After reading the same posts about rules, non-rules rules, and mis-interpretations of the rules year after year, it got me to thinking. So I'll ask you:
What percentage of people, who regularly play sanctioned events, do you think have actually read the Rule Book?

Interesting thread.

I spotted this weekend at amatuer only event and it was clear to me that most players just do not read the rule book.

The hole I spotted on had lots of OB and one player threw ob about half way down the fairway and began to retee. I told him he did not half to do so.

Many players were unaware of the meter from OB rule as well.

Were those players who regularly play PDGA tournaments (I take that to mean more than 1 per month during the season)?

In addition to the current requirements, those whom the PDGA dubs as Tour players should also have to pass the official's test.

Were those players who regularly play PDGA tournaments (I take that to mean more than 1 per month during the season)?



most no, some yes.

The hole I spotted on had lots of OB and one player threw ob about half way down the fairway and began to retee. I told him he did not half to do so.



It's halve. Get with the program...

If eye had a quarter fore every thyme ewe used the wrong whirred.... Ide bee wretch.

The hole I spotted on had lots of OB and one player threw ob about half way down the fairway and began to retee. I told him he did not half to do so.



It's halve. Get with the program...

If eye had a quarter fore every thyme ewe used the wrong whirred.... Ide bee wretch.


Actually, it's "have".

Where's my $.50?

Very interesting results so far.....

.....and oddly, not much discussion about it yet?

it won't let me vote as it says there's already been a vote from this ip address...if i'm the only one using this computer, how is that posssible...
(computer geek help requested)

i say after playing for over 10 years in events all around the country, it's less than 10% of players that have read the rules book and about 25% of them that keep up with rules changes and about 10 percent of those that ACTUALLY KNOW the rules in the rules book.....



which is a long way of saying about 7 people know all the rules :eek:



:D

Come on now, y'all are expecting way too much from people that want to compete on the highest level of their chosen sport. That's a tough rule-book to read and digest. I mean really, it's like 45 one-eighth sized pages of text...and there aren't even any pictures!

It prolly takes like half and hour to 45 minutes to read through the whole thing, and who has that kind of time to waste?!?!?

thanks for answering my computer geek question while you were responding :p

:D

Come on now, y'all are expecting way too much from people that want to compete on the highest level of their chosen sport. That's a tough rule-book to read and digest. I mean really, it's like 45 one-eighth sized pages of text...and there aren't even any pictures!

It prolly takes like half and hour to 45 minutes to read through the whole thing, and who has that kind of time to waste?!?!?



That is a bit much... I finished the rules update for 2006 sittin on the John..... That is not too much to ask....

We live in america, following the rules is not a requirement, it is a suggestion... Unfortunately, not many play by the rules....

This is a great thread. I once stroked a guy for kicking his bag/chair after I had warned him during the round . He was soo angry not knowing what the official ruling was , it killed his round , and he still got the x-tra cry baby strokes after the round .... Brian Mace once told me , the " rules are a tool" .. The smart golfer will use all his tool's ...

this guy, loves his tool(s)... But the moderator may get a little upset with chit chat about my tool.... :D

Perhaps this thread is proof to something must of us already know - that people don't read thier rulebook.

Now when I took my officals test back in 04, I read the thing and I have read the changes every year since, but before that time, despite 11 years of disc golf before that, I had never read the rule book.

I, like most players, learned from the local guys in local tournaments, like the monthlies and doubles in Raleigh. I had rules chairmen Carlton Howard and former board member Kirk Yoo around to teach me all kinds of things about rules and etc.

Despite never reading the rule book in 04, I pretty much knew everything I had read.

My point in all of this is that so many times in doubles or monthlies we accept things like flip the disc or pick up around the basket or chain slapping or drug and alcohol use or foot faults or not penalizing players for wrong scores or this or that etc.

If clubs would step up and follow the rules during all monthlies (or minis as they are called in other parts of the country) and doubles events, then new players will naturally learn the rules. Still they need to read the rule book, but in doing this, not so many bad habits will be carried into PDGA play.

Interesting that we can require players to carry a mini but haven't required them to carry the rulebook. Even if that doesn't mean someone has read it, at least there would be a few copies around when a question arises.

The hole I spotted on had lots of OB and one player threw ob about half way down the fairway and began to retee. I told him he did not half to do so.



It's halve. Get with the program...

