LIV Golf

[evemccc]

Indeed, Morikawa could also be a flash in the pan. And my personal feeling had he left to join LIV would have been similar to my opinion on Smith.

At no point was I trying to big up Morikawa compared to Smith.

Absolutely fair point of view

But my point is 1) that Smith does now play - and win - in a field with excellent golfers (evidenced by field’s Major haul)
2) Ans that the PGA Tour field isn’t always so strong — evidenced by those no-names above who’ve won this year AND the acceptance of this as a truism….hence the proposed changes to remedy this and move to an elite field by PGL supported by Rory and NLU, and going forward those changes made of elevated events by the PGA Tour

 

[evemccc]

I may have missed something - not been on this thread in a few weeks

Seems like the rankings is all about major qualification

Couldn’t the LIV players just go through Final Qualifying of the Open, The US Open etc

Simple

 

[Swango1980]

Absolutely fair point of view

But my point is 1) that Smith does now play - and win - in a field with excellent golfers (evidenced by field’s Major haul)
2) Ans that the PGA Tour field isn’t always so strong — evidenced by those no-names above who’ve won this year AND the acceptance of this as a truism….hence the proposed changes to remedy this and move to an elite field by PGL supported by Rory and NLU, and going forward those changes made of elevated events by the PGA Tour

Yes, and I never disagreed with Point 1. Smith has done extremely well lately.

I've also never suggested every PGA event is made up of the absolute elite. In fact, I've said otherwise before on this thread, as I've compared the appeal of big standard PGA events as little less appealing than a LIV event from the standard of players alone. That is, LIV fields are far from elite.

Perhaps most of us would like every event to have the worlds best golfers? Certainly when I hear people boasting or mocking events based on field strengths?

Personally, I wouldn't actually want that. The Majors and WGC's hold a special place in the calendar as that is when all the best compete. I suspect if more and more fields were able to attract all the best in the world, it would dilute the appeal to the Majors to some extent.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Not all PGA Tour wins are created equal

Not all major wins are created equal

EVERYBODY who is honest would acknowledge that the 150th Open at St Andrews was wanted more than the PGA Champ at for example Bethpage

EVERYBODY knows that two is better than one, as it's a higher number.
...Thomas didn't win either of his majors at Bethpage

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Yep…Morikawa could well be a flash in the pan (using the same logic as applied above?)…He didn’t win anything this year, to my memory didn’t pose much challenge in the Majors, and look at some of the names who did win on the PGA Tour


JT has won the worst major, twice — IMO has a worse major record than Cameron Smith

Morikawa could well not have another stellar season but so far in three years as a pro he has had two - so not a bad ratio , he was 5th in this years US Open and also 5th in the Masters

And the USPGA is prob looked down as the “worst” but when it comes to strength of field it has more of the worlds top 150 players in it and could well be the strongest of the Majors

But it’s very weird logic to say winning two is a worse record than winning one Open ?‍

Absolutely fair point of view

But my point is 1) that Smith does now play - and win - in a field with excellent golfers (evidenced by field’s Major haul)
2) Ans that the PGA Tour field isn’t always so strong — evidenced by those no-names above who’ve won this year AND the acceptance of this as a truism….hence the proposed changes to remedy this and move to an elite field by PGL supported by Rory and NLU, and going forward those changes made of elevated events by the PGA Tour

no names ?‍

Are these the lower level tour events ?

There are 48 events on the PGAT , they vary in terms of strength depending on the entry , there are more Tour card holders than spaces on every event so just like the ET each event won’t have the same field each week , there are also events being held when majors are on

But the likes of - Homa , Rory , Im , Burns , Matsuyama , Hovland , Scheffler , Speith , Rahm , Horschel , Fitzpatrick, Cantlay , Schuaffle, Finau , Zalatoris all won on tour last season -

The current PGAT caters for a wide variety of the Tour card holders

 

[Slab]

Again, why?

I don't really know much about other sports in terms of their ranking systems. But has Ronnie O'Sullivan not been well down in the snooker World Rankings for many years, despite many considering him to still he the best? And he has won the World Championships while not being World No.1. The reason being he chooses to play fewer events.

