I think the rule exists solely so there's something to point to in case someone goes to an unreasonable extreme. Considering mold changes can be made to a named disc without re-approval, and an "identical" disc with 1/4" more dome is acceptable, the idea that the thickness of a hot stamp would be an unacceptable modification is silly.
That on top of the precedent that if you are on Innova's payroll and you add 6 stamps to a disc it's legal, and if you're at home and you add a mini stamp to the bottom of a disc (where the aerodynamics will be effected less) it's illegal. Makes no sense.
It's not about enforcement. It's about ambiguity in the rules. The PDGA maintains qualifying specifications for discs. As long as your modifications are within these specifications, it shouldn't matter what you do with the disc. In my opinion this is over reach by the PDGA. And, I believe it's time, at least on a professional level, that we get away from players policing other players.
I don't see how we can completely disassociate rule enforcement from rule ambiguity. Ambiguous rules are difficult to enforce consistently. Players have be policing themselves and other players for centuries. Again, as long as the rules are unambiguous, it shouldn't be that difficult players to keep other players honest. That said, there are some rules that are well intended and completely unambiguous, but require a disinterested third party to consistently enforce. 802.03 - Excessive Time is a good example. To be consistent, someone needs to impartially adjudicate when the players as "arrived" at their disc.
I made a formal proposal to change the rule to one based on the Technical Standards and adherence to the specifications of the mold at the time of its approval (tolerances for subsequent runs and inherent variations). The PDGA dismissed them out of hand. Never mind that they had previously referred to the Technical Standards in the rule/QA regarding factory seconds. (Hubris withing the rules committee in full operation.)
I think it's a good thing that the rules are (for the most part) enforced by players, not by some referee. Players know the rules, and most issues can be solved by discussing the issue in the card. If players cannot resolve the issue (i.e. after discussion they disagree with eachother) they can ask TD to resolve the issue. Most commonly these issues seem to be about course design (unclear OB-lines or edge cases regarding course/hole/event specific rules). The beauty of this system is that policing is the same in casual and tournament play, issues are spotted and solved on the spot. There is also no referee to blame about "unjust" decisions. To finish, adding a referee to each card would not be practical nor would it solve the "problem". You'd need a lot of referees, and they all would interpret the rules slightly differently.
As long as the disc conforms to PDGA rules with respect to general shape and weight, why do we need all these other nuanced bits? Heck, even in golf, I can get after-market stamps on my golf balls. That doesn't make them illegal, so long as they abide the general shape and weight requirements imposed by the USGA/PGA. Develop rules that can be enforced and ditch the stuff that can't. Simple.
This is a classic legal philosophy question--should the rule be (a) clear, or (b) fair? Clarity is good because it is mechanical and everyone can understand, either it passes the test or it fails. But, is it fair that just a little past an arbitrary line makes one a rule-breaker? If the infraction does not really matter, should it be enforced? If you know the answer, tell every judge who ever lived.
@@martyjenkins3631 Are you suggesting it isn't possible to be both clear and fair? Assign rules of shape, weight, and, if necessary, material composition and deformity. This is what the PGA/USGA has done for all golf equipment, most notably for golf balls and golf clubs. It really isn't that difficult.
@@glennpearson9348 And as soon as you scratch your new disc, you no longer meet the clear rules of weight. So, are you illegal, or should we be fair and say the difference is not worthy of enforcement? Clarity or fairness?
@@martyjenkins3631 As in golf, weight is usually given a range, not a precise number. Presumably, the weight range would allow for minor wear and tear, as well as manufacturing tolerances.
How about tighter rules for lies in the rough or guidelines for course designers to try and avoid having really nasty roughs that you can't retrieve discs from like giant thorn vine nests and ridiculous thick invasive species like honeysuckle trees.
The only thing that should be illegal is intentionally deforming the disc. Paint, extra hot stamps, removing hot stamps, single layer vinyl stickers, surface etching, etc should be legal. You still need to get from tee to green, and nothing can convince me that something with negligible thickness alters the flight enough to give competitive advantage.
Well, a bit of paint or some glow tape will often change the flight of a disc. Hot stamps on the top of a disc will change it's flight as well. I agree with those saying that it should only be ink and dye that gets absorbed into the plastic.
@@scotranney8456 How? and to what extent can a player used this to predictably gain an advantage to their game? I have not seen people making the argument that some factory stamps would produce a better flying disk than others, otherwise manufacturers would be utilising this as a selling argument.
That counter point is literally addressed in the PDGA rules: "B. Allowed modifications to a disc after production are limited to: 1. Wear and tear from usage during play; 2. Moderate sanding to address wear and tear or small molding imperfections; 3. Marking with dye or permanent marker ink."
Define "wear and tear from play" also define "moderate sanding or modifications" again not clear and concise like rules should be. Technically wear and tear from play would also exclude half the ways people "beat in" discs. Who and how would you check that the dent came from play and not the washing machine or throwing it at a wall. Also if you dig deeper on the PDGA q&a section of the site it states discs with stamps like this are still approved and does not state that the hot stamp must be from a or b location.
@@bradlasseigne8436 I'm not defending the rules by any means. All I'm saying is that the one "counter point" you had, has specifically been addressed so it is in fact not a counter point.
I think a lot of this comes down to the spirit of the regulations. Rules like this should not be enforced unless it is a blatant attempt to gain an advantage via altering the disc. I don’t think the regulation was put in place to hamper creativity and it should not be policed as so.
I can see the PDGA rolling out a video ad saying "You wouldn't hot stamp a disc" similar to the "You wouldn't steal a car" ad many years ago, dealing with piracy.
I think this rule should be rewritten. The manufacturing process of discs is not even precise enough that discs of the same mold have the exact height or flight characteristics. The dome (or absence if it) of the disc itself can make a difference of several millimeters. I don't think that there is justification, that adding a negligible layer of thickness through stamps or paint, might alter the flight characteristics, so that the player would have an advantage because of it. Discs should be validated within a min/max range in diameter, height, weight, and so on. If any modification exceeds one of those ranges the disc should be regarded as illegal. I also have an issue with section F/G of 813.01. For me this reads as if any player could, in theory, maliciously question another's player's favorite disc's legality, so that he cannot throw it until the TD re-approves it.
Can you imagine if ANYBODY EVER has added a hot stamp to a disc to specifically alter its flight. Like why??? If anything, any "substance" will only make a disc perform worse. I just don't understand where the specific cheating is?
@@pigs6486 Stamps I agree, but I would not generally rule out any substance. A moderate layer of paint could in theory increase the weight by some grams so it would perform better in strong winds, for example. However, the PDGA already defines a legal maximum weight for a mold. If the weight of the disc exceeds it, it is illegal either way. No matter if by modification or a faulty manufacturing process.
@@thomasm5679 Or perhaps a layer of grippy paint on the inner rim of a driver to increase friction and spin? Someone needs to make a video testing out if it's possible to alter your disc with stamps and/or paint to increase its performance!
This rule change is ludicrous. I am a dye artist and I created a custom foil hot stamp for my work that I place on my dyed discs with a hot stamp press. I contacted the PDGA last year prior to purchasing the equipment to make sure that I wasn't breaching any rules and the response I received was that it was up to the TD if there were any complaints. My stamp is less than 2 inches in diameter. The foil is so light as to be negligible in it's change to the weight of the disc. The PDGA needs to explain to me how this would conceivably change the flight of the disc. Now I have clients asking me not to stamp their work (which I have complied with) and players who have received my previous work are now concerned with the legality of playing with a disc that have hot-stamped. Like you said in the video: how much overhead are we creating for TD's and how many players are going to complain to a TD that someone are their card was using an "illegal" disc? This is insane.
As for the "team" stamps potentially being illegal, I'd say no, because that is done by the manufacturer and is therefore legal. 3rd party stamping would be illegal based on the rules.
The only thing I can come up with is if a disc has been purposefully stamped so many times to where it's drastically altered the disc physically. From what I've gathered about hot stamping, it's tough to properly get so many stamps until the foil just won't do it proper anymore.
Strongly disagree what other sport could you paint on the item being used for example a baseball a basketball a football a soccer ball? So why is it so dumb when it comes to disc golf? It is a professional sport after all and should be treated as such can paint golf balls I’m sure lol.
@@infinimetrical Jake Hunter of Hunter Hotstamps intentionally put over 200 hotstamps on a disc, and it didnt change the scale weight. The foils are incredibly insignificant in their weight or the flight.
