I have a few questions regarding Amateur payout structures.

I have reviewed the PDGA payout tables and while I feel they are a bit too flat and too deep, I am okay with them. I've already confirmed with the PDGA that I can add money in whatever fashion I see fit, and I do appreciate that.

My questions revolve around *removing* money from Amateur payout to support Pro payout. Let me start by saying that I'm not considering doing this myself, but I have been asked lots of questions about the matter and I want to be sure that I'm giving the proper answers. What are the PDGA's guidelines on this practice? If this has been discussed before or if it's in the Competition Manual... I can't find it.

For example: I've seen an event that paid 23% of the total MA2 entry fee to the MA2 field. Even after factoring in the $4 A-tier PDGA per-head charge and a $15 player's package the percentage is still well below 50%. I won't use the real numbers because I'm not trying to call anyone out, but it basically worked like this (using the actual percentages):

$50 entry
50 players
$590 total payout (23.6% of the total)

Granted, I don't know the "retail" value of the player's package but I estimated it at $15 which I think was generous given the contents. remove that and the PDGA's fee, the players still put in $31 each to the prize pool, taking it down to $1550. There's still almost $1000 missing, and that's just from the MA2 field. The same was done for *all* of the other amateur fields... but not consistently. Here's how each division's payout breaks down based on the total entry pool, not counting player's packages or PDGA fees:

MA1 - 48.5%
MM1 - 52.9%
MG1 - 48.8%
FW1 - 42.2%
FG1 - 51.6%
MA2 - 23.6%
FW3 - 40.0%

again, this isn't about calling one tournament out it's about determining the proper guidelines for the practice of removing cash from amateur divisions. Is there anything in the rules or comp. manual that should dictate how these players are paid out? Shouldn't it at least be uniform across all divisions? In this and many cases, players drove several hours to come play a large event but didn't know in advance that they would effectively be sponsoring the Pro divisions and that their level of sponsorship would vary based on the division they participated in. If there isn't a guideline for this now.. should there be?

The total compensation at retail value for Ams as a percentage of base entry fees (after PDGA, admin, tour and greens fees are deducted) is set for each tier. See page 4 www.pdga.com/documents/2008/08TourStandards.pdf (http://www.pdga.com/documents/2008/08TourStandards.pdf)

As long as these are met, the TD is able to do whatever they wish with profits from retail/wholesale differential and sponsorship. Based on your example, that event likely didn't comply with the guidelines. However, CTP value needs to also be included in the total payout for Ams.

You should send an email to the TD and ask if he can send you the PDGA TD report that actually spells out all the event expenses and shows the PDGA recommended payouts.

Until you have that, you are simply guessing at the expenses and the cost/value of the prizes.

Here are a few expenses you may not have taken into account:

Trophies - the cost can be subtracted from the entry fees and the value considered part of the payout.
Park Fees - In So Cal these can be substantial.
Printing - For the registration forms, scorecards, tee signs etc, etc? This is not generally free.
Meals/Player parties - These expenses can also be deducted from the entry fees and the value added to the payout.
Player Packages and prizes - Just because you figure a disc is not worth $17.00 doesn't mean the TD figured it that way. A lot of players seem to think just because they can find a person to sell them a Star disc for $13.00 means the value should be $13.00. It is quite alright for the TD to value a disc using MSRP.
CTP's - These are an expense and add value to the payout.



Again, until you can see the report and see the actual expenses you are guessing.

I don't have info on the CTP prizes but I can already see that I should have counted on a $25 player's pack instead of a $15 one... I'm not sure how "retail" is determined but I know that $25 is generous for what they got... that's beside the point. Also, is the PDGA per-head fee to be included in the Am payout total?

now I have a new question :)

The PDGA has agreed that as long as I comply with the basic guidelines, I can distribute added cash as I see fit. I see a gray area though, when this concept is combined with the original post. At my upcoming C-tier, I have the option of only paying out 85% to amateurs. I'm not going to do that... but hypothetically, could one take that 15% and redistribute it as "added cash" to the *same* division, thereby "bending" the payout structure to be a bit more top heavy?

bottom line is you can pay out however you please- just expect lots of whining if it strays too far from the recommendations/expectations.

I'm all for bending the payout so the top finishers get substantially more than those below. Added cash should goto the first place or top three in each division in AM only events that draw in some decent sponsorship. My payout thought process is from that of poker tournaments where the higher you finish the better you get paid. the difference between 2nd & 3rd or 1st & 2nd should be larger than the $10 I've seen in many payouts lately.