If eye had a quarter fore every thyme ewe used the wrong whirred.... Ide bee wretch.



Have you been deputized, Peckham? Then here's your badge. :D

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/276/grammarpolicepj6.jpg

Despite never reading the rule book in 04, I pretty much knew everything I had read.

ok, how exactly did you kow everything you had read despite never reading? this one is making my brain explode.

meaning the rules, I knew most of them that I was reading...b/c I was taught properly by two great disc golfers

Interesting that we can require players to carry a mini...



Really?


A player may instead choose, without touching or repositioning the thrown disc, to use the thrown disc as the marker

803.03A :cool:

But anytime you have a disc above the playing surface, OB, or casual relief, you need a mini. Also, if a player asks you to mark your disc to get it out of the way, you need a mini.

Exactly.

When I was growing up and played a new game for the first time, the first thing my mom always did was get the rules out and read them. I learned by that example and always read the rules before I ever play anything. Before I played a full round or bought a single disc I went to pdga.com, printed out a set of the rules, and read them. I guess I'm just wierd, but it is the way I was reared.
I still haven't taken the officials test. I ordered it, then lost it. Then re-ordered it, but it never came. I just gave up and decided to be a rules nazi without credentials. :D
My husband and some of my friends don't like to play with me because I "don't know how to play casual". I can't help it, it is just the way I am, a type-A, anal, rule-following geek, and I'm okay with myself that way. I played a couple rounds recently without a mini. When I threw out of bounds or into the woods I just picked up and threw from the nearest place in bounds, in the clearing. It just about tore me up inside, but I did it.

this guy, loves his tool(s)... But the moderator may get a little upset with chit chat about my tool.... :D


Not to state the obvious... but lee... you *are* a tool.

:D

on topic, I think that there should be a rules aptitude test somewhat similar to the officials test, only not quite as stringent. And I think the officials test should be more difficult. I also think that if a player is going to play more than, say, 3 events per year in any of the Pro divisions or 5 events per year in the Advanced divisions, they should have to pass the rules aptitude test.

Of course that's a bit of a lofty goal... but imagine how much smoother tournaments would run if even "halve" of the players knew the rulebook well. Maybe the rule should be that there must be at least one rulebook present per card at b-tier and higher events. The PDGA could use some fundage to supply these to TDs who run the larger events in an effort to improve the overall image of the PDGA and DG as a whole...

ok, I'm probably asking too much... but I still think it would be cool :)

ohh, one more thing I just thought of... what if instead of my above idea the PDGA started waiving the per-player sanctioning fees for officials in attendance? Require a current officials certificate and rulebook in hand to qualify for the waiver. Limit the number of waivers per event to something like 20% of each field and grant waivers on a first-come, first-served basis. Those who accept a waiver must also wear some sort of officials badge and handle rule questions during the round... That might make for some extra paperwork, but it's an idea worth considering. It would push more players to take the officials test and would promote better rules understanding on the course, and I don't think it would cost the PDGA much in the long run. Just an idea...

Anything that creates more paperwork for the TD is a bad idea. It's easy for a TD to count how many players they have and multiply by $2/$3/$4. It would be difficult to check and log officials and documentation, and then enforce dress code of badges, etc.

It's an interesting proposition, but ideas that result in more things for the TD to do will generally have little chance of being done.

yeah, you're right... and I've been doing some work behind the scenes to try and improve the amount of paperwork that TDs are required to complete :). while the above might not be currently viable without some changes, I think we could do *something* to promote rule knowledge and reward those who have proven their aptitude... Any ideas?

Interesting that we can require players to carry a mini


We can? I rarely carry a mini at a tournament. I usually have to borrow one when I go OB. I've read the rule book a couple of times and I couldn't tell you for sure if I need to carry a mini. Signs point to not.

If no one has a mini to loan you, I would give you a courtesy warning per 801.01C for the first time you needed to mark your shot. So, technically you aren't forced to carry a mini if you're willing to risk the potential penalty. This is a lot easier to call than foot faults.

If no one has a mini to loan you, I would give you a courtesy warning per 801.01C for the first time you needed to mark your shot. So, technically you aren't forced to carry a mini if you're willing to risk the potential penalty. This is a lot easier to call than foot faults.


