Having taken out the words that offend you, would you disagree with my comments above?
So you're asking if I disagree with:
- Rules/criteria are open to change
- This change "happens regularly"
- Jon Rahm commented on OWGR-related things
- The reasons for change are "obvious"
- The changes are to ensure accuracy
The first is a statement of fact, as is the second depending on your definition of "regularly."
The third is a statement of fact, too, inasmuch as Jon Rahm commented on the OWGR. But he's not an expert in the OWGR, he's just someone with an opinion, and DataGolf have commented, too, but as their comments don't align with your opinions, you're largely ignoring those (their comments, paraphrased somewhat accurately I hope, are that while the points seem to be "off" at the top [with RSM getting too many], they're as far off in favor of the DP as you move down the leaderboard).
I disagree that the reasons for the change are "obvious" as that again implies that anyone who doesn't agree with you is somehow blind to the "obvious," and the last relies on a presumption of the goals of the system, despite their stated goal as ranking the tours and leagues that are… and I forget their specific word, but basically "authorized" Tours.
I think LIV golf events may eventually get ranking points. They'll likely be small, in part because golfers will have seen their OWGR rank slip since as early as June, and because 30+ of the players on the Tour are pretty low anyway, and… I don't see them adding them retroactively.
So basically, you want them NOW and I think they'll eventually get them, despite
not complying with the criteria, and that change will occur… just not as immediately as you want them to. And I'm fine with that… I just don't think they should get to bully their way into getting ranking points when they've done basically NOTHING to comply with the criteria, going so far as to make shit up.
You didn't answer my Hero line of discussion, either.
With regards my best part of a year commentI didn't contest that. I only pointed out that your statement was misleading as their first event was less than a year ago.
However given LIV signed-up a chunk of the best players early on
I think you and I would disagree on who the "best" players are, or how many of the "best" players they have. LIV fields get pretty thin after a small number of players, and since they're busy playing these exhibition events… we have no way of really judging well they're playing right now. The more they play their insular events, the more we lack a valid frame of reference.
In other words:
- You want the LIV Tour to get points now and/or think they should have already been getting them. I think they're coming, but a ways out, and the reasons they've not gotten them yet are valid.
- You also likely think the LIV Tour has more of the "top" or "best" players than I do.