LPGA Off Season

[North Texas]

Yeah, ridiculous that the women are playing the course 5% shorter than the men, even though the women average 15% shorter off the tee.

 

Agree. It only takes a little common sense to set the course so the women hit the same club into the green as the men do. Whoever set this up doesn't have any.

[new2g0lf]

I haven't, I know for a fact they aren't but there are numerous discussions here about how the PGA should assist the LPGA, how LPGA players should play in PGA events, pay gaps and comparisons of scratch golfers and LPGA members which is really what I was responding to.

Posted elsewhere. Obviously, this is not the greatest field. Distance is not set at exact parity like you dream of but there is clearly an advantage for the men.

 

http://www.vicopengolf.com/card

 

https://www.golfdige...-for-the-future

 

Amid all of this giddiness, there have been one or two murmurings of discontent. Many of the women have noted the sight of several of their tees sitting either directly alongside or marginally ahead of those of the men. This, many argue, will lead to a wide disparity in the winning scores that will only support the chauvinistic notion that the men can play and the women can’t.

 

“It’s not that hard,” says one woman who asked not to be identified. “All they have to do is set the test up so that we are all hitting the same clubs into the greens. There are some holes out there where I’ll be going in with a hybrid and many of the men will be hitting short irons. To a tight pin, that’s just not fair.”

 

Going back to the analogy of marathon runners, men and women run the same course and the time disparities are rarely talked about because it's a given that the fastest men are typically faster than the fastest women. The men compete against the mens times and women against the womens times.

 

In the case of a course that plays the same length or close, the women are still competing only against the women and the men against the men, the difference in score of the winning man and woman will be accounted for by the mans ability to hit the ball further. Shortening the course for women so they can hit the same clubs into the green and post similar scores as the men imo does not lend more credibility to the womens game. It's not a secret that women play shorter courses and most golf fans in their head adjust the scores to reflect the difference in length if direct comparisons are going to be made with men. .

 

I could dunk the ball as much as Lebron James if I get to dunk on an 8' net and he a 10' net, will anyone be foolish enough to believe I'm as good as Lebron because given the conditions of competition I was able to produce similar numbers?

[I_HATE_SNOW]

Yeah, ridiculous that the women are playing the course 5% shorter than the men, even though the women average 15% shorter off the tee.

Average course length LPGA is 6200 - 6600. PGA is 7200, 8 - 14 % not 5%.

[Argonne69]

Yeah, ridiculous that the women are playing the course 5% shorter than the men, even though the women average 15% shorter off the tee.

Average course length LPGA is 6200 - 6600. PGA is 7200, 8 - 14 % not 5%.

 

That is correct. However, I was referencing the length of the men's tees at the VIC Open, i.e. 6796 and 6940. The women are playing 6479 and 6573.

[Titleist_PT23]

I haven't, I know for a fact they aren't but there are numerous discussions here about how the PGA should assist the LPGA, how LPGA players should play in PGA events, pay gaps and comparisons of scratch golfers and LPGA members which is really what I was responding to.

Posted elsewhere. Obviously, this is not the greatest field. Distance is not set at exact parity like you dream of but there is clearly an advantage for the men.

 

http://www.vicopengolf.com/card

 

https://www.golfdige...-for-the-future

 

Amid all of this giddiness, there have been one or two murmurings of discontent. Many of the women have noted the sight of several of their tees sitting either directly alongside or marginally ahead of those of the men. This, many argue, will lead to a wide disparity in the winning scores that will only support the chauvinistic notion that the men can play and the women can’t.

 

“It’s not that hard,” says one woman who asked not to be identified. “All they have to do is set the test up so that we are all hitting the same clubs into the greens. There are some holes out there where I’ll be going in with a hybrid and many of the men will be hitting short irons. To a tight pin, that’s just not fair.”

 

Going back to the analogy of marathon runners, men and women run the same course and the time disparities are rarely talked about because it's a given that the fastest men are typically faster than the fastest women. The men compete against the mens times and women against the womens times.

 

In the case of a course that plays the same length or close, the women are still competing only against the women and the men against the men, the difference in score of the winning man and woman will be accounted for by the mans ability to hit the ball further. Shortening the course for women so they can hit the same clubs into the green and post similar scores as the men imo does not lend more credibility to the womens game. It's not a secret that women play shorter courses and most golf fans in their head adjust the scores to reflect the difference in length if direct comparisons are going to be made with men. .

 

I could dunk the ball as much as Lebron James if I get to dunk on an 8' net and he a 10' net, will anyone be foolish enough to believe I'm as good as Lebron because given the conditions of competition I was able to produce similar numbers?

