2023 Professional Golf thread

[doublebogey7]

Cant blame Spieth for a weakness in the rules. Rule should be changed so that the intended shot that prompts the relief has to be played if the relief is taken. We have seen a few other similar.
Eyebrows raised at the rules rather than any players in these situations.

This is not a weakness in the rules, but deliberately written in this way, to reduce subjectivity and ensure equity.
For example, A player takes ACC relief from a position where they could make a normal stroke. The drop leaves them in such a position that they are not now able to take a normal stroke, due to interference from an integral part of the course. What are the players options under your rule change.

 

[Swango1980]

Would've loved McIlroy to get a win at a stacked event before the Masters, but in reality it was a fairly ragged round (not just for him, granted) with a sequence of shots starting with the 8 iron on 14 that was all a bit below average and probably made people feel fairly good about their own game.

It was striking how similar his putt on 18 was to the one in Dubai a few weeks ago.... would have been interesting if he'd got to 9 under what pressure that would have put on Kitayama.

McIlroys comments about entertainment value miss the mark I think.... this was a far better tournament (imho) than the normal birdiefest we get - having the leaders bogey, double & triple to bring the rest of the field into contention was excellent viewing and the frustrations the players experienced (Kitayama, Hatton, McIlroy, English, Spieth, Fitzpatrick, Hovland, Scheffler, Cantlay, Rahm etc.) made for better TV. An exceptional player holding a round together on a tough course (with hard greens!) is surely better than watching exceptional players have birdie chance after birdie chance?

Interesting to see Rahm wobble for the first time in months as well - he might be human after all!

If any of my shots were as good as Rory's stinkers, I would be living in dreamland. I'd much rather hit a 220 yard 8 iron (or whatever the distance was, not sure) that ends up missing the green, than thinning a 3 hybrid that gets fluky and rolls up to within 3 foot of the pin

 

[rksquire]

If any of my shots were as good as Rory's stinkers, I would be living in dreamland. I'd much rather hit a 220 yard 8 iron (or whatever the distance was, not sure) that ends up missing the green, than thinning a 3 hybrid that gets fluky and rolls up to within 3 foot of the pin

To be fair it was only 190 (!) and he did slip... the other one was out of the rough across the fairway into other rough - a shot I regularly play at my own course! But he does play to a higher standard.

 

[Swango1980]

To be fair it was only 190 (!) and he did slip... the other one was out of the rough across the fairway into other rough - a shot I regularly play at my own course! But he does play to a higher standard.

O yeah, you jogged my memory. I can definitely do that shot, but I can do it from a perfect fairway lie

 

[BubbaP]

Note sure how 'official' this is when the schedule isn't published yet, but if so may disappoint a few. (Dell Match Play)

https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2023/03/06/pga-tour-dell-technologies-match-play-2024-schedule/?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Note sure how 'official' this is when the schedule isn't published yet, but if so may disappoint a few. (Dell Match Play)

https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2023/03/06/pga-tour-dell-technologies-match-play-2024-schedule/?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook

The matchplay was becoming a non event because of the way it was structured and they did that because the players didn’t want to play one game , lose and go home. Shame has Matchplay is great but not sure it lends to a tour event

 

[BubbaP]

The matchplay was becoming a non event because of the way it was structured and they did that because the players didn’t want to play one game , lose and go home. Shame has Matchplay is great but not sure it lends to a tour event

Yeah, hard to disagree.
Guess that's the end of WGCs ...

 

[rksquire]

Probably impossible to have a rational discussion on this, and even decide what thread it needs to go on (happy for it to be moved or deleted as admins see fit) as it does include reference to LIV, but having had a bit of time to think about the PGAT changes, it's clear the future has not really become any more clear so might have a bit of a contradictory ramble whilst gathering my thoughts...

