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

[jdl]

1 hour ago, smashdn said:

 

Logistics I think we can throw out of the discussion correct?  That has no bearing on the merits for rewarding points.

 

If my other post gets approved, see what I say about the purpose of the criteria.  I don't disagree with the reasoning you provide for the cut, ie the added pressure, I don't know that that reasoning is integral to being able to reward OWGR points.  What I would say though, is there another method of getting to that end or creating that aspect without actually removing players from the field.  I think you could within LIV's round and team construct via not having those individual scores below "the cut line" count for individual placement in that final round.  Have them still play so their scores can count for the team part.  OWGR doesn't/shouldn't care about the team part at all.

 

I suspect [one of] the real purposes of the cut being an OWGR criteria, is that they do not want to award points, even fractions of points, just for showing up and "fogging a mirror."  You do and should actually have to show up and earn your points.  I can fully get behind that.  But LIV could, and should if they want the points, find a way to meet the intent.

Yeah I guess we're not too far off from agreement here. And I think in the case of LIV, the lack of cuts when added to the "closed shop" issue compounds the problem. These things are OK as occasional exceptions but not as the main aspects of your tour.

[Shilgy]

2 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

And after the other tours were created/formed.  The OWGR was created in the mold of what already existed.

 

Doesn't make it right or wrong, just need to understand that when we discuss the merits of specific OWGR criteria.  

 

Ham-bone effect in action.  Question why it is so and what purpose the criteria serves.  Don't get hung up on the criteria, understand the why criteria exists in the first place and accomplish that end.  If the end goal or purpose is met with a different method, that should be what is important.

Yes, the criteria is based on individual performance in open tours…generally (no, not always) 72 hole events with a cut…full field(again,  no, not always)…with a way for new players to play their way into the field.

 

vs

 

48 man field where the team aspect is heavily promoted AND players adjust their strategies based on team not individual play at times…54 hole events with no cut….a whopping 4 players can get in each year(but it’s a one time beginning of the year availability)….and a majority of the players are safe for the length of their contract.

 

Basically the LIV tour wants to force their square peg into a round hole.  Similar o if the Putt Putt world championship wanted ranking points and attempted to bully their way in.

 

Soon(not soon enough but soon-I would bet within six years or less-might be way less) the Saudis will pull the plug. Biggest mistake they made was attaching themselves to the lawsuit which if the court proceedings play out may also cost them their Premier League team.

[bscinstnct]

2 hours ago, Ghost of Snead said:

Since it's all quiet on the defection rumor front including here on WrX, I doubt there are any more "big names" willing to jump to LIV. 

 

Yeah, and they really need at least 2, ideally 3 big names to give this a shot in the arm as far as a broader audience. 
 

They seem to have around 500k viewers for US events, not horrendous. But this needs to get 2MM viewers on weekends to just be competitive with decent PGA tour events. 

[kasting333]

3 hours ago, jdl said:

Yeah I guess we're not too far off from agreement here. And I think in the case of LIV, the lack of cuts when added to the "closed shop" issue compounds the problem. These things are OK as occasional exceptions but not as the main aspects of your tour.

Calling LIV a “closed shop” is disingenuous when the pga & euro tour is blackballing players. 

[billyspan]

Some DJ trivia in honor of his LIV win. Note: I like DJ and his game. Unfortunately, incredibly boring with the media.  Keep him from becoming a true super star, but to his credit, probably keeps his personal and family lives sane!

 

PGA TOUR Wins - 24

LIV Wins - 2

54-hole PGA TOUR Wins - 3

Only known "Net Winner" PGA Tour win - 2020 TOUR Championship

 

Now back to playing golf vs consuming it for the day! 😉

[Golferpaul]

On 5/14/2023 at 3:58 PM, HomaComa said:

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

Yes.  Determining the best golfer requires that you consider all golfers.  Does anybody here actually believe that the Masters would be as competitive if they had excluded LIV golfers (Three of them were in the top five)?  So why are you trying to eliminate them?  Are the PGAT guys afraid of the competition?

 

 

 

 

 

[Golferpaul]

On 5/14/2023 at 8:02 PM, NormanFan said:

 

The problem is that the field is MUCH smaller and it never really changes.

PGAT WGC events: 64 players and guaranteed money.

LIV events:  48 players with guaranteed money

 

Not much different.

