Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Ian Mackenzie on April 03, 2023, 04:30:23 PM
-
....Blackstone instead of the Saudi PIF.
...And Ernie Els was the CEO, not Greg Norman.
Would there still be the underlying enmity, or would the parties get together and build the new Super League?
I think the Saudi PIF thing may be overplayed as their involvement in F-1, Premier League and Womens' Golf is well established.
Is this whole stinking mess around LIV really only a reflection of its CEO - the Great White Bitter Shark?
-
For me, the PIF is the problem. Couldn't care less about the rest of the operation. The F1 circles I run in are equally against the Saudi race and any efforts the PIF may be making to take over the sport.
-
PIF's investments are so prolific that its challenging associate the PIF as the problem while simultaneously dissociating where the PIF's money already exists.
-
The source of the funds is a problem.
Mickelson's off the record comments were pretty clear on who they got into bed with.
The bigger issue though is the trashing of the PGA tour by some of the players on the way out the door. Forgetting of course that the PGA tour created a place for them to play, grow and then jump to this new tour.
You also have all the false statements of wanting to play less and then suddenly travelling more to get World Ranking points.
Plus the trashing of the tour at the same time groups suing to get into the FedEx playoffs and European tour events.
It all just doesn't sit with some of us who believe that golf is played by ladies and gentleman and taking some of the actions/comments they have taken just don't align with that philosophy.
-
PIF's investments are so prolific that its challenging associate the PIF as the problem while simultaneously dissociating where the PIF's money already exists.
I agree. Folks are drawing highly arbitrary lines in the sand about the origin and amount of dirty money. For some reason folks turn a blind eye to the realities of dirty money in our economy. It's the American way to pick and choose the new enemy of the month among a viper's nest of countries and corporations. I am waiting for the day when the US gets serious about China and Russia. These are the hard and more important questions of our time.
Even so, I dislike LIV and hope it fails. I am disappointed in the product. LIV did serve as a springboard for radical Tour changes. However, it's only made the Tour more insular when I hoped the opposite would happen.
Ciao
-
A LIV by any other name (or backers) would have still garnered the aggressive retort by the pga tour.
There have been other times there were challenges and the tour always responded with more money distributed.
The Saudis gave a convenient black hat to identify in the fight, but the fight would have been there regardless
-
Interesting hypothetical, yet I'm certain that neither Schwarzman nor Gray would ever (even for a nanosecond) consider something so financially irresponsible.
Instead, a better party might be a Russian Oligarch or the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund.
-
PIF's investments are so prolific that its challenging associate the PIF as the problem while simultaneously dissociating where the PIF's money already exists.
I agree. Folks are drawing highly arbitrary lines in the sand about the origin and amount of dirty money. For some reason folks turn a blind eye to the realities of dirty money in our economy. It's the American way to pick and choose the new enemy of the month among a viper's nest of countries and corporations. I am waiting for the day when the US gets serious about China and Russia. These are the hard and more important questions of our time.
Even so, I dislike LIV and hope it fails. I am disappointed in the product. LIV did serve as a springboard for radical Tour changes. However, it's only made the Tour more insular when I hoped the opposite would happen.
Ciao
Ben and Sean, I agree it's complicated, I'm just of the opinion that you've got to start somewhere and Saudi is as good a place as any. I'm an incrementalist, if my whole house is a mess, I just have to pick a spot and get started.
-
Steve nailed it,
I don't see an alternate backer either because I don't think anyone else would have thrown insane money at such a venture.
P.S. In other news, another setback for LIV players who want to keep their DP Tour memberships and/or play in those events
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/golf/report-dp-world-tour-secures-major-legal-victory-against-liv-golf/ar-AA19sjV5?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=a252d7ab8b574b4d9e92555ccfa61bce&ei=26
-
Too legit to quit
-
Steve nailed it,
I don't see an alternate backer either because I don't think anyone else would have thrown insane money at such a venture.
P.S. In other news, another setback for LIV players who want to keep their DP Tour memberships and/or play in those events
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/golf/report-dp-world-tour-secures-major-legal-victory-against-liv-golf/ar-AA19sjV5?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=a252d7ab8b574b4d9e92555ccfa61bce&ei=26 (https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/golf/report-dp-world-tour-secures-major-legal-victory-against-liv-golf/ar-AA19sjV5?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=a252d7ab8b574b4d9e92555ccfa61bce&ei=26)
The penny will drop once you grasp that LIV isn't about golf for the Saudis. I am not convinced they chose the right vehicle for their goals, but golf is merely the vehicle.