I mean it ain’t too dumb cuz I could just pour a lot of paint in the rim and let it dry and this could allow the disc to fly differently than it is soppose so
Dyes and stamps should be allowed fully, no restrictions as to who stamps or dyes the disc. Part of the beauty of disc golf is it's art, and artists. As well, paired with the companies who request or accept such beautiful art for discs.
Doing more research on the pdgas website q&a section, "double stamps, x-outs, team stamps, etc are allowed as long as they follow the approved weight, rim shape and thickness, etc." It doesnt state where the stamps have to come from there or in the illegal disc secetion. So there is confusion even from their own staff... I do know that Mr k is our state representative and always understands the rules completely different than they are written.
You have misconstrued the QA reference to "remaindered" discs. The parenthetical list there includes only specific features occurring in the manufacturers' domain. So "etc." cannot be interpreted as open to things that go beyond that scope of the list. Post manufacturer hot stamps (such as team stamps) are neither specified nor within the scope of the specified list. Nice try though. It is interesting to note that the PDGA recognizes the effectiveness of conformity with the Technical Standards when deciding legality; but they dismiss those criteria as useful (with the particular mold dimensions) as guidance when judging what individuals and aftermarket folks can be free to do.
I feel that the sensible rule would be about weight, width, and deformation. If it isn't overweight, then there is some manufactured disc out there that flies similar to any possible deformation on the surface. If you put holes in your disc, this is altering the intended flight use of the Disc. If I add a hot stamp, this is within the intended use of the Disc. For example; I have two Westside Worlds, one is a factory stamped world. And the other is a hand eye stamped world. Are you telling me they got pdga approval for every stamp in existence? If they could even measure it would be irrelevant to the sport of disc golf.
I feel like this is only a problem if the amount of the detectable substance being added or removed makes the disc actually weigh more or less then the approved weight scale, like there is a pretty wide range of weights that are allowed so as long as the disc remains in that range is shouldn't be a problem in my opinion
Agreed! I emailed PDGA and got response from Mike. I have collaborated with Disc dye artists and dye adds a considerable amount of weight (175g to 183g after in one instance for a Firebird). This is a nothing burger but still unsure what the initial issue was with this. I custom hot stamp on the side and this hurts my brain
If you have an issue with this rule Applying a coat of anything to anything will ultimately affect the aerodynamics of said object, Now when it comes to a disk that can only weigh up to a 175g *A coat of paint can definitely affect that*
These intricate rules seem so arbitrary and counter intuitive to me. If I get called out for an illegal disc at any local B or C tier events because of a hot stamp then so be it. Hahahaha. I love disc golf, but I am not a professional. I can keep playing rounds and rounds of fun filled disc golf without the PDGA if silly rules dictate such low key events. 🤷♂️
the funny thing, is the very next rule is that players are allowed to add material or device for night or snow play. so that makes the above rule a daytime only rule. that's pretty silly imo. the rule should be of a certain amount of weight and thickness. like under 1 gram in weight and 1 mm or less in thickness. that way you can add stickers for night time and hot stamps, but can't do anything crazy like add fishing weights or something.
Played a round at an event recently with a guy who had glow stickers on a lot of his discs. By the rules this would make them illegal for PDGA play but they are not changing the flight of the disc or giving him any advantage over the rest of us on the card. I think the PDGA needs to look at what a disc looks like when it is sent to them for approval vs sold to the public, they look quite different but are legal discs. That puts a lot of faith in the manufacturer to maintain the same flight even with sometimes extensive design work.
Hot take here...I think the rule, in it's intention, has merit. That being said, I think the rule needs to be modified to include a qualifier that has some measurable criteria. By adding a hot stamp, for instance, does the physics of the disc change, yes... But how much? Is the change significant enough to noticeably change the flight characteristics of the disc... Likely not. There needs to be a quantifiable definition for the tolerance of an acceptable deviation....a percentage level of change that is a threshold to deem the disc illegal. A hot stamp may add...idk, .01grams of weight resulting in a .001% variation in flight characteristics, which is virtually undetectable. Where as adding a metal backed decal that weighs maybe 1.3 grams might result in a 3% deviation in flight characteristics, which may result in a detectable change. All these numbers are hypothetical....The PDGA really needs to perform some testing to determine the amount of material addition that can be added before the flight characteristics are noticeably altered and include that in the criteria for this rule to be valid.
Mostly I would say is that. People know their discs. There are different molds and plastics that alter the flight characterics of the discs. A hot stamp when it is 0.01mm in height cannot alter it too much. So I'm gonna say that hot stamps are ok. Just because every run of, even the same run of discs might/will have different flight characterics.
I love that someone with a clear eye to the spirit and letter of the law is making comment on these things. Only in the last several years have enough eyes been brought to the sport to really push on the rules and bring the PDGA through its hippy roots and into a modern governing body. It seems like the easiest thing would be for the PDGA to amend the rules to practice (Add hot stamping / wiping to the approved modifications) or otherwise disambiguate the language. I think it would be interesting to see what would happen if hot stamping were completely disallowed for tournament play. TrashPanda points out that this is the most wasteful part of manufacturing process, though I wonder how it compares to the decodye process...
After dozens of tree hits, I've accumulated quite a few beat-in discs. They did not leave the manufacturer this way. They all have different flight characteristics than a brand new disc and some have become my favorite discs to throw. This "modification " is way more extreme than any paint could ever do.
@@WillEnj0y Isn't it the point? A disk so badly damaged that it no longer meets the qualifications of a legal disc cannot be used right? The spirit of the rule is modifying the flight path in an unfair way, I think. So a modified disc that is well within the parameters of a legal disc but cannot be used seems outside the spirit of the rule. The can make them that way but you can't mod a disc the same way and use it? I think all mods should be legal IF the disc still meets the stds (size weight rim etc)
As written, the rule makes three exceptions (allowances) for postproduction treatments* of a disc. Conventional practices of rules interpretation have it that exceptions are to be construed narrowly and to say one thing is to exclude the other. Nothing falling outside the clear and unambiguous* terms of those exceptions is allowed. All the text that follows the 3 allowances section reminds us of the prior rule’s reliance on detectable thickness and flight characteristics as presumably measurable criteria. Those two aspects now exist in the universe of what is “other” than allowed in the three exceptions. The chair of the Rules Committee expounds on the rule with extraneous references to detectable thickness and absorption. He sends us chasing those aspects with no hope of avoiding the facts of what the PDGA has written. (* The absorbing ink of a permanent marker (per se) and dye (per se) are directly implicated as modifications. Treatment is a more apt way to identify that which may or may not be done; * ”Moderate sanding” is fraught with uncertainty in its practical application and enforcement as a player moves from one set of competitors and event officials to others with different notions about what is moderate and what is excessive.) You might take note of the rule associated with making a disc illegal. As it stands now, once a disc is “questioned” by a competitor it is, by rule, illegal. No second is required, no vote of the card is permitted, and no recourse to provisional throws is possible. The disc owner must forego the use of the disc or risk penalty and disqualification if he expects the eventual official ruling will not be made by a disagreeing official. Consider the difference potential about what is moderate sanding or aftermarket hot stamps or off the course wear-and-tear.
I think the PDGA needs to take a serious look at all of the objections to the vagueness, because this could have serious impact on a player if you have someone doing everything right, but your potentially in a big event competing for the lead and the person in second place is upset that they lost and instead of accepting defeat they throw a fit about the winning player who outplayed them, and instead bringing up some completely irrelevant issue that by technicality of a director who opened the door for it, complains about a disc that has an insignificant logo, or wiped clean. Not to mention, what about the multiple companies out there such as AGL that their entire business is hot stamping post-produced discs. That's not just adding a little logo, that is their business, so according to this letter, their entire business is in violation of PDGA rule, and they have sponsored players.
The problem I have with this rule is that there is no uniformity to how big the stamp is on a disc. Some stamps are bigger and take up more space and some stamps are smaller and take up barely any space such as Innova's factory seconds. Heck Discraft sales a lot of misprints that are double stamped thereby "doubling the weight" of the stamp. But it says that a manufacturer can add an extra stamp. So why can't a retailer or you personally?
Rules are rules even if they are unpopular. Better question to be asked is: What is the definition of "post production" and is there a process to be approved as a "producer"? (ie disc companies other than the actual manufacturer that makes them the discs)
^This! They don't define production. Are all DD discs illegal since they don't manufacture their discs and only stamp them? Likewise, if a 3rd party orders blanks with the intent or stamping them, are they still considered in production until the desired outcome is achieved?