[Golferpaul]

If you think about rankings rationally, you would only consider who you beat every day.  It doesn't matter if it's a one day event or five days.  And it doesn't matter if you miss the cut or if there is no cut.

 

What matters is who you beat.

 

The Golf Week / Sagarin rankings do that.

 

Jeff Sagarin’s rating system is based on a mathematical formula that uses a player’s won-lost-tied record against other players when they play on the same course on the same day, and the stroke differential between those players, then links all players to one another based on common opponents.

 

Jon Rahm is back at No. 1 in Golfweek/Sagarin rankings (usatoday.com)

 

So when Mickelson, Reed, and Koepka beat all but two golfers at the Masters, they should get some good ranking points.

[Cactus Jack]

8 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Yeah, and they really need at least 2, ideally 3 big names to give this a shot in the arm as far as a broader audience. 
 

They seem to have around 500k viewers for US events, not horrendous. But this needs to get 2MM viewers on weekends to just be competitive with decent PGA tour events. 

 

IF, and it's a big IF, LIV can provide a viable pathway for the players to enter the majors I think we'd see several new signings. 

[Golferpaul]

current leader in the clubhouse:

 

[HomaComa]

2 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

Yes.  Determining the best golfer requires that you consider all golfers.  Does anybody here actually believe that the Masters would be as competitive if they had excluded LIV golfers (Three of them were in the top five)?  So why are you trying to eliminate them?  Are the PGAT guys afraid of the competition?

 

 

 

 

 

Nobody is trying to eliminate them. If we give LIV owgr points I say we give the Champions tour points as well

[idrive]

15 hours ago, Ghost of Snead said:

Since it's all quiet on the defection rumor front including here on WrX, I doubt there are any more "big names" willing to jump to LIV. 

 

Whatever happened to all those guys that were constantly telling us all the players that were going to jump?  They read it on the internet so it had to be true.

 

5 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

current leader in the clubhouse:

 

 

Lets wait until day four is over before handing him the trophy.  

 

Edited May 19, 2023 by idrive

[jdl]

2 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

 

So when Mickelson, Reed, and Koepka beat all but two golfers at the Masters, they should get some good ranking points.

they did

[OBbogey5]

LIV screaming about majors and World Rankings. Why don’t they just host a tournament with a $1B purse. Invite how LIV would rank the top 100 players. Winner gets $100,000,000. See what PGAT players do with that nugget out there.

[Cactus Jack]

3 hours ago, idrive said:

 

Whatever happened to all those guys that were constantly telling us all the players that were going to jump?  They read it on the internet so it had to be true.

 

 

Lets wait until day four is over before handing him the trophy.  Any bets he won't be in the top ten when it's all over?

 

How about we celebrate the guy for putting together an awesome round. I think it’s time for the negativity and hating to stop, it’s not good for the forum. Let’s enjoy the game rather than tearing it down. 

[2bGood]

7 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

PGAT WGC events: 64 players and guaranteed money.

LIV events:  48 players with guaranteed money

 

Not much different.

Very different. You played your way into WGC events and in theory nearly any golfers had a pathway to play their way in.

 

LIV event - you get picked by Greg. 

 

[ahenderX]

13 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

PGAT WGC events: 64 players and guaranteed money.

LIV events:  48 players with guaranteed money

 

Not much different.

The difference is the PGA Tour averages at least 75 players per tournament. LIV averages 48.

[freeze16172002]

13 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

current leader in the clubhouse:

 

you want ranking points for that now?

[idrive]

9 hours ago, Cactus Jack said:

How about we celebrate the guy for putting together an awesome round. I think it’s time for the negativity and hating to stop, it’s not good for the forum. Let’s enjoy the game rather than tearing it down. 

 

Why would I celebrate someone's "awesome round" when he isn't someone I root for.  That'd be like me rooting for the cowboys to win the Superbowl.

 

I think it's time for liv to fold and bring the players back together again under one roof so we can see them perform against each other more often. Stop all of the quibbling.

 

I haven't encountered anything in regard to the game of golf that has done more harm than liv has. 

[smashdn]

On 5/18/2023 at 7:52 AM, jdl said:

Yeah I guess we're not too far off from agreement here. And I think in the case of LIV, the lack of cuts when added to the "closed shop" issue compounds the problem. These things are OK as occasional exceptions but not as the main aspects of your tour.

