LIV Golf

[wjemather]

There was a cut at the Dunhill Links.

Nope.
Field of 168. 129 played all 3 rounds; 39 withdrew or retired. No cut, other than to the number of holes played.

 

[Deleted member 25172]

only if you are wearing shorts!

What about Stromberg trousers?

 

[Deleted member 1147]

You can't put a handicap card in if playing a team event, so you shouldn't get WR points either.

 

[Dando]

Nope.
Field of 168. 129 played all 3 rounds; 39 withdrew or retired. No cut, other than to the number of holes played.

there is usually a cut for the professionals

 

[SteveW86]

https://www.europeantour.com/dpworl...ail/alfred-dunhill-links-championship-update/

Suggests there was a cut for the team event, with the top 30 making it to the final round.

I deleted my comment as I wasnt sure on the actual situation, but there is usually a cut for the pro event and for the team event.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

https://www.europeantour.com/dpworl...ail/alfred-dunhill-links-championship-update/

Suggests there was a cut for the team event, with the top 30 making it to the final round.

I deleted my comment as I wasnt sure on the actual situation, but there is usually a cut for the pro event and for the team event.

Yes, an anomaly of terrible weather prevented it on this occasion. Rather than it being the norm.

 

[SteveW86]

Common sense prevailing

 

[wjemather]

You can't put a handicap card in if playing a team event, so you shouldn't get WR points either.

Not true (you can in jurisdictions where those team formats are acceptable), but a stellar example of irrelevant whataboutery nonetheless.

 

[Deleted member 25172]

Not true (you can in jurisdictions where those team formats are acceptable), but a stellar example of irrelevant whataboutery nonetheless.

Have you ever thought about contacting the OWGR to offer your services in order to clear up this mess they've created?

 

[Swango1980]

Imagine this.

I’m trying to promote a discussion on why the OWGR system is totally inflexible (apart from when it suits them of course..)

Do I think TMRW should get world ranking points,… No I don’t, based on what I know about it.
Should it be part of the discussion on modernising the game of golf. Yes, Absolutely

I could reword this to:

The OWGR has proved that it CAN be flexible, but is accused of inflexibility if it doesn't scrap certain criteria at the request of a minority.

 

[Mel Smooth]

I could reword this to:

The OWGR has proved that it CAN be flexible, but is accused of inflexibility if it doesn't scrap certain criteria at the request of a minority.

To be fair, that just compounds the view that OWGR isn’t fit for purpose anymore.

 

[Jason.H]

Maybe LIV should change tack and play 72 holes strokeplay with a cut like all the other tours and forget the team element. Play Monday to Thursday so not to clash with rival tours .
Let’s face it I’m a proper golf fan and I don’t bother watching LIV.

 

[Dando]

Maybe LIV should change tack and play 72 holes strokeplay with a cut like all the other tours and forget the team element. Play Monday to Thursday so not to clash with rival tours .
Let’s face it I’m a proper golf fan and I don’t bother watching LIV.

there's more chance of Oscar Pistorius getting athletes foot

 

[GB72]

It is frustrating that there was a period of detente but this seems to have upset the apple cart again. As I have said before, I am not a fan of the PGA Tour or LIV and I think that the whole global structure of professional golf needs looking at but that may just be me.

If I were the Saudis, I would just pull the PGA funding deal and spend the money actually setting up a full, global tour under a traditional model, put in the big purses, get the OWGR points approved in advance, try to attract as many pros as possible and just set up a full rival to the PGA and stop working around them. That would set the cat amongst the pidgeons.

 

[doublebogey7]

That the majors will make sure they have a system in place to keep the best players in their events?

They will, infact haven’t a few of them already made statements that confirm that?

The first sentence is simply a repeat of what I was talking about.
Now the second statement would progress the argument if accurate, but I've seen nothing in recent weeks to suggest that it is.

 

[BubbaP]

Guess everyone is going to take different things from the statements.
I have 'no skin in this game', for me this is telling:

"—not so much their format, that can be dealt with through a mathematical formula—"

So they could do it, but chose not to.