Ciao
-
The source of the funds is a big deal for fans. If it wasn't for that then there wouldn't be as much reason to have animosity towards LIV.
But I am guessing that the tour would be fighting back just as much as it wasn't funded by LIV. I am old enough to remember when the WHA launched and the NHL did lots of stuff out of spite to try to block them from being successful. In that context it is just all about the money.
-
In addition to Saudi bankrolling, the LIV using traitor criminal comrade Trumpsky courses was a major problem. Also all the LIVers except Harold not telling the truth and saying they took the money over morals. ::)
-
Without taking a side in the PGA Tour/LIV imbroglio it’s clear that LIV had a very good showing at the Masters. Two of the top three finishers and three of the top six were from LIV. Twelve of the eighteen players in the field made the cut. I would think that a public relations/marketing blitz isn’t far off with those results as the headline. Something to the effect of “Who says these guys aren’t tournament tested?”
-
Without taking a side in the PGA Tour/LIV imbroglio it’s clear that LIV had a very good showing at the Masters. Two of the top three finishers and three of the top six were from LIV. Twelve of the eighteen players in the field made the cut. I would think that a public relations/marketing blitz isn’t far off with those results as the headline. Something to the effect of “Who says these guys aren’t tournament tested?”
I am not convinced LIV had much if anything to do with the Masters results. These guys were good before there was a LIV. However, I remain convinced that any world ranking system which ignores LIV players is a scam.
Ciao
-
Scam isn't the word I'd use, after all the OWGR are up front about not giving ranking points for LIV tournaments. The description I'd give the ranking system is that it's deeply flawed.
Niall
-
It’s spite. A flawed system is better than a happy Kingdom.
-
Without taking a side in the PGA Tour/LIV imbroglio it’s clear that LIV had a very good showing at the Masters. Two of the top three finishers and three of the top six were from LIV. Twelve of the eighteen players in the field made the cut. I would think that a public relations/marketing blitz isn’t far off with those results as the headline. Something to the effect of “Who says these guys aren’t tournament tested?”
But it is interesting that the guys that finished at the top (mickelson, Reed and Kopeka) didn't really need to do so as they still get into majors, at least for a few years. The guys from LIV that really could have used a top 12 finish in the Masters to get invited back next year did not. Players like Gooch, Ancer, Pereira, Kokrak, Niemann, Varner, etc. No LIV golfer earned their way into the 2024 Masters on the weekend. Niemann came closest at T16.
-
Without taking a side in the PGA Tour/LIV imbroglio it’s clear that LIV had a very good showing at the Masters. Two of the top three finishers and three of the top six were from LIV. Twelve of the eighteen players in the field made the cut. I would think that a public relations/marketing blitz isn’t far off with those results as the headline. Something to the effect of “Who says these guys aren’t tournament tested?”
But it is interesting that the guys that finished at the top (mickelson, Reed and Kopeka) didn't really need to do so as they still get into majors, at least for a few years. The guys from LIV that really could have used a top 12 finish in the Masters to get invited back next year did not. Players like Gooch, Ancer, Pereira, Kokrak, Niemann, Varner, etc. No LIV golfer earned their way into the 2024 Masters on the weekend. Niemann came closest at T16.
Seconded.
Also, is nobody going to say it? Brooks was great... for 54 holes.
-
Also, is nobody going to say it? Brooks was great... for 54 holes.
Very true, but look at Old Man Phil. He had the lowest score for the final round.
-
Also, is nobody going to say it? Brooks was great... for 54 holes.
Very true, but look at Old Man Phil. He had the lowest score for the final round.
He was also only good for 54 holes, just not in a row.
-
....Blackstone instead of the Saudi PIF.
Then the PGA Tour's consultants would advise them to repeat the "you shouldn't want to take that bad, dirty private equity money..." talking point so that Jay & all of his cronies can continue to protect their own best interests...
-
8) Blackstone??? I wonder what kind of ESG considerations they'd be pushing on the LIV investment decisions???
