Women’s professional golf - does anyone care?

[shortgame]

The only true way to compare skill levels is to set up the exact same conditions ie. have 100 men hit a 7 iron into a green then 100 women do the same and then compare the proximity to the hole results and how many putts are taken from there. As they are playing different courses in different conditions you are never going to get a true reflection

Not quite. The only true reflection would be for the tour events to be co-sanctioned. Same course, same days, same tees etc. Everything the same.

Then and only then, after a year or so, would you get a true reflection.


I'm sure we're all doing everything we can to encourage more girls (and ladies) to take up and enjoy the sport for everyone's benefit, though there's no quick or easy solution. BUT I am sure it is possible.


An increased talent pool will naturally lead to improved standards. (All IMO of course).

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Why is that a problem?
If you genuinely think a ladies US Masters wouldn't have a positive impact on the woman's game, I certainly can't agree to disagree with you.

It’s a problem because we need the LET to rely on women, not rely on whether daddy chooses to watch it!

A positive impact on the US Ladies Tour? Not sure it needs it, there are people who don’t think the Masters should be considered as a Major in the men’s game.
Do I genuinely believe a Ladies Masters would have a positive impact on the LET or getting females in to golf? No, no I don’t think it would.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

If you can’t watch both and see that objectively the men’s game is of a higher standard, then I don’t think you’re being honest.

Well I have watched both - live, so feel able to comment honestly.

Professional Womens golf is different from mens golf - not better or worse - just different. At the elite level the standard is very high and I would argue from 100 yards in their short game is often superior.

So they don't hit the ball off the tee 350+ yards - it just means they often have to play the course as it was designed to be played. This compares with the men being able to overpower resort type courses longer than 7500 yards by hitting it anywhere. Just different.

Frankly the womens professional game is much more similar to a low handicap mens game and if men don't think they can learn anything from their game they are in denial.

Think the average Cat 1 male golfer can learn how to hit the ball 350+ yards when they get to 30?

 

[shortgame]

So they don't hit the ball off the tee 350+ yards

They don't have to though do they to compete with each other?

If they were to play on a joint tour off the same tees they would then have to to be able to compete. Unless they had a hell of a compensating advantage elsewhere - which I honestly don't think.is the case.

 

[Deleted member 21258]

You can twist stats as much as you like and make whatever you want out of them. I could argue that the male putting stats look better because the guys are hitting shorter clubs into greens and therefore getting the ball closer to the hole. The only true way to compare skill levels is to set up the exact same conditions ie. have 100 men hit a 7 iron into a green then 100 women do the same and then compare the proximity to the hole results and how many putts are taken from there. As they are playing different courses in different conditions you are never going to get a true reflection.

Your almost just making up stuff to support your agreement, rather than providing any evidence to back up what you say. Not much of a discussion, oh well

For myself I was shocked at how much poorer the stats are, as never really looked at them before. I had always assumed they would be as good for like for like myself, as can not see a reason why they should not be.

I am just quoting the stats as I find them. you think sand saves are not similar stats to compare on average over the tours and season ?

If you wish to check similar stats you find many are like the two I quote, GIR is even more in favour for men (84% vs 77%) but maybe to do with distance thing but courses are longer, Putting average is again more in favour of the men 27.82(74 under 29) vs 28.63(7 under 29) but if you think comparing across the tours over the season is comparable, then fair enough.

 

[Grant85]

Well I have watched both - live, so feel able to comment honestly.

Professional Womens golf is different from mens golf - not better or worse - just different. At the elite level the standard is very high and I would argue from 100 yards in their short game is often superior.

So they don't hit the ball off the tee 350+ yards - it just means they often have to play the course as it was designed to be played. This compares with the men being able to overpower resort type courses longer than 7500 yards by hitting it anywhere. Just different.

Frankly the womens professional game is much more similar to a low handicap mens game and if men don't think they can learn anything from their game they are in denial.

Think the average Cat 1 male golfer can learn how to hit the ball 350+ yards when they get to 30?

I think it would be interesting to see them compete around a 3000 to 4000 yard course with a good number of players, a reasonable sample size with some top ranked players.

