LIV Tour Discussion Thread (*** NO POLITICS ***)

[OBbogey5]

Apologies if it’s been mentioned.. I saw a recent PGA Championship promo commercial and the LIV golfers were very front and center,, as if there never was a LIV. 

[idrive]

5 hours ago, HomaComa said:

Does anyone here actually believe the LIV guys deserve OWGR points for playing 54 holes and having 48 man fields 😂

 

The question is, do they meet the criteria to receive points.

 

For those that have trouble reading the answer is No, they don't.

 

2 hours ago, Cincy_Ken said:

Does anyone not? He just beat Cam Smith, other talented in their prime golfers were in the top 10. Not to diminish Jason Day but DJ beat more quality golfers than Day did. Could care less about 54 vs 72, 54 to me is long enough to identify a legitimate champion 

 

How many leaderboards look the same at the end of 54 holes opposed to what it looks like after 72 holes.

 

There is absolutely some talent on liv. Possibly ten or so could compete and make some cuts on the PGAT. When you start talking about quality golfers, you're only fooling yourself if you think liv has more than a few that could make the cut on any kind of regular basis on the PGAT.

 

Keep in mind, any of the players that made the cut at the Byron Nelson could compete on liv. Only about ten of the liv players would have made the cut at the Byron Nelson.

[Shilgy]

3 hours ago, Cincy_Ken said:

Does anyone not? He just beat Cam Smith, other talented in their prime golfers were in the top 10. Not to diminish Jason Day but DJ beat more quality golfers than Day did. Could care less about 54 vs 72, 54 to me is long enough to identify a legitimate champion 

Why do you call them higher quality? Because you’ve heard of them?  Did you watch the big boy tour this week?  They have quality players up and down the leaderboard….many of them new blood.  LIV has a small handful of quality players….a bunch of over the hill “names”….and filled the field with guys off the street.

[Ghostwedge]

1 hour ago, idrive said:

 

The question is, do they meet the criteria to receive points.

 

For those that have trouble reading the answer is No, they don't.

 

 

How many leaderboards look the same at the end of 54 holes opposed to what it looks like after 72 holes.

 

There is absolutely some talent on liv. Possibly ten or so could compete and make some cuts on the PGAT. When you start talking about quality golfers, you're only fooling yourself if you think liv has more than a few that could make the cut on any kind of regular basis on the PGAT.

 

Keep in mind, any of the players that made the cut at the Byron Nelson could compete on liv. Only about ten of the liv players would have made the cut at the Byron Nelson.

Well buckle up pro..... 18 of them are playing in the PGA next week.

How many will make the cut ? Probably more than you think.

[HomaComa]

8 hours ago, mitchl said:

do the golfers deserve it?   I think if possible, they should rank them.   The golfers don’t deserve it unless they are playing in a tour and events which meets the criteria for inclusion.     That criteria can’t just be thrown out when it is being used in hundreds of events which have met the criteria for a handful of golfers who want to be ranked, and only a small fraction (maybe 10) are even relevant

 

for 54 holes, that’s not an issue, IMO.   

48 man fields?   Also not an issue, the math works to adjust the strength of field to what the field size is.

 

what the problem is, that all the events are invitational, and playing in them is not at all performance based.   More than half of the field is locked in regardless of their performance.   That is not at all the same as the smalller field PGA or other events, because there is criteria based in performance to get there.   You don’t get into the no cut playoff fields because Monohan invites you to play,   The whole season determines the cut of who gets in, and then each field after is based on a criteria.

 

however in LIV, you could be a warm body throwing up last place finishes for 4 events in a row and you’re still in the field… and you’re going to get ranking points just for being there.

 

and once a season making changes won’t do it, if you’ve got so many locked in multi year deals.   It needs to be every 2-4 events bottom finishers get relegated and some method to promote someone in, amd if that bottom finisher is Phil, then he needs to go with the nobodies.

Yeah but the OWGR clearly states that avg field size needs to be 75 players. Why should the OWGR adjust anything for LIV 

[Short Pete]

On 5/14/2023 at 3:54 AM, kasting333 said:

FYI 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/liv-golf-qualifying-school-tournament-relegation-2024

One question: If, say Max Homa, Pat Cantlay and Sam Burns opt to attend this qualifying tournament and actually play there, do they lose the PGA Tour membership (regardless if they would qualify or not)?