While the PGA Tour had 232 players with 2022 earnings of $258,744,576 recorded,
there probably wouldn't be LIV Golf prize money standings totaling $304,162,697 for their 67 golfers:
1. Dustin Johnson
Events: 10
Earnings: $36,802,167*
*Johnson was awarded $18,000,000 for being crowned the 2022 LIV Golf Individual Champion
2. Branden Grace
Events: 10
Earnings: $19,131,332*
*Grace was awarded $8,000,000 for finishing second in the 2022 LIV Golf points list
3. Peter Uihlein
Events: 10
Earnings: $16,206,452*
*Uihlein was awarded $4,000,000 for finishing third in the 2022 LIV Golf points list
4. Patrick Reed
Events: 9
Earnings: $13,322,714
5. Talor Gooch
Events: 10
Earnings: $11,049,900
6. Pat Perez
Events: 9
Earnings: $9,653,900
7. Carlos Ortiz
Events: 9
Earnings: $9,053,647
8. Charles Howell III
Events: 8
Earnings: $8,720,333
9. Brooks Koepka
Events: 9
Earnings: $8,597,100
10. Cameron Smith
Events: 7
Earnings: $8,429,000
11. Charl Schwartzel
Events: 10
Earnings: $8,403,000
12. Eugenio Lopez-Chacarra
Events: 9
Earnings: $8,020,500
13. Sergio Garcia
Events: 10
Earnings: $7,715,786
14. Louis Oosthuizen
Events: 10
Earnings: $7,086,500
15. Paul Casey
Events: 8
Earnings: $6,506,367
16. Henrik Stenson
Events: 7
Earnings: $5,865,000
17. Abraham Ancer
Events: 9
Earnings: $5,595,500
18. Matthew Wolff
Events: 9
Earnings: $5,352,833
19. Anirban Lahiri
Events: 7
Earnings: $5,281,000
20. Joaquin Niemann
Events: 7
Earnings: $5,194,286
21. Chase Koepka
Events: 10
Earnings: $4,590,964
22. Bryson DeChambeau
Events: 9
Earnings: $4,555,750
23. Lee Westwood
Events: 10
Earnings: $4,535,914
24. Hennis Du Plessis
Events: 4
Earnings: $4,530,000
25. Jason Kokrak
Events: 8
Earnings: $4,319,500
26. Danny Lee
Events: 2
Earnings: $4,273,000
27. Matt Jones
Events: 10
Earnings: $4,241,700
28. Richard Bland
Events: 10
Earnings: $3,866,833
29. Sam Horsfield
Events: 10
Earnings: $3,884,000
30. Ian Poulter
Events: 10
Earnings: $3,556,333
31. Marc Leishman
Events: 7
Earnings: $3,475,400
32. Laurie Canter
Events: 10
Earnings: $3,184,950
33. Wade Ormsby
Events: 8
Earnings: $3,069,500
34. Graeme McDowell
Events: 10
Earnings: $2,912,381
35. Kevin Na
Events: 10
Earnings: $2,893,286
36. Sihwan Kim
Events: 9
Earnings: $2,747,000
37. Brendan Steele
Events: 2
Earnings: $2,445,833
38. James Piot
Events: 10
Earnings: $2,207,000
39. Phil Mickelson
Events: 10
Earnings: $2,137,350
40. Bernd Wiesberger
Events: 10
Earnings: $2,110,500
41. Scott Vincent
Events: 10
Earnings: $2,041,200
42. Martin Kaymer
Events: 8
Earnings: $1,911,800
43. Phachara Khongwatmai
Events: 8
Earnings: $1,858,333
44. Harold Varner III
Events: 7
Earnings: $1,778,500
45. Turk Pettit
Events: 8
Earnings: $1,691,000
46. Jediah Morgan
Events: 10
Earnings: $1,647,000
47. Cameron Tringale
Events: 7
Earnings: $1,545,600
48. Justin Harding
Events: 3
Earnings: $1,319,167
49. Sadom Kaewkanjana
Events: 8
Earnings: $1,312,286
50. Adrian Otaegui
Events: 4
Earnings: $1,294,500
51. Hudson Swafford
Events: 8
Earnings: $1,241,000
52. Jinichiro Kozuma
Events: 3
Earnings: $1,205,000
53. Shaun Norris
Events: 7
Earnings: $1,006,000
54. Shergo Al Kurdi
Events: 2
Earnings: $1,044,000
55. Mito Pereira
Events: 2
Earnings: $1,032,000
56. Sebastian Munoz
Events: 2
Earnings: $875,000
57. David Puig
Events: 5
Earnings: $849,600
58. Travis Smyth
Events: 3
Earnings: $846,000
59. Hideto Tanihara
Events: 5
Earnings: $752,600
60. Oliver Bekker
Events: 1
Earnings: $737,500
61. Ryosuke Kinoshita
Events: 3
Earnings: $624,000
62. Yuki Inamori
Events: 2
Earnings: $501,000
63. Dean Burmester
Events: 2
Earnings: $332,000
64. Ian Snyman
Events: 2
Earnings: $316,000
65. Pablo Larrazabal
Events: 1
Earnings: $315,000
66. Thomas Pieters
Events: 2
Earnings: $299,000
67. Blake Windred
Events: 2
Earnings: $263,000
-
It dawned on me that how the LIV guys played at the Masters was really besides the point. Of course some played well, LIV spent a Billion-plus to get some top players to take their money, they are professionals with a track record. Koepka was always accused of not taking the regular tour events that seriously when he was on the tour, not surprised he played well now that he's healthy.
