world Ranking points at Isleworth

[mr_divots]

[quote name='indiangolfer' timestamp='1417558409' post='10532989']
[quote name='mr_divots' timestamp='1417558055' post='10532951']
[quote name='Barto78' timestamp='1417544578' post='10531601']
I seem to recall Jack saying he could basically mark off every player in a field and get the # down to about 10-15 guys he had to actually beat each week. Those fields were 156 man fields as far as i know.

Perhaps someone who has a better memory or knows the actual quote can find it for us. Also, my sincere apologies if i am way off base w/ my recollection of the quote.
[/quote]
I've heard that one too. Albeit, there were CUTS to be made by said players back then, and they were playing for PEANUTS compared to now, so there was a lot of hunger out on tour. Nothing has changed with the top players in a field being able to be identified. But the DESIRE to win by the top players, who are MUCH richer now, I'm not sure you could compare to someone who slept in cars, etc. Those guys were around when Jack played. Not so much now.
And there are all these endorsement contracts. A little insurance for all the sponsors is nice, isn't it? Their main staffers can be in the big events year after year after year. One big corporate happy. Exactly why I hardly watch golf anymore.
[/quote]

Guys who don't play hard in those days left the tour for lack of money, the guys who don't play hard never make it to the tour these days. It's freaking unbelievable how hard it is to get a card these days. Today's nationwide tour or whatever it is called players would have blown the socks off everyone but the top 5 players of the nostalgic generation imo.
[/quote]
I don't disagree about qaulity of fields now versus then, but I think my point on "protecting" the top players for the benefit of their sponsors got lost along the way.
Think about it. These guys are the face of these companies. They want them around for as long as possible to maximize their investment in them.
Really speaks to the change in qualifying for the tour.

[Shilgy]

Big Three Golf, Shell's Wonderful World of Golf were today's silly season in their time. The rich got richer just like today. And for all the scraping by in times of yore comments perhaps that was true in the early 40's to 50's but when did Arnie and Jack get their own planes? Top to bottom they seem higher paid but in comparable lifestyle the players today don't have it that much better and are still vastly underpaid compared to their MLB, NFL and NBA brethren.
I may sound like it but never intend to disparage the players of times gone by but lets face it, they were only facing their own neighborhood relative to todays all world tours.

[kemau]

[quote name='corky' timestamp='1417557448' post='10532895']
[quote name='Barto78' timestamp='1417533892' post='10530587']
Ahhh....The Tiger haters are back out in full force i see. Complaining about RR points. This field is stronger than the Australian Masters last week and doesn't give an automatic invite to the British Open. Where was the outrage last week?
[/quote]

[quote name='kemau' timestamp='1417553321' post='10532503']
[quote name='corky' timestamp='1417546171' post='10531757']
Never really started this thread as a criticism of Tiger but it seems some of his supporters are so conditioned to see everything through a TW filter that they lose perspective.......

[b]I would have started this thread if it had been Rory's tournament.......[/b]

The thing that got me riled up was Zach Johnson saying that "this tournament was just a way of shaking off rust and that the guys see it as a nice relaxing tournament played in 2 balls under 4 hours"...... It does not deserve any ranking points.
[/quote]

i see you haven't started won decrying the hypocrisy of nedbank, which has been played since 1981. i did a search and not a single topic on it from anyone. ahhh but since it's tiger's tournament....
[/quote]

This tournament too should have no ranking points..... Was never aware of the points available.... Ignorance is bliss I suppose.....you got me... Feel better?


However.. Your first sentence makes no sense.... Do you mean 'one' instead of 'won'.....I guess?
[/quote]

no i don't feel better....just taking care of the "ignorance" part you mentioned. however i must ask if YOU feel better pointing out my improper use of "won"? that's what "one" is reduced to when their hypocrisy is exposed. i guess

[Shankieboink]

I can't see a problem with OWGR points beeing rewarded. The question is if too many are beeing rewarded, and that I probably could agree on. However, beating 17 players from the top 30 or so will always be harder than to beat 2 players from the top 30 and 150 players from the top 1000 on the OWGR. Also, the rich getting richer quote. Seriously? That's how every tournament works, especially the big ones.