Have there not been examples in other sports where a player has been generally considered the best in that sport, yet not been the top of their rankings? These sports do not crumble, or the ranking points systems collapse. It is just how things work. People will always moan about how ranking points systems work anyway.

Again; credibility of their current system, as I said. But yeah what you outline could happen too.
Just maybe the big tours and partnered media will gradually reduce how much ‘stock’ they place in the world rankings every week to the point that it really doesn’t matter if the worlds best player is No1 or not listed at all (that’s just not what they do with owgr now) I'm easy about it either way

What they can’t do is to harp on about world rankings week in week out as some kind of grail, if there’s a bloke sitting at home supping out of a Claret Jug with his green jacket is on the back of the chair while Rory (other players available) is lauded as world No1 because he picked up his 5th Canadian open and a couple of no-cut wgc’s to sit atop an artificial tree

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Again; credibility of their current system, as I said. But yeah what you outline could happen too.
Just maybe the big tours and partnered media will gradually reduce how much ‘stock’ they place in the world rankings every week to the point that it really doesn’t matter if the worlds best player is No1 or not listed at all (that’s just not what they do with owgr now) I'm easy about it either way

What they can’t do is to harp on about world rankings week in week out as some kind of grail, if there’s a bloke sitting at home supping out of a Claret Jug with his green jacket is on the back of the chair while Rory (other players available) is lauded as world No1 because he picked up his 5th Canadian open and a couple of no-cut wgc’s to sit atop an artificial tree

Historically the World Rankings are mainly key for major entry - not many “harp” on about them , up until recently the conversations when it comes to golf we’re always normally about who won which major and then Ryder Cup - many didn’t really care who was number 1 - players cared to get into certain positions to allow them to get into bigger competitions not so they can say they are ranked such and such

Scheffler for example is number 1 right now , he isn’t lauded that much for it but people do laud him for winning The Masters

The rankings were started to help sort entry into majors - that’s a key role for them

The only reason why the talk has increased about them is because of LIV not getting the points now and this idea that they are now “irrelevant” because certain players are playing in events that don’t count towards them - I suspect most don’t care about the points but are worried about those points being used for major entry - that’s the reason why they want them and that’s why they are being talked about so much.

 

[Swango1980]

Again; credibility of their current system, as I said. But yeah what you outline could happen too.
Just maybe the big tours and partnered media will gradually reduce how much ‘stock’ they place in the world rankings every week to the point that it really doesn’t matter if the worlds best player is No1 or not listed at all (that’s just not what they do with owgr now) I'm easy about it either way

What they can’t do is to harp on about world rankings week in week out as some kind of grail, if there’s a bloke sitting at home supping out of a Claret Jug with his green jacket is on the back of the chair while Rory (other players available) is lauded as world No1 because he picked up his 5th Canadian open and a couple of no-cut wgc’s to sit atop an artificial tree

The world rankings also loses credibility if ranking points are dished out to a closed shop tour, with all the other limitations in play. Too much attention is paid to the top players on LIV, who have already done very well in their career. But, what about all the other players who have not proven themselves, or on the decline due to age? These types of players can still have good weekend, and in a limited field event with no cut, they could finish well up the leaderboard, above the worst case of 48th. That means they could end up with a big chunk of world ranking points, whilst better players on other tours are struggling to get anywhere near as many points, as they've to sustain the form through 4 rounds, against bigger fields, not to mention qualify to play in these events.

So, to stop the above happening, even if World Ranking Points were to be offered to LIV in a similar format to what it is in now, these points would need to be severely limited. If that was the case, the big players you are speaking of could still potentially win a Major, and still be well off World Number 1 as they've not picked up any decent points on LIV.

 

[Slab]

The world rankings also loses credibility if ranking points are dished out to a closed shop tour, with all the other limitations in play. Too much attention is paid to the top players on LIV, who have already done very well in their career. But, what about all the other players who have not proven themselves, or on the decline due to age? These types of players can still have good weekend, and in a limited field event with no cut, they could finish well up the leaderboard, above the worst case of 48th. That means they could end up with a big chunk of world ranking points, whilst better players on other tours are struggling to get anywhere near as many points, as they've to sustain the form through 4 rounds, against bigger fields, not to mention qualify to play in these events.