Trophies - the cost can be subtracted from the entry fees and the value considered part of the payout.
Park Fees - In So Cal these can be substantial.
Printing - For the registration forms, scorecards, tee signs etc, etc? This is not generally free.
Meals/Player parties - These expenses can also be deducted from the entry fees and the value added to the payout.
Player Packages and prizes - Just because you figure a disc is not worth $17.00 doesn't mean the TD figured it that way. A lot of players seem to think just because they can find a person to sell them a Star disc for $13.00 means the value should be $13.00. It is quite alright for the TD to value a disc using MSRP.
CTP's - These are an expense and add value to the payout.

Again, until you can see the report and see the actual expenses you are guessing.


I agree that it's important to know the facts first, and that's the main reason I'm not giving specifics. That said, I'm very familiar with MSRP and my statements are not based on what I can sell a disc for on eBay :).

Also, in the above quote, which tournament expenses can be factored into the Am payout? CTP prizes make sense but I've already written my printing, park fees, etc. off as "cost of doing business" and have never considered taking it out of a prize pool.

I honestly am not trying to start an argument over this, I just think it should be discussed. As a TD I want to be sure I know that I'm doing everything as close to "by the book" as possible.

The net entry fee (what the players gave you minus PDGA fees, park fees, greens fees, series fees, non-member fees, etc) plus the retail value of anything the players get non gratis (provided food, CTP's, retail amount of players packs, trophies, Ring of Fire prizes, drinks, supply costs, etc) can be included in the TD report towards the total value of the event. The payout percentage for Am's is based on the total net entry they put into the event versus the total retails value they got out of the event. By the PDGA guidlines, the event has to give the Am's 85% back (in event value) that they gave the event in net entry fees.

Also, I may have misunderstood, but it looks like your initial numbers were showing the percentage of the field (each division) that finished "in the cash"...not the percentage of the players entry fee that got paid back to them (in event value). Did I get that wrong?

Regarding expenses, a TD can deduct the cost of running the event from the entry fees. Otherwise, the TD (or the club) is paying money out of their own pocket. Expenses include PDGA player fees, local club or series fees, printing, postage, park fees, advertising, equipment rental, etc. No one should be expecting TD's to spend their own money on this. Try to pay the $1,000+ fee for La Mirada Park permits out of your own pocket and then tell me if you think it is ok for a TD to pay these expenses on their own.


Regarding payouts - As a TD, it is my personal opinion that the payout tables provide the "minimum" payout guidelines. That being said, if I want to use the added cash to award the first place Advanced player a $200 target instead of the $60.00 suggested by the PDGA tables, I interpret that to be OK. If I want to pay $45.00 instead of the $60.00, that would be a cause for concern.

Regarding the C-Tier. I think you have come up with a usable loophole: pay out at the minimum recommendation of 85% then use the 15% "TD Fee" as added cash in any way you see fit. If you want to use the added cash to bump the Pro purse or to pay more to the top 5 or 10 Am players, I personally don't see a problem with that.

Again, the only problem the PDGA or any players should have with payout is when payouts are less than the minimum recommendations - after expenses.

JRoc - I calculated based on the entire field, such that:

X players in the division x $Y entry = prize purse
total of monies paid via "payout" to that division = actual prize purse

That's how I got the percentages I posted. After removing the player's packs and PDGA fees, the percentages get higher but nowhere close to the 100% PDGA guideline for an A-tier. Also, one must assume that the players packs and other "event value" provided to each division are equal. Even if enough "event value" could be accounted for to justify the lower payouts... the drastic difference in percentage paid out from division to division is still suspect.

Discette -

I completely understand the need for TDs to generate profit and I'm also very familiar with the costs of running an event. I'm not suggesting that the TD simply "eat" these costs, I'm just looking for the regulations surrounding how to pay for them. Perhaps I haven't dug deep enough, but I can't find documentation to support the statement that "a TD can deduct the cost of running the event from the entry fees". I'd very much like to be corrected in this matter. I've always just assumed that sponsorship and merch profits were the proper methods of covering these expenses.

From the tour standards:


� TD/Host Club Event Fee: Provided an event meets or exceeds tier payout requirements, TDs/clubs are allowed to retain 10% of the net entry fees as an event organization and management fee up to the following maximums: NT $750, A $400, B $200, C $100. TDs/clubs may choose to donate this fee back to the event as part of their sponsorship.




