Professional Rankings

[IJames]

I'm not sure it's a 'mess', it's definitely inaccurate - you can't have a ranking system that supposedly uses mathematics and specific parameters, that then just throws in an arbitrary number for The Masters - just because....
The Masters is easier to win, there is less competition, and so in an accurate World Golf Ranking system, that would be reflected in the total points awarded to the winner.

It's quite reasonable to add a bonus for the 4 Majors and The (5th Major) Players! I agree that The Masters points allocation is 'esier to win' However, that is offset somewhat by the fact that fewer players make the cut, therefore receive points, which I believe are all standardised by position with winner receiving 100. That may make it inaccurate, but not catastrophically so (imo)! To do so is a bit like saying doing 70mph in a 30mph is dangerous, but doing 65mph is not! And if it's so inaccurate, I wonder why LIV is so desperate to accreditted and have their players participate in it! The cynic in me thinks it's simply for publicity!

 

[IJames]

If you’d have kept reading my comment, you may have seen how I called out reasons. sorry for not calling out Sandy Lyle specifically though

That's completely irrelevant to my reply - apart from the SL comment which simply seems sarcastic! FWIW, My understanding, which I can't confirm without a load of hassle as the data has been removed, is that finishing position points in Majors (and The Players) are not based on Strength of Field values, but on ratios of the winners allocation (100 or 80).

 

[wjemather]

you have about 60 less players as a start. Sure, all the players are the best in the world, but you also have players from Asia etc who won’t be high in the OWGR. You have the LIV guys who are lower in the OWGR…and they’ll bring the SoF rating down a bit

Since August last year, current owgr ranking has no bearing on 'field rating' (SoF is a thing of the past). Field ratings are the sum of players' 'performance points' which are based on their 'strokes gained world rating', which is similar to DataGolf ranking.

For example, DJ (ranked 69) contributes more points to The Masters field rating than more than half of those ranked above him, and Garcia (161) contributes more points to the field rating than Horschel (24).

LIV players contributions will only be affected when there are a small number of qualifying events from which to calculate their sgwr, at which point their performance points are reduced.

 

[Mel Smooth]

Thoughts?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1651295780513120274

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Thoughts?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1651295780513120274

Same thoughts anytime there is the same discussion

Fulfil the requirements needed to gain ranking points and the event will be eligible

Nothing has changed since the first day they started when they knew there would be no ranking points and none of the players thought twice about it all

 

[Mel Smooth]

Same thoughts anytime there is the same discussion

Fulfil the requirements needed to gain ranking points and the event will be eligible

Nothing has changed since the first day they started when they knew there would be no ranking points and none of the players thought twice about it all

If you've watched the video (have you?), you'll see that Dan is basically saying the OWGR is failing because it's hiding behind the "fulfilling the requirements" arguments, well, we think they are, they've not actually said anything of note.
He's right, you can't have a golf ranking system that doesn't rank some of the best golfers in the world, and the hope that people like you have Phil, that the OWGR can strongarm LIV into 72 hole events with cuts is a failing argument.
Those are my thoughts on what Rappaport had to say.
OWGR either changes, or it will disappear as a legitimate ranking system.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

If you've watched the video (have you?), you'll see that Dan is basically saying the OWGR is failing because it's hiding behind the "fulfilling the requirements" arguments, well, we think they are, they've not actually said anything of note.
He's right, you can't have a golf ranking system that doesn't rank some of the best golfers in the world, and the hope that people like you have Phil, that the OWGR can strongarm LIV into 72 hole events with cuts is a failing argument.
Those are my thoughts on what Rappaport had to say.
OWGR either changes, or it will disappear as a legitimate ranking system.

The requirements for a tour to gain ranking points are simple and laid out - every other tour follows the same process and LIV need to follow it

Doesn’t matter what someone things - it’s irrelevant, there is a process to follow and there is no reason why LIV should be allowed to bypass that and ignore it.


Apply for points - fulfil what’s needed to gain points and when the boxes are ticked then they get points

It’s not something they can buy or bully their way to getting

They all knew the situation and nothing has changed since day 1


Constantly crying about them and demanding them won’t change a thing.