So, to stop the above happening, even if World Ranking Points were to be offered to LIV in a similar format to what it is in now, these points would need to be severely limited. If that was the case, the big players you are speaking of could still potentially win a Major, and still be well off World Number 1 as they've not picked up any decent points on LIV.

No disagreement from me there, if they ever get points for a liv event it would need to be fractional & based on how liv change things in order to earn points in the first place

Even with zero points for liv. What I'm saying is if a liv player has a couple of jacket and jug combo deals under their belt in the next few seasons its the owgr system that'll come under fire if they've blanked him and continue to hold up 'their man' as world No1 as they do now, that's all

 

[ColchesterFC]

Currently, no. There will be though, and as I keep saying. It’s quite clear that LIV are prepared to modify their format to get points, so, it’s only a matter of time until they do. That’s assuming the OWGR don’t start blocking their application despite meeting their own criteria.

So that ends the argument about whether LIV should be awarded OWGR points. As one of LIVs biggest fans you admit that they don't currently meet the criteria to have points awarded and yet you've been defending those, Greg Norman etc, who have been saying that they should have points awarded and even arguing for it yourself. If, or when, LIV modify their product to meet the criteria, at that point they can start saying that they deserve OWGR points. The criteria are quite clearly laid out and LIV chose to create a product that didn't meet those criteria, but then start bitching and moaning that they aren't getting points.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

So that ends the argument about whether LIV should be awarded OWGR points. As one of LIVs biggest fans you admit that they don't currently meet the criteria to have points awarded and yet you've been defending those, Greg Norman etc, who have been saying that they should have points awarded and even arguing for it yourself. If, or when, LIV modify their product to meet the criteria, at that point they can start saying that they deserve OWGR points. The criteria are quite clearly laid out and LIV chose to create a product that didn't meet those criteria, but then start bitching and moaning that they aren't getting points.

Don’t they have to run a tour for a year complying with the rules before OWR points will be awarded?

 

[Mel Smooth]

So that ends the argument about whether LIV should be awarded OWGR points. As one of LIVs biggest fans you admit that they don't currently meet the criteria to have points awarded and yet you've been defending those, Greg Norman etc, who have been saying that they should have points awarded and even arguing for it yourself. If, or when, LIV modify their product to meet the criteria, at that point they can start saying that they deserve OWGR points. The criteria are quite clearly laid out and LIV chose to create a product that didn't meet those criteria, but then start bitching and moaning that they aren't getting points.

Have you missed the bit where I repeatedly said they’ll modify the product until all the OWGR requirements are satisfied?

Infact, I don’t think I’ve ever said that the series is currently eligible for points. What I have said, is that they have some of the best players in the world who deserve to be ranked, and if the current OWGR system can’t accommodate that, then it should be questioned.

 

[ColchesterFC]

Have you missed the bit where I repeatedly said they’ll modify the product until all the OWGR requirements are satisfied?

Infact, I don’t think I’ve ever said that the series is currently eligible for points. What I have said, is that they have some of the best players in the world who deserve to be ranked, and if the current OWGR system can’t accommodate that, then it should be questioned.

Nope, hence the fact that I put that once LIV meet the criteria they can start saying that they should get points. Until then GN and the players, like McDowell has done today, need to stop the whinging about not getting OWGR points.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

Have you missed the bit where I repeatedly said they’ll modify the product until all the OWGR requirements are satisfied?

Infact, I don’t think I’ve ever said that the series is currently eligible for points. What I have said, is that they have some of the best players in the world who deserve to be ranked, and if the current OWGR system can’t accommodate that, then it should be questioned.

Have the OWGR ever said they won’t accommodate LiV? Or just they have to comply with their requirements?

 

[Swango1980]

Have you missed the bit where I repeatedly said they’ll modify the product until all the OWGR requirements are satisfied?

Infact, I don’t think I’ve ever said that the series is currently eligible for points. What I have said, is that they have some of the best players in the world who deserve to be ranked, and if the current OWGR system can’t accommodate that, then it should be questioned.

Your communication skills must be severely lacking, it is probably due to your scattergun approach to just shouting and screaming (from a forum perspective) your points, hoping one day one of your points might stick.

This whole time you appeared to be shouting and screaming that LIV deserves World Ranking Points now, due to the players playing. I'll not go back and read every single post, but that is the strong vibe you were giving off. I never remember you saying that you agreed it currently does not deserve points, but your hope that one day it will change enough for them to be considered.