None of this means that the LIV tour is any more viable however. I'm not sure that anyone doubted that the guys that received the most money from them were good players. In no way does this make me more interested in who wins a LIV event or what the team format even is let alone who is winning it. The reason that I never got excited for the old "silly-season" events never had to do with the fact that the guys that took the money to play in them weren't good players or that there wasn't a lot of money to be made. Rather, the formats and events never seemed important to either me or even to the players themselves.
-
It dawned on me that how the LIV guys played at the Masters was really besides the point. Of course some played well, LIV spent a Billion-plus to get some top players to take their money, they are professionals with a track record. Koepka was always accused of not taking the regular tour events that seriously when he was on the tour, not surprised he played well now that he's healthy.
It also demonstrated that they managed to pick off a few top players, but the depth runs out pretty quickly. While they had 3 of the top 5 or whatever, they also had only 4 of the top 20 or so. And they have 48 players, with only 18 qualified. 11.5 were predicted to make the cut, and 12 did. Lee, Poulter, etc. weren't even there.
-
It dawned on me that how the LIV guys played at the Masters was really besides the point. Of course some played well, LIV spent a Billion-plus to get some top players to take their money, they are professionals with a track record. Koepka was always accused of not taking the regular tour events that seriously when he was on the tour, not surprised he played well now that he's healthy.
It also demonstrated that they managed to pick off a few top players, but the depth runs out pretty quickly. While they had 3 of the top 5 or whatever, they also had only 4 of the top 20 or so. And they have 48 players, with only 18 qualified. 11.5 were predicted to make the cut, and 12 did. Lee, Poulter, etc. weren't even there.
38% qualified is good considering guys have so few opportunities to earn ranking points. So 12 made the cut. That's suggests LIV events should be earning ranking points even if on a highly modified basis. No need to respond. I know you believe the ranking system should ignore highly successful golfers.
Ciao
-
It dawned on me that how the LIV guys played at the Masters was really besides the point. Of course some played well, LIV spent a Billion-plus to get some top players to take their money, they are professionals with a track record. Koepka was always accused of not taking the regular tour events that seriously when he was on the tour, not surprised he played well now that he's healthy.
It also demonstrated that they managed to pick off a few top players, but the depth runs out pretty quickly. While they had 3 of the top 5 or whatever, they also had only 4 of the top 20 or so. And they have 48 players, with only 18 qualified. 11.5 were predicted to make the cut, and 12 did. Lee, Poulter, etc. weren't even there.
38% qualified is good considering guys have so few opportunities to earn ranking points. So 12 made the cut. That's suggests LIV events should be earning ranking points even if on a highly modified basis. No need to respond. I know you believe the ranking system should ignore highly successful golfers.
Ciao
I believe there is a two year process from "application" to decision on OWGR points. When did LIV submit their application? Did they know the criteria?
Why would LIV then choose to then sue two of the entities that make up part of the advisory board and "client list" of the OWGR?
Like most issues related to LIV that I have seen, this OWGR problem seems self-inflicted.
IMO, this is a case of misunderstood expectations by the defecting LIV players. I believe they were told by LIV, when they had the pen in their hands, that the OWGR thing would not be an issue. And now that it is, they are a bit chuffy about it.
-
That's suggests LIV events should be earning ranking points even if on a highly modified basis. No need to respond. I know you believe the ranking system should ignore highly successful golfers.