I guess that's one way to say you were wrong...

chuck's right (:eek: gasp! :eek:)... but so are you. you don't technically have to carry a marker. You used to have the option to use a disc as a marker, but if you did, that disc had to be declared a marker for the rest of the round and could not be thrown. I cannot find that rule any more in the current book, and my old books are in a box somewhere in the attic... You are still allowed to play from behind your thrown disc if possible. The first time you have to move your lie for any reason (OB, etc.), you're required to mark it with a mini, according to the current rules.

basically, assuming that every one of your shots lands safely in a playable location, you do not have to carry a mini. If you are okay with that assumption... feel free to leave your mini markers at home :)

Even if your disc is suspended a few inches off the ground, you must mark your lie with a mini. In addition, players can ask you to mark your lie in situations such as your disc is overlapping yours on the ground or is on top of the basket.

I'm pretty sure that's covered by "landing safely in a playable location"... but, elaborate if you must ;)

Dang!

I swear, everytime I read the rulebook, I notice something else that I hadn't paid attention to before.

Here's one I noticed when searching for any new rules about re-teeing when an initial drive goes OB.

From Grouping/Sectioning section:

[ok - skipped a bit] D. When there are more entrants than can play together in one round, the field of competitors may be split into sections or pools.

E. If conditions differentially affect play among sections, the director may consider using a sectioning procedure for cut and advancement. Under this procedure, a proportionate number of advancing players are taken from each section by score and the scores are not carried forward.




Is this the rule pertaining to any kind of "Finals" arrangement whether it's a Final-9 or Final round? You know...the one where only the top half of each division proceeds onto the Finals.

If so, then I've got to say that I've never paid attention to the fact that it states "and the scores are not carried forward." That seems to imply that all previous scores are wiped clean and everyone starts with a "clean slate" so-to-speak. Can it be true?

It is for the case where different sections experience conditions that are so different that the scores from the different sections are not comparable.

The two groups are equally seeded by ratings.
Course 1 is open, course 2 is heavily wooded.

Let's say that the average score for group A on course 1 in the morning under calm conditions was 50. The average score for group B on course 2 on the other side of town was 48.

Gale force winds developed in the afternoon, and the average score for group B on course 1 was 62. The average score for group A on course 2 was 52.

The average total score for group 1 is 102
The average total score for group 2 is 110

If there is a cut or shuffle that combines the groups, cumulative totals are not comparable between the groups.
An equal percentage of each group should be taken and all scores up to that point wiped out.

There should be poll asking how many people are aware that there's a "Competition Manual" that accompanies the rule book. I strongly believe this information should be consoliated in to one resource along with ratings cut offs for division and sanctioning requirements for tiered events (ie B-Tier must have this much added cash etch). I'm so sick and tired of having to read the board for rules interpretations and competition manual related questions. And maybe this "all in one resource" could be sent out each year as you renew your PDGA membership....then no one has an excuse for not having a rule book/competition manual on hand. This would also be another "benefit" of renewing your PDGA membership (ie see Hawkgammons thread).

That's in the process. There are now printed Competition Manuals but I see they are not available for sale at the PDGA Pro Shop yet along with the Rulebooks. Hopefully, within a year or the next rules update, the Rulebook will remain being managed by the Rules Committee and the Competition guidelines by the Competition Committee. At least that's the proposal. But since the Rules Committee has overseen the competition section of the rules for so long, it's taking some time to make the transition and work out who will be in charge of what sections.

How do you spell beauracracy? Sounds like a silly case of pride and lack of communication. Well, when they figure it out, let them know having one book with everything in it will make it easier for everyone involved. And then to send a copy to each member come renewal time...that would be BRILLANT!

I don't think you'll find them in the same book because rules will be updated every three years and Competition guide possibly annually.

The rulebook should be reviewed anually and released as the official book for that year. Every three years is certainly not frequent enough for a sport as dynamic as ours currently is. By the time it's solid enough to last longer than that, so should be the competition manual. It makes sense to publish them as one book and it makes sense to have ratings classifications and tier requirements become appendices to that book. I'm sure chuck isn't exactly running the printing press... but this board is our main voice for such issues.

Contact Board members if you think a faster update cycle is needed. Having observed the process with volunteer committee members, I can't see annual updates being doable or even an appropriate process. Maybe every two years. You need at least a year to see how rules changes are working. If you do annual updates, you have to start the process in February to go thru the sequence of proposals, reviews, revisions, approvals, writing, formatting and printing. This doesn't provide more than a few months to observe rules changes in the field from the previous year.