[freeze16172002]

12 hours ago, Cincy_Ken said:

Does anyone not? He just beat Cam Smith, other talented in their prime golfers were in the top 10. Not to diminish Jason Day but DJ beat more quality golfers than Day did. Could care less about 54 vs 72, 54 to me is long enough to identify a legitimate champion 

Day played against a bunch of young guys playing their hearts out because that event meant something. Tour card, stable life, ranking points, two year exemption etc, what were the LIV players playing for again? BTW C Smith was the only top ten golfer Liv signed, most of Liv players were north of 100 in the world rankings

Edited May 15, 2023 by freeze16172002

[moora]

Yes, I agree that the current OWGR points system is brilliant at ensuring we get the most entertaining golf at the Majors. Because nobody wants to see major winners like Dustin Johnson, Cameron Smith, Brooks Koepka, Bryson DeChambeau or Phil Mickelson play at the Majors.

 

No, we all want to see players that manage to compete in 72 holes tournaments with a cut, because those players bring the most entertaining and enjoyable golf in the world. 

 

I’m sure the Majors also agree.

[johnseg]

1 hour ago, moora said:

Yes, I agree that the current OWGR points system is brilliant at ensuring we get the most entertaining golf at the Majors. Because nobody wants to see major winners like Dustin Johnson, Cameron Smith, Brooks Koepka, Bryson DeChambeau or Phil Mickelson play at the Majors.

 

No, we all want to see players that manage to compete in 72 holes tournaments with a cut, because those players bring the most entertaining and enjoyable golf in the world. 

 

I’m sure the Majors also agree.

It happens all the time. Right now golf is in a transition. There are so many young guys coming up. Guys like Phil, Westwood, Garcia, etc. just aren't who LIV fans want them to be. The guys from the early 2000's are being father timed out. Just the nature of the beast. The names we came up with are going away and can't compete week in and week out.

[HackerDad78]

14 hours ago, jimecherry said:

me they deserve points based on the quality of players as apposed to the legacy or lack thereof of the tournaments. so about 1/4 of the points of a non designated pga event would be a good start.

Totally agreed.  Full disclosure - NOT a LIV and detest Norman for what he's done to pro golf. BUT, it's still golf at a high level, not unlike other pro tours.  But to award the same points with wildly different criteria makes zero sense.  1/4 to 1/3 of the points makes sense based on limited, repetitive fields, and 54 vs. 72 play with no cut. 

[HackerDad78]

2 hours ago, Short Pete said:

One question: If, say Max Homa, Pat Cantlay and Sam Burns opt to attend this qualifying tournament and actually play there, do they lose the PGA Tour membership (regardless if they would qualify or not)?

I'm confused by the question. Why would they play a qualifier to join another league with full-time, except status on the PGA Tour? Or are you asking to determine whether a qualifying event vs. a competing tournament invalidates PGAt membership? 

My guess is a qualifier is likely different than a tournament, but it's just a hunch. I would imagine we'll be seeing a lot of seeing a lot of 2nd tier guys on supplemental tours vying for those 4 spots, maybe Korn Ferry guys who couldn't get their cards? Not sure.  But I'd be really surprised to see anyone with full-time status on the PGAt be interested.  But hey, I've been wrong before! 

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, moora said:

Yes, I agree that the current OWGR points system is brilliant at ensuring we get the most entertaining golf at the Majors. Because nobody wants to see major winners like Dustin Johnson, Cameron Smith, Brooks Koepka, Bryson DeChambeau or Phil Mickelson play at the Majors.

 

No, we all want to see players that manage to compete in 72 holes tournaments with a cut, because those players bring the most entertaining and enjoyable golf in the world. 

 

I’m sure the Majors also agree.

The major winners you mention will be in for a few more years….well through next year for Byson I seem to recall.

 

10 hours ago, Ghostwedge said:

Well buckle up pro..... 18 of them are playing in the PGA next week.

How many will make the cut ? Probably more than you think.

17 now with Kaymer out. 
 

Barring great form in a major this year how many will be in going forward?