In fact, I actually think there would be an audience for something like that. Especially at this time of year with not much else happening.

 

[Dibby]

Do you really believe the ''not as good is wrong ' ?

Do you believe if the top women were placed in the top mens tour playing those courses, would perform and win week in week out ? Surely you don't believe they can given the difference in length between the top 10 men players vs top 10 women players? Yeah I think they probably could earn a living on the mens tour.

The top woman hits it 275 yards on lpga, that's like 190th on the mens tour giving away 30-40 yards every week on a number of tee shots/fairway, is a lot. Cant see many mens names at that driving distance and below in the top 10 male players or that win very regularly.

I am someone that watchs womens golf and enjoys it but have to be honest, I don't think the women play to the same standard, some to do with physical differences between male/females.

Out of interest, to flip this the other way round, do you believe watching a ball being hit 30-60 yards further makes for much more exciting and engaging TV coverage?

Maybe I have a rubbish tv, but the length of a shot doesn't really make much difference to the excitement of my viewing. If a tee is set up so players can just carry a hazard to make a green, I don't care if that distance is 150 yards or 300 yards, it's exciting to see people take on the risk.
Equally seeing someone hit a bomb down a fairway 100 yards wide is less exciting.

Providing the courses are set up appropriately, I don't buy that mens golf is inherently more engaging to watch.

 

[Kellfire]

Well I have watched both - live, so feel able to comment honestly.

Professional Womens golf is different from mens golf - not better or worse - just different. At the elite level the standard is very high and I would argue from 100 yards in their short game is often superior.

So they don't hit the ball off the tee 350+ yards - it just means they often have to play the course as it was designed to be played. This compares with the men being able to overpower resort type courses longer than 7500 yards by hitting it anywhere. Just different.

Frankly the womens professional game is much more similar to a low handicap mens game and if men don't think they can learn anything from their game they are in denial.

Think the average Cat 1 male golfer can learn how to hit the ball 350+ yards when they get to 30?

This is about entertainment, not learning. I’m sure I could learn a lot about course management from elite female players. They’re much better than I will ever be. But they’re not as good as the comparable elite men and that’s why I would always watch the men’s game ahead of women’s if I had the option. I do sometimes watch women’s golf and without a doubt in my mind there are more blatant mistakes and awful choices made by women, and they are overall much more reliant on their caddies, too.

 

[shortgame]

Out of interest, to flip this the other way round, do you believe watching a ball being hit 30-60 yards further makes for much more exciting and engaging TV coverage?

No. Not at all

Used to be when Woods / Daly were the exceptions

 

[Grant85]

Your almost just making up stuff to support your agreement, rather than providing any evidence to back up what you say. Not much of a discussion, oh well

For myself I was shocked at how much poorer the stats are, as never really looked at them before. I had always assumed they would be as good for like for like myself, as can not see a reason why they should not be.

I am just quoting the stats as I find them. you think sand saves are not similar stats to compare on average over the tours and season ?

If you wish to check similar stats you find many are like the two I quote, GIR is even more in favour for men (84% vs 77%) but maybe to do with distance thing but courses are longer, Putting average is again more in favour of the men 27.82(74 under 29) vs 28.63(7 under 29) but if you think comparing across the tours over the season is comparable, then fair enough.

If you had access to enough numbers you could compare a few of the woman in terms of strokes gained to really compare abilities.

i.e. there will be stats for Strokes Gained off the tee. Lexi Thompson drives it an average of 272 yards off the tee. If she was somewhat accurate she would definitely not be last in strokes gained driving on the PGA Tour.

 

[Grant85]

Out of interest, to flip this the other way round, do you believe watching a ball being hit 30-60 yards further makes for much more exciting and engaging TV coverage?

Maybe I have a rubbish tv, but the length of a shot doesn't really make much difference to the excitement of my viewing. If a tee is set up so players can just carry a hazard to make a green, I don't care if that distance is 150 yards or 300 yards, it's exciting to see people take on the risk.
Equally seeing someone hit a bomb down a fairway 100 yards wide is less exciting.

Providing the courses are set up appropriately, I don't buy that mens golf is inherently more engaging to watch.

Big argument for not having longer courses was the Open at Carnoustie.