• "If everyone is super, then no-one will be", Syndrome, The Incredibles, 2004. The elevated events, on paper, seem great. Who doesn't want to see the best players (or most of them) compete against each other more often? Well, it just occurred to me I'm a little less excited for the Players than I normally am, coming of the back of the Waste Management, Genesis and Bay Hill. What now sets aside the '5th' Major from the aforementioned tournaments (apart from $20m vs $25m). I've seen it quite a few weeks already, and bar a jaunt to the UK for a geographical change for the Open, the Majors themselves aren't really going to play out much differently to things we've seen already. As Sky are going out of there way to tell us, there are 17 'super' events this year, spectator fatigue may mean Syndrome isn't entirely wrong and the the Majors might be just that bit less 'super'. Maybe the presence of Smith and DJ sets the Majors aside as something different?
• Change hasn't happened, necessarily, because of LIV, but it has certainly accelerated it. Mystic Phil Mickleson is no martyr, nor are the others, but it does not surprise me that in some way they will feel a certain satisfaction that they were 'right' with regard to how they said the PGAT should change - but I imagine this self righteousness will give way to anger & more resentment.
• 8 elevated events is much better than 13 designated events and indeed the originally envisaged 14 LIV events. 2024 will see the reduced fields so it is possible the Majors can arguably say their product is different and therefore remain the pinnacle of the sport. I hope so - but I'm not sure; sure we love a Cinderella story at the Majors, but we really tune in to see the best of the best against each other, and next year, we'll see that at 8 other events undiluted.
• James Hahn isn't entirely wrong - his concerns are genuine. The 'hate' and commentary directed his way in recent days is not right.
• The strategic alliance and the 10 tour cards - how many of those guys get to play elevated events? There'll obviously be the non-designated events who probably will be crying out for the Meronks and the Højgaards' but it will be interesting to see the fallout from broadcasters and sponsors for these.
• Can't help but feel the non-elevated events are basically Korn Ferry + events, rather than PGAT Lite.
• Buyers remorse at LIV - might be true of BDC, DJ, Cam Smith, Ancer, Niemann and maybe a few others (Casey, Reed?) in due course but despite their anger about things that are happening now, the likes of Westwood, Poulter, GMac etc., didn't have a seat at the table and were unlikely to benefit really from the elevated events
• Can't work out if the format of the elevated events basically provides the same potential opportunity for the non-elevated events as the DPWT for LIV guys..... ie those events could be enhanced with the presence of Reed and others competing. It serves as a comeuppance, but not a complete exile. Court cases and suits could be rendered irrelevant by such a move. "Of course you can play on the PGAT, but unfortunately you don't currently meet the criteria for these 8 events...". The future of the PGAT, and that of the LIV players, is no longer inextricably linked by the Courts.... findings may be one way or the other, but the progression of the PGAT will see any successful outcome (for Reed for example) rendered pointless (Bar some amazing run at the Masters, Asian Tour or DPWT).
• I've tried, as I'm not anti-LIV, to see the future for LIV. 14 events, even if everything had went to plan, is too much. In its favour remains the desire to be more global (not fully realised but 7 countries in 14 events isn't terrible) and the potential for a season long team event to be something (again, it's not quite there), I'm okay with the shotgun starts and fine with 54 holes. However, even the most optimistic of optimists will have to concede, if there wasn't opposition and everything went to plan with their vision, 14 LIV events for the worlds best, plus 8 for the PGAT, 4 for the Majors, plus 3 Fed-Ex play-offs and the Players....that's 30 weeks of golf. Make some assumptions about the current 'war' and you'd have to say that McIlroy, Fitzpatrick, Hatton, Fleetwood and Rahm will have to make some time for the DPWT. On the simple basis that players are greedy but not stupid, the elevated events, PIP and EON rewards will see of potential defections from Cantlay, Xander and a few others; it may also accelerate a few now who are likely to be without elevated status but, ultimately, they won't be missed and aren't killer blows. The LIV model will have to be revised, if access is to be granted for its players across tours, as 30+ weeks is an impossible ask, particularly as some have also signed up Woods/McIlroy cash cow. Again, if all things were equal with amiable crossover, that's probably a max of 8 LIV events that can be accommodated.
• The DPWTs position isn't great. There'll be a 2 tier system in the PGAT next year, the Strategic Alliance is (predictably?) of little consequence, other than being a potential feeder tour to the riches of the US of A. A real global tour doesn't seem to be anything the PGAT is interested in, so there probably is a place for the DPWT but it does feel like it needs to innovate now to maintain some relevance - unfortunately it really feels like it's a passenger.
• For LIV to grow (expectations for it to be overnight were naive at best!), it needs to gradually add better caliber players. With the copying innovations on the PGAT this is unlikely. Even the addition of ranking points won't escalate the standings of their players; it'll help, to some degree, but with the (false?) rankings of the current field, it is too weak overall to justify significant points overall to, say, any 2023 PGAT event.
• Know it has changed somewhat, but the LIV 48 man / locked player pool was not a good idea (I wasn't opposed to this at the start, but am now). Think the PGAT have got it more correct with their 60% retention rate, although it remains imperfect. There is potential for the LIV model to evolve, but it's now complicated by moves elsewhere.
• There's no such thing as an independent contractor either at LIV or the PGAT.... as it turns out, there never was.

