LPGA Ginn Tribute - Michelle Wie's Round

[3puttbert]

A couple of things.

My index moves between 3 and 5 throughout the year. I have played 2 courses that the LPGA plays tournaments on (Bulle Rock and SeaView) and the LPGA just had an open qualifier at my boyhood course. (The best score there was a 73.+2). I have always played them from the tips and I have never shot higher then 80. I know the course set up at Bulle Rock was shorter then it could be when the LPGA plays there.

 

Re: MW - Is it correct that if a player shoots 88 or higher they are no longer allowed to play in anymore events the remainder of the year? If so, I propose this is why her agent spoke to her after 16 and then she WD immediatly afterwards.

[littlepingman]

It really makes you wonder if the LPGA Tour would actually grant her early membership at this point. It doesn't appear that she is ready. I was afraid the negative reinforcement she put on herself during the PGA tour and other men's events would eventually take its toll on her game on the LPGA, it appears that has happened.

[HeadonaStick]

.

 

How quick we are to go into a feeding frenzy when something negative occurs.

We've not been that quick. It's been several months.

 

Not really. Anytime Wie does anything there is a very vocal group that attacks the negative. Today it is because she had a disaster of a round and withdrew. Is anyone here really sure her wrist was not bothering her? After all, her LPGA play has been very good. But very few even mention that - but look at the head-hunting bandwagon that has emerged over one very poor LPGA showing.

 

and the 'something' is actually several things really.....

 

Also, I'm not a scratch player; I'm off 2. And I would certainly like to take you up on that bet about breaking 90 on an LPGA course. I genuinely would. Does that mean I'm deserving of some sponsor's invites to PGA events and a big contract with Nike???

 

Well, you might break 90 on an LPGA set-up. Could you do it with the cameras and the fans etc.? Not that that is really the point. The point is, the courses are not a walk in the park as some seem to think. I don't know too many people who play off an honest 2 so those people are a pretty rare bunch too.

 

As for being deserving of sponsor's invites - does anyone care if you can break 90 on an LPGA course? Would you generate "buzz" by playing in an event? If not, then no, you aren't deserving of a sponsor's exemption. Ditto the multi-million dollar Nike contract. Do you believe those things are awarded because of her ability to score?

 

Shooting that score would be embarassing for any reasonable amateur player, let alone the 'next superstar'

 

I am sure Wie is also embarrassed. What do you suggest? Should she retire?

 

And I bet most of the LPGA Pros feel the same way.

 

About being embarrassed shooting an 88 or about Wie retiring?

 

Absolutely pathetic. The play, and the quitting. And the fact that she even came close to that '88 Rule' is even more ridiculous. It's a bit like telling a driver 'If you have more than six accidents in a week, you'll be banned from the roads for a year..' when common sense says they should be turning in their car keys quite willingly..

When Wie approaches 88 six times on the LPGA then your analogy makes sense. As it is, she had one very poor round that may, in fact, be the result of an injury. Does her very good play on the LPGA prior to this round count for nothing?

 

I don't have an issue with her W/D. I'm not sure what the point to continuing would have been. In the same situation, I would have withdrawn too - it certainly makes sense to me. Why would anyone wash out an entire season based on one poor round?

[Ogre41]

While I think that she withdrew because she was so close that 88 score, I also think that she has more than proven her worth on the LPGA tour. She definitely belongs out there; or at least she did before the injury. The PGA is another story entirely, but she will probably play at least once more this year with the guys (and I really hope she doesn't). Hopefully she heals quickly and gets back to playing with the LPGA more, although, losing most of this season wouldn't be a total wipeout as she can only play in so many events anyway due to her age. I imagine that she will be back next year full strength and we will see if she can live up to that ginormous hype that she has surrounding her. I wish he luck with that.

[HeadonaStick]

A couple of things.

My index moves between 3 and 5 throughout the year. I have played 2 courses that the LPGA plays tournaments on (Bulle Rock and SeaView) and the LPGA just had an open qualifier at my boyhood course. (The best score there was a 73.+2). I have always played them from the tips and I have never shot higher then 80. I know the course set up at Bulle Rock was shorter then it could be when the LPGA plays there.