 

I'm guessing just these will be in

Bryson, DJ, Koepka, Phil, Reed(Masters only), Smith and Kaymer(PGA only)

 

Thats it….none of the rest will qualify in future years.

 

My over under on cuts would be 8 1/2.

[HomaComa]

2 hours ago, moora said:

Yes, I agree that the current OWGR points system is brilliant at ensuring we get the most entertaining golf at the Majors. Because nobody wants to see major winners like Dustin Johnson, Cameron Smith, Brooks Koepka, Bryson DeChambeau or Phil Mickelson play at the Majors.

 

No, we all want to see players that manage to compete in 72 holes tournaments with a cut, because those players bring the most entertaining and enjoyable golf in the world. 

 

I’m sure the Majors also agree.

All those players have exemptions into the majors til at least 2024. They made the decision to go to a tour that doesn’t offer OWGR points so they should LIV with it.

[2bGood]

14 hours ago, HomaComa said:

Yeah but the OWGR clearly states that avg field size needs to be 75 players. Why should the OWGR adjust anything for LIV 

And it said it long before LIV existed. LIV knew the criteria before they set up their tour. It is weird that they complain they don't qualify. 

Edited May 16, 2023 by 2bGood

[2bGood]

2 hours ago, moora said:

Yes, I agree that the current OWGR points system is brilliant at ensuring we get the most entertaining golf at the Majors. Because nobody wants to see major winners like Dustin Johnson, Cameron Smith, Brooks Koepka, Bryson DeChambeau or Phil Mickelson play at the Majors.

 

No, we all want to see players that manage to compete in 72 holes tournaments with a cut, because those players bring the most entertaining and enjoyable golf in the world. 

 

I’m sure the Majors also agree.

 

You should love LIV as it seems to be more about entertainment than competition. The other goal is not to fill the filed with most entertaining golfers - heck you might as well add some of the YouTube guys if they were. 

[smashdn]

On 5/12/2023 at 3:56 PM, idrive said:

For me, the team thing is nothing short of silly, stupid. Even the #1 liv fan here on this board hasn't "picked out a team".

 

On 5/12/2023 at 7:54 PM, mitchl said:

But also, he indicates a conflict with the team aspect of that.   That certainly is an issue.   LIV has indicated that in the coming years that the individual play will be less significant than the team play.  Ok, well if that's the case, how do you rank them?

 

I don't follow why the team aspect is an issue.  I watched yesterday and I saw guys who were well out of contention individually gutting it out the last couple of holes because their scores meant something on the team front.

 

Is that a bad thing?  Is the OWGR org telling us it is far better for guys to coast or mail it in when they are out of the top ten individually coming down the stretch?

 

Maybe I am completely missing it, but is there a reason for a player to not play well due to the team aspect?  How is the team part of it somehow undermining the integrity of the individual stroke play competition?

 

 

On 5/14/2023 at 9:22 AM, aus10KC said:

I watched the last 7 holes yesterday on CW sports. The broadcast was not good and cut out often. Didn't care for how they do hole flyovers.

 

It was good to see some of these guys play. DJ, Cam, Brooks.

 

Has anyone else have technical issues with the broadcast on CW?

 

I watched on my phone on the app out in the sticks with only 4g.  No issues.

 

13 hours ago, HomaComa said:

Nah. Limited field and 54 holes isn't a legit competition

 

So something like a PGA Professional 36 hole stroke play event is not legitimate.  What does limited field mean exactly?  Anything less than 75 or just not having open qualifying or criteria to the point it restricts the field.

 

 

----

My thoughts have always been that the OWGR can make their own rules as they see fit.  If their criteria excludes a chunk of the golfers who would otherwise be in the mix it just harms their system and the events that rely on that system.

 

I have said before (either this thread or another) the OWGR would do well to look at the rationale for their criteria.  Some it it makes good sense and should be upheld.  A cut to me serves no purpose.  54 hole events are already accounted for so no issues there.  Mathematically this is not difficult.  The "team aspect" is of no consequence.

 

I also tend to think that how the OWGR came into being largely shaped their criteria.  Instead of deciding criteria first, they quite obviously developed criteria around already existing golf tours.  And since most golf tours are cookie cutter organizations in different parts of the world or in different strata of golfers, the criteria fits well.  But when a group wants to slightly change the mold it is basically locked out.  