Is there a Golf Monthly PIP fund for length of posts (or just quantity?) and if so, which Crown Prince should I send my banking details to?

 

[Swango1980]

Probably impossible to have a rational discussion on this, and even decide what thread it needs to go on (happy for it to be moved or deleted as admins see fit) as it does include reference to LIV, but having had a bit of time to think about the PGAT changes, it's clear the future has not really become any more clear so might have a bit of a contradictory ramble whilst gathering my thoughts...

• "If everyone is super, then no-one will be", Syndrome, The Incredibles, 2004. The elevated events, on paper, seem great. Who doesn't want to see the best players (or most of them) compete against each other more often? Well, it just occurred to me I'm a little less excited for the Players than I normally am, coming of the back of the Waste Management, Genesis and Bay Hill. What now sets aside the '5th' Major from the aforementioned tournaments (apart from $20m vs $25m). I've seen it quite a few weeks already, and bar a jaunt to the UK for a geographical change for the Open, the Majors themselves aren't really going to play out much differently to things we've seen already. As Sky are going out of there way to tell us, there are 17 'super' events this year, spectator fatigue may mean Syndrome isn't entirely wrong and the the Majors might be just that bit less 'super'. Maybe the presence of Smith and DJ sets the Majors aside as something different?
• Change hasn't happened, necessarily, because of LIV, but it has certainly accelerated it. Mystic Phil Mickleson is no martyr, nor are the others, but it does not surprise me that in some way they will feel a certain satisfaction that they were 'right' with regard to how they said the PGAT should change - but I imagine this self righteousness will give way to anger & more resentment.
• 8 elevated events is much better than 13 designated events and indeed the originally envisaged 14 LIV events. 2024 will see the reduced fields so it is possible the Majors can arguably say their product is different and therefore remain the pinnacle of the sport. I hope so - but I'm not sure; sure we love a Cinderella story at the Majors, but we really tune in to see the best of the best against each other, and next year, we'll see that at 8 other events undiluted.
• James Hahn isn't entirely wrong - his concerns are genuine. The 'hate' and commentary directed his way in recent days is not right.
• The strategic alliance and the 10 tour cards - how many of those guys get to play elevated events? There'll obviously be the non-designated events who probably will be crying out for the Meronks and the Højgaards' but it will be interesting to see the fallout from broadcasters and sponsors for these.
• Can't help but feel the non-elevated events are basically Korn Ferry + events, rather than PGAT Lite.
• Buyers remorse at LIV - might be true of BDC, DJ, Cam Smith, Ancer, Niemann and maybe a few others (Casey, Reed?) in due course but despite their anger about things that are happening now, the likes of Westwood, Poulter, GMac etc., didn't have a seat at the table and were unlikely to benefit really from the elevated events
• Can't work out if the format of the elevated events basically provides the same potential opportunity for the non-elevated events as the DPWT for LIV guys..... ie those events could be enhanced with the presence of Reed and others competing. It serves as a comeuppance, but not a complete exile. Court cases and suits could be rendered irrelevant by such a move. "Of course you can play on the PGAT, but unfortunately you don't currently meet the criteria for these 8 events...". The future of the PGAT, and that of the LIV players, is no longer inextricably linked by the Courts.... findings may be one way or the other, but the progression of the PGAT will see any successful outcome (for Reed for example) rendered pointless (Bar some amazing run at the Masters, Asian Tour or DPWT).
