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

[smashdn]

16 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

 

Honest to goodness I have zero problem with giving the Champions Tour points.  If the math works, then the math works.  And if the math works for one group, the math should work for any other.  

 

(I still agree though that the lack of "open qualifying" (though poorly delineated by the OWGR as to what is "good enough") is a stumbling block for LIV.)

[ThinkingPlus]

1 hour ago, Cactus Jack said:

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. 

I think the mods have done a fabulous job. Isolating most all LIV discussion to this thread was a brilliant solution on many levels.

[smashdn]

42 minutes ago, 2bGood said:

 

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. You have no one challenging to take the spot of the tour, and other guys protected from ever having to leave. It just way easier to find yourself in the top half. 

 

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

 

Completely agree.  It is a problem.  I think if you asked them what the first model was supposed to be it was supposed/intended to be very similar to the WGC events but on a year-long duration.  Your performance/placement in the previous season (obviously PGAT and maybe DPWT I suppose too) was going to "unlock" you a spot in LIV.  That clears the qualification hurdle.  Might even clear the field size hurdle.

 

This is very, very similar to European football model with Europa, Europa Conference and Champions Leagues.  You earn your way into those more exclusive competitions via your performance in your domestic league.  You get your side in, you have another avenue for revenue.

 

(Warning: Big "ifs" ahead.)  If the PGAT and DPWT etc. would allow it and if the scheduling would allow it, it could become really darn entertaining.  However, we have discussed all the reasons why there is not and will not be agreement to allow your tour's top golfers to play in 8-10 events outside of your tour per year.  PGAT schedules every week of the year and I think they are looking for more weeks on the calendar, perhaps going to a lunar calendar to sneak more events in per year.  PGAT dictates where the players cannot play and when essentially.  Nobody wants to see Greg Norman win, it is very much personal long before this point.

 

Clearly this diminishes the individual tours (Ask Man City fans if they are ok with just winning the PL title or do they need to also win the Champions League).  This model might even diminish the majors because you have more events with the world's best players getting together and in a smaller, more talent concentrated field.

 

Conceptually I think for the golf fan it would have/could have been awesome.  All the other issues (chiefly who makes money, who loses money and power) are hurdles too tall to clear.  Golf will likely never have this ideal.

[smashdn]

1 hour ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

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. 

 

Agreed.

 

This is a genuine question for those who have experienced this as I never have.  I played other sports in hs and college, not golf.  Does the team aspect of those scoring formats really change your individual way of play due to the team scoring portion?

[Golferpaul]

18 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

I agree.  If you are trying to identify the best golfers you have to include the Sr tour.

[Golferpaul]

6 hours ago, freeze16172002 said:

you want ranking points for that now?

Yes.  If you beat the best golfers in the world, give the points.  Every day is a new day.

[betarhoalphadelta]

5 hours ago, Cactus Jack said:

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. 

 

I agree. I have done my level best (as an anti-LIV voice) to behave like an adult. You're correct that there are some that are rehashing the same tired tropes to bash LIV that have been thrown out for hundreds of pages. 

 

That said, I would point out that it is not entirely one-sided. We're still hearing arguments from LIV proponents about how Monahan is a tyrant, how the tour should have "worked with" LIV, and how unfair it is that the tour has and enforces their competing events restriction and should just let the players play wherever they want. This is a competition between the tours for primacy in the professional golf world, and it's tiring to hear over and over how the PGAT should have just rolled over and not fought for their own interests--which happen to be the interests of the entirety of the player/member base, not just the top stars. 

 

I too would like people to behave themselves such that the mods don't have to moderate the thread. I'm sure they're quite tired of it too. However this is a discussion forum, and LIV proponents should understand that the goal shouldn't be to make this a pro-LIV echo chamber where negative comments aren't allowed. It should be a place where people of differing opinion simply hash it out like adults rather than children. 

[Shilgy]

3 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

Yes.  If you beat the best golfers in the world, give the points.  Every day is a new day.

Geez @Cactus Jack…..responses like this don’t deserve a retort?

 

Its like we should have a skins game too and give OWGR points for best hole?  Points are given for best tournament score…not round by round which means nothing.

[CDM]

The stupidity keeps rolling........... they just need move on and let product vs product be the way. 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/judge-grants-liv-golf-stay-164457881.html 

[2bGood]

8 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

Agreed.

 

This is a genuine question for those who have experienced this as I never have.  I played other sports in hs and college, not golf.  Does the team aspect of those scoring formats really change your individual way of play due to the team scoring portion?

Yes it does. Really depends on the format, but it can be like Match play where you play shots you might not normally as you have to hit a certain number. We used to play count 4 out 6. Guys going out later sometimes knew that if they did shoot X under in the back nine there score did not matter. 

Edited May 20, 2023 by 2bGood

[2bGood]

On 5/18/2023 at 3:30 PM, Golferpaul said:

current leader in the clubhouse:

 

I think Bryson will be asking Greg if they can make LIV and 18 holes event. 😁

 

XVIII golf has a ring to it and they good just go with the 18 decent golfer they have and send the chumps home. 

 

 

(I sure hope this ages well😉) - posted after 27 holes.

Edited May 20, 2023 by 2bGood

[freeze16172002]

5 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

Yes.  If you beat the best golfers in the world, give the points.  Every day is a new day.

If you're leading the tournament after the 1st or the 4th round, same amount of points. Makes sense, led the 1st round missed the cut but got ranking points

[freeze16172002]

5 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

I agree.  If you are trying to identify the best golfers you have to include the Sr tour.

The champion tour players are the best players in the world?

