2016 Am Worlds - Madison, Wi

[lyleoross]

Sorry, I'm saying Teired, but what is written is Tour. PDGA Tour events.

 

[burnin4]

As I understand the PDGA amateur rules and how they have been applied over the years:

A. Current PDGA members with Am Status are allowed to win cash:
1. In any type of disc sports competition, sanctioned or not, before they are members
2. Before being officially reinstated as an Amateur, having cashed as PDGA pros for many years.
3. In non-sanctioned events and leagues
4. In PDGA sanctioned leagues
5. In side games like Ace pools, CTPs and skins

B. Current PDGA Ams cannot win cash in PDGA sanctioned tournaments including doubles

Which of these rules if any did the new Advanced Master World Champ break?
I suspect most if not all current Am PDGA members reading this, or you know, have won cash in one or more of the allowable ways from A.1 to A.5.

Those weren't the rules that were sent out for Worlds Qualifying Criteria. The PDGA did not segment their definition of "Amateur Status" for once a player has become a pdga member. The Qualifying Criteria document clearly stated "Players must also maintain their Amateur status by declining Pro cash until after the Am World Championship." Shouldn't that apply to all competitors regardless of when they joined the pdga, pertaining to previous PDGA events? It's not like the PDGA can't identify if he took cash at all of those pdga events, they know.

I already know I'm going to lose this battle, but the INTEGRITY of our sport has been compromised because of a loophole. The PDGA has a chance to do the right thing but they are going to hide behind the loophole then make a change for 2017. A veteran Pro PDGA player accepted cash for 8years as a non member, then bought a membership in Sept 2015, played 3 Pro Rds, then got an invitation to play in the Amateur World Championship??? 3 rds??? That's a whole different argument.

The sad part is I really liked MK, but after getting msgs from players from all over the world telling me they've been competing against him in the Pro PDGA division for a decade is disheartening. He clearly took advantage of the system, many of his acquaintances are embarrassed for him, and quite frankly if the PDGA doesn't do the right thing then I will be disgusted. I realize this isn't the PGA or the Olympics, but their is no ASTERISK beside their definition of "Amateur," but apparently there are lots of Asterisks on the PDGA's definition of an Amateur.

 

[JC17393]

Application of the rule is tough, but we have what Chuck gave us. If the PDGA has consistently applied the rules according to Chuck's interpretation, and Chuck probably has a very good feel for the PDGA's intent, then Burnin is out of luck. If ever, even once, they applied them according to how they're written, Burning wins in a court of law.

This is what I've been trying to say. Regardless of how the rules are written, they have been enforced exactly as Chuck laid out for as long as I've been playing (and surely longer), which I believe speaks to intent. So I think it's a tough road to go in arguing that the rules should now be enforced differently because this one guy "took advantage" of that widely accepted interpretation of the rules.

IMO, to go after MK now would necessitate opening the books on every amateur in the membership in search of others like him that may have accepted cash in a sanctioned Pro division prior to joining. I honestly think there are more than just he who are "guilty" of cashing as non-members and joining later as amateurs, especially in Europe where in many places there are no amateur divisions in the first place. I think it would be unfair to single him out without attempting to flush out the rest by similar processes.

 

[lyleoross]

This is what I've been trying to say. Regardless of how the rules are written, they have been enforced exactly as Chuck laid out for as long as I've been playing (and surely longer), which I believe speaks to intent. So I think it's a tough road to go in arguing that the rules should now be enforced differently because this one guy "took advantage" of that widely accepted interpretation of the rules.

IMO, to go after MK now would necessitate opening the books on every amateur in the membership in search of others like him that may have accepted cash in a sanctioned Pro division prior to joining. I honestly think there are more than just he who are "guilty" of cashing as non-members and joining later as amateurs, especially in Europe where in many places there are no amateur divisions in the first place. I think it would be unfair to single him out without attempting to flush out the rest by similar processes.

Agreed! His seems the most egregious, or at least the most pronounced I've seen, but as you've pointed out, not likely to be the only one.

I do think the PDGA should clean up their definition, but that is per my likes and dislikes and sometimes, to tight of a definition can get you in more trouble than to loose of a definition. I think retroactive cleaning is impossible, and stupid, but the notion of changing it going forward doesn't seem a bad idea. As Burning points out, it hardly seems fair to him to compete against a guy that is by all practical purposes, playing as a professional.