Manufactures are recognized as such in the disc approval process. There is no identification ambiguity there. Expanding the scope of the company identity might be legit if the company contractually outsources the stamping/foiling/hot dipping/dying process. The PDGA, by its rule, effectively protects the companies' commercial interest in controlling the business from plastic injection to retail store shelves.
This is pretty crazy... considering when a disc is beat up it loses its weight and possibly few layers.. So adding a stamp to a beat disc would be more like trying to put it back to legal weight haha
I am a disc dyer and I could see painting onto the disc with a layer of say acrylic paint or spray paint being a rule (you CAN hand paint with dye though just to clarify to newbie dyers) but wiping a stamp in should in NO WAY be illegal for the main reason that the stamp is the only thing on adisc that will wear off with play. Every single disc that has been thrown at least once or has shelf wear from the store its being purchased from would be illegal... and that would obviously be ridiculous. So no, the rule wording is NOT for wiping a stamp.
There are lots of "illegal discs" due to the way people went about the process. For example I've heard of people wrapping the disc in a towel and sticking it in the spindryer to "break it in" but I wouldn't personally call that out since similar results can be had from playing in extremely warm areas (see Australian open 2016 and what happened to Paul's Roc though that is obviously not what you'd want). My personal favourite is throwing the disc into obstacles since this in my opionion is explicitly allowed under "wear from play" and practice = playing. The moment someone in a position of authority suggests we can't practice with our competition discs is when I cancel =) TLDR: basically I don't intent to call out any disc that could have gained its characteristics from play and I want to include all countries, there is a huge temperaturespan from Greenland to Dubai.
I use paint markers instead of sharpies to put my name on discs. Thus adding probably less than 0.001 g of weight to my disc and taking off (or adding idk) 20 strokes off my game.
Technically, Team stamps are added by the manufacturer, so shouldn't be illegal for the reasons you said. Adding a personalized hot stamp can effect the shape of a disc if put in the right spot or is big enough. Example: a large Hot staple can make a dome disc flat, which will fly differently than a actual flat top mold. Paint should be subjective to the type and thickness. Writing your name with a paint pen and painting your disc with a thick oil base paint are Not the same... One will effect your Disc, the other will not. Just a few points to think about and should be taken into consideration as well.
I was hoping you were going to address jump putting. Just got back from US Am dgc, and about a 1/3 of the players I observed, released jump putts after their feet were off the ground. I see some pros who also foot fault doing the same, and they are not being called out for it. I wish either rules be enforced or changed as it is not fair to the competitors who follow them when we have people getting in some instances feet closer before releasing their putt!
Maybe if somebody hot stamped the top of their disc with a speckle / sharkskin pattern that would have a significant effect on aerodynamics. I'm sure there are people out there who could try something like that and evaluate the effect.
Being an amateur disc golfer. I feel like some of these rules seems a bit unnessesary. Like you wonder how big difference adding a bunch stickers and other "customizable grafics" would honestly help get an advantage. I guess if you change the characteristics of a disc by adding weight, it could have an impact. But if that is the case, why not instead have a weight limit, and let all players weight their discs before tournament, feels like easier and better solution.
Very interesting topic, thanks for making the video and raising the broader question of whether or not the PDGA has an enforcement problem. I think it very clearly does and they need to write their rules in a way that can be applied fairly and evenly - no small task. On the note of enforcement, would you be interested in making a video addressing the topic of performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) in the sport? I find it surprising that very little is said or done about them, despite the fact that the PDGA claims to be prioritizing things it considers "unfair competitive advantage" (e.g. the Natalie Ryan case that you've covered in quite some detail). There is money in this sport, quite a lot in fact, and with that comes incentive to do whatever you can to get a competitive advantage. PEDs have a long history in almost every sport and I think it's quite naïve to think ours is the exception. If the PDGA or DGPT truly prioritizes unfair competitive advantages, do you think we'll soon see required PED testing (or randomized PED testing) for entrance into events? Or will the PDGA never really address this issue because of their broader enforcement problems?
The night before pro tournament play there should be a weigh-in and identification of discs. Only 18 discs should be allowed per player per round. With some (say “2”) supplementations per round on hole 9. This is so no heavies are allowed and, most importantly, announcers can describe each disc’s mold and specific weight during play! Imagine how much this will boost sales!
I think it is a rule that they have because it gives them something clear black and white statement to fall on but realistically no one is ever going to call someone for a hot stamp and I doubt a tournament director would ever care because they probably gave out some hot stamped discs for their tournament. The only thing I could see people calling out (besides an obvious alteration) would be those printed discs. I don't know what the process is called but the discs with an image printed onto it where you can very easily feel the grooves from the printer and see a depth change.
If a hot stamped disc is legal because it is the manufacturer’s stamp it follows that an X out with a second stamp, intentionally or accidentally is also legal, but a retailer’s second stamp on an x-out disc is not. It makes no sense. The rule should be that any modification of the disc that materially changes its flight characteristics is illegal, like scuffing a baseball. Otherwise the rule is simply arbitrary. The intent of the “thickness of the ink” is arguably that one could stamp one’s way to a disc with modified flight characteristics. It’s almost a given that a second hot stamp does not do that. I would suggest that the PDGA do the experiments. Lord knows with the huge influx of members they have to have some spare cash laying around. If they need limits I’d suggest limiting the size of the hot stamp to no more than 20% of the disc’s flight surface or some such arbitrary limitation so that people aren’t foiling over a whole disc; that said my Star Wars Buzz had a complete foil top. If the rule doesn’t fulfill the intent, it needs to be changed.
My question is, are you feeling the stamp or are you feeling a lip left from the hot stamp stamping the disc and minutely raising the plastic on the perimeter of the stamp?
Shout out to Mile Krupica who is a great TD and IL state coordinator! In MA4 he told me I had to remove glow tape from my discs because they were detectable thickness. If someone on my card reported me he told me I could be assessed a 2 stroke penalty for each time I threw that disc. I believe Ricky mentioned that Paul McBeth reported him for having an "unmarked disc" years ago and the TD had to go and investigste so it has happened. But in actuality, ive seen many players ask the card and say "hey i have glow tape on this disc do you guys mind if I throw it" and on many MPO MA1 cards Ive seen the card approve it. I think the rule needs to be there to make sure people arent doing crazy weird mods to their discs. But I think in most cases a TD would never be able to prove that a Manufacturer didnt make that stamp. That would require an extensive knowledge. Bottom line is you are probably a jerk if you are reporting someone for having a hot stamp but I get that there needs to be some sort of mod rule.
The purpose of the rule is to take this out of the TD's hands. Making judgement calls is just not feasible so the rule is now clear and all the TD has to do is see the extra stamp and follow the rules. I had someone call me out not long ago for having a small piece of glow tape on my putter. Yeah, against the rules, but not intentionally. I just couldn't get the tape off after a glow round. I swapped the putter out with another and life went on. The tape certainly didn't have any effect on my putting ability.
I don’t know. I think even if the stamps, modifications, etc. do affect the disc who cares? How much does it really affect the flight? I agree with the enforcement issue too. We are not about to have TD’s checking everyone’s bag.
Does this mean that all dynamic discs that have been stamped in emporia and not at the lat64 factory be illegal? Dynamic is not the manufacturer, but does in house stamping.
I think it's splitting hairs. Maybe in laboratory test conditions one could prove that there is a difference between discs with added hot stamps/paints/inks/etc. and "clear" discs, but let's be honest - during normal gameplay on a course these differences would be neglible. And what about discs with normal wear and tear? They lose the paint from logos and they even lose some weight by losing small amounts of plastic from scratches etc. Moreover, in this way they even slightly change their shape and thus properties of flight which is known as "beating up" a disc. So, as I said in the beginning, I think it's just splitting hair. And somewhat silly rule ;))
It's gotten to the point of absurdity. One hilarity is that LED tournaments can not be PDGA sanctioned, UNLESS the disc makers put the led in (and conform to other standards). I think it's due to the huge influx of money, which makes SPONSORS more important than having your own personal disc. If hot stamping would be allowed, then more ad dollars would go to the players instead of e.g. streaming rights holders.
I sanded a part of my disc to add grip where I hold it and I don’t use it in competition in fear that someone will make a stink about it even though it doesn’t affect the flight at all. It’s a dumb rule.
This is a rule that should be regarded similar to dress code. Surface embellishments can change the aerodynamics, but arguably probably not more than chunking a disc into a tree or gravel driveway. If they start justifying the rule based on aerodynamic claims they will definitely have a problem. That will require concrete standards that would likely roll in disc wear condition as well. So in the meantime they stick by it like the dress code and the rule is the rule. For enforcement, it would be really easy to do what most every other pro sports entity does and if there is a purse, submit for verification after the win .