Edit: But that doesn't talk about expenses. Just profit.

"a TD can deduct the cost of running the event from the entry fees".


They can't to determine the base entry fee against which payout percentage is judged. If the total entry fee is $50, you can deduct PDGA fee, credit card processing fee, Series fee, Ace fund, greens fee, meal fee (if identified as included) to determine the base entry fee upon which the payout percentage will be calculated. General admin costs such as printing, office supplies, advertising, and shelter fees are not deductible to determine base entry fee. A greens fee is only where a pay-for-play course or a pay-to-enter the park is involved and those fees are essentially passed thru to the collecting entity. In theory, a park and/or shelter rental fee could potentially be the equivalent of greens fees allocated among all players to reduce the base fee but I don't believe that connection has been allowed in the base entry fee calculations yet.

Am payout for an "A" tier is 110%(not 100%)...Certain events have done that for years...but people keep going back, so why would they stop

I stand corrected :).

I'm not looking to point out errors with a specific event or suggest that someone change their methods. What I *am* looking for is documentation to support those methods. If the way that this example event was done is okay with the PDGA... then my perspective on a few things changes. I also would then have more options on how to calculate payout in my own events, and I can better explain the payout in other events to people who ask but don't necessarily read these boards.

Get a blank version of the TD report and enter projected numbers for your event and see how the %'s work out...I have done this in the past to estimate the amount of cash and merch we need to have on hand for payout

funny you should mention that, as I was doing exactly what you suggested right before reading your post :)

as an aside... I'll never be one to knock established events or the methods of established TDs as long as the players are getting enough of what they want to keep them coming back. What I don't like, however, is hearing from an Am (this happened last night at a mini, in fact) that he drove 5 hours each way to play a tournament, paid a $50 entry fee, took 3rd in his division, and got two discs that he'll never use as his payout. He said he didn't even receive a t-shirt... and that he will never be going back to that city to play golf again. Now, I tried to find a way to explain all of that to him. I tried to find a way to make it seem okay and explain that there is more to the DG tournament experience than payout (I honestly believe this). The person I was talking to is a very reasonable individual from whom I've *never* heard a complaint about a tournament. I still couldn't convince him that it was worth his time and gas money to go back next year.

I started this thread in part to find a reasonable explanation for what this player experienced. I still haven't found one. I also was looking for some guidelines that would define and hopefully allow me more flexibility in payout structure, and I *have* found that.

back to topic - I believe I will try out the C-tier payout-bending with the titleDISC Open. Nothing crazy, but I'll take that 15% and re-add it to the top of each division along with the added cash I am already putting in. I think I can make the 13-person MPO field pay $500 for first place which isn't bad for a 1-day C-tier :). I think I can do that without taking money from any other divisions. If I succeed... I'll be using that method for all future C-tier events.

:eek: Look at the MA2 payouts for the GTO.

:eek: Look at the MA2 payouts for the GTO.





Ok MA2 shouldn't complain about being shafted on plastic. Heck they should just get a nice players pack and trophies to the top 5.

:eek: Look at the MA2 payouts for the GTO.





Ok MA2 shouldn't complain about being shafted on plastic. Heck they should just get a nice players pack and trophies to the top 5.



A lightning disc does not equal a nice players pack. Other than that I agree. I played The Memorial this year and was happy with the players pack only structure. It was also advertised as such.
I didn't play the GTO but did think about and look into it. I don't recall anyone saying MA2 would be sponsoring MA1 and open.

:eek: Look at the MA2 payouts for the GTO.





Ok MA2 shouldn't complain about being shafted on plastic. Heck they should just get a nice players pack and trophies to the top 5.




I agree, but until that is the official PDGA stance, players should be complaining things look a little fishy.

PS-I was very glad to see The Memorial pull off their "experiment." Gives me hope that we are moving in a better direction.

I don't agree that MA2 shouldn't complain about being shafted on plastic... it's a division like any other. They shouldn't expect added cash and huge fanfare, but they should expect to get out what they put in, at least as much as any other division.

As a person at the Am/Pro ratings border, I wanted to add a few thoughts to the discussion.

I don't ever expect to be a serious, world-class golfer -- it's just not something I have the time to practice to get to that level. But I enjoy the competitive environment, comaraderie, stat-tracking, mental challenge, etc... that are part of tournament play.

