Hope it isn't a dumb question

[ChUcK]

During casual play someone asked if a supporting point not on the lie could be further ahead than the supporting point that is on the lie, provided neither were closer to the hole than the lie.

This is ok, right?

[Dogma]

During casual play someone asked if a supporting point not on the lie could be further ahead than the supporting point that is on the lie, provided neither were closer to the hole than the lie.

This is ok, right?

If you imagine a line from the hole to your lie, and then imagine a perpendicular line through your lie, how could the supporting point be "further ahead than the supporting point that is on the lie", without being over that perpendicular line and closer to the hole? Or do you maybe mean that you have, for example, a foot at 29cm behind your lie (within the legal 30 cm), and the other foot forward of it, but not in front of the lie?

[curt]

I would say that as long as you have 1 supporting point along the line of play and within 30cm of the marker, then any other supporting point could be wherever you feel like it, provided it is behind a line that runs perpendicular to the line of play and is tangent to the rear of your marker.

[some call me...tim?]

Or do you maybe mean that you have, for example, a foot at 29cm behind your lie (within the legal 30 cm), and the other foot forward of it, but not in front of the lie?

I'm guessing that's what he means...like in the case of straddle putting but maybe having to stand kind of cockeyed b/c of a tree or rock being in the way. I do believe it would be legal.

[ChUcK]

Or do you maybe mean that you have, for example, a foot at 29cm behind your lie (within the legal 30 cm), and the other foot forward of it, but not in front of the lie?

That is indeed what I meant. I read the original post again and it reads like a riddle of some sort. Like, you have a fox and a rabbi and a baby, can only fit one of them in the rowboat at a time, etc.

Anyways, a local AmPro was adamant that this was a stance violation until we showed him that the rules didn't disallow it, and I promised I'd ask Chuck K online.

[Bruce]

Or do you maybe mean that you have, for example, a foot at 29cm behind your lie (within the legal 30 cm), and the other foot forward of it, but not in front of the lie?

I'm guessing that's what he means...like in the case of straddle putting but maybe having to stand kind of cockeyed b/c of a tree or rock being in the way. I do believe it would be legal.

I straddle this way any time I'm straddling to the right of my mark. I found I was missing right a lot, and had to stagger my stance by 6-9 inches to correct this. To do this, obviously you have to have your left foot 9-12 inches behind your marker to stay legal.

Worth noting that technically it isn't a perpendicular line you can't cross, it's a circle around the basket, as you only have to be 'no closer' than your lie. On drop ins that means you can have your feet at 6 and 3 o'clock of the basket and still be entirely legal...

[Dogma]

Worth noting that technically it isn't a perpendicular line you can't cross, it's a circle around the basket, as you only have to be 'no closer' than your lie.

Good point.

[ChUcK]

Worth noting that technically it isn't a perpendicular line you can't cross, it's a circle around the basket,

Is this a Rules Q&A Technicality? Considering the average distance of a putt combined with the average leg-span of a DGer, the line used to determine stance violations should be a perpendicular one. The amount of arc a putter experiences at a 20' putt (if the line of play is actually the 'circle of play') is negligible. Both feet would be exactly 240" away from the pin. With a perpendicular line, assuming a 36" foot-span on a straddle putt, the foot not behind the lie would be 242.7" away. That's a 1% increase in distance with the off-foot, while the on-foot is still the same distance away.

I just can't see the 'circle of play' being a very practical application of rules. It is much simpler, and nothing is effectively lost, if a perpendicular line is used.

Chuck, give us some input here, huh?

EDIT: I should go on record saying that I think the 'circle of play' is ultimately the most correct way to play, I just can't imagine Barry McSquat carrying around a 50-foot adjustable compass to prove that he isn't committing a stance violation.

"Let's see if I'm ready for my round. Extra towels, check. PDGA rulebook, check. Antique Brass Nautical Sextant With Optional Rotational Destabilizers And Steam Wand For Lattes In Order To Check Circle Of Play Legalities, check."