It seems like timhe rule may have been introduced by manufacturers to prevent people from selling their own versions of discs that are more or less stable because of the presence of these stamps. I can sort of sympathize.
I think there should be minimum and maximum weight , width and thickness restrictions only. I guess the material that they're made out of should be plastic.
The manufacturer stamp should be just as illegal as an aftermarket one. This rule is just nonsense. They don't even have a standard basket, and yet they want to hyper-regulate the discs that can be used and pretend it's not for financial gain. Are we trying to enforce a fair sport or trying to make sure the companies that paid us to get their discs approved are the only ones that can make money? I'm not even making an accusation. I truly have never understood why anyone cares what disc they use or how they alter it.
In the magic: the gathering community we call the act of trying to call someone on a stupid rule like this to gain some sort of marginal advantage 'angle shooting', it's very frowned upon. I believe that since this rule has such ambiguity (noticeable thickness) that it's completely unenforceable, as is the rules regarding disc tuning and conditioning.
I haven’t seen anyone prove that a hot stamp adds a detectable thickness to a disc. The hot stamps are pressed into the surface leaving a mark if wiped, they don’t simply lay on the surface of the disc. If a hot stamp doesn’t significantly, or even actually, change the weight of a disc then what? That idea of a hot stamp adding anything worth regulating falls apart under scrutiny so quickly it’s not funny.
I feel removing a hot stamp isn’t an issue. As your only removing artwork that was put on a disc after the mole was already made. Adding a weighted element though. Ie paint, yes I agree. It would in fact alter the weight in ways to create a different flight pattern than the original disc. So I agree with painting things. But not for removing hot stamps to make discs cleaner. Or to re-ink a disc should the user like the disc color of the plastic. That’s my 2 cents on the matter. Great vids.
With the right equipment I can detect the thickness added by writing your information on with a permanent marker. Source: have done so with a high quality profilometer.
I have forgotten to take off the price sticker on new disc many times. That would be considered agents the rules? What if I didn't get all the sticky stuff from the price stickers off? It is a different texture so that would be against the rules?
I really don’t understand what the PDGA is getting at. What problem do they think is going to arise here? Are we taking a max weight disc and trying to get it heavier by adding 100 hot stamps? Also, what if the mini stamp is done by the manufacturer? What if I am actually an employee of the manufacturer and do the hot stamping myself while at work? How is a TD to determine the hot stamps origin?
I am currently playing a B tier and they put a different division on my card. I play MA60 and on my card was a MA70, because like you said there was only 1 MA70 entered in the Event. Can clarify if that's in violation of this rule. Thanks for your channel
Who is the manufacturer of the disc, ultimately, if you can add things that would be within the rules for the initial manufacturer later? In my mind, adding a stamp completes the manufacturing of a disc sold in incomplete form.
Paint (and stamps) have weight. It is possible to increase the weight over max or max for manufacturer. You could also change its gyroscopic nature... Someone real clever could doctor a disc to perform a very specific manner.
In my opinion, you would have to actually prove that a hot stamp benefits the player and gives them an advantage during play. What if i continuously use my chalk bag to coat the disc to grip it better? is that not an advantage then to someone who doesnt have one readily available? whatever alteration is done to the disc has to be proven to provide a distinct advantage to the player over others in this situation. Otherwise, the rule is useless. The only caveat would be if the stamp adds so much weight that its above the maximum amount allowed.
Flight characteristics are no longer relevant to determinations of illegal discs. That criteria has been moved to a section of the rules that does not control what is allowed.
The rule(s) are too open ended. Dye and ink change the disc. You can't add something to another thing and think that it's still the same. EVERYTHING is measurable with the right tools. The PDGA needs to come up with much more precise specifications or just kill the ability to make discs unique entirely. As a disc dyer, I obviously don't want that, but they need to do something. As for hot stamps, I live close to Gateway Disc Sports and have had custom stamps done. The fact that as long as they do it, it's fine, but if I do the exact same thing at home, it's not, is dumb.
My concern for all this is, did the PDGA committee actually weigh a painted/hot stamped discs?? Like did they find a random MA3 player having fun throwing a pretty dyed disc they made and noticed it had “paint” on it too. And made a asinine statement like - hold up he threw it 10 fr further the whole time How much difference does it make when you add paint or 1-2 extra hot stamps? Does it add an extra 3-6g?
This rule is poorly written. But, If I was a TD having to enforce this rule, I'd consider if the hot stamp or modification in question in question changes the disc to a greater degree than legal manufacturer hotstamps do. Consider a case where a player adds 100 hotstamps to their disc, and the application is all on one side like a black and white cookie. Legal manufacturer stamps come in a wide assortment of shapes, sizes and variety, from no stamp, to covering most of the flight plate, and from symmetrically applied to asymmetrically applied, but usually one single layer. Therefore, anything in this range is not meaningfully different. 100 stamps however is meaningfully different, because you have surpassed a monolayer of hotstamp thickness, and have likely applied more than a flight plate's worth of area.
You can get misprint discs that have multiple stamps from the manufacturer which is no different then applying a secondary stamp through a disc golf shop (retailer). Wiping a stamp versus the stamp flaking off naturally is no different either. Adding glow tape I would assume would add slightly more weight to a disc but why would you leave that on during sanctioned play. From the TD side if there’s an expectation that we should be checking everyone’s discs…good luck. This isn’t NASCAR. 😂
First of all wiping the stamp off isn’t the same because you can buy blank discs. Second, to police the situation all they have to do is to what racing competitions do and have official and unofficial results. You don’t know who actually won a NASCAR race until the winning cars have been inspected. So the pdga would only have to inspect either the people who cash or just the top few. Finally if you can feel the stamp, it is detectable
If I get a disc hot stamped after I purchase it, how is that different from the manufacturer hot stamping the disc? Embossing a disc with mold/company/weight whether it be and imprint or raised impression from the mold is altering the thickness of the disc so why are stamps or embossing even allowed then? That would basically mean the manufacturers are making discs illegal before leaving the factory by hot stamping meaning they should only be sending out blanks that were purchased by an individual or for resale. This rule is silly and pointless.
I think the rule exists solely so there's something to point to in case someone goes to an unreasonable extreme. Considering mold changes can be made to a named disc without re-approval, and an "identical" disc with 1/4" more dome is acceptable, the idea that the thickness of a hot stamp would be an unacceptable modification is silly.
That on top of the precedent that if you are on Innova's payroll and you add 6 stamps to a disc it's legal, and if you're at home and you add a mini stamp to the bottom of a disc (where the aerodynamics will be effected less) it's illegal. Makes no sense.
It's not about enforcement. It's about ambiguity in the rules.
The PDGA maintains qualifying specifications for discs. As long as your modifications are within these specifications, it shouldn't matter what you do with the disc.
In my opinion this is over reach by the PDGA.
And, I believe it's time, at least on a professional level, that we get away from players policing other players.
I don't see how we can completely disassociate rule enforcement from rule ambiguity. Ambiguous rules are difficult to enforce consistently.
Players have be policing themselves and other players for centuries. Again, as long as the rules are unambiguous, it shouldn't be that difficult players to keep other players honest. That said, there are some rules that are well intended and completely unambiguous, but require a disinterested third party to consistently enforce.
802.03 - Excessive Time is a good example. To be consistent, someone needs to impartially adjudicate when the players as "arrived" at their disc.
I made a formal proposal to change the rule to one based on the Technical Standards and adherence to the specifications of the mold at the time of its approval (tolerances for subsequent runs and inherent variations). The PDGA dismissed them out of hand. Never mind that they had previously referred to the Technical Standards in the rule/QA regarding factory seconds. (Hubris withing the rules committee in full operation.)
Thickness change post-sell should just be limited (e.g. to
I think it's a good thing that the rules are (for the most part) enforced by players, not by some referee. Players know the rules, and most issues can be solved by discussing the issue in the card. If players cannot resolve the issue (i.e. after discussion they disagree with eachother) they can ask TD to resolve the issue. Most commonly these issues seem to be about course design (unclear OB-lines or edge cases regarding course/hole/event specific rules).
The beauty of this system is that policing is the same in casual and tournament play, issues are spotted and solved on the spot. There is also no referee to blame about "unjust" decisions. To finish, adding a referee to each card would not be practical nor would it solve the "problem". You'd need a lot of referees, and they all would interpret the rules slightly differently.
@@Ahmmad_bridge As long as it doesn't exceed the 5mm max set by the pdga, it should not matter.