 

Exactly.  As they are currently constructed, or as the OWGR currently awards points within a field, everyone would be getting points in the case of LIV, even the guy placing DFL.  I don't agree that should be the case.  An easy fix in my mind is, OWGR just modifies slightly their cut criteria verbiage to say something to the effect "only those placing in the top half (or whatever fraction is agreed upon) of non-cut events shall be awarded points."  

 

Now you have your purpose of the cut (I assume) as OWGR sees it, but you can still have all your guys playing that last round to have their scores count towards the team aspect or whatever.

 

That still would have guys who "are out of it" after two rounds still playing.  Maybe that in and of itself gives the OWGR guys heartburn.  I can't really understand why but if they have that issue then clearly my solution doesn't address that.

 

If you really get to thinking about the cut deal and OWGR points, the OWGR guys are essentially saying we don't want to award points at all to guys who can't play the first two rounds (in conglomerate) decent.  We don't even what those bums to have access to points.  After those sclubs are out of the picture then we let the remainder fight amongst themselves for the bigger slices of the points pie.

 

---

But doing all that above requires a change, and work on the OWGR's part.  Work that they were likely either explicitly told not to do or implicitly told to not make easy.  Plus I think we would all agree that it is likely not a fun day at the office to work with GN on how LIV can massage what they do and OWGR can massage what they require to get to a common goal, if a common goal is even desired by either party.

[Ghostwedge]

14 hours ago, HomaComa said:

Nobody is trying to eliminate them. If we give LIV owgr points I say we give the Champions tour points as well

You know that's not an answer. The difference between DJ\Cam Smith and Champions Tour players is playing for a title and the other barely if making a cut at a Major.

[CDM]

15 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

current leader in the clubhouse:

 

 

Yep and good to see him look back to some normal aspect.   Bummed that Rahm had a bad day and Rory.  Would be great to see Bryson, Rahm, Rory, Dj, and a few others battle for the win this weekend. This PGA championship is shaping up to be a great one, just enjoy the golf....!

 

Bryson played round one great. Needs to validate on a tough course and conditions today.  (I was shocked that Brandle Chamblee was giving props) 

 

The pannel even noted the rankings are not reflective. floored me.  Rich Lernner's comments as it relates to DJ's play  "Sure does not look or play like the 82 ranked player in the world".  

 

*Anyone see DJ's press confrence on how he pulled a muscle in his back "picking up a big kid".....  LOL some funny stuff     

 

Be it you are a LIV fanboy or  PGAT shill let the OWGR crap go.  We all know that is just the PGAT trying to find away to defend themselves, plain and simple.  Just enjoy the golf. OWGR being used is a "weapon" is only hurting us fans..!   OWGR BS aside .... TIME will be the true factor.   

 

Personal note:  I think Bryson ooks more "healthy" if that makes sense?  I always thought all the muscle was not good for him.  He has talent for sure, but can he keep it up for the entire event.

 

I am hoping Rahm rebounds and Rory.  Rory looked good on the back 9 yesterday for sure...!  Maybe the spark he needed...!

 

[CDM]

2 hours ago, Ghostwedge said:

You know that's not an answer. The difference between DJ\Cam Smith and Champions Tour players is playing for a title and the other barely if making a cut at a Major.

 

Did Phil not play a few champions tour events when he turned 50.  I think he won and curshed it a few times..... ?

Edited May 19, 2023 by CDM

[CDM]

1 hour ago, idrive said:

 

Why would I celebrate someone's "awesome round" when he isn't someone I root for.  That'd be like me rooting for the cowboys to win the Superbowl.

 

I think it's time for liv to fold and bring the players back together again under one roof so we can see them perform against each other more often. Stop all of the quibbling.

 

I haven't encountered anything in regard to the game of golf that has done more harm than liv has. 

 

................WHAT YOU HATE THE COWBOYS......... SHOCKED 🤣

[smashdn]

On 5/16/2023 at 9:32 AM, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

From SI: https://www.si.com/golf/news/owgr-liv-golf-taking-time-on-a-decision-mike-whan-usga

 

 

If a team goal (cautiously lagging to avoid a three-putt to protect team score) interferes with an individual goal (aggressively stroking a birdie putt to move up the standings, even if it brings three-putt into play), then there's a problem. 

 

It's not that team golf causes a player to play worse. But it may cause them to do something that would be inconsistent with their own interests in pure individual play. Since OWGR is ranking individuals, that could be an issue. 