That said, I want everyone to have a good time and I want everyone to play where they will have the most fun. People who are playing AM shouldn't let their fun be determined by winning plastic. I usually win plastic at tournaments, and often have given away half the discs before I even get home... to me, the AM payout is the least important element of the tournament.

However, I am also good at math and not independently wealthy, so I like to have a high return on my investment of time and money.

As far as my time goes, I want to have as enjoyable a time as possible for me to consider a tournament to be the best way possible for me to spend my weekend. I also want to keep out-of-pocket expenses as low as possible so it's a good value for my money.

That said -- things that increase my enjoyment and therefore my ROI, include a great tournament atmosphere -- and that includes great food (between rounds and at the end of the day are both great, if you can swing it); lots of random ways for people to win (CTPs are especially good, since they don't take extra time; they also help people who might be having a bad round to have a few shots to look forward to help keep their heads in the game); clearly marked courses and tee distances; short player meetings/closing ceremonies.

I know a lot of this has been discussed -- ad naseum -- in other places, but I think it is helpful to keep in mind here as well. The thing all players are looking for is great ROI on their time and money.

For me, in many ways, I prefer to play in advanced, because it it is often a lot higher ROI -- my entry fee is lower, stress during the round is lower (because there's not $50 riding on a missed putt); I've already got a players package to offset my entry fee, etc... basically, even if I come in first and only take home two discs, I've had a good day.

I am a fan of keeping the payouts flat and deep in AM -- spread the love around -- and keep people's ROI as high as possible for as many people as possible. If folks really want to battle one another for money, they can play pro. Am's shouldn't be playing for payout, they should be playing for fun.

I also thing this would help lessen any "bagging" claims -- if payouts at the top of AM divisions are low, it lessens the worry that people are playing AM for the winnings -- if we start adding lots of money to the top of AM divisions, it encourages people who are playing for merchandise to keep playing for merchandise.

I'm okay with moving some money from AM to Pro, as long as AMs are still getting a high ROI from the tourney experience. But I also would love to see tourneys with a flatter entry fee structure.

I find it rather unfortunate in some ways that I've improved to a 967 rating -- disc golf is a weird sport in that the better we get, the higher our entry fees become, but that isn't related to us having a better time or not. In some ways, it is backwards, because as our fees (our investment) go up, a high ROI becomes harder and harder to achieve.

I would be a huge fan of a tourney where all entry fees for every division were the same price -- let's say $30 -- and payouts were deep and flat for AMs, with lots of CTPs, and a couple of bucks from each AM entry were added to help with the pro payout.

As long as lower divisions cost less than higher divisions, there is incentive for people to play to the lowest division they can just to keep their costs low for the weekend and their ROI as high as possible.

Any tournament I show up for, I have two options: play advanced and save money, win a few discs, play relaxed, take home a players package, etc... OR play Pro and spend more money, win nothing, take home nothing, and play with people who are more likely to be stressed out about their shots.

Which sounds like a better way to spend my day?

Anyway, just things to think about as you are redistributing monies -- whatever you can do to make the whole experience more valuable for players is what you should do -- and I am totally against stacking higher winnings for the top few AMs. (Even though I am likely to be one of those top few AMs) -- encourage AMs to play for fun, not for fat prizes. If people want to play for fat prizes, encourage them to move up to Pro.

If your original questions weren't just stalking horses for a broader discussion of why-ams-should-form-their-own-organization-because-this-is-the-Pdga, Chuck's post points to a document giving you the % standards for am payouts at different tiers.

The only way I know of to answer the question "% of what?" is to work backward form the TD report, if it still shows % values for ams and pros. There is no document that says what you can and cannot deduct from the entry fee or the payout to get net payout as a % of base entry fee.

From having worked with the TD report previously I know this formula is pretty close:

Am Payout=(Value of player pack + Per player value of payout + per player value of sidegames that are included in the entry fee like CTPs or whatever + per player value of food that is included + per player value of trophies + per player value of pretty much anything else you give them during the tournament) X Number of Ams

Total Am Entry Fees = (Actual entry fee - (PDGA Player fee + Series fee + Club fee + course use fee)) X Number of Ams.