 

Re: MW - Is it correct that if a player shoots 88 or higher they are no longer allowed to play in anymore events the remainder of the year? If so, I propose this is why her agent spoke to her after 16 and then she WD immediatly afterwards.

Well, distance isn't the only factor that makes a course difficult. Really, debating about whether or not you or anyone else could break 80 isn't really the point anyway. I have also played courses the PGA uses and aside from distance (which I can't handle) they are not too difficult - until they are set up for a tournament. Then I have a tough time breaking 100 from the forward tees.

 

I have seen LPGA set-ups and it just makes me laugh when someone thinks they are "easy" to play. They aren't, at least when set up for tournament play. That was really my point. Since I can't make arrangements for anyone here to play that (or any other) course, let's drop it. I'll concede that anyone here who says they could beat MW can. Still, that is largely irrelevant.

 

It is true that a player who is not a member of the LPGA is barred from accepting additional exemptions for the season if they shoot an 88. I am almost certain that is what her manager spoke to her about.

[augiep38]

Just this week she said the wrists were not a factor. It is awful suspect to withdraw after 16 holes citing wrist problems. If the wrists hurt that bad why tee off at all or drop out at the turn.

 

This just goes to show how Wie thinks the world revolves around her. She disrespected her playing partners and the game today.

 

The bottom line is her fans will spin it what ever way makes them feel the best, but the reality is that Wie has issues that need to be addressed and the best way to address them is to prove you belong. You do not prove anything by accepting invites and withdrawing for bogus reasons or by missing the cut by a mile.

[HeadonaStick]

I don't have an issue with her W/D. I'm not sure what the point to continuing would have been. In the same situation, I would have withdrawn too - it certainly makes sense to me. Why would anyone wash out an entire season based on one poor round?

 

Of course it works for her to WD to sidestep the 88 rule. I wouldn't say it's the standup thing to do though. There's obviously a purpose for such a rule, and that presumably is to maintain a high level of play on the LPGA. It seems fair enough, it is not a lifetime ban, it's just to say "You're not quite ready, go practice and come back in a year." Of course Michelle Wie being Miss Entitlement, it's like, oh my god, why should she have to suffer such a rule?

Well, why should she suffer such a rule? Her prior play shows she is ready to compete on the LPGA. If she were a member of the tour she would not be subject to the rule. If she were 18 she would already be exempt based on her play last year.

 

If this were her first event on the LPGA I'd agree - a high level of play needs to be maintained. I also suspect the spirit of this particular rule is to prevent one time sponsor's exemptees from becoming regular 88 shooters on tour. It was not designed to address a player like Wie - or it would apply to ALL players on tour. Not just those receiving exemptions.

[tei3rn]

Re: MW - Is it correct that if a player shoots 88 or higher they are no longer allowed to play in anymore events the remainder of the year? If so, I propose this is why her agent spoke to her after 16 and then she WD immediatly afterwards.

 

I believe the score of 88 or higher on pertains to non-members of the LPGA.

 

I just seems fishy that she withdrew after she was approached by her manager...and to use the wrist as an excuse. Unless she re-injured it during the round, she said she felt as strong as ever in a pre-tournament article.

 

Here's her quotes:

 

...As for how she'll fare this week, Wie, 17, isn't sure. "I've been out so long," Wie said. "But I feel really good about my game."

 

As for her future, that's different.

 

"The injury has made me even stronger," said Wie, who injured her wrist in a fall while jogging in February. "It makes me even more determined and more excited to be out here. You know, I'm just going to give it my 110% and see where it gets me. If it doesn't get me to the top, then I guess I'll have to try something else."

[littlepingman]

I don't think too many people are actually wishing any bad on the girl. Personally, I want all the best things for her, and I bet most people here feel the same way. I wish she was out there knocking the flagsticks down and battling it out with Pressel, Creamer, Ochoa, Annika, etc. That would be great entertainment. But situations like this are going to bring out the critics and the sympathizers alike, and I am sure neither side is going to budge an inch.

[littlepingman]

Re: MW - Is it correct that if a player shoots 88 or higher they are no longer allowed to play in anymore events the remainder of the year? If so, I propose this is why her agent spoke to her after 16 and then she WD immediatly afterwards.