Nope, that doesn't "suggest" that. And no, I don't "believe the ranking system should ignore highly successful golfers." I've always pointed out essentially what Ian and others have said: that there's a process by which they have to go, requirements they need to meet, etc. They haven't done them, and those moving to LIV knew that before they left, particularly some of the later movers. I don't think a special case should be made to grant LIV golfers OWGR points early.
-
If you can't get to a major, but you want to see the best players in the world, get to a LIV event
-
Without taking a side in the PGA Tour/LIV imbroglio it’s clear that LIV had a very good showing at the Masters. Two of the top three finishers and three of the top six were from LIV. Twelve of the eighteen players in the field made the cut. I would think that a public relations/marketing blitz isn’t far off with those results as the headline. Something to the effect of “Who says these guys aren’t tournament tested?”
But it is interesting that the guys that finished at the top (mickelson, Reed and Kopeka) didn't really need to do so as they still get into majors, at least for a few years. The guys from LIV that really could have used a top 12 finish in the Masters to get invited back next year did not. Players like Gooch, Ancer, Pereira, Kokrak, Niemann, Varner, etc. No LIV golfer earned their way into the 2024 Masters on the weekend. Niemann came closest at T16.
Seconded.
Also, is nobody going to say it? Brooks was great... for 54 holes.
I will 3rd this.
And when we look at the bigger picture of top performers in this masters, specifically the top 30 (in this case 32 with ties)
75% play on the PGA Tour
16% play on LIV
9% Other - 1 Am 2 from Asian tours.
-
It dawned on me that how the LIV guys played at the Masters was really besides the point. Of course some played well, LIV spent a Billion-plus to get some top players to take their money, they are professionals with a track record. Koepka was always accused of not taking the regular tour events that seriously when he was on the tour, not surprised he played well now that he's healthy.
It also demonstrated that they managed to pick off a few top players, but the depth runs out pretty quickly. While they had 3 of the top 5 or whatever, they also had only 4 of the top 20 or so. And they have 48 players, with only 18 qualified. 11.5 were predicted to make the cut, and 12 did. Lee, Poulter, etc. weren't even there.
38% qualified is good considering guys have so few opportunities to earn ranking points. So 12 made the cut. That's suggests LIV events should be earning ranking points even if on a highly modified basis. No need to respond. I know you believe the ranking system should ignore highly successful golfers.
Ciao
I believe there is a two year process from "application" to decision on OWGR points. When did LIV submit their application? Did they know the criteria?
Why would LIV then choose to then sue two of the entities that make up part of the advisory board and "client list" of the OWGR?
Like most issues related to LIV that I have seen, this OWGR problem seems self-inflicted.
IMO, this is a case of misunderstood expectations by the defecting LIV players. I believe they were told by LIV, when they had the pen in their hands, that the OWGR thing would not be an issue. And now that it is, they are a bit chuffy about it.
My take is that any ranking system exists to rank. The ranking system should find ways to be inclusive rather than exclusive if they hope to produce an accurate ranking. It shouldn't take an application, two years and whatever other highly subjective criteria thrown up to ignore obviously high quality players. Unlike Niall, I do think the ranking system is a scam.
Ciao
-
That's suggests LIV events should be earning ranking points even if on a highly modified basis. No need to respond. I know you believe the ranking system should ignore highly successful golfers.
Nope, that doesn't "suggest" that. And no, I don't "believe the ranking system should ignore highly successful golfers." I've always pointed out essentially what Ian and others have said: that there's a process by which they have to go, requirements they need to meet, etc. They haven't done them, and those moving to LIV knew that before they left, particularly some of the later movers. I don't think a special case should be made to grant LIV golfers OWGR points early.
Erik
I'm all for rules but rules can be changed. If you look at the history of the rankings that has happened quite a lot to make it more relevant with the latest changes happening only last year and when LIV was already up and running.
Bear in mind also that according to their articles of incorporation that one of their objectives is "to devise, maintain, review, update, administer and promote the recognition of a system that fairly ranks the relative performances of male professional golfers participating in the leading golf tournaments throughout the world, taking into account all relevant factors including, amongst other matters, the date of the tournament, the prestige of the tournament, the standard of the other participants and the value of the tournament prize fund."
It doesn't look to me that they are trying too hard to meet that objective.
Niall
-
8) Blackstone??? I wonder what kind of ESG considerations they'd be pushing on the LIV investment decisions???
First off I think you are confusing Blackstone with BlackRock - two different companies. Blackstone is a private equity GP and BlackRock is the world's largest asset manager, primarily in public markets like equities and fixed income.