[Shilgy]

[quote name='Shankieboink' timestamp='1417563798' post='10533415']
I can't see a problem with OWGR points beeing rewarded. The question is if too many are beeing rewarded, and that I probably could agree on. However, beating 17 players from the top 30 or so will always be harder than to beat 2 players from the top 30 and 150 players from the top 1000 on the OWGR. Also, the rich getting richer quote. Seriously? That's how every tournament works, especially the big ones.
[/quote]Not certain you were referring to me but my rich getting richer quote was not a complaint. Just pointing out that silly season events have been in place for years, hence rich getting richer. And every event is not set up that way, just those with small elite fields and no cut. An earned benefit in my opinion.

[indiangolfer]

[quote name='Shilgy' timestamp='1417567658' post='10533693']
[quote name='Shankieboink' timestamp='1417563798' post='10533415']
I can't see a problem with OWGR points beeing rewarded. The question is if too many are beeing rewarded, and that I probably could agree on. However, beating 17 players from the top 30 or so will always be harder than to beat 2 players from the top 30 and 150 players from the top 1000 on the OWGR. Also, the rich getting richer quote. Seriously? That's how every tournament works, especially the big ones.
[/quote]Not certain you were regretting to me but my rich getting richer quote was not a complaint. Just pointing out that silly season events have been in place for years, hence rich getting richer. And every event is not set up that way, just those with small elite fields and no cut. An earned benefit in my opinion.
[/quote]

Nothing silly about it. Ask GMac who went on to win an US Open because of points he earned earned in this event that got him in.

[corky]

[quote name='kemau' timestamp='1417560954' post='10533181']
[quote name='corky' timestamp='1417557448' post='10532895']
[quote name='Barto78' timestamp='1417533892' post='10530587']
Ahhh....The Tiger haters are back out in full force i see. Complaining about RR points. This field is stronger than the Australian Masters last week and doesn't give an automatic invite to the British Open. Where was the outrage last week?
[/quote]

[quote name='kemau' timestamp='1417553321' post='10532503']
[quote name='corky' timestamp='1417546171' post='10531757']
Never really started this thread as a criticism of Tiger but it seems some of his supporters are so conditioned to see everything through a TW filter that they lose perspective.......

[b]I would have started this thread if it had been Rory's tournament.......[/b]

The thing that got me riled up was Zach Johnson saying that "this tournament was just a way of shaking off rust and that the guys see it as a nice relaxing tournament played in 2 balls under 4 hours"...... It does not deserve any ranking points.
[/quote]

i see you haven't started won decrying the hypocrisy of nedbank, which has been played since 1981. i did a search and not a single topic on it from anyone. ahhh but since it's tiger's tournament....
[/quote]

This tournament too should have no ranking points..... Was never aware of the points available.... Ignorance is bliss I suppose.....you got me... Feel better?


However.. Your first sentence makes no sense.... Do you mean 'one' instead of 'won'.....I guess?
[/quote]

no i don't feel better....just taking care of the "ignorance" part you mentioned. however i must ask if YOU feel better pointing out my improper use of "won"? that's what "one" is reduced to when their hypocrisy is exposed. i guess
[/quote]

Don't think you know what the meaning of hypocrisy is.... I admitted My ignorance of the other tournaments world ranking points..... Which is why I started THIS thread about THIS tournament....... You chose the thread drift....... But whatever.....I'm out

[Shilgy]

[quote name='indiangolfer' timestamp='1417571621' post='10534027']
[quote name='Shilgy' timestamp='1417567658' post='10533693']
[quote name='Shankieboink' timestamp='1417563798' post='10533415']
I can't see a problem with OWGR points beeing rewarded. The question is if too many are beeing rewarded, and that I probably could agree on. However, beating 17 players from the top 30 or so will always be harder than to beat 2 players from the top 30 and 150 players from the top 1000 on the OWGR. Also, the rich getting richer quote. Seriously? That's how every tournament works, especially the big ones.
[/quote]Not certain you were regretting to me but my rich getting richer quote was not a complaint. Just pointing out that silly season events have been in place for years, hence rich getting richer. And every event is not set up that way, just those with small elite fields and no cut. An earned benefit in my opinion.
[/quote]

Nothing silly about it. Ask GMac who went on to win an US Open because of points he earned earned in this event that got him in.
[/quote]I stand corrected I think. Shark shootout or father son would be silly season, hero challenge or nedbank challenge would be off season/non tour events that have a real benefit other than immediate financial in the form of ranking points.