 

That said, I do agree that LIV should not get OWGR points based upon the dearth of qualifying spots for the season.  I don't care that there is no qualifying for each event as the PGAT only awards four spots in the events it has monday qualifiers for a field of ~140.  It seems they keep it around just for the purpose of checking a box, likely an OWGR box.

 

[jimecherry]

3 hours ago, freeze16172002 said:

Day played against a bunch of young guys playing their hearts out because that event meant something. Tour card, stable life, ranking points, two year exemption etc, what were the LIV players playing for again? BTW C Smith was the only top ten golfer Liv signed, most of Liv players were north of 100 in the world rankings

when dj was signed he was still in the top 10. and most liv players were in the top 50 when they were signed.

[2putttom]

15 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Why do you call them higher quality? Because you’ve heard of them?  Did you watch the big boy tour this week?  They have quality players up and down the leaderboard….many of them new blood.  LIV has a small handful of quality players….a bunch of over the hill “names”….and filled the field with guys off the street.

😆  .... "LIV has a small handful of quality players….a bunch of over the hill “names”….and filled the field with guys off the street."  Kinda like men's league. 

[widow-maker]

The criteria for OWGR points was set long before LIV came into being.  LIV Golf fails to hit most of the benchmarks for OWGR points.  They do have several of the best players in the world, but how do you give them ranking points based on the preset criteria that they aren't even close to hitting?  It's not fair to the players on the other tours that are out there grinding because LIV Golf is such a different format.  

 

I suppose that the Major Championships could come up with their own methods for handing out exemptions for the LIV tour.  Maybe top 5 in their Tour standings or something like that.  If they were to do that then LIV wouldn't even need to concern themselves with OWGR.  In their closed community in wouldn't matter.  Not sure how the USGA, R&A, PGA of America, and the Masters feel about that, though. 

[bekgolf]

8 hours ago, moora said:

Yes, I agree that the current OWGR points system is brilliant at ensuring we get the most entertaining golf at the Majors. Because nobody wants to see major winners like Dustin Johnson, Cameron Smith, Brooks Koepka, Bryson DeChambeau or Phil Mickelson play at the Majors.

 

No, we all want to see players that manage to compete in 72 holes tournaments with a cut, because those players bring the most entertaining and enjoyable golf in the world. 

 

I’m sure the Majors also agree.

 

LIV can choose to abide by the OWGR that was in place before they existed but they choose not to.  IMO Liv should make a true direct cut from all other golf and hold their own majors, devise their own ranking system, etc.  Be truly independent of the PGA tour.

 

The Liv players wanted to play a different form of golf, why do they want to come back to play 72 holes for less money and at the same time take time away from their families? 

[Ghostwedge]

9 hours ago, Shilgy said:

The major winners you mention will be in for a few more years….well through next year for Byson I seem to recall.

 

17 now with Kaymer out. 
 

Barring great form in a major this year how many will be in going forward?

 

I'm guessing just these will be in

Bryson, DJ, Koepka, Phil, Reed(Masters only), Smith and Kaymer(PGA only)

 

Thats it….none of the rest will qualify in future years.

 

My over under on cuts would be 8 1/2.

Sounds fair....

[grm24]

9 hours ago, Shilgy said:

The major winners you mention will be in for a few more years….well through next year for Byson I seem to recall.

BDC got a 10 year exemption into the US Open from his 2020 US Open win. 5 years each for the Masters, PGA and Open Championship. He would be good thru 2025 for the other 3 majors and 2030 for the US Open under current rules.

[HomaComa]

10 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

 

I don't follow why the team aspect is an issue.  I watched yesterday and I saw guys who were well out of contention individually gutting it out the last couple of holes because their scores meant something on the team front.

 

Is that a bad thing?  Is the OWGR org telling us it is far better for guys to coast or mail it in when they are out of the top ten individually coming down the stretch?

 

Maybe I am completely missing it, but is there a reason for a player to not play well due to the team aspect?  How is the team part of it somehow undermining the integrity of the individual stroke play competition?