WNBA plays on a 10 foot hoop. I don't have firm stats here but I think they dunk less than the men in the NBA. Most people can understand why.

 

And, the WNBA product does not seem to be as well regarded as the LPGA (apologies in advance to anyone) relative to the mens' tour.

 

Anyways, it's clear that your objective is just to "bash the LPGA." We all get it. The person described in Post #77 is you - congrats.

[Argonne69]

It really does look like the crew setting up the Vic couldn't be bothered with building signs at multiple teeboxes, so they simply put the women's tees a few yards in front of the men's tees. Oy.

 

[Titleist_PT23]

It really does look like the crew setting up the Vic couldn't be bothered with building signs at multiple teeboxes, so they simply put the women's tees a few yards in front of the men's tees. Oy.

Will be interesting to see the leading and average score for each of the men and women after the second round is complete.

[new2g0lf]

I haven't, I know for a fact they aren't but there are numerous discussions here about how the PGA should assist the LPGA, how LPGA players should play in PGA events, pay gaps and comparisons of scratch golfers and LPGA members which is really what I was responding to.

Posted elsewhere. Obviously, this is not the greatest field. Distance is not set at exact parity like you dream of but there is clearly an advantage for the men.

 

http://www.vicopengolf.com/card

 

https://www.golfdige...-for-the-future

 

Amid all of this giddiness, there have been one or two murmurings of discontent. Many of the women have noted the sight of several of their tees sitting either directly alongside or marginally ahead of those of the men. This, many argue, will lead to a wide disparity in the winning scores that will only support the chauvinistic notion that the men can play and the women can’t.

 

“It’s not that hard,” says one woman who asked not to be identified. “All they have to do is set the test up so that we are all hitting the same clubs into the greens. There are some holes out there where I’ll be going in with a hybrid and many of the men will be hitting short irons. To a tight pin, that’s just not fair.”

 

Going back to the analogy of marathon runners, men and women run the same course and the time disparities are rarely talked about because it's a given that the fastest men are typically faster than the fastest women. The men compete against the mens times and women against the womens times.

 

In the case of a course that plays the same length or close, the women are still competing only against the women and the men against the men, the difference in score of the winning man and woman will be accounted for by the mans ability to hit the ball further. Shortening the course for women so they can hit the same clubs into the green and post similar scores as the men imo does not lend more credibility to the womens game. It's not a secret that women play shorter courses and most golf fans in their head adjust the scores to reflect the difference in length if direct comparisons are going to be made with men. .

 

I could dunk the ball as much as Lebron James if I get to dunk on an 8' net and he a 10' net, will anyone be foolish enough to believe I'm as good as Lebron because given the conditions of competition I was able to produce similar numbers?

WNBA plays on a 10 foot hoop. I don't have firm stats here but I think they dunk less than the men in the NBA. Most people can understand why.

 

And, the WNBA product does not seem to be as well regarded as the LPGA (apologies in advance to anyone) relative to the mens' tour.

 

Anyways, it's clear that your objective is just to "bash the LPGA." We all get it. The person described in Post #77 is you - congrats.

 

How is it bashing the LPGA to be interested in what their scores would be compared to the men if they played the same exact course and tees.

[Titleist_PT23]

I haven't, I know for a fact they aren't but there are numerous discussions here about how the PGA should assist the LPGA, how LPGA players should play in PGA events, pay gaps and comparisons of scratch golfers and LPGA members which is really what I was responding to.

Posted elsewhere. Obviously, this is not the greatest field. Distance is not set at exact parity like you dream of but there is clearly an advantage for the men.

 

http://www.vicopengolf.com/card

 

https://www.golfdige...-for-the-future

 

Amid all of this giddiness, there have been one or two murmurings of discontent. Many of the women have noted the sight of several of their tees sitting either directly alongside or marginally ahead of those of the men. This, many argue, will lead to a wide disparity in the winning scores that will only support the chauvinistic notion that the men can play and the women can’t.

 

“It’s not that hard,” says one woman who asked not to be identified. “All they have to do is set the test up so that we are all hitting the same clubs into the greens. There are some holes out there where I’ll be going in with a hybrid and many of the men will be hitting short irons. To a tight pin, that’s just not fair.”

 

Going back to the analogy of marathon runners, men and women run the same course and the time disparities are rarely talked about because it's a given that the fastest men are typically faster than the fastest women. The men compete against the mens times and women against the womens times.