[hogans71]

[quote name='indiangolfer' timestamp='1417571621' post='10534027']
[quote name='Shilgy' timestamp='1417567658' post='10533693']
[quote name='Shankieboink' timestamp='1417563798' post='10533415']
I can't see a problem with OWGR points beeing rewarded. The question is if too many are beeing rewarded, and that I probably could agree on. However, beating 17 players from the top 30 or so will always be harder than to beat 2 players from the top 30 and 150 players from the top 1000 on the OWGR. Also, the rich getting richer quote. Seriously? That's how every tournament works, especially the big ones.
[/quote]Not certain you were regretting to me but my rich getting richer quote was not a complaint. Just pointing out that silly season events have been in place for years, hence rich getting richer. And every event is not set up that way, just those with small elite fields and no cut. An earned benefit in my opinion.
[/quote]

Nothing silly about it. Ask GMac who went on to win an US Open because of points he earned earned in this event that got him in.
[/quote]

Not sure what you are trying to say here but he was comfortably in the top 45 of the world rankings leading up to the 2010 US OPEN and won a European event just weeks prior. He was in with or without his performance in Tigers '09 event...

[golfortennis]

While I'm still not totally sold on the Nedbank event, the fact that it is now official money on a recognized tour is a big change. Still not sold on the idea that ranking points are given out, but the ET has made it part of the tour schedule. I think whether it should be or not is a valid, yet different, discussion.

This one here.....well, it's guys getting money....

[indiangolfer]

[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1417582814' post='10534907']
[quote name='indiangolfer' timestamp='1417571621' post='10534027']
[quote name='Shilgy' timestamp='1417567658' post='10533693']
[quote name='Shankieboink' timestamp='1417563798' post='10533415']
I can't see a problem with OWGR points beeing rewarded. The question is if too many are beeing rewarded, and that I probably could agree on. However, beating 17 players from the top 30 or so will always be harder than to beat 2 players from the top 30 and 150 players from the top 1000 on the OWGR. Also, the rich getting richer quote. Seriously? That's how every tournament works, especially the big ones.
[/quote]Not certain you were regretting to me but my rich getting richer quote was not a complaint. Just pointing out that silly season events have been in place for years, hence rich getting richer. And every event is not set up that way, just those with small elite fields and no cut. An earned benefit in my opinion.
[/quote]

Nothing silly about it. Ask GMac who went on to win an US Open because of points he earned earned in this event that got him in.
[/quote]

Not sure what you are trying to say here but he was comfortably in the top 45 of the world rankings leading up to the 2010 US OPEN and won a European event just weeks prior. He was in with or without his performance in Tigers '09 event...
[/quote]

""That was a pretty cool deal, just to be involved that week," McDowell said. "And next thing, I finished second and got myself in the 38th spot in the world."
[color=#000000][left][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]
Read more: [url="http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2010/10/truth-rumors-mahan-bounces-back-after-ryder-cup-disappointment.html#ixzz3KqYpod6g"]http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2010/10/truth-rumors-mahan-bounces-back-after-ryder-cup-disappointment.html#ixzz3KqYpod6g[/url]"[/background][/left][/color]

[Lennon Mccartney]

[quote name='indiangolfer' timestamp='1417618455' post='10536009']
[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1417582814' post='10534907']
[quote name='indiangolfer' timestamp='1417571621' post='10534027']
[quote name='Shilgy' timestamp='1417567658' post='10533693']
[quote name='Shankieboink' timestamp='1417563798' post='10533415']
I can't see a problem with OWGR points beeing rewarded. The question is if too many are beeing rewarded, and that I probably could agree on. However, beating 17 players from the top 30 or so will always be harder than to beat 2 players from the top 30 and 150 players from the top 1000 on the OWGR. Also, the rich getting richer quote. Seriously? That's how every tournament works, especially the big ones.
[/quote]Not certain you were regretting to me but my rich getting richer quote was not a complaint. Just pointing out that silly season events have been in place for years, hence rich getting richer. And every event is not set up that way, just those with small elite fields and no cut. An earned benefit in my opinion.
[/quote]