• I've tried, as I'm not anti-LIV, to see the future for LIV. 14 events, even if everything had went to plan, is too much. In its favour remains the desire to be more global (not fully realised but 7 countries in 14 events isn't terrible) and the potential for a season long team event to be something (again, it's not quite there), I'm okay with the shotgun starts and fine with 54 holes. However, even the most optimistic of optimists will have to concede, if there wasn't opposition and everything went to plan with their vision, 14 LIV events for the worlds best, plus 8 for the PGAT, 4 for the Majors, plus 3 Fed-Ex play-offs and the Players....that's 30 weeks of golf. Make some assumptions about the current 'war' and you'd have to say that McIlroy, Fitzpatrick, Hatton, Fleetwood and Rahm will have to make some time for the DPWT. On the simple basis that players are greedy but not stupid, the elevated events, PIP and EON rewards will see of potential defections from Cantlay, Xander and a few others; it may also accelerate a few now who are likely to be without elevated status but, ultimately, they won't be missed and aren't killer blows. The LIV model will have to be revised, if access is to be granted for its players across tours, as 30+ weeks is an impossible ask, particularly as some have also signed up Woods/McIlroy cash cow. Again, if all things were equal with amiable crossover, that's probably a max of 8 LIV events that can be accommodated.
• The DPWTs position isn't great. There'll be a 2 tier system in the PGAT next year, the Strategic Alliance is (predictably?) of little consequence, other than being a potential feeder tour to the riches of the US of A. A real global tour doesn't seem to be anything the PGAT is interested in, so there probably is a place for the DPWT but it does feel like it needs to innovate now to maintain some relevance - unfortunately it really feels like it's a passenger.
• For LIV to grow (expectations for it to be overnight were naive at best!), it needs to gradually add better caliber players. With the copying innovations on the PGAT this is unlikely. Even the addition of ranking points won't escalate the standings of their players; it'll help, to some degree, but with the (false?) rankings of the current field, it is too weak overall to justify significant points overall to, say, any 2023 PGAT event.
• Know it has changed somewhat, but the LIV 48 man / locked player pool was not a good idea (I wasn't opposed to this at the start, but am now). Think the PGAT have got it more correct with their 60% retention rate, although it remains imperfect. There is potential for the LIV model to evolve, but it's now complicated by moves elsewhere.
• There's no such thing as an independent contractor either at LIV or the PGAT.... as it turns out, there never was.

Is there a Golf Monthly PIP fund for length of posts (or just quantity?) and if so, which Crown Prince should I send my banking details to?

Agreed with first point. The more events you have, supposedly, all the best players you can muster, then the less excited you get about each one. I think it just diminishes the Majors and events like the Players. Sure, they are still big events and worth watching, just not quite as high profile as before, relative to the other weekly events. I guess we generally get excited about the World Cup in football when it comes around. If it was every 2 or 1 year, less exciting. Or, if the PL was stripped down in such a way that the top teams could play each other 8 times a season, rather than 2, then it would diminish the anticipation and excitement before each game (and I'd hate to lose 7-0 to Liverpool 4 times a season).

I broadly agree with a lot of other points, but no need for a response to each one. LIV has certainly help change golf. It put more money in the pockets of LIV players, and now looks to be putting more money in the pockets of the PGAT top players. I guess your comment could well go into the LIV thread (as LIV accelerated this), but this is probably the right one in that it is now driven by the PGAT changes, and thus the impact on professional golf as a whole. Question will be, is this generally fantastic news for fans? If the PGAT generates more money on the back of this, it is probably a sign that sponsors and broadcasters are more willing to part with their money, knowing their are more fans buying into it. If the rate of growth of the PGAT income decelerates, and even drops, then at some point we may conclude the opposite is true.

