robdeforge
Double Eagle Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2014
- Messages
- 1,356
Player A runs the risk of being disqualified from the tournament in this scenario.
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
Post-production Hot Stamps are Illegal
- Thread starter seedlings
- Start date
Player A runs the risk of being disqualified from the tournament in this scenario.
I think your read is correct. The rules are silent, imho, on whether wiping/removing a stamp is illegal. People can interpret rules as they choose; but unless there is an official interpretation from PDGA or its authorized entities, I suggest sticking with what the rules say.
803.01F4 clearly says you cannot add material of a detectable thickness, such as paint, etc.
I also don't get the controversy -- other than this "controversy" is based upon 3rd party dealers wanting to make money easier. Because those dealers could use dyes and be legal, never approach the "hot stamp foil" issue, and the disc would look very very similar.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2009
- Messages
- 3,217
I think their daily production capacity for hot stamping would greatly exceed the capacity if they were dyeing. I would expect they'd need to price the dyed version higher due to the increased labor time involved on a per disc basis.
TheOtherBill
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2010
- Messages
- 2,633
All of this is prob moot anyway. If DD wants personalized DyeMax discs to be legal then they will be in the next rules update.
Simon has frequently talked about only playing with wiped putters to avoid being OCD about thumb placement.
Simon has frequently talked about only playing with wiped putters to avoid being OCD about thumb placement.
Dye is legal. Specifically referenced in the OP.
Like I said. For them to make money easier.
Last edited:
How many DGPT players are bagging "illegal" discs?
This, ISTM, is one of the issues with the approach to the DG rules, that we don't officially recognize the importance of intent. This despite the fact that intent is implicit in certain rules.
Applying something to the disc intended to change the flight characteristics should be illegal, period. Applying something that doesn't actually change the flight characteristics, especially something that is in fact applied to legal discs all the time, cant be illegal if you expect people to take the rules, as written, seriously.
This, ISTM, is one of the issues with the approach to the DG rules, that we don't officially recognize the importance of intent. This despite the fact that intent is implicit in certain rules.
Applying something to the disc intended to change the flight characteristics should be illegal, period. Applying something that doesn't actually change the flight characteristics, especially something that is in fact applied to legal discs all the time, cant be illegal if you expect people to take the rules, as written, seriously.
TheOtherBill
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2010
- Messages
- 2,633
It's printed on, not dye -
Dynamic Discs - DyeMax
Dynamic Discs
https://www.dynamicdiscs.com › pages › dyemax
DyeMax is a service that Dynamic Discs uses to provide the most detailed image that can be put on a disc. It's not actually dye though.
biscoe
* Ace Member *
Dye sublimation is the process- legal.
TheOtherBill
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2010
- Messages
- 2,633
You mentioned this as a question 10 years ago in this thread post 8- https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92906
Post #15 seems to clarify that UV printing would add thickness, as well as this from post #6 -
"These were dyed from a printer onto the discs. UV printer opens the pores, the dye is injected, and then resealed."
- IMO (since I don't have the time, inclination or interest in doing a miniture measurement) that opening the plastic pores then resealing does add thickness
And I don't give a rip about the legality or who throws what, I am just certain that if this was found to make the discs illegal then DD, Discstore and all the retailers that do this would get the rule changed.
Is Simon promoting an illegal disc here?
Most pros have some discs they sell which have custom stamps that they use to actually make money. Many pros are sponsored by disc retailers which have custom stamps.
Are we saying that these pros are promoting and selling illegal discs? It seems so. If I show up to a tournament and call someone's Flight Factory Heimborg Destroyer illegal, can you imagine the shock? I have doubts the TD would back me up. I have doubts that the TD should back me up.
You can't ignore these kinds of issues. It will eventually bite the PDGA.
Most pros have some discs they sell which have custom stamps that they use to actually make money. Many pros are sponsored by disc retailers which have custom stamps.
Are we saying that these pros are promoting and selling illegal discs? It seems so. If I show up to a tournament and call someone's Flight Factory Heimborg Destroyer illegal, can you imagine the shock? I have doubts the TD would back me up. I have doubts that the TD should back me up.
You can't ignore these kinds of issues. It will eventually bite the PDGA.
BillFleming
* Ace Member *
You are using Simon's new disc as an example of a 'possibly' illegal disc. However, that is not a normal plastic release. It is the R2 (recycled plastic) version. It is possible that MVP submitted that to the PDGA for approval with that stamp. It's also possible that they just created the disc/stamp without a need for additional approval - remember, the rules for illegal disc state after production. If MVP produced the R2 Glitsches with that stamp, then it would be legal. From what Simon says....it seems like his other sponsor may have come up with the design (with his input) and MVP added it to the disc when they produced it.
This, but more importantly, how would I, as the purchaser and user of that disc, know whether the stamp was applied at the MVP warehouse or in the PowerGrip warehouse?
There is literally no way for me to be sure.
Now, I very highly doubt that the custom "Yeet Street Discs" stamp I have on one disc was applied in the MVP warehouse, but again, how would I know?