 

 

 

I watched on my phone on the app out in the sticks with only 4g.  No issues.

 

 

So something like a PGA Professional 36 hole stroke play event is not legitimate.  What does limited field mean exactly?  Anything less than 75 or just not having open qualifying or criteria to the point it restricts the field.

 

 

----

My thoughts have always been that the OWGR can make their own rules as they see fit.  If their criteria excludes a chunk of the golfers who would otherwise be in the mix it just harms their system and the events that rely on that system.

 

I have said before (either this thread or another) the OWGR would do well to look at the rationale for their criteria.  Some it it makes good sense and should be upheld.  A cut to me serves no purpose.  54 hole events are already accounted for so no issues there.  Mathematically this is not difficult.  The "team aspect" is of no consequence.

 

I also tend to think that how the OWGR came into being largely shaped their criteria.  Instead of deciding criteria first, they quite obviously developed criteria around already existing golf tours.  And since most golf tours are cookie cutter organizations in different parts of the world or in different strata of golfers, the criteria fits well.  But when a group wants to slightly change the mold it is basically locked out.  

 

That said, I do agree that LIV should not get OWGR points based upon the dearth of qualifying spots for the season.  I don't care that there is no qualifying for each event as the PGAT only awards four spots in the events it has monday qualifiers for a field of ~140.  It seems they keep it around just for the purpose of checking a box, likely an OWGR box.

 

Not for the purpose of OWGR

[jimecherry]

4 hours ago, bekgolf said:

 

LIV can choose to abide by the OWGR that was in place before they existed but they choose not to.  IMO Liv should make a true direct cut from all other golf and hold their own majors, devise their own ranking system, etc.  Be truly independent of the PGA tour.

 

The Liv players wanted to play a different form of golf, why do they want to come back to play 72 holes for less money and at the same time take time away from their families? 

cause noones family is worth more than a major ;}

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, Ghostwedge said:

Sounds fair....

And I’d take the under.

[CaymanS]

As a retired engineer steeped in data, I'm sure there is an equitable calculation method to weigh points for the LIV players and it should be implemented.  The result would not be  favorable for those playing in limited fields without cuts, and events with fewer rounds, but it is what it is.  Some points are better than none.  They may never accrue points for entry into any other tour, but it is what it is.

[HomaComa]

1 hour ago, CaymanS said:

As a retired engineer steeped in data, I'm sure there is an equitable calculation method to weigh points for the LIV players and it should be implemented.  The result would not be  favorable for those playing in limited fields without cuts, and events with fewer rounds, but it is what it is.  Some points are better than none.  They may never accrue points for entry into any other tour, but it is what it is.

Thing is SOF is determined by the top 50 players in the field.  LIV’s got a grand total of 5 players in the top 50 and they ain’t getting points any time soon for those 54 hole scrambles since they refuse to adhere to the simple requirements. I’d wager a decent amount of money that there’s gonna be 5 or less LIV golfers in the top 100 by the Masters next year. After the Open they aren’t getting any points til the Saudi International which takes place a full 7 months after the Open.

 

[TiScape]

https://golf.com/news/liv-golf-broadcast-ending-tulsa-abrupt/?amp=1

 

 

[Shilgy]

2 hours ago, CaymanS said:

As a retired engineer steeped in data, I'm sure there is an equitable calculation method to weigh points for the LIV players and it should be implemented.  The result would not be  favorable for those playing in limited fields without cuts, and events with fewer rounds, but it is what it is.  Some points are better than none.  They may never accrue points for entry into any other tour, but it is what it is.

Why should it be implemented?  Seriously why? Because you know some of the names so they “deserve” points?

 

As previously, repeatedly, mentioned the criteria for a “tour” to be included were created long before LIV existed.  Other than complain Greg and company have done nothing really to comply.  And furthermore, tried to do an end around finagling with the likes of the esteemed MENA Tour to piggyback points from an accredited tour that hadn’t played event since pre Covid.

[freeze16172002]

20 hours ago, jimecherry said:

when dj was signed he was still in the top 10. and most liv players were in the top 50 when they were signed.

DJ was 41 in the world rankings when he signed with LIV. 11/48 were in the top 50 your numbers are completely wrong