Nothing silly about it. Ask GMac who went on to win an US Open because of points he earned earned in this event that got him in.
[/quote]

Not sure what you are trying to say here but he was comfortably in the top 45 of the world rankings leading up to the 2010 US OPEN and won a European event just weeks prior. He was in with or without his performance in Tigers '09 event...
[/quote]

""That was a pretty cool deal, just to be involved that week," McDowell said. "And next thing, I finished second and got myself in the 38th spot in the world."

[left]
[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]Read more: [url="http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2010/10/truth-rumors-mahan-bounces-back-after-ryder-cup-disappointment.html#ixzz3KqYpod6g"]http://blogs.golf.co...l#ixzz3KqYpod6g[/url]"[/background][/left]

[/quote]

Great point Indian Golfer. I love Mcdowell. Its cool Tigers event kind of kick started 2010 for him.

"By getting into the top 50 by year's end, McDowell claimed berths in the Masters and two early-season World Golf Championships events. Another runner-up finish came at the WGC stop at Doral, which provided another windfall of rankings points.
That proved to be crucial around Memorial Day, when the cutoff loomed for the top 50 to get into the U.S. Open. He sat squarely on the bubble at the European Tour's BMW Championship, but a tie for 28th was enough to move him up to No. 49.
He was in the Pebble Beach field"

[hogans71]

[quote name='indiangolfer' timestamp='1417618455' post='10536009']
[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1417582814' post='10534907']
[quote name='indiangolfer' timestamp='1417571621' post='10534027']
[quote name='Shilgy' timestamp='1417567658' post='10533693']
[quote name='Shankieboink' timestamp='1417563798' post='10533415']
I can't see a problem with OWGR points beeing rewarded. The question is if too many are beeing rewarded, and that I probably could agree on. However, beating 17 players from the top 30 or so will always be harder than to beat 2 players from the top 30 and 150 players from the top 1000 on the OWGR. Also, the rich getting richer quote. Seriously? That's how every tournament works, especially the big ones.
[/quote]Not certain you were regretting to me but my rich getting richer quote was not a complaint. Just pointing out that silly season events have been in place for years, hence rich getting richer. And every event is not set up that way, just those with small elite fields and no cut. An earned benefit in my opinion.
[/quote]

Nothing silly about it. Ask GMac who went on to win an US Open because of points he earned earned in this event that got him in.
[/quote]

Not sure what you are trying to say here but he was comfortably in the top 45 of the world rankings leading up to the 2010 US OPEN and won a European event just weeks prior. He was in with or without his performance in Tigers '09 event...
[/quote]

""That was a pretty cool deal, just to be involved that week," McDowell said. "And next thing, I finished second and got myself in the 38th spot in the world."
[color=#000000][left][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]
Read more: [url="http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2010/10/truth-rumors-mahan-bounces-back-after-ryder-cup-disappointment.html#ixzz3KqYpod6g"]http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2010/10/truth-rumors-mahan-bounces-back-after-ryder-cup-disappointment.html#ixzz3KqYpod6g[/url]"[/background][/left][/color]
[/quote]

I get that, and that's great. I'm a fan of the guy and that US Open was one of my favorites.

I was merely pointing out that while yes, he could view it as a "stepping stone" for the year, at no point was he in jeopardy of not qualifying for something SEVEN months later as he was well within the required top sixty in the owgr during all that time..

[mrt99]

Top 60 in the world rankings did not get you into the 2010 US Open. Back then it was still only the Top 50.

[joey2aces]

rich get richer????? redistribution of points!!!!

Funny how that works... play well and get rewarded. Play poorly and complain about those who play well.