 

I believe the score of 88 or higher on pertains to non-members of the LPGA.

 

I just seems fishy that she withdrew after she was approached by her manager...and to use the wrist as an excuse. Unless she re-injured it during the round, she said she felt as strong as ever in a pre-tournament article.

 

She is a non-LPGA member, so it would have applied to her if thats the case.

[mat562]

Why have a rule at all if it doesn't apply to all players equally?

 

Did she receive an invite from the sponsor?

 

Yes.

 

So the rule applies to her.

 

And the general feeling is that she's dodged it by being economical with the truth.

 

I'm not Anti-Wie.

 

I just wonder how long we have to suffer this 'wunderkind' talk without any real substance to give it credence.

 

She played well last year at times. But now she's not doing, and she's still being treated 'preferentially' and that's wrong to my mind. There are plenty of up and coming LPGA pros who are more deserving of that place in a tournament (and PGA pros in the case of the invites she gets to men's events.)

 

If she qualifies, then fine. But giving her a place based on her reputation is wrong.

[Grimace45]

I play off a solid 2 and played three courses that the LPGA plays.

 

Bulle Rock (McDonald's LPGA) - shot low of 72 and high of 78 in six rounds

 

DuPont CC (former site of McDonald's LPGA) - shot low of 70 and high of 81 in about a dozen rounds there.

 

Seview Bay Course (home of former ShopRite Championship) - Shot 67 there the weekend beofore the tournament two years ago and have never shot over 77 there in well over a dozen rounds.

 

 

Add in the TV cameras and the gallery and I am sure I still break 80. Also, I played the course a lot further back than they did at all the venues. Not saying the courses are easy, but the 88 rule should never come into play for someone of her stature.

[HeadonaStick]

Why have a rule at all if it doesn't apply to all players equally?

 

Did she receive an invite from the sponsor?

 

Yes.

 

So the rule applies to her.

 

And the general feeling is that she's dodged it by being economical with the truth.

 

I'm not Anti-Wie.

 

I just wonder how long we have to suffer this 'wunderkind' talk without any real substance to give it credence.

 

She played well last year at times. But now she's not doing, and she's still being treated 'preferentially' and that's wrong to my mind.

 

If she qualifies, then fine. But giving her a place based on her reputation is wrong.

Her exemption is not based on reputation. It is based on how much she can "draw" for the sponsor and nothing more. By the way, many top golfers made their way onto tour with exemptions. To my knowledge neither Annika nor Tiger ever qualified. If Wie were a member of the tour she would not need examptions.

 

She played well all of last year on the LPGA. She's only played one round this year. How is she being treated preferentially?

 

She finished top 5 in 3 of 4 majors last year. Seems like she has backed up the talk to some degree.

 

By the way, the rule does apply to her, and under the rule she is fine. It doesn't address w/d.

 

You are making a rather large assumption saying she is being "economical" with the truth. In light of her play on the LPGA prior to this event it is obvious that she is not playing up to her standards on the LPGA so it seems reasonable to assume there is a problem and it is also reasonable to assume the problem is her wrist. If there is a problem she is well within her rights to withdraw - and given the circumstances she should have.

 

Why would you assume the worst?

 

I play off a solid 2 and played three courses that the LPGA plays.

 

Bulle Rock (McDonald's LPGA) - shot low of 72 and high of 78 in six rounds

 

DuPont CC (former site of McDonald's LPGA) - shot low of 70 and high of 81 in about a dozen rounds there.

 

Seview Bay Course (home of former ShopRite Championship) - Shot 67 there the weekend beofore the tournament two years ago and have never shot over 77 there in well over a dozen rounds.

 

 

Add in the TV cameras and the gallery and I am sure I still break 80. Also, I played the course a lot further back than they did at all the venues. Not saying the courses are easy, but the 88 rule should never come into play for someone of her stature.

Unless, of course, she is actually injured.

 

By the way, great scores. Thanks for sharing.

[mat562]

Name me one other female player who has received multiple invites to LPGA events when not otherwise qualified.

 

There aren't any.