 

In the case of a course that plays the same length or close, the women are still competing only against the women and the men against the men, the difference in score of the winning man and woman will be accounted for by the mans ability to hit the ball further. Shortening the course for women so they can hit the same clubs into the green and post similar scores as the men imo does not lend more credibility to the womens game. It's not a secret that women play shorter courses and most golf fans in their head adjust the scores to reflect the difference in length if direct comparisons are going to be made with men. .

 

I could dunk the ball as much as Lebron James if I get to dunk on an 8' net and he a 10' net, will anyone be foolish enough to believe I'm as good as Lebron because given the conditions of competition I was able to produce similar numbers?

WNBA plays on a 10 foot hoop. I don't have firm stats here but I think they dunk less than the men in the NBA. Most people can understand why.

 

And, the WNBA product does not seem to be as well regarded as the LPGA (apologies in advance to anyone) relative to the mens' tour.

 

Anyways, it's clear that your objective is just to "bash the LPGA." We all get it. The person described in Post #77 is you - congrats.

 

How is it bashing the LPGA to be interested in what their scores would be compared to the men if they played the same exact course and tees.

Sorry, probably better to just acknowledge that we have differing perspectives on what this (playing the same length course) would show, should it be done, and does it even matter / how would the world be different if we had the results from 50 tournaments.

 

For whatever its worth, my personal gut feeling is a) that the scratch male will not do well against the LPGA player on the shorter course (if distance was king, Lexi would crush the filed a lot more than she does), b) it will be close both playing 7000 yards, but the LPGA player will still win on average (less big numbers, better short game), and c) much past 7000 and the women just don't hit it far enough (i.e. pick a bunch of courses with 250-270 forced carries and they will be dropping and hitting three all day).

 

But as you point out, these are merely guesses.

[Argonne69]

I guess professional boxing should drop the weight classes. I'd be much more interested in seeing how a flyweight stacks up against a heavyweight.

[North Texas]

I guess professional boxing should drop the weight classes. I'd be much more interested in seeing how a flyweight stacks up against a heavyweight.

 

Yea, and the next time the wife and I go out to play, I think I'll tell her she needs to play the 6600 yards tees with me.

[new2g0lf]

I guess professional boxing should drop the weight classes. I'd be much more interested in seeing how a flyweight stacks up against a heavyweight.

 

Look, you keep making slippery slope arguments that don't apply. I enjoy watching the LPGA, the golf they play in terms of distances is much closer to those I play, so for me it's much more relatable. I made the analogy that a golf course is like a marathon course, the difference is in the marathon, the men and women run the same distance and their times are what they are. In golf the course is shortened (made easier) for the women so their scores can be relative to the men. My point has been who cares what their scores are? Does the LPGA believe people will see them as being equal to the men if their their scores are comparable despite the course length being different?

 

This quote

This, many argue, will lead to a wide disparity in the winning scores that will only support the chauvinistic notion that the men can play and the women can’t.

All they have to do is set the test up so that we are all hitting the same clubs into the greens. There are some holes out there where I’ll be going in with a hybrid and many of the men will be hitting short irons. To a tight pin, that’s just not fair.”

 

indicates that whoever said it is delusional or has a major inferiority complex. At the pro level, it's not about hitting from tees that allow everyone to hit the same club into the green, if that's the case Jim Furyk should ask to hit from ladies tees because his average driving distance is 5 yards shorter than the top LPGA golfers and he is hitting hybrid while DJ is hitting a short iron (or wedge) every time they play.

 

Distance is a huge factor in the pro game, it just seems like some want us to ignore it for the ladies so they can pretend to be viewed as just as good as the men. I don't care what their scores are, if they want to relate their golf abilities at a professional level to the men they need to play the same course lengths (at least sometimes) just like the shorter hitters on the PGA Tour have to.

 

This is my last post here (no applause please). I think the LPGA is great, I wish I could play half as good as any of them. I think they should aspire to compete with the men and go for the big money, but it needs to be on equal footing. I could be in the minority but I believe that one of the biggest reasons that they aren't given the credit they deserve is because they play shorter courses than the PGA Tour (no one is being fooled) and therefore are considered inferior golfers because of it. Sorry if I ruffled any feather here, I think we all want the same thing for the LPGA just disagree on what's the best way for them to get there.

[Seamus_McDuff]

So let’s have them play lengths where +9 wins and the rounds are six hours. That’ll be fun to watch.

 

Since the marathon example keeps getting brought up, there are races(not necessarily marathons) where there’s a handicap. The women are given a head start and there’s a bonus for the overall winner.