[Lennon Mccartney]

[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1417582814' post='10534907']
[quote name='indiangolfer' timestamp='1417571621' post='10534027']
[quote name='Shilgy' timestamp='1417567658' post='10533693']
[quote name='Shankieboink' timestamp='1417563798' post='10533415']
I can't see a problem with OWGR points beeing rewarded. The question is if too many are beeing rewarded, and that I probably could agree on. However, beating 17 players from the top 30 or so will always be harder than to beat 2 players from the top 30 and 150 players from the top 1000 on the OWGR. Also, the rich getting richer quote. Seriously? That's how every tournament works, especially the big ones.
[/quote]Not certain you were regretting to me but my rich getting richer quote was not a complaint. Just pointing out that silly season events have been in place for years, hence rich getting richer. And every event is not set up that way, just those with small elite fields and no cut. An earned benefit in my opinion.
[/quote]

Nothing silly about it. Ask GMac who went on to win an US Open because of points he earned earned in this event that got him in.
[/quote]

Not sure what you are trying to say here but he was comfortably in the top 45 of the world rankings leading up to the 2010 US OPEN and won a European event just weeks prior. He was in with or without his performance in Tigers '09 event...
[/quote]
Not sure what you are trying to say here ...The top 60 didnt get you into the US Open in 2010...

[DavePelz4]

[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1417558639' post='10533011']
Don't bother Dave- his obsession with both mine and imakavelli's posts is Fatal attraction, bunny in the pot, frightening. I've long ago blocked him so at this point I don't have the slightest idea of how many posts he has but I put it at 75% the number of his posts being responses to ours.

Forget the fact that none have said anything derogatory in reference to TW. I've commented often that these limited field events should hold less weight- I don't care who the "ambassador" is...

I often wondered what a troll is... should I be wondering any longer?
[/quote]

I get it now.

[mrt99]

[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1417625914' post='10536597']I was merely pointing out that while yes, he could view it as a "stepping stone" for the year, at no point was he in jeopardy of not qualifying for something SEVEN months later as he was well within the required top sixty in the owgr during all that time..
[/quote]

Went back and took a closer look (just for shi## and giggles) and Graeme barely snuck his way into the 2010 US Open as the world #49 (as of the May 2010 world ranking cut off date). So yeah, those world ranking points from Tiger's tournament in 09 were pretty damn important. Without them he'd have had to play in a sectional qualifier.

[hogans71]

[quote name='mrt99' timestamp='1417626526' post='10536647']
Top 60 in the world rankings did not get you into the 2010 US Open. Back then it was still only the Top 50.
[/quote]

Interesting. Thanks for that...

[hogans71]

[quote name='DavePelz4' timestamp='1417628376' post='10536807']
[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1417558639' post='10533011']
Don't bother Dave- his obsession with both mine and imakavelli's posts is Fatal attraction, bunny in the pot, frightening. I've long ago blocked him so at this point I don't have the slightest idea of how many posts he has but I put it at 75% the number of his posts being responses to ours.

Forget the fact that none have said anything derogatory in reference to TW. I've commented often that these limited field events should hold less weight- I don't care who the "ambassador" is...

I often wondered what a troll is... should I be wondering any longer?
[/quote]

I get it now.
[/quote]

It certainly takes a dedicated effort on his part to respond to only TWO people all the time(now three! Lucky you!) but hey, if that's how he gets his jollys, so be it. He's blocked anyway so what do I care? He can troll to his heart's content- makes no never mind to me...

[redfirebird08]

Definitely think this event and other small events like it should not have world ranking points. However, I strongly disagree with the idea that a 70+ player WGC should be stripped of ranking points. WGC win is miles better than a full field lower tier event on Tour, regardless of the cut issue.

[hogans71]

[quote name='redfirebird08' timestamp='1417631655' post='10537145']
Definitely think this event and other small events like it should not have world ranking points. However, I strongly disagree with the idea that a 70+ player WGC should be stripped of ranking points. WGC win is miles better than a full field lower tier event on Tour, regardless of the cut issue.
[/quote]

I agree with all that..

[corky]

[quote name='joey2aces' timestamp='1417626904' post='10536671']
rich get richer????? redistribution of points!!!!