Every single player knew they were going to a tour that hosted events that had no world ranking points assigned to them.

There is no “strong arming” - there is every tour being treated the same - no special treatment for anyone

 

[IanM]

You can't be critical of respecting a player's decision to opt out in return for a fantastic pay off. They don't care, why should you?

 

[Mel Smooth]

The requirements for a tour to gain ranking points are simple and laid out - every other tour follows the same process and LIV need to follow it

Doesn’t matter what someone things - it’s irrelevant, there is a process to follow and there is no reason why LIV should be allowed to bypass that and ignore it.


Apply for points - fulfil what’s needed to gain points and when the boxes are ticked then they get points

It’s not something they can buy or bully their way to getting

They all knew the situation and nothing has changed since day 1


Constantly crying about them and demanding them won’t change a thing.


Every single player knew they were going to a tour that hosted events that had no world ranking points assigned to them.

There is no “strong arming” - there is every tour being treated the same - no special treatment for anyone

So what you are saying pro golf HAS to be played to a set format, and it would be impossible to have a fair system of ranking golfers unless they all play to that format?

You are still seeing it as a means to prevent LIV players from gaining access to majors. Meanwhile the people that want to see golf prosper are looking for ways to protect those events so they include the best players in the world, regardless of where they play.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

So what you are saying pro golf HAS to be played to a set format, and it would be impossible to have a fair system of ranking golfers unless they all play to that format?

You are still seeing it as a means to prevent LIV players from gaining access to majors. Meanwhile the people that want to see golf prosper are looking for ways to protect those events so they include the best players in the world, regardless of where they play.

What I’m saying is right now there is a process for tours to follow if they want ranking points

The qualification for those ranking points is clear

The majors don’t seem to have any issues with the ranking points and how they are calculated

Don’t seem to be missing any top players in the coming majors

Why should everything change just because 40 guys decided to do something different

Everything is known - LIV knew the situation, the players knew the situation and they clearly weren’t too bothered about the ranking points when they joined LIV - once again it’s a small minority wanting everything to suit them

 

[IanM]

Meanwhile the people that want to see golf prosper are looking for ways to protect those events so they include the best players in the world, regardless of where they play.

Absolutely correct.

That's why Liv needs to be stood up to.

The Saudi's funded Liv for influence and prestige. Norman was similarly always looking for a way increase his influence.

Do you really think LIV was set up for the good of the game and altruism?

 

[Mel Smooth]

Absolutely correct.

That's why Liv needs to be stood up to.

The Saudi's funded Liv for influence and prestige. Norman was similarly always looking for a way increase his influence.

Do you really think LIV was set up for the good of the game and altruism?

Why it was set up is totally irrelevant, particularly in this debate.

It was, it’s proving to be extremely popular, and it will be around for some time.

If the majors want the best players in the world in their events (they need them - whether they want them or not), then there has to be an accurate system to rate them for qualification.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Why it was set up is totally irrelevant, particularly in this debate.

It was, it’s proving to be extremely popular, and it will be around for some time.

If the majors want the best players in the world in their events (they need them - whether they want them or not), then there has to be an accurate system to rate them for qualification.

A very long way to go yet

For something that’s “extremely popular” as you claim , it’s not really backed up by facts when for a recent event the viewing figures were that poor they were beaten by repeats of The Funniest Animals


You are getting carried away by one single event .

 

[doublebogey7]

Why it was set up is totally irrelevant, particularly in this debate.

It was, it’s proving to be extremely popular, and it will be around for some time.

If the majors want the best players in the world in their events (they need them - whether they want them or not), then there has to be an accurate system to rate them for qualification.

That is up to them to decide surely, and so far they have decided to stick to the qualifying system that has stood the test of time. Personally I don't see any sigmificant changes happening while LiV refuse to counter compromise but also recognise that the Majors have to do what is in their best interest. All this whinging from those who choose to associate with LiV is exteemely tedious, when they knew, or ought to have known, what the consequences of this League would be for those players jumping.

 

[BubbaP]

Seems like people may be going around in circles again.

Which ever 'side' of the debate people are on, and there decent points either way, I still find it odd that the owgr stay so quiet.