With the Competition guide looking like it will be updated annually, maybe any new rules Q&A items could be included in that book so rules issues could be addressed for the years in-between full updates.

I would like to see a new rulebook/competition manual/Q&A every year with PDGA memberships/renewals. Each section doesnt necessarily need to be different year to year.

I just don't see it getting printed every year but posted online for downloading as changes occur.

I said it should be reviewed... that doesn't mean they *have* to change anything. Seems like a fairly simple process. The rules committee takes notes throughout the year of TD and player rule issues, and if there are any worth discussing, they discuss them at a regular (could be as infrequent as annual) meeting. Apply any changes deemed necessary and give the rulebook a fresh stamp of approval. If they don't want to spend a few extra bucks republishing, that's their problem and a gross misjudgment in my opinion. A sanctioning body exists to regulate, and what regulations could possibly be more important than the basic rules of the game?

I'm not saying I disagree, but I'm not on the Rules Committee. You'll need to contact the Board if you feel the cycle needs to sped up or improved.

I edited, laid out, and managed getting the rules booklets printed one year, as a volunteer. I don't remember the printing and mailing costs, but it was a big chunk of change. If I had been charging for the editing and layout, that would not have been cheap, either.

Completely re-doing them every year, including mailing them out annually, would create a fairly large, currently (I think.) unbudgeted-for expense.

I get the cost issue and I know it is a valid concern. But it goes back to what the PDGA spends the membership fees and tournament fees on. I will always support the PDGA as I feel they are striving to better the game for all involved. But I would rather receive an "all in one rules resource" when I renew and nothing else (not even DGWN). Again, there's nothing more important than the actual rules of the game...and by looking at the above poll, the PDGA needs to be proactive in resolving the apathy of it's members when it comes to the rules.

Terry, on another note....what do you think about combining the rule book, competition manual, and all of the sanctioning and ratings guidance?

Jon wrote: "Again, there's nothing more important than the actual rules of the game...and by looking at the above poll, the PDGA needs to be proactive in resolving the apathy of it's members when it comes to the rules"

I wonder how the poll response would differ if the question had been worded as: "have actually read [some part of] the Rule Book?" I think the percentages would go up, but not a lot.

My point is this: I think very few players read the entire rule book. Even fewer have read the Competition Manual (or are even aware of it). In spite of providing printed and electronic versions of the rules, many people opt to believe what their peers say while on the course without checking for themselves. I was once in that category, especially when I first started playing. Few of us ever, in any sport, seek out a rule book and familiarize ourselves with the ins and outs of the game (e.g., baseball, soccer, basketball). We just pick it up as we go (or as we learn it in school). I don't call that apathy, but rather its how we've been conditioned to learn sports.

While I think it would be great for everyone to have a working knowledge of the rules, my experience indicates that will never happen. I advocate that all players carry a copy, and when something sounds fishy, consult the booklet with the group. Hopefully there will be some congruence among the players in how they interpret the wording... :o :D

Cheers,
Steve

Got a meeting, quick reply:

I think we have a problem with making it clear what is a rule, what is a TD expectation, what is etc. It's not even clear, to me, when some of the rules apply during play or at other times.

Even though there is a distinct competition manual and rules book, I think there is too much undefined overlap between the two. That doesn't mean they can't be published together, but I think what is and is not a rule is getting fuzzier.

Sorry, that was less cogent than I would like but I've got to go do the talking heads thing.

I'd like to see a strategic effort to really clarify things.

Why not publish the current rules in the DGWN in addition to the standard rulebook? With the tremendous amount of ad space, there can't be much if any cost for the PDGA to send that out to its members. Adding a few pages for an updated rules book once per year should be negligible.

On the other hand, so few people actually read the DGWN aside from the cover... maybe putting the rules there would actually hurt awareness.

That's not right....

Funny, but just not right.

Actually, putting the entire rules into Disc Golf World each year might (a) save money from other methods of getting the rules out to players in print annually and (b) become a reason why every member, not just the current 75+ percent, wants to get Disc Golf World as part of their membership.