 

[Imurg]

I think the future of European Ladies golf is looking fairly rosy right now.....

 

[JonnyGutteridge]

Who’s excited to hear all about Pete Dye and the fact that Sawgrass used to be a swampy marsh?

 

[Crow]

Who’s excited to hear all about Pete Dye and the fact that Sawgrass used to be a swampy marsh?

I'd only be excited if there was some absolutely whacky fact that NOBODY had heard before, something completely mad, such as that his wife had suggested the 17th.

 

[Pin-seeker]

I think the future of European Ladies golf is looking fairly rosy right now.....
View attachment 46856

One of my favourite swings at the minute

 

[timd77]

One of my favourite swings at the minute

Yep, and she absolutely wallops the ball!

 

[Imurg]

And she's 16.........

 

[BubbaP]

Probably impossible to have a rational discussion on this, and even decide what thread it needs to go on (happy for it to be moved or deleted as admins see fit) as it does include reference to LIV, but having had a bit of time to think about the PGAT changes, it's clear the future has not really become any more clear so might have a bit of a contradictory ramble whilst gathering my thoughts...

• "If everyone is super, then no-one will be", Syndrome, The Incredibles, 2004. The elevated events, on paper, seem great. Who doesn't want to see the best players (or most of them) compete against each other more often? Well, it just occurred to me I'm a little less excited for the Players than I normally am, coming of the back of the Waste Management, Genesis and Bay Hill. What now sets aside the '5th' Major from the aforementioned tournaments (apart from $20m vs $25m). I've seen it quite a few weeks already, and bar a jaunt to the UK for a geographical change for the Open, the Majors themselves aren't really going to play out much differently to things we've seen already. As Sky are going out of there way to tell us, there are 17 'super' events this year, spectator fatigue may mean Syndrome isn't entirely wrong and the the Majors might be just that bit less 'super'. Maybe the presence of Smith and DJ sets the Majors aside as something different?
• Change hasn't happened, necessarily, because of LIV, but it has certainly accelerated it. Mystic Phil Mickleson is no martyr, nor are the others, but it does not surprise me that in some way they will feel a certain satisfaction that they were 'right' with regard to how they said the PGAT should change - but I imagine this self righteousness will give way to anger & more resentment.
• 8 elevated events is much better than 13 designated events and indeed the originally envisaged 14 LIV events. 2024 will see the reduced fields so it is possible the Majors can arguably say their product is different and therefore remain the pinnacle of the sport. I hope so - but I'm not sure; sure we love a Cinderella story at the Majors, but we really tune in to see the best of the best against each other, and next year, we'll see that at 8 other events undiluted.
• James Hahn isn't entirely wrong - his concerns are genuine. The 'hate' and commentary directed his way in recent days is not right.
• The strategic alliance and the 10 tour cards - how many of those guys get to play elevated events? There'll obviously be the non-designated events who probably will be crying out for the Meronks and the Højgaards' but it will be interesting to see the fallout from broadcasters and sponsors for these.
• Can't help but feel the non-elevated events are basically Korn Ferry + events, rather than PGAT Lite.
• Buyers remorse at LIV - might be true of BDC, DJ, Cam Smith, Ancer, Niemann and maybe a few others (Casey, Reed?) in due course but despite their anger about things that are happening now, the likes of Westwood, Poulter, GMac etc., didn't have a seat at the table and were unlikely to benefit really from the elevated events
• Can't work out if the format of the elevated events basically provides the same potential opportunity for the non-elevated events as the DPWT for LIV guys..... ie those events could be enhanced with the presence of Reed and others competing. It serves as a comeuppance, but not a complete exile. Court cases and suits could be rendered irrelevant by such a move. "Of course you can play on the PGAT, but unfortunately you don't currently meet the criteria for these 8 events...". The future of the PGAT, and that of the LIV players, is no longer inextricably linked by the Courts.... findings may be one way or the other, but the progression of the PGAT will see any successful outcome (for Reed for example) rendered pointless (Bar some amazing run at the Masters, Asian Tour or DPWT).
• I've tried, as I'm not anti-LIV, to see the future for LIV. 14 events, even if everything had went to plan, is too much. In its favour remains the desire to be more global (not fully realised but 7 countries in 14 events isn't terrible) and the potential for a season long team event to be something (again, it's not quite there), I'm okay with the shotgun starts and fine with 54 holes. However, even the most optimistic of optimists will have to concede, if there wasn't opposition and everything went to plan with their vision, 14 LIV events for the worlds best, plus 8 for the PGAT, 4 for the Majors, plus 3 Fed-Ex play-offs and the Players....that's 30 weeks of golf. Make some assumptions about the current 'war' and you'd have to say that McIlroy, Fitzpatrick, Hatton, Fleetwood and Rahm will have to make some time for the DPWT. On the simple basis that players are greedy but not stupid, the elevated events, PIP and EON rewards will see of potential defections from Cantlay, Xander and a few others; it may also accelerate a few now who are likely to be without elevated status but, ultimately, they won't be missed and aren't killer blows. The LIV model will have to be revised, if access is to be granted for its players across tours, as 30+ weeks is an impossible ask, particularly as some have also signed up Woods/McIlroy cash cow. Again, if all things were equal with amiable crossover, that's probably a max of 8 LIV events that can be accommodated.
• The DPWTs position isn't great. There'll be a 2 tier system in the PGAT next year, the Strategic Alliance is (predictably?) of little consequence, other than being a potential feeder tour to the riches of the US of A. A real global tour doesn't seem to be anything the PGAT is interested in, so there probably is a place for the DPWT but it does feel like it needs to innovate now to maintain some relevance - unfortunately it really feels like it's a passenger.
• For LIV to grow (expectations for it to be overnight were naive at best!), it needs to gradually add better caliber players. With the copying innovations on the PGAT this is unlikely. Even the addition of ranking points won't escalate the standings of their players; it'll help, to some degree, but with the (false?) rankings of the current field, it is too weak overall to justify significant points overall to, say, any 2023 PGAT event.
• Know it has changed somewhat, but the LIV 48 man / locked player pool was not a good idea (I wasn't opposed to this at the start, but am now). Think the PGAT have got it more correct with their 60% retention rate, although it remains imperfect. There is potential for the LIV model to evolve, but it's now complicated by moves elsewhere.
• There's no such thing as an independent contractor either at LIV or the PGAT.... as it turns out, there never was.