 

Apart from Sorenstam at Colonial (who willingly admitted it was essentially a 'one off') name me another modern day LPGA Pro (or rather, female professional) who repeatedly gets invited to PGA events with the degree of regularity that Wie does.

 

There aren't any.

 

Ergo, she's treated preferentially.

 

Also, I don't know who said it, but there's a saying: "What you did yesterday isn't much use when you need to do it today."

 

I shot 64 once, about 10 years ago. Can I have an invite to a tournament please?

[squarre]

A couple of things.

My index moves between 3 and 5 throughout the year. I have played 2 courses that the LPGA plays tournaments on (Bulle Rock and SeaView) and the LPGA just had an open qualifier at my boyhood course. (The best score there was a 73.+2). I have always played them from the tips and I have never shot higher then 80. I know the course set up at Bulle Rock was shorter then it could be when the LPGA plays there.

 

Re: MW - Is it correct that if a player shoots 88 or higher they are no longer allowed to play in anymore events the remainder of the year? If so, I propose this is why her agent spoke to her after 16 and then she WD immediatly afterwards.

Well, distance isn't the only factor that makes a course difficult. Really, debating about whether or not you or anyone else could break 80 isn't really the point anyway. I have also played courses the PGA uses and aside from distance (which I can't handle) they are not too difficult - until they are set up for a tournament. Then I have a tough time breaking 100 from the forward tees.

 

I have seen LPGA set-ups and it just makes me laugh when someone thinks they are "easy" to play. They aren't, at least when set up for tournament play. That was really my point. Since I can't make arrangements for anyone here to play that (or any other) course, let's drop it. I'll concede that anyone here who says they could beat MW can. Still, that is largely irrelevant.

 

It is true that a player who is not a member of the LPGA is barred from accepting additional exemptions for the season if they shoot an 88. I am almost certain that is what her manager spoke to her about.

I don't think most here believe she doesn't belong on the LPGA Tour. I think she has shown in the past that she clearly has the talent to play out there. However, avoiding this rule by pulling a WD (if that is what she did) is pretty weak.

 

As far as players not being able to break 90 on LPGA set up....that isn't close to true. I grew up playing at a course that hosted a PGA Tour event and in all honesty for the better players it wasn't set up as hard as it could be. The firm and fast conditions probably did make it harder for players with mid to high handicaps, but I know most of the low handicap players felt the course was easier during tournament week than under normal conditions.

[BM1]

Assuming she is injured, why did she play? For the sponsors? For herself? For who or what I am really not sure.

 

Everyone must remember that she is 16 and there is no way that SHE is making all the decisions here.

 

Not sure who is.

 

Is there a point in which the LPGA step in and stop there #1 future talent from going the way of Jennifer Capriati. I see this going so badly that her being Ty Tryon a best case. The weight of the world is going to do more than ruin her golf game!

[littlepingman]

Everyone must remember that she is 16 and there is no way that SHE is making all the decisions here.

 

I am sure she is 17 now, but I definitely agree she isn't making the decisions.

 

Birthdate: October 11, 1989

 

She will be 18 very soon.

[dmboak]

Well, why should she suffer such a rule? Her prior play shows she is ready to compete on the LPGA. If she were a member of the tour she would not be subject to the rule. If she were 18 she would already be exempt based on her play last year.

Who's fault is it that she's not a member? It's her own. She's been in a huge funk since late last summer. The novelty has worn off...now everybody (I should say a lot of people) goes to see the next train wreck. I don't particularly dislike her, but she needs to work on her game instead of pointing to that 2nd place finish last year.

[HeadonaStick]

Name me one other female player who has received multiple invites to LPGA events when not otherwise qualified.

 

There aren't any.

 

Morgan Pressel.

 

Besides, most female players of Wie's caliber trun pro and don't need the exemptions.

 

Apart from Sorenstam at Colonial (who willingly admitted it was essentially a 'one off') name me another modern day LPGA Pro (or rather, female professional) who repeatedly gets invited to PGA events with the degree of regularity that Wie does.

 

There aren't any.

 

How many players actually want to play PGA events and could create the buzz Wie does?

 

Ergo, she's treated preferentially.