 

[lyleoross]

Burnin - the point that Chuck has made seems to me to be that the PDGA stays out of monied interests unless you are a registered member. They do that for a reason, it gets real sticky in a big hurry. This guy seems on the edge, but in actuality is well within the designed intent of the rules, like it or not. That doesn't impune the reputation of the PDGA, it simply says, "we have no intent of monitoring the money taken by non-PDGA players." You can dislike the guy, but you can't argue that. This is why some argue that preference should be given to members and some day that may happen.

I know how the rules are written, and I agree with your interpretation, but that is irrelevant. As Chuck and JC are pointing out, the PDGA has a well established intent and unless you can find an exception, you're not likely to win. I am curious to see what the PDGA says though and I will point out, the PDGA is very flexible in such things and might even change how they define the rule.

 

[Cgkdisc]

The validity of my citation of PDGA Am policy above including Worlds invites is indicated by Pete May, who was a pro player for several years and eventually won the Pro Legends World title in 2012: http://www.pdga.com/tour/event/10864#MPL then was reinstated as an Amateur and won the Advanced Legends World title the following year in 2013: http://www.pdga.com/tour/event/14310#ML1 and for the next two years.

Take a look at the 2013 Am World Invite criteria and the key wording I believe looks the same as the 2016 invite criteria: http://www.pdga.com/files/2013_AmJr_Worlds_-_Invite_Criteria_0.pdf

 

[burnin4]

^I agree and understand the rules, just curious how the PDGA will segment their definition of Amateur status, because even though MK wasn't a PDGA member he was still cashing in PDGA events for 8years. Very disheartening because the PDGA clearly knows he's not an Amateur. It's also disheartening to see someone win money as a professional and never support the organization that has been providing the opportunity for him to make money as a pro, until he was ready to take advantage of the system.

Oh well, I don't want to come across as a sore loser, I was content with finishing 2 strokes out of 404 behind him, respected his game, but then the msgs started coming in from players all over the world, outing him.

 

[teemkey]

I think there are two issues based on MK's PDGA page:

1) MK competed in one event in 2015. He competed in MPM (there were no AM divisions) and won the division. Did he take cash?

2) There are no other sanctioned events from 2015 or any other year. It's been reported that he's played in PDGA events for several years, perhaps a decade). Is there any requirement to inform the PDGA of previously accepting cash in sanctioned events when registering for the first time?

2a

 

[Cgkdisc]

No & No.

 

[JC17393]

I think there are two issues based on MK's PDGA page:

1) MK competed in one event in 2015. He competed in MPM (there were no AM divisions) and won the division. Did he take cash?

2) There are no other sanctioned events from 2015 or any other year. It's been reported that he's played in PDGA events for several years, perhaps a decade). Is there any requirement to inform the PDGA of previously accepting cash in sanctioned events when registering for the first time?

2a

1) There's no indication that anyone was paid anything at that event. It's official, so if there were payouts, they'd be reported (not just for MK, but for everyone). So probably safe to say he did not take cash.

2) No requirement whatsoever. It's not even a question that is asked. I think the only argument that can be made that previous cash should be taken into account is that someone who has accepted cash in events (sanctioned or not) should register for a pro membership. I don't know anyone who has signed up with the PDGA for the first time who didn't sign up Am simply to save the difference in fees, even when their intent was only to play pro divisions. So to expect anyone to sign up as a pro just because they have taken cash before is probably a fool's errand.

 

[corin_brown]

So OP, has the PDGA replied significantly to your query? Has it been just, "let us look into it and we'll get back to you" or have they given any noteworthy reaction?

 

[lyleoross]

The validity of my citation of PDGA Am policy above including Worlds invites is indicated by Pete May, who was a pro player for several years and eventually won the Pro Legends World title in 2012: http://www.pdga.com/tour/event/10864#MPL then was reinstated as an Amateur and won the Advanced Legends World title the following year in 2013: http://www.pdga.com/tour/event/14310#ML1 and for the next two years.

Take a look at the 2013 Am World Invite criteria and the key wording I believe looks the same as the 2016 invite criteria: http://www.pdga.com/files/2013_AmJr_Worlds_-_Invite_Criteria_0.pdf

I understand what was done, and also that there is a specific rule that allows this, but I don't think that is the point at hand - of course Chuck may point out that often enough I don't understand the point at hand....