And I think you are overestimating what BlackRock is actually doing in ESG. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink talks about ESG a lot, but they still hold a lot of "dirty" assets - for example, BlackRock is the second largest shareholder of Exxon Mobil as they own 7.2% of the company.
-
I'm all for rules but rules can be changed.
They can be, but why should they? LIV is literally suing Augusta National and the Masters, and they're a chunk of the OWGR. To say that LIV has handled OWGR points (lying multiple times, misleading, suing, etc.) well is to be either completely ignorant or to just be trolling. I'm not saying you are saying this, just that LIV folks have done these things, and I see no real reason why their "application" should be pushed through, or why the rules should be changed for them.
At the end of the day, you have a bunch of players with no cut, playing 54 holes, with no qualifying process whatsoever. Somewhere near 2/3 of the field any given week at LIV is not in the top x-hundred in the world.
If you look at the history of the rankings that has happened quite a lot to make it more relevant with the latest changes happening only last year and when LIV was already up and running.
The multi-year process that changed the OWGR calculation was just that: a multi-year process.
It doesn't look to me that they are trying too hard to meet that objective.
I disagree. LIV has given them no real reason to change the rules because they jumped the gun and then acted like babies about it.
-
8) Blackstone??? I wonder what kind of ESG considerations they'd be pushing on the LIV investment decisions???
First off I think you are confusing Blackstone with BlackRock - two different companies. Blackstone is a private equity GP and BlackRock is the world's largest asset manager, primarily in public markets like equities and fixed income.
And I think you are overestimating what BlackRock is actually doing in ESG. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink talks about ESG a lot, but they still hold a lot of "dirty" assets - for example, BlackRock is the second largest shareholder of Exxon Mobil as they own 7.2% of the company.
No confusion on my part... see [size=78%]https://www.blackstone.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/02/BX-Firmwide-ESG-Policy.pdf (https://www.blackstone.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/02/BX-Firmwide-ESG-Policy.pdf)[/size]
-
I know you believe the ranking system should ignore highly successful golfers.
Ciao
This wasn't directed at me, but I don't think ranking systems should ignore highly successful golfers. But they should ignore events whose fields are determined not by any specified ranking criteria, but rather whoever Greg decided to give money to. I can watch a PGA Tour event and can find out exactly how every player in the field earned their way into the event (even if I think that a bunch of them shouldn't be playing!). How did Chase Koepka earn his way into LIV events? Or the other 20+ guys who can't get regular starts on the PGA Tour?
-
I know you believe the ranking system should ignore highly successful golfers.
Ciao
This wasn't directed at me, but I don't think ranking systems should ignore highly successful golfers. But they should ignore events whose fields are determined not by any specified ranking criteria, but rather whoever Greg decided to give money to. I can watch a PGA Tour event and can find out exactly how every player in the field earned their way into the event (even if I think that a bunch of them shouldn't be playing!). How did Chase Koepka earn his way into LIV events? Or the other 20+ guys who can't get regular starts on the PGA Tour?
It doesn't matter how players came to be on the tour or any tour. What matters is that they are professional players. Any ranking system can devise a point system to account for relative lack of field quality. But a ranking system shouldn't ignore a tour with relatively low qualify fields. Again, a ranking system exists to rank players. The entire system is subjective. Points are devised in a subjective manner. So subjectively include players from another tour. I don't see what the problem is. There are over 20 tours included in the rankings. Is anybody putting their hand up to say LIV isn't as strong as any of these tours?
Ciao
-
It doesn't matter how players came to be on the tour or any tour.
No, how they got on the Tour definitely matters. According to the OWGR, and according to what I'm tempted to say common sense, but…
What matters is that they are professional players.
There are mini tour players that are "professional golfers." I'm technically a professional. I don't think that if I was on LIV I should get OWGR points for beating Chase Koepka once every five events. :)
But a ranking system shouldn't ignore a tour with relatively low qualify fields.
They're not ignoring them because of "relatively low quality fields."
-
It's about 13 hours until the beginning of the CW LIVE broadcast of the LIV Singapore event. Right now they have played about 13-14 holes, so tomorrow's NON-LIVE airing, in direct competition with the PGA tournament in Mexico is just another raised middle finger. If it were live, they would be playing under the lights.
-
:D Hey Pete,
Well CBS & Warner Bros. (CW) do have to market things for their USA market...
Best for 2023