Still have the same problem, though, of publishing them on line and having people print them out - 8.5x11-inch paper doesn't fit well into your back pocket :cool:

Our club gave out an offical PDGA rulebook with our membership packages in '06 (along with a club stamped Nalgene bottle, club sticker, pencil and a bag tag--not bad for $20 I'd say!), which ended up being over 200 of them. The idea being that no Mile High Disc Golf Club member has an excuse for not knowing the rules. Does that mean everybody read them, NO! But I know a lot more players carry their rulebook with them. So I'd guess that someone has a rulebook in their bag in most groups at local tournaments. And we have regular rule discussions on our forum as well.
A couple tournaments have Jr./Rec players meetings start 15 minutes earlier than the rest to go over some of the basic fundamental rules, I always thought that was a great idea.
I think some kind of requirement for Open is a good idea too, like mandatory passing of the officials test (which I agree is too easy, we sat in a hotel room one evening between days at a tourney with about 10 of us and discussed each question until we came up with an agreeable answer, then we all wrote it down). What other sport can you sign up, pay the fee, and be a Pro. You could sign up and pay and not even know a single rule. And then the burden is put on the rest of the group, which isn't exactly fair either.
So, there are things that can be done locally that can get things going in the right direction.
-mikew

Seems to me that all of the reasons given for not publishing the two together are things that can be worked out eventually. But it may take time to devise the best way to do that because I think that this is one of those "growing pains" of an organization that is developing at an increasingly faster pace.

I don't think anyone would disagree that having both in one pocketsize book would be most convenient. They could be Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 of one publication, with cross references to each other. Additionally, perhaps over time the Competition Manual will not require annual revisions and the two can be revised on a bi-annual cycle, if needed. If at the end of two years everything is good, then leave it.

I have two questions in all of this. Why is it that the Competition Manual is revised annually? Shouldn't it's revisions be tested in the field as rules are? Perhaps it's just that it's a young document and needs annual attention.

The Competition manual doesn't HAVE to be revised every year. But enough things are changing that updates have been required. Minimum entry fees and mileage among different tier events are part of the manual and would be expected to change regularly in the future. I think some of those items could end up in an appendix that is updated each year rather than the whole manual, once things stabilize.

That's in the process. There are now printed Competition Manuals but I see they are not available for sale at the PDGA Pro Shop yet along with the Rulebooks. Hopefully, within a year or the next rules update, the Rulebook will remain being managed by the Rules Committee and the Competition guidelines by the Competition Committee. At least that's the proposal. But since the Rules Committee has overseen the competition section of the rules for so long, it's taking some time to make the transition and work out who will be in charge of what sections.



Actually, Chuck, the revised Competition Manual was not ready in time for the reprinting of the rules books that was done this fall. Had nothing to do with any communication with the RC at all. At least that's what Brian H. told me last fall. I tried to get the Competition Manual (used to be the NT Handbook) in printed form multiple times in my time as Comp Dir, but got shot down by the BoD. Then Nez actually suggested we print them in the same booklet with the Rules Book, which I thought was a fantastic idea. We were all set to do this, but Dave Gentry and Cris Bellinger decided to make a lot of changes to the document, which unfortunately weren't completed by the time the booklets needed to be printed.

Chap

Chap

I'd like to see them in the same book, too. But here is an example why it may not always work out with separate groups doing updates.

Folks, the rules are constantly reviewed by the Rules Committee. We keep a list of possible changes for the next edition, and we hash out ideas all of the time. Some of those ideas get codified into Q&A's, if we feel it's important enough to do so, and we feel there's something missing from the rules book that needs to be explained better.

The process for actually updating the rules book can be initiated either by the BoD or by the RC. Any actual changes in the rules can only be approved by the BoD. The RC makes recommendations to the BoD, and they say yea or nay. If you knew how much work actually goes into updating the rules book, you wouldn't be asking for an update every year. Even the USGA and the Royal & Ancient only update their rules for traditional golf every 2 years. We've typically been in the 4-5 year range (official rules editions were changed in 1984, 1990, 1997, 2002, and 2006). Sometimes it takes a couple of years before any needed changes become apparent. You don't want to change rules so fast, that you don't get a chance to see how they work. Same with the Competition System. Changing it too often only confuses players and TDs.

Rules Books are reprinted when PDGA HQ runs out of them, which recently has been about once a year.

Chap

Even the USGA and the Royal & Ancient only update their rules for traditional golf every 2 years.



Actually, it's every four years. I just got my USGA rulebook last week and they've just decided to send members a new rulebook evey year even though the changes are every four years.