I don't recall the TD report allowing the TD to charge the sanctioning or insurance fees against the ams in whole or in part. Certainly nothing in there lets you charge your miscellaneous expenses like printing and cardstock and paint against the ams. The TD also has to pay for his own beer and ice. :D

I'm not going to get drawn into the rest of the conversation. If you don't like am-scam tournaments, don't play them. If you want to get even, remind everyone next year a few weeks in advance how much the tournament sucked this year. If you want to do something positive, organize a group of ams to run tournaments for ams. Btching here after the fact is probably the least effective response. I know from at least 10 years of experience.

I certainly appreciate your point of view and for the most part I personally share the same motivation for playing a tournament. I have plenty of plastic, I definitely don't need more. In fact, I usually opt for the full-color collectors disc that I'll never throw just because I like having something to remember a tournament by.

While my personal motivations are very similar to yours, I also appreciate that the majority of disc golfers do not play for the same reasons. Even many of those who do not *need* to win plastic still judge the value of their tournament by the dollar amount they (can potentially) take home. Other players actually *do* need the merch.

I'm very much in favor of making a win mean something. I also feel like winning a few times means its time to move up and be competitive in the next division. Players advance their skill level at greatly different rates... and I think that the current ratings structure that the PDGA uses is very fair.

I think that winning, even if it's MA4, should be worth something. Whether it be a trophy, a special disc, or just a decent amount of payout more than 2nd place, it should be significant. I don't agree with a payout structure where 1st place is awarded only 5% or 10% more than second. I say if we're going to play for dollar amounts, even in plastic, then those dollar amounts are always going to be significant to the players.

With my next event I'm really focusing on showing the City that competitive disc golf can be a very good thing. My main goal is to impress them to the point that they get excited about putting in more courses and having more big events. The best way that I know of to impress the City is to make sure that all my players have the best tournament experience possible. I don't have to agree with player motivations in order to understand them. In the end, the players are the ones that support my events so as many of the players as possible are going to get what they want out of the event. If I get feedback that more people would rather play for low entry fees and trophy-only payout... then next year the tournament will move that direction. If everyone loves the top-heavy payout structure, I'll keep that.

Mr. Brakel has mentioned an entry fee structure that I really like. He calls it "half-in" and I think there's some real potential in that idea. I also really like the Memorial's "experiment" and might give that idea a shot at some point. I think both methods have the ability to please more players than the standard-ish payout structure that most events employ. Next year's titleDISC Open will utilize the most effective payout and entry fee structure that I can find. Like I said... whatever makes the most people happy.

Happy players = fun tournament.
fun tournament = good turnout
good turnout + happy players = fun tournament for me :)

hopefully you don't see me as part of the "bit[/b]ching" because that was never my intention. I really just wanted to find the areas of flexibility in the payout structure so that I could carve up something that I think the players will like. The rest of it is just a sore spot that I shouldn't have brought to this thread... so I apologize for that.

BTW - is "am-scam" a common method in your part of the world (no, I don't mean you specifically)? I guess we're just not used to it around here... or at least not to that extent.

You should payout the required percentages of entry fees plus tier-required added cash in accordance with the PDGA quidelines. Any added merch or cash above that can be spread around in any way you see fit. Take the series bonus payouts for example, they are essentially additional added cash being paid above the PDGA standard payout.

The biggest point to all of this is to deliver what the players expect. Absent any prior notice, the standard payout at nearly 100% of entry minus PDGA fees is expected.

If you plan to deviate from that model in any significant manner, the players should be told, and told before they sign up. Deciding after the event is nearly full (as has been done in the past) is not a good idea.

The beauty of the disc golf in a thriving area like Texas is that there is generally a market for whatever type of event you wish to provide. You just have to pick the type that you enjoy running and find a way to get the word out to the players that will enjoy it. As long as the players know what you are planning to provide ahead of time and you meet the PDGA guidelines, the rest is up to you.

the TDO will definitely meet PDGA guidelines :p

I just wanted to be sure I knew exactly what those guidelines were so that in my quest to improve payout I didn't bend or break any rules.

the TDO will definitely meet PDGA guidelines :p

I just wanted to be sure I knew exactly what those guidelines were so that in my quest to improve payout I didn't bend or break any rules.



enhancing payout has never been a rule breaker :cool:

I love Bruce's "half-in" idea, and hope it spreads.