 

Not really. Show me someone who meets the tour's requirements and creates the buzz Wie does and I assure you they would get the same invites. It is the sponsor's who invite her, and they don't do it out of kindness, they do it so their tournament gets press. Nothing more.

 

Also, I don't know who said it, but there's a saying: "What you did yesterday isn't much use when you need to do it today."

 

I shot 64 once, about 10 years ago. Can I have an invite to a tournament please?

I thought we covered this.

 

No.

 

Nobody wants to watch you. That's all the exemptions are about. They aren't about golf. They aren't about someone's "big break." they are about getting a return on investment. Normally the sponsor's exemptions are doled out to repay favors or garner favors for the sponsor - which is the reason for the 88 stroke rule. If someone like Tiger comes along that generates buzz for a sponsor then they get an exemption.

 

How many times could you get the words "John Deere" in print if you played?

[mat562]

Which brings us back to the '88 Rule' designed to weed out those who dont belong...

 

And on today's evidence....

 

I rest my case.

 

And regarding Morgan Pressel; I think she's proved her talent adequately.

[dmboak]

How many times could you get the words "John Deere" in print if you played?

 

All advertising isn't necessarily good advertising.

 

Right now the typical sentence is "Why the hell did the Deere invite Wie? She can't break 90 in an LPGA event"

[BM1]

Name me one other female player who has received multiple invites to LPGA events when not otherwise qualified.

 

There aren't any.

 

Morgan Pressel.

 

Besides, most female players of Wie's caliber trun pro and don't need the exemptions.

 

Apart from Sorenstam at Colonial (who willingly admitted it was essentially a 'one off') name me another modern day LPGA Pro (or rather, female professional) who repeatedly gets invited to PGA events with the degree of regularity that Wie does.

 

There aren't any.

 

How many players actually want to play PGA events and could create the buzz Wie does?

 

Ergo, she's treated preferentially.

 

Not really. Show me someone who meets the tour's requirements and creates the buzz Wie does and I assure you they would get the same invites. It is the sponsor's who invite her, and they don't do it out of kindness, they do it so their tournament gets press. Nothing more.

 

Also, I don't know who said it, but there's a saying: "What you did yesterday isn't much use when you need to do it today."

 

I shot 64 once, about 10 years ago. Can I have an invite to a tournament please?

I thought we covered this.

 

No.

 

Nobody wants to watch you. That's all the exemptions are about. They aren't about golf. They aren't about someone's "big break." they are about getting a return on investment. Normally the sponsor's exemptions are doled out to repay favors or garner favors for the sponsor - which is the reason for the 88 stroke rule. If someone like Tiger comes along that generates buzz for a sponsor then they get an exemption.

 

How many times could you get the words "John Deere" in print if you played?

 

In this case it seems as though it may be a waste for the sponsor. No one will see her play this week and this buzz will be over by the weekend. If she won the event or did really well she would be in the news a lot longer.

[littlepingman]

And regarding Morgan Pressel; I think she's proved her talent adequately.

 

I agree with you on that one!!! Just in case no one knows I'm a big fan...LOL

[Grimace45]

Didn't Morgan Pressel then go to Q school, get her card, become a member of the LPGA Tour and win a major.......all by the age of 18?

[BM1]

How many times could you get the words "John Deere" in print if you played?

 

All advertising isn't necessarily good advertising.

 

Right now the typical sentence is "Why the hell did the Deere invite Wie? She can't break 90 in an LPGA event"

 

Good point. Anyone honestly watching the John Deere for Michelle Wie alone is watching because they want to see a trainwreck! Most golf fans probably could care less about here now. Unless you count ones who want o bash her. It seems as though only one or 2 members are defending her here.

[littlepingman]

In this case it seems as though it may be a waste for the sponsor. No one will see her play this week and this buzz will be over by the weekend. If she won the event or did really well she would be in the news a lot longer.

 

That is an excellent and very valid point.

[mat562]

Pressel did indeed do things 'the right way'.

 

And she's done very well since, to say the least.

 

If Wie did the same, I'd be the first to applaud. I really would.

 

But I don't like this 'The world owes me a living' attitude that tournament sponsors and corporate sponsors alike seem to have fostered in her camp.