Ultimately they'll be judged on their own stated aims

 

[doublebogey7]

Seems like people may be going around in circles again.

Which ever 'side' of the debate people are on, and there decent points either way, I still find it odd that the owgr stay so quiet.

Ultimately they'll be judged on their own stated aims
View attachment 47542View attachment 47543

There no need at all for OWGR to say anything at least until the 12 month application period is up. Better in my view that they keep any discussions under wraps until they've got something constructive, either way, to say.

I am sure over the next few years we will be hearing of changes to their rules and that may include offering points to those playing in LiV events. I struggle to see though how they can include LiV while it remains a wholly invitation tour, as it would not appear to me to meet the "fairly ranks the relative performances" part of the objectives. I know LiV are proposing to change that at some time in the future but until that is achieved I don't see LiV getting points.

 

[wjemather]

This constant repetition of deliberate half-truths and untruths from people who are staunchly anti-LIV is utterly tiresome.

Given the only functional purpose of the rankings is qualification for the majors, it needs to be ranking all elite professional tournaments and allocating points fairly. By offering more points for last place (or near last place) finishes in no-cut PGA Tour sanctioned events than top 5s (and wins) on other major tours, that's something that it's current structure and formulae utterly fail to do.

There are several independent rankings out there that manage to include LIV events with no great drama. We can be fairly certain that if it were free from PGA Tour politics and influence, the OWGR would too, and with very little fuss. It would also not be gifting comparatively big points for dfl finishes in the Atlanta handicap, the Hawaii exhibition, The Bahamas invitational, etc.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

This constant repetition of deliberate half-truths and untruths from people who are staunchly anti-LIV is utterly tiresome.

Given the only functional purpose of the rankings is qualification for the majors, it needs to be ranking all elite professional tournaments and allocating points fairly. By offering more points for last place (or near last place) finishes in no-cut PGA Tour sanctioned events than top 5s (and wins) on other major tours, that's something that it's current structure and formulae utterly fail to do.

There are several independent rankings out there that manage to include LIV events with no great drama. We can be fairly certain that if it were free from PGA Tour politics and influence, the OWGR would too, and with very little fuss. It would also not be gifting comparatively big points for dfl finishes in the Atlanta handicap, the Hawaii exhibition, The Bahamas invitational, etc.

Not sure what “untruths” are being spoken


But the Majors are on the board for the rankings and they don’t appear to have any issues with how they work , they don’t appear to be making any changes to them.

As you say the rankings are for entry into Majors and also other events around the world and the governing bodies of those majors and ranking events will be the ones to make those choices surely. Why would they have someone independent do it ?

Here is an idea - how about LIV allow their entries via the World Rankings just like other tours and majors and that way they can also have a say in how they are calculated.

 

[Captainron]

The OWGR set up has been around for yonks. It is a the current baseline of player capability measurement and entry to many events and the Majors is largely is based on these rankings.

Creating a new tour without taking that fact into account before setting up was a huge mistake on the part of LIV.

Moaning about it after the fact because the players they bought can't earn these is irrelevant as they set up to fail on this specific issue which is now biting them on the backside.

Personally, I hope LIV never gets OGWR recognition.

 

[doublebogey7]

This constant repetition of deliberate half-truths and untruths from people who are staunchly anti-LIV is utterly tiresome.

Given the only functional purpose of the rankings is qualification for the majors, it needs to be ranking all elite professional tournaments and allocating points fairly. By offering more points for last place (or near last place) finishes in no-cut PGA Tour sanctioned events than top 5s (and wins) on other major tours, that's something that it's current structure and formulae utterly fail to do.

There are several independent rankings out there that manage to include LIV events with no great drama. We can be fairly certain that if it were free from PGA Tour politics and influence, the OWGR would too, and with very little fuss. It would also not be gifting comparatively big points for dfl finishes in the Atlanta handicap, the Hawaii exhibition, The Bahamas invitational, etc.

Can you please point out the untruths, as I try to do from the other purspective rathar than just stated is as if it was a fact. I would could then either defend or correct the record. maybe though this wasn't aimed at me and I am just paranoid .