As long as the disc conforms to PDGA rules with respect to general shape and weight, why do we need all these other nuanced bits? Heck, even in golf, I can get after-market stamps on my golf balls. That doesn't make them illegal, so long as they abide the general shape and weight requirements imposed by the USGA/PGA. Develop rules that can be enforced and ditch the stuff that can't. Simple.
This was my thought as well, either a disc meets a set of specifications or it does not, not matter how it was made or modified.
This is a classic legal philosophy question--should the rule be (a) clear, or (b) fair? Clarity is good because it is mechanical and everyone can understand, either it passes the test or it fails. But, is it fair that just a little past an arbitrary line makes one a rule-breaker? If the infraction does not really matter, should it be enforced?
If you know the answer, tell every judge who ever lived.
@@martyjenkins3631 Are you suggesting it isn't possible to be both clear and fair? Assign rules of shape, weight, and, if necessary, material composition and deformity. This is what the PGA/USGA has done for all golf equipment, most notably for golf balls and golf clubs. It really isn't that difficult.
@@glennpearson9348 And as soon as you scratch your new disc, you no longer meet the clear rules of weight. So, are you illegal, or should we be fair and say the difference is not worthy of enforcement? Clarity or fairness?
@@martyjenkins3631 As in golf, weight is usually given a range, not a precise number. Presumably, the weight range would allow for minor wear and tear, as well as manufacturing tolerances.
Silly rules that should never be enforced, along with moving unattached debris out of your run up that can injure in a heartbeat.
How about tighter rules for lies in the rough or guidelines for course designers to try and avoid having really nasty roughs that you can't retrieve discs from like giant thorn vine nests and ridiculous thick invasive species like honeysuckle trees.
The only thing that should be illegal is intentionally deforming the disc. Paint, extra hot stamps, removing hot stamps, single layer vinyl stickers, surface etching, etc should be legal. You still need to get from tee to green, and nothing can convince me that something with negligible thickness alters the flight enough to give competitive advantage.
agreed…nobody is gonna put 50 hot stamps on their disc to add a gram or two to the weight
@@wakimura303 that would be hilarious though 😂
Well, a bit of paint or some glow tape will often change the flight of a disc. Hot stamps on the top of a disc will change it's flight as well. I agree with those saying that it should only be ink and dye that gets absorbed into the plastic.
@@scotranney8456 How? and to what extent can a player used this to predictably gain an advantage to their game? I have not seen people making the argument that some factory stamps would produce a better flying disk than others, otherwise manufacturers would be utilising this as a selling argument.
paint can add a lot of weight and i agree should not be allowed. but the hot stamps weight next to nothing that rule is really unnecessary
I think wiping the stamp brings up the best counter point, even wear over time the stamps wipe off.
That counter point is literally addressed in the PDGA rules:
"B. Allowed modifications to a disc after production are limited to:
1. Wear and tear from usage during play;
2. Moderate sanding to address wear and tear or small molding imperfections;
3. Marking with dye or permanent marker ink."
i could throw my disc at a tree, wall, road, etc and change it more than adding a custom foil or wiping a stamp. this rule is retarded.
Define "wear and tear from play" also define "moderate sanding or modifications" again not clear and concise like rules should be. Technically wear and tear from play would also exclude half the ways people "beat in" discs. Who and how would you check that the dent came from play and not the washing machine or throwing it at a wall. Also if you dig deeper on the PDGA q&a section of the site it states discs with stamps like this are still approved and does not state that the hot stamp must be from a or b location.
@@bradlasseigne8436 I'm not defending the rules by any means. All I'm saying is that the one "counter point" you had, has specifically been addressed so it is in fact not a counter point.
@@bradlasseigne8436 "wear and tear from play" seems pretty clear to me. I don't see ambiguity there.
I think a lot of this comes down to the spirit of the regulations. Rules like this should not be enforced unless it is a blatant attempt to gain an advantage via altering the disc. I don’t think the regulation was put in place to hamper creativity and it should not be policed as so.
If someone enforces this during an event they will be blacklisted from any C-tier events. This has been decided by all the TDs in Sweden.
Yeah, as long as you aren't using one of those super light dino discs or playing with a hole in it I'm not really gonna care lol.
So cool seeing a clip from one of our videos in there! Love what you're doing Chris. Keep Doing It!
I don't think hot stamps are covered by the spirit of the rule. Unfortunately, it's too ambiguously worded like a lot of the PDGA rules.
They are not but krupika chiming in and calling them out now makes it applicable. Way to go mike...🎉
I can see the PDGA rolling out a video ad saying "You wouldn't hot stamp a disc" similar to the "You wouldn't steal a car" ad many years ago, dealing with piracy.
I think this rule should be rewritten. The manufacturing process of discs is not even precise enough that discs of the same mold have the exact height or flight characteristics. The dome (or absence if it) of the disc itself can make a difference of several millimeters. I don't think that there is justification, that adding a negligible layer of thickness through stamps or paint, might alter the flight characteristics, so that the player would have an advantage because of it.
Discs should be validated within a min/max range in diameter, height, weight, and so on. If any modification exceeds one of those ranges the disc should be regarded as illegal.
I also have an issue with section F/G of 813.01. For me this reads as if any player could, in theory, maliciously question another's player's favorite disc's legality, so that he cannot throw it until the TD re-approves it.
Can you imagine if ANYBODY EVER has added a hot stamp to a disc to specifically alter its flight. Like why??? If anything, any "substance" will only make a disc perform worse. I just don't understand where the specific cheating is?
@@pigs6486 Stamps I agree, but I would not generally rule out any substance. A moderate layer of paint could in theory increase the weight by some grams so it would perform better in strong winds, for example. However, the PDGA already defines a legal maximum weight for a mold. If the weight of the disc exceeds it, it is illegal either way. No matter if by modification or a faulty manufacturing process.
@@thomasm5679 Exactly.
@@thomasm5679 Or perhaps a layer of grippy paint on the inner rim of a driver to increase friction and spin? Someone needs to make a video testing out if it's possible to alter your disc with stamps and/or paint to increase its performance!
@realfatchicken8723 surely it couldn't affect the flight more than overmolded discs. At least I wouldn't think so.
This rule change is ludicrous. I am a dye artist and I created a custom foil hot stamp for my work that I place on my dyed discs with a hot stamp press. I contacted the PDGA last year prior to purchasing the equipment to make sure that I wasn't breaching any rules and the response I received was that it was up to the TD if there were any complaints. My stamp is less than 2 inches in diameter. The foil is so light as to be negligible in it's change to the weight of the disc. The PDGA needs to explain to me how this would conceivably change the flight of the disc. Now I have clients asking me not to stamp their work (which I have complied with) and players who have received my previous work are now concerned with the legality of playing with a disc that have hot-stamped. Like you said in the video: how much overhead are we creating for TD's and how many players are going to complain to a TD that someone are their card was using an "illegal" disc? This is insane.
As for the "team" stamps potentially being illegal, I'd say no, because that is done by the manufacturer and is therefore legal. 3rd party stamping would be illegal based on the rules.
This is a dumb rule that shouldn’t be enforced.
You can’t just not enforce the rule though, so maybe keep it, excluding specifically hot stamps of a set thickness or less
The only thing I can come up with is if a disc has been purposefully stamped so many times to where it's drastically altered the disc physically. From what I've gathered about hot stamping, it's tough to properly get so many stamps until the foil just won't do it proper anymore.
Strongly disagree what other sport could you paint on the item being used for example a baseball a basketball a football a soccer ball? So why is it so dumb when it comes to disc golf? It is a professional sport after all and should be treated as such can paint golf balls I’m sure lol.
@@infinimetrical Jake Hunter of Hunter Hotstamps intentionally put over 200 hotstamps on a disc, and it didnt change the scale weight. The foils are incredibly insignificant in their weight or the flight.
I mean it ain’t too dumb cuz I could just pour a lot of paint in the rim and let it dry and this could allow the disc to fly differently than it is soppose so
Dyes and stamps should be allowed fully, no restrictions as to who stamps or dyes the disc. Part of the beauty of disc golf is it's art, and artists. As well, paired with the companies who request or accept such beautiful art for discs.
Doing more research on the pdgas website q&a section, "double stamps, x-outs, team stamps, etc are allowed as long as they follow the approved weight, rim shape and thickness, etc." It doesnt state where the stamps have to come from there or in the illegal disc secetion. So there is confusion even from their own staff... I do know that Mr k is our state representative and always understands the rules completely different than they are written.