 

It's the same reason the Ryder Cup and President's Cup aren't ranked by OWGR. 

 

This example, though I cannot disagree with the fact he said it was due to the team portion, is also rather flimsy when really broken down and taken at more than face value.

 

What if the situation you cite was not "to protect team score" but instead "to make the cut?"  All I need here is a par and I make the cut, I could be more aggressive and stoke this in for a birdie which would give me a better score, but it also brings three putt and missing the cut into play.  It is the exact same action/reaction, but the rationale for the action/reaction is different.  Now that seems the OWGR is concerned with motive for how a player plays the way they play.  if we are going legislate motive you are opening a big ol' can o' worms.  Think of all the situations where the players may be motivated to not take on risk to protect a score rather than be aggressive to score lower.  Also, OWGR aren't concerned with score save for the impact of score on where the player places in relation to the rest of the field.

 

Tiger has said on several occasions that when he was in the final pairing he treated some instances as though they were match play rather than stroke play and intentionally played shots short of his opponent (which is not accurate wording as they are all opponents in stroke play) so that he could hit first into the green and by hitting it close put added pressure on his playing partner (more accurate).  Is that methodology the best way to score or the best way to win?   Scoring is obviously tied to winning but winning doesn't necessarily mean you must shoot the lowest score capable.

 

Legislating based upon motive is a slippery slope.

 

Frankly, I make decisions when I play (individually) that are not always in my own best interests in regards to scoring.  My scores don't mean squat but to me though, and my handicap.  You guys wouldn't ever be motivated to play differently due to the effect or potential effect on your handicap would you?

Edited May 19, 2023 by smashdn

[Cactus Jack]

1 hour ago, idrive said:

 

Why would I celebrate someone's "awesome round" when he isn't someone I root for.  That'd be like me rooting for the cowboys to win the Superbowl.

 

I think it's time for liv to fold and bring the players back together again under one roof so we can see them perform against each other more often. Stop all of the quibbling.

 

I haven't encountered anything in regard to the game of golf that has done more harm than liv has. 

I would argue that the multiple daily negative comments made in this thread is not good for the forum or the game. The constant ripping of people and LIV is exhausting and frankly unnecessary. Due to our collective poor behavior we can’t even discuss LIV freely. 
 

Every negative comment has been made on repeat for hundreds of pages. When can we focus on the golf and the incredible players? Because of the this thread we’re not even allowed to talk about LIV anywhere else. In my opinion it’s time for this thread to turn the corner. 

[aus10KC]

16 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

If you think about rankings rationally, you would only consider who you beat every day.  It doesn't matter if it's a one day event or five days.  And it doesn't matter if you miss the cut or if there is no cut.

 

What matters is who you beat.

 

The Golf Week / Sagarin rankings do that.

 

Jeff Sagarin’s rating system is based on a mathematical formula that uses a player’s won-lost-tied record against other players when they play on the same course on the same day, and the stroke differential between those players, then links all players to one another based on common opponents.

 

Jon Rahm is back at No. 1 in Golfweek/Sagarin rankings (usatoday.com)

 

So when Mickelson, Reed, and Koepka beat all but two golfers at the Masters, they should get some good ranking points.

 

They did get OWGR points for their masters results. I don't see what the problem is.

[smashdn]

On 5/18/2023 at 7:44 AM, johnseg said:

Do you think really cares about OWGR points? The more I think about it the more I believe that it is just noise to get the Majors to come up with a LIV criteria for entry. LIV keeps yelling we have good players we need a path and eventually the Majors say the Top 5 LIV players at the end of the season automatically qualify for the next four majors or something akin to that.

 

The fits they are throwing just aren't consistent with trying to work together with the OWGR committee.

 

This is one potential qualifying criteria for entry into the PGA Championship field.

• Any tournament winner co-sponsored or approved by the PGA Tour since the previous PGA Championship 

 

Do you think it would be consistent with existing criteria and beneficial to LIV to have something akin to that for LIV?  Wouldn't you, as a player, want your league/tour you are playing for to be afforded the same luxury?  We can call it whining/crying/bellyaching, but part of GN's role is to get LIV to the same level as the other tours.  That whining is applying pressure, directly and indirectly to force the OWGR and majors to reckon with LIV.  You may elect to not take them seriously, and that is anyone's right, but you need to understand the risk exists that if you don't, LIV could stick around long enough to really upset the apple cart when it comes to credibility of the ranking system and qualifying and whatnot.  Could, not saying will but could.  It is but a risk to be weighed.