Length was pretty much not a factor. The ball was running for miles and most guys were hitting irons off most tees... even at some of the par 5s.

The big takeaway was that on the Sunday, there was loads of guys involved at the business end of the tournament. Shorter guys like Kevin Kisner and Eddie Pepperell, longer guys like Rory and Tiger, and of course all round class players like Justin Rose and Molinari.

If the set-up had favoured bombers, then likely that we would not have had so many players competing for the event.

Of course, the longer players still have an advantage as they will be hitting a 9 iron rather than a 7 or 8 - but it is not so much of advantage that is takes other styles of golfer out of play. And it leads to a MUCH more exciting event.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Your almost just making up stuff to support your agreement, rather than providing any evidence to back up what you say. Not much of a discussion, oh well

For myself I was shocked at how much poorer the stats are, as never really looked at them before. I had always assumed they would be as good for like for like myself, as can not see a reason why they should not be.

I am just quoting the stats as I find them. you think sand saves are not similar stats to compare on average over the tours and season ?

If you wish to check similar stats you find many are like the two I quote, GIR is even more in favour for men (84% vs 77%) but maybe to do with distance thing but courses are longer, Putting average is again more in favour of the men 27.82(74 under 29) vs 28.63(7 under 29) but if you think comparing across the tours over the season is comparable, then fair enough.

Yet again you have missed the point. The modern mens game is all about overpowering courses, bomb a drive and wedge into par 5's. Women will never be able to do that but put them on a like for like footing and they are just as good. 2% difference in sand saves, wow how crap are those women they really must work harder! I have been to as many women's events as I have men's and they can hold their own in terms of skill.

 

[IanM]

Thinking about the original question.... it's professional golf... so as a golfer I care.

I think I'd care more about watching, if I had more interest in who was contending. That's no different to the men, late on a Sunday at the Lesser Hickville Open, on the PGA Tour...leader board full of Americans, I go to bed! If "one of ours" is in the running, I stay up and watch. This summer, Georgia winning at Lytham... compulsive viewing. Didnt care that she drives it shorter than a bloke, or her putting stats relative to the blokes! Brit winning her home Open...excellent!! My club has three Womens' Internationals...when they are off playing, we are interested!

So, I think if you care about the outcome, you watch. So, we need another Laura Davies... who is marketable. Maybe we have Georgia Hall who will go on to bigger and better. And, as said above, as more play, it drives up the standards!

 

[Hobbit]

I've watched a lot of live golf on both the European tour and the LET. Apart from not bombing drives, the elite from both tours are pretty even. Unfortunately, I find it difficult to feel any affinity for the ladies game. With the men's you rock up, look down the start sheet and pick various groups you want to have a look at. With a the ladies its Kim Jung who?? It needs another Laura Davies or Anika Sorenstam(?) - I can't even be sure out to spell their surnames.

 

[Deleted member 21258]

Out of interest, to flip this the other way round, do you believe watching a ball being hit 30-60 yards further makes for much more exciting and engaging TV coverage?

Maybe I have a rubbish tv, but the length of a shot doesn't really make much difference to the excitement of my viewing. If a tee is set up so players can just carry a hazard to make a green, I don't care if that distance is 150 yards or 300 yards, it's exciting to see people take on the risk.
Equally seeing someone hit a bomb down a fairway 100 yards wide is less exciting.

Providing the courses are set up appropriately, I don't buy that mens golf is inherently more engaging to watch.

Certainly don't think just hitting it long is interesting to watch, I don't find long drive comps interesting.

For me I would limit the balls that the pros play to ensure the courses are still playable. The yardage needs to be good to provide a challenge to the women and men playing at the professional level, as they tend to play a different game to us amateurs, but that is no different to any other kind of sport we are rubbish in comparison. So for them to be hitting 100 yards over a pond in front of a flat green, is generally not very scary for them and would just lead to a birdie feast.