What the criteria says:

"Players must also maintain their amateur status by declining pro cash or accpeting merch in lieu of cash at PDGA Tour Events."

That is a pretty clear statement. It says Players, not PDGA members, or non-PDGA members or martians. Words have meaning in a legal sense. Player, by definition, is anyone who plays the sport, with no other qualifications. This is where we get to intent. Clearly, that wasn't what the PDGA intended, but it is what they wrote. By what you've said, the intent is for PDGA registered players. Again, that isn't what they wrote, and honestly, they should have written it better. "The PDGA is concerned only with the status of PDGA registered players, any player who is not a member is not subject to PDGA rules until such a time as they register as a member. Once a member, to have Am status you cannot accept cash at a PDGA Tour Event." Then there is no argument.

The use of amateur is also important. They are specifically defining that "Player" as amateur if they don't accept cash at a PDGA Tour Event. By that strict definition, and the terms they used, MK is not an Am. All of this is irrelevant. As you've pointed out, their intent is clear, both by this action, and by past actions. Player, for the PDGA, in this sense, means a PDGA player. All other players aren't of concern, no matter what they've done. I will remind Burnin' that many will point out that there dozens if not hundreds of casual players in CA and other places who "play for fun." They are incredibly accomlished, have played in many situations, and have never registered with the PDGA. Many of them could stomp all over everyone at Worlds. They don't because they aren't interested. The PDGA leaves this definition as is because they value the skill those players have and would love to have them join. Even more so, parsing out which of them is legal, and which isn't becomes a nightmare, hence, we are only interested once you've become a member. In that sense I think the PDGA is correct, they are interested in their registered players, and for all practical purposes can only hold their members accountible to their rules. It may be small comfort, but MK has had his win. Unless he commits to staying Am, it can't happen again unless he follows the path laid out for Pete May.

Many have argued that playing in any PDGA event makes you a PDGA member. Perhaps the PDGA should consider that notion?

 

[lyleoross]

I would also point out that as I've thought about this, I don't fault MK. Again, he didn't break any rule. He wanted to win a major event, who doesn't, he had the skill to do so, and he played within the intent of the PDGA guidelines. I understand Burnin's annoyance, and I admire his competitive desire to capture the win, but for the moment, the best he can do is call MK a bagger, something I'd have to say has merit.

 

[Steve West]

To throw some Competition Manual quotes in here:

2.1 General
Last updated: Monday, August 10, 2015 - 16:03

A. Players are not allowed to enter a division for which they are ineligible. Please see the online Divisions, Ratings, and Point Factors table for specifics.

B. A player is solely responsible for knowing what division(s) they are eligible to compete in. Entry into an ineligible division may result in disqualification from the event and/or suspension from PDGA events.
…
D. A player must properly identify themselves when competing in a PDGA sanctioned event. Players who wish to remain anonymous or who assume a false identity will be disqualified from the event and face potential suspension from the PDGA tour.

2.3 Reclassification
Last updated: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 - 14:39
…
Amateur to Professional
…
An Amateur player is automatically re-classified as Professional when the player has accepted cash while competing in a Professional division. Accepting prizes in lieu of cash payout or accepting money for winning an ancillary contest such as an ace pool, top-of-the-card round prize, or CTP contest does not cause a player to relinquish his or her amateur status.

 

[JC17393]

What the criteria says:

"Players must also maintain their amateur status by declining pro cash or accpeting merch in lieu of cash at PDGA Tour Events."

That is a pretty clear statement. It says Players, not PDGA members, or non-PDGA members or martians.

Context matters as well. Read the whole paragraph for that context.

"All Amateur and Junior participants in the 2016 PDGA Amateur & Junior Disc Golf World Championships must be current 2016 PDGA Amateur members and be a certified official (having passed the Certified Official's exam and paid the certification fee) before they can register for for the event. Official Certification must be good through the end of the event. Players must also maintain their amateur status by declining pro cash or accepting only merchandise in lieu of cash at PDGA Tour Events until after the 2016 PDGA Amateur & Junior Disc Golf World Championships or they will no longer be eligible."

Clearly, it is referring to "players" as players who meet all the criteria laid out earlier in the paragraph (the bolded) and have registered for the tournament. The use of "players" in this case is assuming that they are already members of the organization, and amateur members at that, because otherwise they're not going to be allowed to register in the first place.