 

There are no additional strings tied to that criteria that I pulled above.  Some of them are "if this" AND you are top 100 OWGR.  That particular one is "winner of the Barbasol is in".  Winner of the Puerto Rico open is in, winner of the Barracuda is in, etc.  You could be the winner of the Charles Schwab and no other tournament or made cut or anything for 11 3/4 months and you are into the field in a major.

[betarhoalphadelta]

27 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

This example, though I cannot disagree with the fact he said it was due to the team portion, is also rather flimsy when really broken down and taken at more than face value.

 

What if the situation you cite was not "to protect team score" but instead "to make the cut?"  All I need here is a par and I make the cut, I could be more aggressive and stoke this in for a birdie which would give me a better score, but it also brings three putt and missing the cut into play.  It is the exact same action/reaction, but the rationale for the action/reaction is different.  Now that seems the OWGR is concerned with motive for how a player plays the way they play.  if we are going legislate motive you are opening a big ol' can o' worms.  Think of all the situations where the players may be motivated to not take on risk to protect a score rather than be aggressive to score lower.  Also, OWGR aren't concerned with score save for the impact of score on where the player places in relation to the rest of the field.

 

Tiger has said on several occasions that when he was in the final pairing he treated some instances as though they were match play rather than stroke play and intentionally played shots short of his opponent (which is not accurate wording as they are all opponents in stroke play) so that he could hit first into the green and by hitting it close but added pressure on his playing partner (more accurate).  Is that methodology the best way to score or the best way to win?   Scoring is obviously tied to winning but winning doesn't necessarily mean you must shoot the lowest score capable.

 

legislating based upon motive is a slippery slope.

 

Frankly, I make decisions when I play (individually) that are not always in my own best interests in regards to scoring.  My scores don't mean squat but to me though, and my handicap.  You guys wouldn't ever be motivated to play differently due to the effect or potential effect on your handicap would you?

 

But every other motivation you bring up is a purely individual motivation. It actually doesn't matter what that individual's motivation is--just that it's individual. 

 

For example, OWGR doesn't score the Zurich Classic. Even though (assuming they required all balls to be holed) they could apply points to the fourball rounds. 

 

But there's a reason for that. In that case, team strategy is ABSOLUTELY used. You'll see it sometimes where a player will have his partner play out of turn for a short par putt so that he can make a more aggressive stroke at his own birdie putt. If one partner blows his drive OB, the other partner may take a more conservative strategy to try to protect a par on that hole because he knows he has to carry the team. 

 

It just brings a whole bunch of motivations into play that aren't there when trying to rank individual golfers against each other. 

 

Granted, I don't think this particular LIV example REALLY makes that big of a difference. One random stroke here or there played differently due to team interests than individual interests probably won't meaningfully affect a player's ranking by more than a spot. And in MOST cases team and individual interests should be aligned. But if the team component of LIV continues to be more and more important--as they seem to desire--it makes it hard to rationalize whether you're ranking a player based on individual metrics or how well he's helping his team succeed. 

 

[2bGood]

7 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

Exactly.  As they are currently constructed, or as the OWGR currently awards points within a field, everyone would be getting points in the case of LIV, even the guy placing DFL.  I don't agree that should be the case.  An easy fix in my mind is, OWGR just modifies slightly their cut criteria verbiage to say something to the effect "only those placing in the top half (or whatever fraction is agreed upon) of non-cut events shall be awarded points."  

 

Now you have your purpose of the cut (I assume) as OWGR sees it, but you can still have all your guys playing that last round to have their scores count towards the team aspect or whatever.

 

 

There is layers of issues though. In concept I have no issue with having no cut and awarding the top half of the field points. There is some issues to work through, but not insurmountable ones.

 

Thing with LIV is, you have a large portion of players that don't **'deserve'** to be there. There are guys on the LIV tour that are there to fill spots, to help recruit their brother, because they used to be good or they accepted Greg's call. Being at the top half of this closed loop field is really not that big of deal when half the golfers are not high caliber. You have no one challenging to take those bottom spots of the tour away, and you have some guys protected from ever having to leave. It is just way easier to find yourself in the top half of LIV than the PGAT. 

 

** I actually think the guys on LIV deserve to be there, just not necessary from a competitive standpoint. 

Edited May 19, 2023 by 2bGood