You have misconstrued the QA reference to "remaindered" discs. The parenthetical list there includes only specific features occurring in the manufacturers' domain. So "etc." cannot be interpreted as open to things that go beyond that scope of the list. Post manufacturer hot stamps (such as team stamps) are neither specified nor within the scope of the specified list. Nice try though.
It is interesting to note that the PDGA recognizes the effectiveness of conformity with the Technical Standards when deciding legality; but they dismiss those criteria as useful (with the particular mold dimensions) as guidance when judging what individuals and aftermarket folks can be free to do.
I feel that the sensible rule would be about weight, width, and deformation. If it isn't overweight, then there is some manufactured disc out there that flies similar to any possible deformation on the surface. If you put holes in your disc, this is altering the intended flight use of the Disc. If I add a hot stamp, this is within the intended use of the Disc. For example; I have two Westside Worlds, one is a factory stamped world. And the other is a hand eye stamped world. Are you telling me they got pdga approval for every stamp in existence? If they could even measure it would be irrelevant to the sport of disc golf.
I feel like this is only a problem if the amount of the detectable substance being added or removed makes the disc actually weigh more or less then the approved weight scale, like there is a pretty wide range of weights that are allowed so as long as the disc remains in that range is shouldn't be a problem in my opinion
Agreed! I emailed PDGA and got response from Mike. I have collaborated with Disc dye artists and dye adds a considerable amount of weight (175g to 183g after in one instance for a Firebird). This is a nothing burger but still unsure what the initial issue was with this. I custom hot stamp on the side and this hurts my brain
They add specific paints with specific finishes to aircraft to improve aerodynamic performance. The same could work for golf discs.
If you have an issue with this rule
Applying a coat of anything to anything will ultimately affect the aerodynamics of said object,
Now when it comes to a disk that can only weigh up to a 175g
*A coat of paint can definitely affect that*
These intricate rules seem so arbitrary and counter intuitive to me. If I get called out for an illegal disc at any local B or C tier events because of a hot stamp then so be it. Hahahaha. I love disc golf, but I am not a professional. I can keep playing rounds and rounds of fun filled disc golf without the PDGA if silly rules dictate such low key events. 🤷♂️
the funny thing, is the very next rule is that players are allowed to add material or device for night or snow play. so that makes the above rule a daytime only rule. that's pretty silly imo. the rule should be of a certain amount of weight and thickness. like under 1 gram in weight and 1 mm or less in thickness. that way you can add stickers for night time and hot stamps, but can't do anything crazy like add fishing weights or something.
Played a round at an event recently with a guy who had glow stickers on a lot of his discs. By the rules this would make them illegal for PDGA play but they are not changing the flight of the disc or giving him any advantage over the rest of us on the card. I think the PDGA needs to look at what a disc looks like when it is sent to them for approval vs sold to the public, they look quite different but are legal discs. That puts a lot of faith in the manufacturer to maintain the same flight even with sometimes extensive design work.
Hot take here...I think the rule, in it's intention, has merit. That being said, I think the rule needs to be modified to include a qualifier that has some measurable criteria. By adding a hot stamp, for instance, does the physics of the disc change, yes... But how much? Is the change significant enough to noticeably change the flight characteristics of the disc... Likely not. There needs to be a quantifiable definition for the tolerance of an acceptable deviation....a percentage level of change that is a threshold to deem the disc illegal. A hot stamp may add...idk, .01grams of weight resulting in a .001% variation in flight characteristics, which is virtually undetectable. Where as adding a metal backed decal that weighs maybe 1.3 grams might result in a 3% deviation in flight characteristics, which may result in a detectable change. All these numbers are hypothetical....The PDGA really needs to perform some testing to determine the amount of material addition that can be added before the flight characteristics are noticeably altered and include that in the criteria for this rule to be valid.
I agree. Give actual parameters of deviation not just "detectable difference".
Good job. This will generate a lot of questions. That’s a good thing.
Mostly I would say is that. People know their discs. There are different molds and plastics that alter the flight characterics of the discs. A hot stamp when it is 0.01mm in height cannot alter it too much. So I'm gonna say that hot stamps are ok. Just because every run of, even the same run of discs might/will have different flight characterics.
always great insight, Thanks Disc Golf Law!!
I love that someone with a clear eye to the spirit and letter of the law is making comment on these things. Only in the last several years have enough eyes been brought to the sport to really push on the rules and bring the PDGA through its hippy roots and into a modern governing body. It seems like the easiest thing would be for the PDGA to amend the rules to practice (Add hot stamping / wiping to the approved modifications) or otherwise disambiguate the language. I think it would be interesting to see what would happen if hot stamping were completely disallowed for tournament play. TrashPanda points out that this is the most wasteful part of manufacturing process, though I wonder how it compares to the decodye process...
After dozens of tree hits, I've accumulated quite a few beat-in discs. They did not leave the manufacturer this way. They all have different flight characteristics than a brand new disc and some have become my favorite discs to throw. This "modification " is way more extreme than any paint could ever do.
"wear and tear from play" is covered in the exceptions.
@@ChadTower that’s not the point
@@WillEnj0y Isn't it the point? A disk so badly damaged that it no longer meets the qualifications of a legal disc cannot be used right? The spirit of the rule is modifying the flight path in an unfair way, I think. So a modified disc that is well within the parameters of a legal disc but cannot be used seems outside the spirit of the rule. The can make them that way but you can't mod a disc the same way and use it? I think all mods should be legal IF the disc still meets the stds (size weight rim etc)
As written, the rule makes three exceptions (allowances) for postproduction treatments* of a disc. Conventional practices of rules interpretation have it that exceptions are to be construed narrowly and to say one thing is to exclude the other. Nothing falling outside the clear and unambiguous* terms of those exceptions is allowed.
All the text that follows the 3 allowances section reminds us of the prior rule’s reliance on detectable thickness and flight characteristics as presumably measurable criteria. Those two aspects now exist in the universe of what is “other” than allowed in the three exceptions.
The chair of the Rules Committee expounds on the rule with extraneous references to detectable thickness and absorption. He sends us chasing those aspects with no hope of avoiding the facts of what the PDGA has written.
(* The absorbing ink of a permanent marker (per se) and dye (per se) are directly implicated as modifications. Treatment is a more apt way to identify that which may or may not be done; * ”Moderate sanding” is fraught with uncertainty in its practical application and enforcement as a player moves from one set of competitors and event officials to others with different notions about what is moderate and what is excessive.)
You might take note of the rule associated with making a disc illegal. As it stands now, once a disc is “questioned” by a competitor it is, by rule, illegal. No second is required, no vote of the card is permitted, and no recourse to provisional throws is possible. The disc owner must forego the use of the disc or risk penalty and disqualification if he expects the eventual official ruling will not be made by a disagreeing official. Consider the difference potential about what is moderate sanding or aftermarket hot stamps or off the course wear-and-tear.
I think the PDGA needs to take a serious look at all of the objections to the vagueness, because this could have serious impact on a player if you have someone doing everything right, but your potentially in a big event competing for the lead and the person in second place is upset that they lost and instead of accepting defeat they throw a fit about the winning player who outplayed them, and instead bringing up some completely irrelevant issue that by technicality of a director who opened the door for it, complains about a disc that has an insignificant logo, or wiped clean. Not to mention, what about the multiple companies out there such as AGL that their entire business is hot stamping post-produced discs. That's not just adding a little logo, that is their business, so according to this letter, their entire business is in violation of PDGA rule, and they have sponsored players.
The problem I have with this rule is that there is no uniformity to how big the stamp is on a disc. Some stamps are bigger and take up more space and some stamps are smaller and take up barely any space such as Innova's factory seconds. Heck Discraft sales a lot of misprints that are double stamped thereby "doubling the weight" of the stamp. But it says that a manufacturer can add an extra stamp. So why can't a retailer or you personally?
Rules are rules even if they are unpopular. Better question to be asked is: What is the definition of "post production" and is there a process to be approved as a "producer"? (ie disc companies other than the actual manufacturer that makes them the discs)
^This! They don't define production. Are all DD discs illegal since they don't manufacture their discs and only stamp them? Likewise, if a 3rd party orders blanks with the intent or stamping them, are they still considered in production until the desired outcome is achieved?
Manufactures are recognized as such in the disc approval process. There is no identification ambiguity there. Expanding the scope of the company identity might be legit if the company contractually outsources the stamping/foiling/hot dipping/dying process. The PDGA, by its rule, effectively protects the companies' commercial interest in controlling the business from plastic injection to retail store shelves.