However saying that I do find it exciting when you find someone hitting it 20-40 yards further than most of the field fairly accurately and has the rest of the game to back it and then wins very often, it is very impressive to watch, whether that is a man or women tbh (so as examples tiger in his prime, it was impressive to watch, bit like Lexi on her good days, it is impressive that they have distance, iron work and short game)

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

If you had access to enough numbers you could compare a few of the woman in terms of strokes gained to really compare abilities.

i.e. there will be stats for Strokes Gained off the tee. Lexi Thompson drives it an average of 272 yards off the tee. If she was somewhat accurate she would definitely not be last in strokes gained driving on the PGA Tour.

Agreed and if you also factor in that she is probably swinging out of her boots to achieve that distance compared to a guy who is only swinging at 90% then she is probably more likely to miss a few fairways as well.

 

[Dibby]

Your almost just making up stuff to support your agreement, rather than providing any evidence to back up what you say. Not much of a discussion, oh well

For myself I was shocked at how much poorer the stats are, as never really looked at them before. I had always assumed they would be as good for like for like myself, as can not see a reason why they should not be.

I am just quoting the stats as I find them. you think sand saves are not similar stats to compare on average over the tours and season ?

If you wish to check similar stats you find many are like the two I quote, GIR is even more in favour for men (84% vs 77%) but maybe to do with distance thing but courses are longer, Putting average is again more in favour of the men 27.82(74 under 29) vs 28.63(7 under 29) but if you think comparing across the tours over the season is comparable, then fair enough.

Read about strokes gained.

As an example, putts per round is only a useful stat if everyone starts the same distance from the hole. Is it better to have a round with 30 putts or 25 putts, given 100% GIR? What if the 30 putt round if from sticking every approach shot to 10 feet, but the 25 putt round never has an approach closer than 50 feet? Does it change which round has the better putting?

Ignoring the above, I'm not sure putting or GIR stats make for more exciting viewing. By that measure, it would mean watching someone like Seve would be boring because he wasn't a big hitter and his low fairways and greens percentages?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Not sure why everytime this comes up the immediate focus turns to comparing with men’s golf and the tour

It’s a shame it can’t be looked at on its own merit

Ladies golf is still very competitive and there are some ladies that have extremely high levels of ability. It can also be extremely exciting - the Ladies British Open this year was superb

But unfortunately it’s very much a minority sport already and the ladies area even more so - the Ladies don’t have the financial backing to have a very competitive European tour - the men get away with it because of the money in the Middle East states - those same states aren’t going to put money into a sport where they see the competitors as second class citizens

It’s a shame but I can see the LET merging with the Asian Tour

 

[Deleted member 21258]

Read about strokes gained.

As an example, putts per round is only a useful stat if everyone starts the same distance from the hole. Is it better to have a round with 30 putts or 25 putts, given 100% GIR? What if the 30 putt round if from sticking every approach shot to 10 feet, but the 25 putt round never has an approach closer than 50 feet? Does it change which round has the better putting?

Ignoring the above, I'm not sure putting or GIR stats make for more exciting viewing. By that measure, it would mean watching someone like Seve would be boring because he wasn't a big hitter and his low fairways and greens percentages?

I think you have forgotten why I posted any of the stats, D4S and BIM was saying that the standard of play in the womens game was as good as the mens game, and I personally thought they would have been, but the available stats are saying they are not(can not find strokes gained for the LPGA that you mention).

When I posted up some stats they changed to 'standard of play', and now it is talking about 'skill and you are talking about strokes gained and excitement'

I am only providing the stats I can find, to try to back up the statements that D4S and like are saying like they are FACT, but cant really back up by stats available, which as I say is disappointing. Sadly not enough people want to watch or sponsor the womens game and that is the problem, you need to deal with that major issue.

The women need to up their game, get more youngens in the game, created a better feeder system, get more sponsors, market themselves better, get more people watching, all the normal stuff that is easier said than done and I hope they do, as I watch it, as like just watching golf.

Anyway I am certainly not anti-womens game(amateur or professional), and all for it, watch it, even play most of my golf with women and so on, so think I will bow out of this now as the discussion is heading in a direction I do not wish to be shown associated with.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

It’s a shame but I can see the LET merging with the Asian Tour

Would that be a problem? If you look at the Mens European Tour they play in Australia, S.Africa, Middle East, North Africa and occasionally in Europe itself. Any tour has to do whatever it needs to do to survive.