stuck and I might get a penalty...the rule itself is not arbitrary only the height off the ground at which the penalty is assessed can be considered arbitrary...

The result of the rule is arbitrary and less professional. Studies have been done by Park & Rec professionals that discovered the lower the skill level of a participant in individual sports, the more they prefer luck elements as part of the competition. That pretty much confirms what you would expect since the more luck involved the better the chances for a lower skilled player to sometimes beat a more skilled player. So keep the 2 meter rule for rec play and only very selectively use it for sanctioned competition and make everyone happy.

if you think about it, a 2-meter rule actually encourages skillful play...if you don't want to get a tree penalty, DON'T THROW YOUR DISC INTO A TREE...this is exactly the same as, if you don't want to get an OB penalty, don't throw your disc out of bounds...


now, if we want to eliminate luck, and say this is all about skill, then instances I've seen in which somebody has thrown a disc OB, and the disc hit something OB (like a moving vehicle, which I have seen happen more than once) and bounced back in bounds, saving them a penalty, we should actually be giving them a penalty in this case b/c only by "luck" did they end up in bounds in those situations...their skill on that particular shot left much to be desired...same thing if somebody shanks a drive well off target, hits a tree hard, and ricochets to end up parked by the basket...it wasn't "skill" that put them there in that case it was "luck" but should we take that shot away b/c we want to eliminate the luck element as much as possible?

Hawk you're missing the point about consistency in the penalty, not whether a shot in the tree might be "bad" or not. If trees caught discs anywhere near the percentage that a pond does, then maybe a 1-meter, 2- meter or 10 meter rule might make sense. But it's a rare set of trees that catches discs like a golden glove shortstop. One in twenty caught by most trees just doesn't come close to the 1 in 100 or even 1000 not caught by an OB area.

actually, chuck, it depends on the tree...there is one tree on my home course w/ a basket sometimes positioned behind it...in my 5 years of playing there I have seen 2 discs get stuck in that tree...if you throw a disc and it gets stuck in that tree, bad luck...other trees catch discs all the time...if you drop through one of those trees, good luck to you...the penalty, however, is entirely consistent...if you get stuck in a tree above 2-meters, it's a penalty, all the time...that's as consistent as it gets...


if you throw into a tree, any tree, on purpose or on accident, you, as the thrower, are bringing the element of "luck" more into play than you would otherwise, b/c once your disc goes into the tree you can't control whether it falls to the ground or gets stuck...don't blame the trees for being inconsistent b/c they don't catch every disc...blame the throwers who throw their discs into the trees...when you throw your disc into a tree, and it gets stuck higher than 2-meters, you deserve a penalty for either taking a risky shot and throwing it in there on purpose or for making a bad shot and throwing it in there on accident...

Flying thru and around trees and other obstacles are as much a part of the game as the variety of ground cover a disc might encounter upon landing, skipping and rolling. They are no more or less special nor should be more special as obstacles in the game than anything else. The 2-meter rule simply adds a fluky penalty element that is unnecessary to the penalty of hitting any vertical obstacle that's part of the game. And to add salt in the wound, the height is arbitrarily set at 2 meters. Bad game structure all the way around.

As I pointed out before, there are certain trees like cedars where a more fair 2m penalty might make sense because they have a high rate of catching discs. If they are located off the fairway where the shot is already off line, I'm okay with a 2 meter penalty. But frankly, my preference would be to make every shot trapped by the cedars a penalty if the disc is not touching the playing surface. No magic line at 2 meters. Then, a bad throw in that direction gets penalized more like throwing OB. That rule tweak would require a waiver from the PDGA.

Luck happens in disc golf and in ball golf as well. You simply can't legislate luck out of a sport. That being said I have not missed the two meter rule being in effect simply because it comes into play very rarely. I could see the rule being rewritten so that there is a time limit for retrieval from a tree. If you can't get the disc out of the tree in say two minutes you incur a penalty. Then it becomes simply a speed of play issue. Also a disc that was stuck further up in a tree would be more likely to be penalized if it was harder to retrieve. But in general I don't see the game changing all that much without the rule in effect. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
I heard the retrieval idea was considered back in the 80s but was scrapped due to safety and foliage damage issues with players trying to quickly scramble up trees to get their discs.

Reply to Discussion


Blog Posts

Disc Golf Approach Shot Tips by Paul Ulibarri

Posted by Alan Barker on October 30, 2014 at 12:40pm — 1 Comment

State of Disc Golf: Disc Golf Growth

Posted by Alan Barker on January 29, 2014 at 2:26pm

What are your favorite Disc Plastics?

Posted by Alan Barker on November 4, 2013 at 1:38pm

2 Tips For Guys To Entice A Girls

Posted by Frederick Cranford on September 11, 2013 at 5:42am

Disc Golf Answerman Episode 6

Posted by CoolDaddySlickBreeze on August 13, 2013 at 4:40pm



© 2015   Created by Terry "the Pirate" Calhoun.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service