I also agree that winning should have something special, but to me, the best special something is a special disc -- Ideally, get someone to do a special dye-job that commemorates the tournament and a first place win. A one-of-a-kind, well-crafted disc that makes a player proud to win it, and it is worth more for it's style and for its emotional value than it just simply being "another disc" -- the cost of the dye job should be pretty minimal, but would allow something special for 1st place... just a thought.

I don't expect to be down in TX for any tournaments anytime soon, but thanks for being open to listen to people's advice in the interest of being fair and keeping as many players happy as possible. I for one am greatly appreciative of tournament directors like you -- all tournament directors really -- who do all of the volunteer work that makes a tournament happen.

I should add while I'm thinking about it -- one other thing that I think adds huge mental value to most players is same-day score reporting on the Web. RADL does this better than any where I know of -- they've got the scores entered into the PDGA with preliminary round ratings almost before the round is over (definitely by the time you drive home from the course). I think a lot of players who are stats-junkies (and there are a lot like this), give a lot of bonus points to tourneys that prioritize getting scores up as quickly as possible. And for TDs, this is essentially a free, easy way to garner goodwill from players and make the event seem more professional.

Good luck with your upcoming event(s).

As long as lower divisions cost less than higher divisions, there is incentive for people to play to the lowest division they can just to keep their costs low for the weekend and their ROI as high as possible.




Quoting just a small part of the whole essay, that is the most eloquent way to state how I feel I have ever read. Why haven't I moved up to advanced yet? The added costs and therefore lower ROI.

What I *am* looking for is documentation to support those methods.



Did you ever find official documentation that explains specifically what is and what is not allowable to be deducted from entry fees?

I did not find any really specific documentation, but as I understand it, we're just supposed to use common sense. If you advertise that the event is benefiting a charity, you can deduct the contribution as a fee. If you are giving a player's pack, you can deduct that too. You should not deduct things like administrative costs (park use fees, sanctioning fees, etc). Not that I agree with it... but that seems to be the acceptable way to do things.

Player packs are not deductible because their value is part of the payout calculation. If the Park Use fee is a per player fee like a "pay for play" or "pay to enter park" course, then that's a deductible item. If it's a fee like rent for a shelter, that's part of the tournament overhead and not used to reduce the base fee for payout calcs.

I think it would help if the PDGA could come up with some more detailed information regarding event payouts: What should be deducted from the net entry fees, what should not be deducted from the net entry fees, what is net entry fee, how side games factor in, handling charity events, etc..

There was a brief explination in the 2007 (maybe 2006) PDGA Tour standards. That helped me figure things out, but theres a lot of TD's out there that dont know exactly how to calculate all the finances correctly for the TD report (I may still be doing it wrong...who knows...)

Player packs are not deductible because their value is part of the payout calculation.


To me, this seems contradictory. If you can't deduct the value of the player packs from the payout calculation, then how are they figured in as part of the payout value? when using the PDGA's scoring spreadsheet, one must somehow deduct the value of the player packs from the entry fee, and the only way to do that is through the "fee" column. If there is another way to do that, please explain.

What TDs do is enter a negative value in the "Enter Added Cash (or deduction) here>" box for each division on the Am Payout page equal to the value of the player packs given out in that division so the payout calculations are based on the amount of entry fees remaining after the player pack cost/value has been deducted.

I agree that the items included and excluded in the payout calculation needs to be detailed somewhere. I thought it was available in writing but it doesn't appear to be. We'll work to get something in the TD report and the Tour Guides to help with that.

"a TD can deduct the cost of running the event from the entry fees".


They can't to determine the base entry fee against which payout percentage is judged. If the total entry fee is $50, you can deduct PDGA fee, credit card processing fee, Series fee, Ace fund, greens fee, meal fee (if identified as included) to determine the base entry fee upon which the payout percentage will be calculated. General admin costs such as printing, office supplies, advertising, and shelter fees are not deductible to determine base entry fee. A greens fee is only where a pay-for-play course or a pay-to-enter the park is involved and those fees are essentially passed thru to the collecting entity. In theory, a park and/or shelter rental fee could potentially be the equivalent of greens fees allocated among all players to reduce the base fee but I don't believe that connection has been allowed in the base entry fee calculations yet.



Chuck, in what PDGA document are the allowable deductions documented? Was there an old doc somewhere?

Thanks,
ERic

I'm not sure there ever was a published document. I know we have had some correspondence on this among the Competition Committee and between the PDGA office and myself when developing the Excel TD report. I have this on my to-do list so we can get this published in a few docs were TDs can see it.