This is pretty crazy... considering when a disc is beat up it loses its weight and possibly few layers..
So adding a stamp to a beat disc would be more like trying to put it back to legal weight haha
I am a disc dyer and I could see painting onto the disc with a layer of say acrylic paint or spray paint being a rule (you CAN hand paint with dye though just to clarify to newbie dyers) but wiping a stamp in should in NO WAY be illegal for the main reason that the stamp is the only thing on adisc that will wear off with play. Every single disc that has been thrown at least once or has shelf wear from the store its being purchased from would be illegal... and that would obviously be ridiculous. So no, the rule wording is NOT for wiping a stamp.
There are lots of "illegal discs" due to the way people went about the process. For example I've heard of people wrapping the disc in a towel and sticking it in the spindryer to "break it in" but I wouldn't personally call that out since similar results can be had from playing in extremely warm areas (see Australian open 2016 and what happened to Paul's Roc though that is obviously not what you'd want). My personal favourite is throwing the disc into obstacles since this in my opionion is explicitly allowed under "wear from play" and practice = playing. The moment someone in a position of authority suggests we can't practice with our competition discs is when I cancel =) TLDR: basically I don't intent to call out any disc that could have gained its characteristics from play and I want to include all countries, there is a huge temperaturespan from Greenland to Dubai.
I use paint markers instead of sharpies to put my name on discs. Thus adding probably less than 0.001 g of weight to my disc and taking off (or adding idk) 20 strokes off my game.
But you throw lightweight do it doesn’t matter.
If someone tells me I can’t throw my hot dog bandit stamped disc form ARDG I will be very sad and personally hate that person forever.
Technically, Team stamps are added by the manufacturer, so shouldn't be illegal for the reasons you said.
Adding a personalized hot stamp can effect the shape of a disc if put in the right spot or is big enough.
Example: a large Hot staple can make a dome disc flat, which will fly differently than a actual flat top mold.
Paint should be subjective to the type and thickness. Writing your name with a paint pen and painting your disc with a thick oil base paint are Not the same... One will effect your Disc, the other will not.
Just a few points to think about and should be taken into consideration as well.
If your finger nail can catch it then it changes the thickness. I am hard pressed to think of a manufacturer where the hot stamp did this
I was hoping you were going to address jump putting.
Just got back from US Am dgc, and about a 1/3 of the players I observed, released jump putts after their feet were off the ground.
I see some pros who also foot fault doing the same, and they are not being called out for it.
I wish either rules be enforced or changed as it is not fair to the competitors who follow them when we have people getting in some instances feet closer before releasing their putt!
Maybe if somebody hot stamped the top of their disc with a speckle / sharkskin pattern that would have a significant effect on aerodynamics. I'm sure there are people out there who could try something like that and evaluate the effect.
Sorry if this has been mentioned. The example you used painting a disc the guy was using acetone, and dye. Should be perfectly legal.
Being an amateur disc golfer. I feel like some of these rules seems a bit unnessesary. Like you wonder how big difference adding a bunch stickers and other "customizable grafics" would honestly help get an advantage. I guess if you change the characteristics of a disc by adding weight, it could have an impact. But if that is the case, why not instead have a weight limit, and let all players weight their discs before tournament, feels like easier and better solution.
Very interesting topic, thanks for making the video and raising the broader question of whether or not the PDGA has an enforcement problem. I think it very clearly does and they need to write their rules in a way that can be applied fairly and evenly - no small task.
On the note of enforcement, would you be interested in making a video addressing the topic of performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) in the sport? I find it surprising that very little is said or done about them, despite the fact that the PDGA claims to be prioritizing things it considers "unfair competitive advantage" (e.g. the Natalie Ryan case that you've covered in quite some detail). There is money in this sport, quite a lot in fact, and with that comes incentive to do whatever you can to get a competitive advantage. PEDs have a long history in almost every sport and I think it's quite naïve to think ours is the exception. If the PDGA or DGPT truly prioritizes unfair competitive advantages, do you think we'll soon see required PED testing (or randomized PED testing) for entrance into events? Or will the PDGA never really address this issue because of their broader enforcement problems?
I've been thinking doing a bit of coke might help with my putting
If you put weed on the banned list there'd only be like 4 people left playing.
The night before pro tournament play there should be a weigh-in and identification of discs. Only 18 discs should be allowed per player per round. With some (say “2”) supplementations per round on hole 9. This is so no heavies are allowed and, most importantly, announcers can describe each disc’s mold and specific weight during play! Imagine how much this will boost sales!
I think it is a rule that they have because it gives them something clear black and white statement to fall on but realistically no one is ever going to call someone for a hot stamp and I doubt a tournament director would ever care because they probably gave out some hot stamped discs for their tournament. The only thing I could see people calling out (besides an obvious alteration) would be those printed discs. I don't know what the process is called but the discs with an image printed onto it where you can very easily feel the grooves from the printer and see a depth change.
UNC Asheville alum here 💪 Love your videos
So my question is this. Will Matt Orum have to stop using his hot stamped Alabama logo disc which is one of his go to discs?
If a hot stamped disc is legal because it is the manufacturer’s stamp it follows that an X out with a second stamp, intentionally or accidentally is also legal, but a retailer’s second stamp on an x-out disc is not. It makes no sense. The rule should be that any modification of the disc that materially changes its flight characteristics is illegal, like scuffing a baseball. Otherwise the rule is simply arbitrary. The intent of the “thickness of the ink” is arguably that one could stamp one’s way to a disc with modified flight characteristics. It’s almost a given that a second hot stamp does not do that. I would suggest that the PDGA do the experiments. Lord knows with the huge influx of members they have to have some spare cash laying around. If they need limits I’d suggest limiting the size of the hot stamp to no more than 20% of the disc’s flight surface or some such arbitrary limitation so that people aren’t foiling over a whole disc; that said my Star Wars Buzz had a complete foil top. If the rule doesn’t fulfill the intent, it needs to be changed.
My question is, are you feeling the stamp or are you feeling a lip left from the hot stamp stamping the disc and minutely raising the plastic on the perimeter of the stamp?
Shout out to Mile Krupica who is a great TD and IL state coordinator!
In MA4 he told me I had to remove glow tape from my discs because they were detectable thickness. If someone on my card reported me he told me I could be assessed a 2 stroke penalty for each time I threw that disc.
I believe Ricky mentioned that Paul McBeth reported him for having an "unmarked disc" years ago and the TD had to go and investigste so it has happened.
But in actuality, ive seen many players ask the card and say "hey i have glow tape on this disc do you guys mind if I throw it" and on many MPO MA1 cards Ive seen the card approve it.
I think the rule needs to be there to make sure people arent doing crazy weird mods to their discs. But I think in most cases a TD would never be able to prove that a Manufacturer didnt make that stamp. That would require an extensive knowledge.
Bottom line is you are probably a jerk if you are reporting someone for having a hot stamp but I get that there needs to be some sort of mod rule.
The purpose of the rule is to take this out of the TD's hands. Making judgement calls is just not feasible so the rule is now clear and all the TD has to do is see the extra stamp and follow the rules.
I had someone call me out not long ago for having a small piece of glow tape on my putter. Yeah, against the rules, but not intentionally. I just couldn't get the tape off after a glow round. I swapped the putter out with another and life went on. The tape certainly didn't have any effect on my putting ability.
Yes. Paint, dye and marker are different. I googled it.
I don’t know. I think even if the stamps, modifications, etc. do affect the disc who cares? How much does it really affect the flight? I agree with the enforcement issue too. We are not about to have TD’s checking everyone’s bag.
1/2 my discs would be “illegal” under this rule….are we not trying to grow the sport? PDGA needs to change this rule ASAP
Does this mean that all dynamic discs that have been stamped in emporia and not at the lat64 factory be illegal? Dynamic is not the manufacturer, but does in house stamping.
As long as the weight of the disc is within the PDGA guidelines, then why should it matter?
I believe the that the better question to ask here is, Why is Chris Clark wearing a Bud Light T-shirt?
I think it's splitting hairs. Maybe in laboratory test conditions one could prove that there is a difference between discs with added hot stamps/paints/inks/etc. and "clear" discs, but let's be honest - during normal gameplay on a course these differences would be neglible. And what about discs with normal wear and tear? They lose the paint from logos and they even lose some weight by losing small amounts of plastic from scratches etc. Moreover, in this way they even slightly change their shape and thus properties of flight which is known as "beating up" a disc. So, as I said in the beginning, I think it's just splitting hair. And somewhat silly rule ;))
It's gotten to the point of absurdity. One hilarity is that LED tournaments can not be PDGA sanctioned, UNLESS the disc makers put the led in (and conform to other standards).
