D
Deleted Member 1156
Guest
Free slots at 10.20 and 12.21 if anyone fancies a knock?
I'll play but only if it's a non qualifier as I don't want to go up 0.2 over the 2 rounds!
The Masters 2018
- Thread starter ger147
- Start date
I'll play but only if it's a non qualifier as I don't want to go up 0.2 over the 2 rounds!
U
User62651
Guest
When is Lyle, Langer, Mize and O'Meara et al going to give someone else a go? Selfish - I'm sure they can get a game there most any time if they want to play the course so why not step aside and give a young guy in worlds top 100 an opportunity in the tournament?:angry:
Ego, whopping ego.
strum88
Newbie
"Because of the qualifications, the Masters' field does not have a set size. This is important because it means older players with lifetime invitations are not taking spots from somebody who may have a better chance to compete." Looks like it doesnt effect others getting in
had a few bets this year, gone for:
Does anyone know if they will have the masters tv app for amen corner this year?
had a few bets this year, gone for:
| Justin Thomas |
| Justin Rose |
| Alex Noren |
| Adam Scott |
| Matt Kuchar |
| Kevin Chappell |
Does anyone know if they will have the masters tv app for amen corner this year?
Their place in the tournament has no bearing on others whatsoever.
Mize has made the cut in 3 of the last 4, Langer has 3 Top 25s in 5 years. Mark O'Meara is likely playing in his last. As for 'et al' then Freddie Couples has 6 top 20s in his last 7 efforts!
Many top 100 players havent anywhere near the recent record of those 'selfish' players...
D
Deleted Member 1156
Guest
These guys aren't being selfish, the issue is the Masters management committee. They have chosen to make it a limited invite only field. As much as it is a great spectacle it shouldn't be classed as a major because of that. Make it a full strength field of 150 then it would deserve major status.
U
User62651
Guest
Fair do's but they always keep numbers low to allow a decent pace of play (in their eyes), you've got to think the 'past masters' aren't helping with pace of play and aren't competing, course is too long and tough to do a Tom Watson Turnberry thing. Too many good players miss out to yesterdays heroes.
Capella
Journeyman Pro
Langer and Couples are two players which I would never rule out in the Masters. And apart from that, having all the older players compete is one of the things that makes the Masters so special, so no matter how good or bad they play, I really would not want to miss seeing them play. Plus, as has been mentioned, even if they decide not to play, it has no influence on the other invitations, so they are not taking anything away from younger players.
bobmac
Major Champion
Totally agree
PJ87
Journeyman Pro
100% this
and it allows tiger to play for the rest of his career.. if it wasn't for this we wouldn't be on the verge of the best masters in history
just got my 50p bet on koepka refunded (each way) so 50p each way stuck on poulter.. paying 8 places .. bit of form atm so fingers crossed
Dan2501
Tour Winner
Agreed - no different to the likes of O'Meara, Daly, Hamilton, Cink and Duval playing in The Open every year.
They can't play past 60. There is no limit at The Masters.
Personally, I think the exemption should be for 10 yrs only. Beyond that you end up with players turning up for a nice jolly and an ego rub, their golfing ability at that level having largely left them. Yes, I do remember Tom Watson at Turnberry but that was very much the exception and you do not base rules on exceptions.
Garush34
Journeyman Pro
Glad to see the masters broadcasting Jack and Gary teeing off on twitter this year.
D
Deleted Member 1156
Guest
Correction......best Masters that YOU can remember. Anyway, a ball hasn't been hit yet, it could be a total washout if 1 player runs away with it.
HowlingGale
Head Pro
Just stuck a few playful each way bets on Justin Thomas, Alex Noreen and for a laugh Freddie C. Was between Freddie and Angel Cabrera.
tugglesf239
Journeyman Pro
I love the old boys trotting out. Personally I love the history of the game and feel the Masters is a real celebration of the sport.
During the week you have people involved aged 7 to 70 years old. All enjoy it and I enjoy watching it. It’s a special thing and so rare in any sport, let alone arguably the joint biggest event in the sport.
All this talk that the Masters is not a major because of its entry qualification is a load of old Nonsense. Ask the players and I’m pretty certain that the would 99% all say that the claret jug and green jacket are the biggest prizes in the sport.
Ultimately the best in the world all get an invite, plus the best of yesteryear.
What’s the difference?
Appreciate that there is no formal qualifying, however you qualify by getting to the top 50 by plying your trade over the year and entire career.
As I understand things the Masters committee also discourage much older champs from continuing to play. So again why the problem.
I love seeing people like Watson, couples, cabrerra, etc
And I will love watching Nickelson, Woods, scott, Garcia in 20 years time as well.
Only annoying thing is the lack of full round coverage and I’d be interested to know why they don’t allow it?
Regardless it’s somthing I personally love. The open and the masters are the two highlights of the year for me. Not just for the competition (although that is essential) but for the sheer spectacle of the whole thing.
During the week you have people involved aged 7 to 70 years old. All enjoy it and I enjoy watching it. It’s a special thing and so rare in any sport, let alone arguably the joint biggest event in the sport.
All this talk that the Masters is not a major because of its entry qualification is a load of old Nonsense. Ask the players and I’m pretty certain that the would 99% all say that the claret jug and green jacket are the biggest prizes in the sport.
Ultimately the best in the world all get an invite, plus the best of yesteryear.
What’s the difference?
Appreciate that there is no formal qualifying, however you qualify by getting to the top 50 by plying your trade over the year and entire career.
As I understand things the Masters committee also discourage much older champs from continuing to play. So again why the problem.
I love seeing people like Watson, couples, cabrerra, etc
And I will love watching Nickelson, Woods, scott, Garcia in 20 years time as well.
Only annoying thing is the lack of full round coverage and I’d be interested to know why they don’t allow it?
Regardless it’s somthing I personally love. The open and the masters are the two highlights of the year for me. Not just for the competition (although that is essential) but for the sheer spectacle of the whole thing.
Orikoru
Tour Winner
I've just done a couple of request a bets on Sky. 66/1 for Bubba, DJ and JT to make 2+ eagles each sounds like easy money to me.
Also did a slightly more out-there one: Rory, DJ, JT 2+ eagles, and Tiger, Bubba, Rahm & Rose to get 1+ eagle. 500/1! 50p on that, should be a nice 250 quid in my pocket, haha.
Also did a slightly more out-there one: Rory, DJ, JT 2+ eagles, and Tiger, Bubba, Rahm & Rose to get 1+ eagle. 500/1! 50p on that, should be a nice 250 quid in my pocket, haha.
U
User62651
Guest
Aye, they'll never beat Jack in 1986 for sheer drama. That back 9 charge.
Woods although equally brilliant always won his majors from the front - nowt wrong with that but little drama for the viewer.
williamalex1
Money List Winner
Just watched big Jack's grandson get a hole in one in the par 3 competition, brilliant,:whoo:
Dan2501
Tour Winner
Gary out-drove Jack during the ceremonial tee-shot. Told Jack after "it's okay, you out-drove me for 50 years"