Even the USGA and the Royal & Ancient only update their rules for traditional golf every 2 years.



Actually, it's every four years. I just got my USGA rulebook last week and they've just decided to send members a new rulebook evey year even though the changes are every four years.



That is what I would like to see. I'm in favor of updating rules and regulations when its required or necessary, not necessarily on a regular schedule. It could be every 10 years, or every 2, or whenever a change is needed. But I do think the rules and competition manual should be published together, and I do think the full booklet should be sent out every year.

The Competition manual doesn't HAVE to be revised every year. But enough things are changing that updates have been required. Minimum entry fees and mileage among different tier events are part of the manual and would be expected to change regularly in the future. I think some of those items could end up in an appendix that is updated each year rather than the whole manual, once things stabilize.



That's what I suspected; it's a young document and requires annual attention for now, at least to correct the two typos I found. :D

Okay, I'm home sick from work for the day and have nothing bettter to do.

Section 1.6 C (Grouping and Sectioning)
"In cases where fewer than three players are required to play together players, an official is required to accompany the group."

The word "players" before the comma is superfluous and should be deleted.

Section 2.1 G (General)
"A player registered as an Amatuer may compete in any Pro division for they are eligible based on age and gender."

The statement as published seems to declare that all Ams are, by default, eligible based on age and gender for any pro division. It should say "...Pro division for which they are eligible based on age and gender."

"In cases where fewer than three players are required to play together players, an official is required to accompany the group."




Not completely accurate either. Official is not required if the group of two is the whole division. In addition, in long events like Worlds, bottom card can be two without an official when they're not remotely close to even cashing. That's not a rule so it shouldn't be in there but it's a common practice that's approved.

Having only two on a card makes it really difficult to get a second on a rules call when needed.

Let me restate that I'm not suggesting that the rules must be updated every year, only that they should be "approved" every year. If changes were made, great. If not, stamp it with the BoD seal of approval for said year and publish away. That sort of thing doesn't necessitate layout or editing changes and is a good ooportunity for any small footnotes, clarifications, typo corrections, etc. that need to be made which don't necessarily affect the meaning of the rule.

I just think it would be good to be able to know that you've got the most current rulebook in hand based on the date. Printing every year also helps to ensure that every (registered) player at least owns a copy. I know this is currently the state of affairs, but I'd like to see it become the *intended and regular* state of affairs. That way there's a regular printing whether or not the PDGA has extras sitting around.

a good ooportunity for any small footnotes, clarifications, typo corrections, etc. that need to be made which don't necessarily affect the meaning of the rule.



I agree. A great opportunity to make typo corrections that don't effect the meaning of the rule.

A couple of typos were corrected in the most recent reprinting.

Rules don't need to be "approved" formally ever year. If the BoD and RC decide not to initiate a change, that is in effect, approving the current rules by not changing them. So in a sense, they are approved every year, although not with a formal vote.

Chap

ooportunity for any small footnotes



I think that's close to a good new word for editing. We need an annual "oops-ortunity" to edit, repair problems or approve. :)

Even the USGA and the Royal & Ancient only update their rules for traditional golf every 2 years.



Actually, it's every four years. I just got my USGA rulebook last week and they've just decided to send members a new rulebook evey year even though the changes are every four years.



What's strange about that, Chuck, is that the current USGA rules went into effect on January 1, 2006. In something dated January 1, 2004, USGA said they're going to update the rules every four years (that's a recent change...it used to be every 2 years). Yet they updated the rules again 2 years later anyway.

Chap

The new book I have dated for 2007 says the rules inside have been effective since Jan 1, 2006 last year. I suspect that the R&A and USGA were synchronizing their updates and the USGA had already updated for 2006. So, they only have a 2-year cycle to line up with the R&A for their joint 2008 update.

Rules don't need to be "approved" formally ever year. If the BoD and RC decide not to initiate a change, that is in effect, approving the current rules by not changing them. So in a sense, they are approved every year, although not with a formal vote.



I agree completely.

Is there a link on this web site for the Competition Manual? I haven't been able to find one (a link) and was only able to get access to the manual once someone posted the link on this board.

Home page, top right
click on :
2007 PDGA TD/Tour Information
(Updated 2/12/07)
click on
2007 PDGA Competition Manual (Updated 1/26/07)