So, can you confirm what you really meant was:

LIV does not deserve World Ranking Points now, but if they change to meet the criteria, then they should be given fair consideration?

If that is the case, I think most people would agree with you. That is, LIV fans and non-LIV fans. At the end of the day, if LIV changes its format and qualifying criteria, then it completely removes many of the hurdles that non-LIV fans have been discussing for months and months. Points that you have continually debated against, but now seemingly areas that you think now need to be changed to get your ranking points.

 

[Mel Smooth]

Your communication skills must be severely lacking, it is probably due to your scattergun approach to just shouting and screaming (from a forum perspective) your points, hoping one day one of your points might stick.

This whole time you appeared to be shouting and screaming that LIV deserves World Ranking Points now, due to the players playing. I'll not go back and read every single post, but that is the strong vibe you were giving off. I never remember you saying that you agreed it currently does not deserve points, but your hope that one day it will change enough for them to be considered.

So, can you confirm what you really meant was:

LIV does not deserve World Ranking Points now, but if they change to meet the criteria, then they should be given fair consideration?

If that is the case, I think most people would agree with you. That is, LIV fans and non-LIV fans. At the end of the day, if LIV changes its format and qualifying criteria, then it completely removes many of the hurdles that non-LIV fans have been discussing for months and months. Points that you have continually debated against, but now seemingly areas that you think now need to be changed to get your ranking points.

So In summary, you’re not going to go back and read what I have said, but what I said (repeatedly according to you) is that LIV deserve OWGR points?

 

[Swango1980]

So In summary, you’re not going to go back and read what I have said, but what I said (repeatedly according to you) is that LIV deserve OWGR points?

That is indeed correct. I am not going to go back and read all 380 pages of this thread, extract all your posts, identify which ones discuss World Ranking Points, and then determine what you meant by your statements.

If you have struggled to make your point clear, by Pg 380 of this thread, then that is a failure on your part. Especially when others have responded, and you have repeatedly failed to clarify what you meant. Had you done, then the failure to initially understand what your were saying could have been our / my fault, but then you'd have been able to resolve that breakdown in understanding.

But, better late than never. You have now clarified that LIV does not currently deserve World Ranking Points in its current format, but one day it may be eligible for ranking points if it changes certain elements of its criteria. Although we may disagree with the details on how to get to this point, we are in 100% agreement with the general point that it does not currently deserve OWGR points, but maybe one day it will.

 

[Bdill93]

That is indeed correct. I am not going to go back and read all 380 pages of this thread, extract all your posts, identify which ones discuss World Ranking Points, and then determine what you meant by your statements.

If you have struggled to make your point clear, by Pg 380 of this thread, then that is a failure on your part. Especially when others have responded, and you have repeatedly failed to clarify what you meant. Had you done, then the failure to initially understand what your were saying could have been our / my fault, but then you'd have been able to resolve that breakdown in understanding.

But, better late than never. You have now clarified that LIV does not currently deserve World Ranking Points in its current format, but one day it may be eligible for ranking points if it changes certain elements of its criteria. Although we may disagree with the details on how to get to this point, we are in 100% agreement with the general point that it does not currently deserve OWGR points, but maybe one day it will.

"Deserve" - probably does actually.. Fields are pretty damn strong these days.

"Qualify according to current rules and regs" - absolutely not!

 

[Swango1980]

"Deserve" - probably does actually.. Fields are pretty damn strong these days.

"Qualify according to current rules and regs" - absolutely not!

Well, I get your point, although "deserve" is subjective, so it depends what one wants to consider. After all, if Scottie Scheffler, Cameron Smith, Rory McIlroy and Patrick Cantlay organised a 4 ball somewhere, and Cantlay won, there might be some that thinks he deserves a few ranking points for beating the top 3 golfers in the world

 

[doublebogey7]

Phil, you know full well that there’s a qualification process into LIV as of next year.

Which does not meet the current OWGR criteria, i.e. that each event must have qualifying criteria. You know full well that LiV is nowhere near meeting OWGR even halfway, though in my view LiV would need to get to nearer 90% of the current criteria to warrant points being awarded.