A key item, if your role is governance of the game, is that some players were contracted to start the thing up, and so the relegation aspects won't apply short term. I would agree that is far from ideal, and a problem for many.

Whether that governance is the role of the OWGR is a subjective matter.

The website still states -
"Since its inception, the Ranking has been continuously refined, taking into account the ever-changing structure of world golf and suggestions from players and tours alike."

Personally think they should have stuck with that. Since the recent algorithm changes, most know the small field size would yield low points. More so with those who used to have decent rankings are now eroded. So would it make much difference? Can see benefits in taking the 'political' aspects away and sitting behind the algorithm. Should still have kept 'the ol' boys' pretty happy. But that isn't the direction they have gone. Perhaps until those contracts expire.

Most other stuff seemed media friendly bluster.
----
I'll probably regret posting on here again, seems a shame discussing items isn't really a thing these days, and 'pile on trolling' appears the norm

 

[Redtraveller]

Here’s my views on this.
The shorter format is much more spectator friendly - whether that’s live at the event or watching the feed.
There are multiple world class players on the course at the same time, so pretty much every group has a star player.
The tour takes ALL those players across the globe.
The series clearly appeals to younger fans, the team aspect IS part of that.
The production is much more focussed on the visuals and audio, the music around the course isn’t blaring as some think, it’s there in the background and provides a nice, chilled vibe - both myself and Jamie commented on this when we were at Centurion.
The shorter format also allows the event to accommodate weather delays without overrunning and being shortened - as we’ve just witnessed at the weekend.
The big one for me though is the events being streamed on multiple platforms, it’s incredibly easy to watch, regardless of which device you have at hand. I appreciate that could change over time, but at the moment it’s a genuine plus point to LIV.

I would disagree that the shorter format is better for spectators. If you go to the Open for example, you’re there from maybe 7am till 7pm (if you want to be) seeing all of the worlds best. It’s hard to get close at times to see players close up. If it’s squeezed over 4/5 hours you’ve got way less chance of getting close to the action, especially with just a handful of top players.

 

[Mel Smooth]

I would disagree that the shorter format is better for spectators. If you go to the Open for example, you’re there from maybe 7am till 7pm (if you want to be) seeing all of the worlds best. It’s hard to get close at times to see players close up. If it’s squeezed over 4/5 hours you’ve got way less chance of getting close to the action, especially with just a handful of top players.

Not really buddy.

The ball from Sergio was the highlight of the day for the youth - he was at the back of the 14th green and had fist bumped pretty much every player as they walked off the green. When Sergio walked past he said "Sergio, Jugar Bien".. Sergio stopped, turned round and tossed him that ball. That's a memory for life for the kid right there.

 

[BubbaP]

I think you’re misrepresenting it a tad. Some aspects of the Liv set up could be handled by an algorithm as the statement makes clear (and is a fairly conciliatory note I think) but it’s the closed shop aspect that was the red line for them.

So, yeah, they chose not to award points as you say but for a very clear and rational reason. I think that also gives Liv a pretty clear steer on how to become compliant.

* establish a viable route that anyone can use to play their way onto the tour
* ensure that no player is immune from relegation

I reckon if they did that the actual scale of player turnover each year could be negotiated but probably wouldn’t need to be that many players. Don’t think there would be an argument against awarding points in that scenario.

Isn't the 'red line' for a nearly closed shop back to governance though?

Is fine if you agree that should be their role, but if their role is player rankings then surely that doesn't actually matter. If a 'closed shop player' is playing rubbish they still won't gain points.

Agree on your 'steer' points. Guess most were expecting some agreement in place with PGAT before then but that looks less likely now.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

I would disagree that the shorter format is better for spectators. If you go to the Open for example, you’re there from maybe 7am till 7pm (if you want to be) seeing all of the worlds best. It’s hard to get close at times to see players close up. If it’s squeezed over 4/5 hours you’ve got way less chance of getting close to the action, especially with just a handful of top players.

I imagine it’s ok at a LIV event as the crowds are small. But a popular event like a PGA tour event or major I agree, the crowds would be too deep.