 

Wie's actions are plain disrespectful and on the back of some poor play I think she's gone down in a lot of people's estimation. We can argue the injury thing ad infinitum, but let's be honest about it; based on the reported circumstances what do most people think?

[HeadonaStick]

Well, why should she suffer such a rule? Her prior play shows she is ready to compete on the LPGA. If she were a member of the tour she would not be subject to the rule. If she were 18 she would already be exempt based on her play last year.

Who's fault is it that she's not a member? It's her own. She's been in a huge funk since late last summer. The novelty has worn off...now everybody (I should say a lot of people) goes to see the next train wreck. I don't particularly dislike her, but she needs to work on her game instead of pointing to that 2nd place finish last year.

A couple of things:

 

1. It is not up to Wie whether or not she gets to be a member of the tour. After Pressel was granted her exemption the LPGA Commissioner made it clear that Wie's request would not be especially welcomed. Remember, Wie still had 2 years of high school remaining. And in my opinion the LPGA commissioner is whacky.

 

2. Last year's season was made up of a lot more than one second place finish.

 

3. I am troubled by Wie's choices (or the choices of Team Wie). When Wie began playing PGA events it made sense - she did have much to learn and the PGA events provided a unique classroom. The sponsors and Wie benefited. The worst thing for Wie was missing the cut by one stroke, making it a lock on future invites.

 

4. The relationship no longer appears to benefit Wie - at least her golf. In fact, the PGA events appear to be taking their toll on her game.

 

5. I am not really a Wie fan, but I think, the girl is a lightning rod for unfair criticism. Playing in "men's" events (even though there is no men's tour) has created a great deal of bigotry towards her by the less enlightened among us. Then others seem to latch on to all the negative comments and spin and perpetuate it. It irritates me - which is shameful of me, but there you go. I just wish people would think more and talk less. And yes, that includes me.

 

6. My comment about Pressel only addresses the fact that prior to gaining her tour card she had multiple exemptions. It has nothing to do with how she eventually earned her card.

 

7. I am not in the "bad press is still press" camp, but many PR people are. I'd be cringing if I was running the John Deere. But I'm not. I also mentioned the Deere to address a very specific point.

 

8. The fact that Wie is out may or may not be a waste for the sponsor. If the exemption didn't go to Wie it very well could have gone to some no-name (by the way, who did the other 7 sponsor's exemptions go to). How many watched today to see Wie? Is a one day ratings jump a waste? Beats me, but probably not to the sponsor.

 

9. The fact that anyone would say Wie doesn't belong based on one round, ignoring her past LPGA play surprises me - at least I'm surprised if they hold every LPGA player to the same standard. Which is, in fact, my only real point.

[littlepingman]

We can argue the injury thing ad infinitum, but let's be honest about it; based on the reported circumstances what do most people think?

 

Thats right. The only thing we know for sure is that her doctors cleared her and she said she was 100%. Just because this was her first competitive round since her injury, we know it isn't her first round of golf since her injury. I am sure she has hit quite a few golf balls and played many practice rounds without too much pain. If she did have pain while playing and hitting shots before or during this tournament's practice rounds she should have never teed it up in the first place. I find it very suspect that her wrist is the only reason for the withdrawal. Remember, Paula Creamer played almost all year last year with a huge brace on her wrist.

[Grimace45]

I think the turning point in the whole Michelle Wie saga was when she (or her "team") decided that she should turn pro. She was a talented player that created a buzz when she played in any event, men's or women's. Once she turned pro and started bringing in $20M a year the tables turned and she was held accountable for not winning. I think she is very talented and think that she will have great success on the LPGA Tour when she finally gets everything sorted out. Truth is, she has been handed a lot more than a lot of other players (male and female) have not in the past. Tiger did play on sponsors exemptions, but he was able to work for his tour card through good play and winning.

 

I also think that her boasts of playing the Masters and Ryder Cup are just rediculous when she can't make the cut on a PGA Tour. There is a huge difference between making the cut and playing the Masters or Ryder Cup.

 

I also find it odd that she played poor at last year's John Deere and it was heat exaustion and then this year during a poor round it was a sore wrist. Isn't John Daly getting killed in the media for the same type of behavior?