I think it's due to the huge influx of money, which makes SPONSORS more important than having your own personal disc. If hot stamping would be allowed, then more ad dollars would go to the players instead of e.g. streaming rights holders.
I sanded a part of my disc to add grip where I hold it and I don’t use it in competition in fear that someone will make a stink about it even though it doesn’t affect the flight at all. It’s a dumb rule.
If the manufacture is allowed to hot stamp the disc they would be allowed to team stamp the disc.
This is a rule that should be regarded similar to dress code. Surface embellishments can change the aerodynamics, but arguably probably not more than chunking a disc into a tree or gravel driveway. If they start justifying the rule based on aerodynamic claims they will definitely have a problem. That will require concrete standards that would likely roll in disc wear condition as well. So in the meantime they stick by it like the dress code and the rule is the rule.
For enforcement, it would be really easy to do what most every other pro sports entity does and if there is a purse, submit for verification after the win .
It seems like timhe rule may have been introduced by manufacturers to prevent people from selling their own versions of discs that are more or less stable because of the presence of these stamps. I can sort of sympathize.
I think there should be minimum and maximum weight , width and thickness restrictions only. I guess the material that they're made out of should be plastic.
This rule is silly. There is very little advantage that disc decoration will give to a player. People don't even call foot faults.
PDGA needs to fix this. Has nobody contacted them about it yet?
I assume tournament stamped discs are okay as the manufacturer is the one putting that stamp on the disc.
if the manufacturer adds a team hotstamp, it would conform with the rules. if a third party adds a team hotstamp, it would violate the rules.
Skateboarding may not be a crime, but disc golfing is!!!!
Keep pounding
The manufacturer stamp should be just as illegal as an aftermarket one. This rule is just nonsense. They don't even have a standard basket, and yet they want to hyper-regulate the discs that can be used and pretend it's not for financial gain. Are we trying to enforce a fair sport or trying to make sure the companies that paid us to get their discs approved are the only ones that can make money? I'm not even making an accusation. I truly have never understood why anyone cares what disc they use or how they alter it.
In the magic: the gathering community we call the act of trying to call someone on a stupid rule like this to gain some sort of marginal advantage 'angle shooting', it's very frowned upon. I believe that since this rule has such ambiguity (noticeable thickness) that it's completely unenforceable, as is the rules regarding disc tuning and conditioning.
I haven’t seen anyone prove that a hot stamp adds a detectable thickness to a disc. The hot stamps are pressed into the surface leaving a mark if wiped, they don’t simply lay on the surface of the disc. If a hot stamp doesn’t significantly, or even actually, change the weight of a disc then what? That idea of a hot stamp adding anything worth regulating falls apart under scrutiny so quickly it’s not funny.
If my disc has been chipped on the edge, am I allowed to repair it back to the original thickness and shape? Adding some material.
Of course not
I feel removing a hot stamp isn’t an issue. As your only removing artwork that was put on a disc after the mole was already made.
Adding a weighted element though. Ie paint, yes I agree. It would in fact alter the weight in ways to create a different flight pattern than the original disc.
So I agree with painting things. But not for removing hot stamps to make discs cleaner. Or to re-ink a disc should the user like the disc color of the plastic.
That’s my 2 cents on the matter. Great vids.
With the right equipment I can detect the thickness added by writing your information on with a permanent marker. Source: have done so with a high quality profilometer.
I have forgotten to take off the price sticker on new disc many times. That would be considered agents the rules? What if I didn't get all the sticky stuff from the price stickers off? It is a different texture so that would be against the rules?
I really don’t understand what the PDGA is getting at. What problem do they think is going to arise here? Are we taking a max weight disc and trying to get it heavier by adding 100 hot stamps? Also, what if the mini stamp is done by the manufacturer? What if I am actually an employee of the manufacturer and do the hot stamping myself while at work? How is a TD to determine the hot stamps origin?
Ok but you can throw such a beat in disc that's literally undetectable of what it is that technically changes its weight and flight paths?
So who is the one with a calibrated micrometer to show the difference between the stamp and the base plastic ?
Well now tournament directors will need the appropriate tool to measure the thickness of a hot stamp. Right? No.
What about “flattened firebirds”!
I am currently playing a B tier and they put a different division on my card. I play MA60 and on my card was a MA70, because like you said there was only 1 MA70 entered in the Event.
Can clarify if that's in violation of this rule. Thanks for your channel
Who is the manufacturer of the disc, ultimately, if you can add things that would be within the rules for the initial manufacturer later? In my mind, adding a stamp completes the manufacturing of a disc sold in incomplete form.
Does that mean they couldn't throw a double stamped disc?
Paint (and stamps) have weight. It is possible to increase the weight over max or max for manufacturer. You could also change its gyroscopic nature... Someone real clever could doctor a disc to perform a very specific manner.
Wiping stamps is completely fine. Old beat up discs have naturally wiped stamps anyway
In my opinion, you would have to actually prove that a hot stamp benefits the player and gives them an advantage during play. What if i continuously use my chalk bag to coat the disc to grip it better? is that not an advantage then to someone who doesnt have one readily available? whatever alteration is done to the disc has to be proven to provide a distinct advantage to the player over others in this situation. Otherwise, the rule is useless. The only caveat would be if the stamp adds so much weight that its above the maximum amount allowed.
Flight characteristics are no longer relevant to determinations of illegal discs. That criteria has been moved to a section of the rules that does not control what is allowed.
The rule(s) are too open ended. Dye and ink change the disc. You can't add something to another thing and think that it's still the same. EVERYTHING is measurable with the right tools. The PDGA needs to come up with much more precise specifications or just kill the ability to make discs unique entirely. As a disc dyer, I obviously don't want that, but they need to do something.
As for hot stamps, I live close to Gateway Disc Sports and have had custom stamps done. The fact that as long as they do it, it's fine, but if I do the exact same thing at home, it's not, is dumb.
My concern for all this is, did the PDGA committee actually weigh a painted/hot stamped discs?? Like did they find a random MA3 player having fun throwing a pretty dyed disc they made and noticed it had “paint” on it too. And made a asinine statement like - hold up he threw it 10 fr further the whole time
How much difference does it make when you add paint or 1-2 extra hot stamps? Does it add an extra 3-6g?
One would have to prove that the disc was thrown during the round.. How many times ie what holes...
This rule is poorly written. But, If I was a TD having to enforce this rule, I'd consider if the hot stamp or modification in question in question changes the disc to a greater degree than legal manufacturer hotstamps do. Consider a case where a player adds 100 hotstamps to their disc, and the application is all on one side like a black and white cookie. Legal manufacturer stamps come in a wide assortment of shapes, sizes and variety, from no stamp, to covering most of the flight plate, and from symmetrically applied to asymmetrically applied, but usually one single layer. Therefore, anything in this range is not meaningfully different. 100 stamps however is meaningfully different, because you have surpassed a monolayer of hotstamp thickness, and have likely applied more than a flight plate's worth of area.
then it would fail for being over weight, if it's under the max weight the stamps should be fine
How do you determine "detectable", sight? Feel? Film Thickness meter?
Often, I see players leave a price tag on the underside of a disc. . is that a legal?
You realize you are wearing a Bud Light shirt. That's even worse than being a Panther fan :)
You can get misprint discs that have multiple stamps from the manufacturer which is no different then applying a secondary stamp through a disc golf shop (retailer).
Wiping a stamp versus the stamp flaking off naturally is no different either.
Adding glow tape I would assume would add slightly more weight to a disc but why would you leave that on during sanctioned play.
From the TD side if there’s an expectation that we should be checking everyone’s discs…good luck. This isn’t NASCAR. 😂
First of all wiping the stamp off isn’t the same because you can buy blank discs. Second, to police the situation all they have to do is to what racing competitions do and have official and unofficial results. You don’t know who actually won a NASCAR race until the winning cars have been inspected. So the pdga would only have to inspect either the people who cash or just the top few. Finally if you can feel the stamp, it is detectable
If I get a disc hot stamped after I purchase it, how is that different from the manufacturer hot stamping the disc? Embossing a disc with mold/company/weight whether it be and imprint or raised impression from the mold is altering the thickness of the disc so why are stamps or embossing even allowed then? That would basically mean the manufacturers are making discs illegal before leaving the factory by hot stamping meaning they should only be sending out blanks that were purchased by an individual or for resale. This rule is silly and pointless.