I think citing the qualification/invitation document does nothing for the argument here.

 

[lyleoross]

Context matters as well. Read the whole paragraph for that context.

"All Amateur and Junior participants in the 2016 PDGA Amateur & Junior Disc Golf World Championships must be current 2016 PDGA Amateur members and be a certified official (having passed the Certified Official's exam and paid the certification fee) before they can register for for the event. Official Certification must be good through the end of the event. Players must also maintain their amateur status by declining pro cash or accepting only merchandise in lieu of cash at PDGA Tour Events until after the 2016 PDGA Amateur & Junior Disc Golf World Championships or they will no longer be eligible."

Clearly, it is referring to "players" as players who meet all the criteria laid out earlier in the paragraph (the bolded) and have registered for the tournament. The use of "players" in this case is assuming that they are already members of the organization, and amateur members at that, because otherwise they're not going to be allowed to register in the first place.

I think citing the qualification/invitation document does nothing for the argument here.

I conceed your point, however, if, as you've succesfully pointed out, the PDGA has no intent of accounting for actions of players while they are not PDGA members, then they should state that clearly. Then the entire discussion becomes moot. On the other hand, what about if I am a PDGA member, lapse, play a Pro event, then reup to play Am Worlds? Where does that leave me?

 

[JC17393]

I conceed your point, however, if, as you've succesfully pointed out, the PDGA has no intent of accounting for actions of players while they are not PDGA members, then they should state that clearly. Then the entire discussion becomes moot. On the other hand, what about if I am a PDGA member, lapse, play a Pro event, then reup to play Am Worlds? Where does that leave me?

Once you're a member, you're a member. You have a membership number whether you are current or not. You're supposed to use that number whether you are current or not. Rounds shot while not current are still added to your ratings average, so why wouldn't cash accepted while not being current not count as well?

Competition Manual section 2.1 D.
"A player must properly identify themselves when competing in a PDGA sanctioned event. Players who wish to remain anonymous or who assume a false identity will be disqualified from the event and face potential suspension from the PDGA tour."

Pretty easy case to make that a lapsed member who signs up for an event without submitting his membership number for the reason of taking cash in a pro division without losing amateur status is trying to "remain anonymous" by failing to properly identify himself to the PDGA (represented by the TD). Also pretty easy for the PDGA to attach the player's membership number to the event results so his cash is counted in the database and he is forced to turn pro for future events.

 

[burnin4]

So OP, has the PDGA replied significantly to your query? Has it been just, "let us look into it and we'll get back to you" or have they given any noteworthy reaction?

The PDGA let me know that they are aware of the situation and plan to follow up with me. A pro player that played with MK since the 90's personally spoke with Brian Graham Executive Director at the European PDGA event this week, told him that he knew first hand that MK had been accepting cash for a decade.

 

[DirtyMeathook]

How would you guys rank the 5 courses? I didn't play the event, but I often play all of the courses other than Capital.

Elver
Birds
Heistand
Token
Capital

 

[burnin4]

I would also point out that as I've thought about this, I don't fault MK. Again, he didn't break any rule. He wanted to win a major event, who doesn't, he had the skill to do so, and he played within the intent of the PDGA guidelines. I understand Burnin's annoyance, and I admire his competitive desire to capture the win, but for the moment, the best he can do is call MK a bagger, something I'd have to say has merit.

I guess everyone is forgetting the fact that this guy cashed for 8+yrs as a Pro in the PDGA. Not the Southeastern league, not Aunt Annie's league, but the GD PDGA. We know this, the PDGA knows this, players he competed against since the 90's are reaching out and have offered to inform the PDGA. There are no fine lines or grey areas that can justify MK's specific and unethical actions.

JC17393, you've clearly spent a lot of time defending MK and you've worked hard to interpret the rules to justify his actions. I applaud all of your efforts to support such unethical conduct in our sport, you seem like a great guy. To me, this is a situation of Right vs Wrong, so forgive me if I believe that once you accept cash, much less for a decade in the PDGA, that you sacrifice the right to compete as an Amateur for a World title. Yes I know a loophole exists, Im going to end up being the sacrificial lamb, and a new rule for 2017 will emerge.

I'm exhausted thinking about this, ready to put it behind me and compete again next year. Even if the PDGA does the right thing it's still not the way I wanted to win. Anyway, this is my last post in this thread until I hear something from the PDGA.