Funny how that works... play well and get rewarded. Play poorly and complain about those who play well.
[/quote]

but that isnt how it works....... Tiger has not played well for 12months +..... or even played at all, but here he is...... elligable for ranking points.... it ain't right

[Forged4ever]

FWIW, The Masters has the weakest field of the four majors, though in fairness, their commitment to keeping with Bob Jones vision of rewarding the World's top Ams by having them involved is a great thing and WTF, the field's pretty damn strong, lol.


Fairways & Greens My Friends,
Richard

[mrt99]

[quote name='Forged4ever' timestamp='1417635162' post='10537527']
FWIW, The Masters has the weakest field of the four majors, though in fairness, their commitment to keeping with Bob Jones vision of rewarding the World's top Ams by having them involved is a great thing and WTF, the field's pretty damn strong, lol.


Fairways & Greens My Friends,
Richard
[/quote]

How is this comment in an way relevant to this thread?

[Forged4ever]

[quote name='mrt99' timestamp='1417635485' post='10537553']
[quote name='Forged4ever' timestamp='1417635162' post='10537527']
FWIW, The Masters has the weakest field of the four majors, though in fairness, their commitment to keeping with Bob Jones vision of rewarding the World's top Ams by having them involved is a great thing and WTF, the field's pretty damn strong, lol.


Fairways & Greens My Friends,
Richard
[/quote]

How is this comment in an way relevant to this thread?
[/quote]Someone mentioned the Masters on the first page(2nd, 3rd posts I think) regarding "strength of field."

And besides, if it's not, tough s*** chief, cuz it won't be the first time that I post something irrelevant nor will it be the last.

However, I'm good with it and that's all that counts

Thanks for taking the time to post-

Fairways & Greens,
Richard

[KYMAR]

Richard have you ever considered signing a response to a rude post directed at you with

"water hazards and OB,
Richard"

Oh, Asking for a friend.

[Forged4ever]

[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1417637621' post='10537773']
Richard have you ever considered signing a response to a rude post directed at you with

"water hazards and OB,
Richard"

Oh, Asking for a friend.


[/quote]Actually, Duff suggested that though I can't bring myself to use that or anything similar, lol.

Hey, at least he got involved in the thread.

The Best to You & Your Friend

Golfingly Yours,
Richard

[Barto78]

[quote name='corky' timestamp='1417634303' post='10537445']
[quote name='joey2aces' timestamp='1417626904' post='10536671']
rich get richer????? redistribution of points!!!!

Funny how that works... play well and get rewarded. Play poorly and complain about those who play well.
[/quote]

but that isnt how it works....... Tiger has not played well for 12months +..... or even played at all, but here he is...... elligable for ranking points.... it ain't right
[/quote]

What does being eligible for ranking points have to do with anything? Would it not be fair for him to be eligible for ranking points at the Masters if the only way he was able to qualify was due to the fact he is a previous winner? That's sort of the same thing as his own tournament? He's eligible because he's responsible for hosting and putting on the event.

[kemau]

[quote name='corky' timestamp='1417634303' post='10537445']
[quote name='joey2aces' timestamp='1417626904' post='10536671']
rich get richer????? redistribution of points!!!!

Funny how that works... play well and get rewarded. Play poorly and complain about those who play well.
[/quote]

but that isnt how it works....... Tiger has not played well for 12months +..... or even played at all, but here he is...... elligable for ranking points.... it ain't right
[/quote]

"Our field of 18 elite PGA TOUR players is determined as follows: the current four major winners, the top 11 available from the Official World Golf Ranking, the defending champion and two special-exemption players.

The 2014 field includes:

Name, Official World Golf Ranking as of 9/15/14, Country

Henrik Stenson (4), Sweden
Jim Furyk (5), USA WITHDREW
Justin Rose (6), England
Bubba Watson (7), USA
Jason Day (8), Australia
Matt Kuchar (9), USA
Rickie Fowler (10), USA
Jordan Spieth (13), USA
Billy Horschel (14), USA
Tiger Woods (15), USA
Zach Johnson (16), USA
Graeme McDowell (18), Northern Ireland
Jimmy Walker (19), USA
Hideki Matsuyama (20), Japan
Hunter Mahan (21), USA
Chris Kirk (22), USA
Steve Stricker (25), USA
Keegan Bradley (26), USA
Patrick Reed (27), USA"