Is there a Golf Monthly PIP fund for length of posts (or just quantity?) and if so, which Crown Prince should I send my banking details to?

Agree with a fair bit, just a note on designated events though, I believe 2024 is only 1 fewer than 2023. It is just how they are being talked about recently that has changed. There is the players, and then the 3 fed ex events - 2 of which in essence were already "limited field, no cut" using the standard definition. Plus they then include the 4 majors (probably many 'average Joes' in the US believe they are run by PGAT ). So that is 8, plus the 8 now being talked about.

 

[BubbaP]

Who’s excited to hear all about Pete Dye and the fact that Sawgrass used to be a swampy marsh?

It's inevitable.
Will be interesting if the 'strongest field in golf' comes out much this year.

Annoyingly the owgr changes make a field strength comparison tricky (fwiw 806 to 435).
Trying a different approach:
2022
6 players ranked in 3 hundreds
1 player ranked in 4 hundreds

2023
9 players ranked in 3 hundreds
4 players ranked in 4 hundreds
1 player in the thousands

Obviously plenty of quality at the top end, but doesn't seem as 'deep' as previous years.

 

[venger]

I have not watched any of the build up, but I'll be interested to hear how much last years champion and/or the tour he plays on gets mentioned

 

[Imurg]

Fast start for Rory.......just in the wrong direction

 

[BrianM]

Looks like pace of play could be an issue again
Wish they would hit them with shot penalties if not keeping up.