How about the custom "Leigh Farm Disc Golf Course" stamp I have on a disc given to me for volunteering? I assume the guy who runs the show had someone stamp them for him, so it's probably "illegal".
What about the "Matt Keats Memorial" stamp I have on a disc that was in the player pack for a tournament? Do I need to wipe that stamp before I play in the next Matt Keats Memorial tournament?
What percentage of tournament playing disc golfers have a stamp of unkown provenance? Nearly all, I'd hazard a guess. The vast bulk of these are technically illegal. This doesn't make any sense as a rule.
biscoe
* Ace Member *
You are drastically overestimating the number of non-factory hot stamps out there. No one I play with on a regular basis has any. Every manufacturer does custom stamping.
BillFleming
* Ace Member *
I was curious about this myself at one time. I talked to a TD and was told that they supplied an image to the disc manufacturer who then stamped that on the discs they provided to the tournament. Now, does that happen with ALL tournament stamped discs? I would think so....would a disc manufacturer want to send hundreds of blank discs to another company just for them to stamp them...but I really don't know for sure as I haven't asked enough TDs to be able to have a definite answer.
He said nobody knows where the stamp originated.
I suppose that the assumption is it was done by the factory and thus not illegal.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2009
- Messages
- 3,217
This. The tourney stamp that Rastnav mentioned was almost certainly a factory job. Very common practice. Not sure why you would need/want to go to an aftermarket vendor for that sort of thing and you'd likely end up paying more.
When I got married (a while back), we looked into getting a custom run of putters (from Innova, I think) with a commemorative stamp for the wedding. If the minimum order quantity was a bit smaller, we would have followed through with it.
Pretty much all the examples offered could have been done at the factory. Hell, Gateway had no problem doing hotstamps with band logos and other artwork they had no right to use. I expect the vast majority of non-standard hot stamps you're seeing in the wild were done by the disc manufacturer.
I still think the press needed to hot stamp discs is probably prohibitively expensive for a small shop. Not to mention the tooling required. Especially when the factories are more than willing to run discs with that shop's art (provided they order enough discs).
Why is it legal for the manufacturer to hot stamp it? I bet it wouldn't be legal for them to paint them.
Imagine a manufacturer coming up with a process that, say, asymmetrically weighted a disc to provide some specific change to flight characteristics. Or applied "pre-wear" to the disc so that they didn't beat in and were consitent for the life of the disc. Orr whatever other change they wanted to make post production.
Presumably all of those things would be illegal.
If any of them wouldn't be illegal, then what purpose is the rule serving? What are the negative consequences that the rule is attempting to prevent?
I think what the rule is attempting to prevent is discs being turned into something that wouldnt be approved if the disc was submitted for PDGA approval. That's essentially it, right? So make it illegal to do something to the disc that is intended to change it's flight characteristics other than through normal wear and tear. That's all.
If you say that is "too hard to adjudicate" I would submit that so is trying to adjudicate any of these things now. How will you know that this hot stamp or that disc "wear" isn't applied in a legal fashion?
BillFleming
* Ace Member *
The rule about applying paint, etc. to a disc and it becoming illegal is an example of the issue with several rules.
1. How do you determine the violation? I mean, sometimes it is obvious a design is paint instead of dye/marker.
2. How do you prove it? You can't just say....I think/believe this disc is has paint (whatever) and it is illegal. You can't just go and pick up another player's disc and examine it.
It's like weight....how can you tell the disc violates the rules?
But the rule has to exist because proof CAN happen. I played with a person who pulled out a disc on a hole and said "watch this...I have this disc just for this throw". They threw an amazing shot that was unexpected. When they were asked what disc that was, they told us and said "I painted it give me better grip". He had mixed a little bit of fine sand with his paint and that gave him a much better grip and angle control. He didn't do it to all his discs because the grit wore at the skin of his thumb....so he saved it for specific shots.
So the rule is needed....it's just one of many that is difficult (not impossible) to enforce. Like the 30 second rule...except we all have watches or phones that can track seconds so it can be enforced. We don't carry a scale or ruler with us to measure weight or sizes.
1. How do you determine the violation? I mean, sometimes it is obvious a design is paint instead of dye/marker.
2. How do you prove it? You can't just say....I think/believe this disc is has paint (whatever) and it is illegal. You can't just go and pick up another player's disc and examine it.
It's like weight....how can you tell the disc violates the rules?
But the rule has to exist because proof CAN happen. I played with a person who pulled out a disc on a hole and said "watch this...I have this disc just for this throw". They threw an amazing shot that was unexpected. When they were asked what disc that was, they told us and said "I painted it give me better grip". He had mixed a little bit of fine sand with his paint and that gave him a much better grip and angle control. He didn't do it to all his discs because the grit wore at the skin of his thumb....so he saved it for specific shots.
So the rule is needed....it's just one of many that is difficult (not impossible) to enforce. Like the 30 second rule...except we all have watches or phones that can track seconds so it can be enforced. We don't carry a scale or ruler with us to measure weight or sizes.