Edited May 19, 2023 by freeze16172002

[billyspan]

On 5/11/2023 at 7:48 AM, 2bGood said:

 

Not sure the numbers add up, there are more like 1.4x more. 

 

Canadians:

PGAT - 7

LPGA - 4

 

 

Australia:

PGAT - 10

LPGA - 7

 

I think Corey Conners was using our posts as motivation... 🙂

[billyspan]

7 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

Honest to goodness I have zero problem with giving the Champions Tour points.  If the math works, then the math works.  And if the math works for one group, the math should work for any other.  

 

(I still agree though that the lack of "open qualifying" (though poorly delineated by the OWGR as to what is "good enough") is a stumbling block for LIV.)

 

Data Golf rankings include the PGA Champions Tour.  Funny, does anyone know if Data Golf uses the "length of course" metric that the SI Rankings do?  Would be very applicable here...

 

[billyspan]

I can an appreciate this viewpoint.  Perhaps all professional golf events could be awarded points, including match-play and team play events.  It would be very imperfect, but so is ANY ranking system.  

 

However (my opinion), I go back to the OWGR being largely directed by the four Majors (the R& A initially) so a top/deserving player on non-U.S./European tour has an opportunity to participate.  Three of the four majors are held in the U.S., there has ALWAYS been a bias in the fields towards Americans as a result.  The Masters was by far the the most global-inclusive U.S.-based Major. However, the U.S. Open and U.S. PGA were notoriously difficult for international players to qualify for.  The examples of omissions or international players needed to qualify from the 1960s-early 90s are rather nuts...

 

Because these rankings are used and governed by the Majors (majority "company" members 4 of the 7), I see it fitting that rankings are determined largely by events that mirror the Majors themselves, individual 72-hole stroke play, 36-hole cut, start on 1 or 10.  The further you deviate from that standard, the longer it will take to properly calculate a new algorithm, the longer the probationary period to prove viability, and the fewer points players will ultimately receive.

[billyspan]

7 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

Agreed.

 

This is a genuine question for those who have experienced this as I never have.  I played other sports in hs and college, not golf.  Does the team aspect of those scoring formats really change your individual way of play due to the team scoring portion?

Yes, having played team golf in HS and college, the answer is yes, absolutely.  Coach will be in your ear from the get go.

[2bGood]

1 hour ago, billyspan said:

I think Corey Conners was using our posts as motivation... 🙂

3 Canadians in the top 10 today, 4 made the cut. I think they all watch this thread. 😉

 

6 Ausies on the weekend - oi, oi, oi

[idrive]

13 hours ago, CDM said:

 

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

 

I don't use the word HATE.  I either root for someone or I don't.  

 

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

13 hours ago, billyspan said:

 

Because these rankings are used and governed by the Majors (majority "company" members 4 of the 7), I see it fitting that rankings are determined largely by events that mirror the Majors themselves, individual 72-hole stroke play, 36-hole cut, start on 1 or 10.  The further you deviate from that standard, the longer it will take to properly calculate a new algorithm, the longer the probationary period to prove viability, and the fewer points players will ultimately receive.

 

I do think this is one of the underappreciated issues with the LIV application for points. It's not just about awarding points to a new format, it's about how to fairly scale those points so it does not overvalue or undervalue finishes on LIV. 

 

Golf tournaments are a grind. The longer they are, the more you phase out variance, where lesser players can "get hot" for a short period of time and stay atop the leaderboard. How many times do we see a nobody rocket up to the 18- or 36-hole lead in a tournament? How many people are looking at PGA Teaching Pro Michael Block who starts the PGA Championship 3rd round in T10 and think he's actually going to finish anywhere near T10? 

 

Limited field and 54 holes is simply a math problem, as we've all said. But they need to really look at it and make sure they solve it right. You want to simulate and battle-test whatever calculation you have for points against how much variability there will be in LIV finishes to make sure you don't award points unfairly in relation to other tours, and it's tough to do that with a LIV history that's barely over 10 tournaments long so far. 

[ahenderX]

6 hours ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

I do think this is one of the underappreciated issues with the LIV application for points. It's not just about awarding points to a new format, it's about how to fairly scale those points so it does not overvalue or undervalue finishes on LIV. 

 

Golf tournaments are a grind. The longer they are, the more you phase out variance, where lesser players can "get hot" for a short period of time and stay atop the leaderboard. How many times do we see a nobody rocket up to the 18- or 36-hole lead in a tournament? How many people are looking at PGA Teaching Pro Michael Block who starts the PGA Championship 3rd round in T10 and think he's actually going to finish anywhere near T10? 

 

Limited field and 54 holes is simply a math problem, as we've all said. But they need to really look at it and make sure they solve it right. You want to simulate and battle-test whatever calculation you have for points against how much variability there will be in LIV finishes to make sure you don't award points unfairly in relation to other tours, and it's tough to do that with a LIV history that's barely over 10 tournaments long so far. 

The Mexican Tour has only 54-hole events and gets OWGR points. It does have a 36-hole cut. I would think it ticks all the boxes regarding other OWGR requirements. LIV has met two requirements — being sponsored by the Asian Tour and having at least 10 events.

Edited May 20, 2023 by ahenderX

[Golferpaul]

20 hours ago, freeze16172002 said:

The champion tour players are the best players in the world?

Yes, some are. Did you forget about Mickelson?

[smashdn]

On 5/19/2023 at 4:43 PM, 2bGood said:

Yes it does. Really depends on the format, but it can be like Match play where you play shots you might not normally as you have to hit a certain number. We used to play count 4 out 6. Guys going out later sometimes knew that if they did shoot X under in the back nine there score did not matter. 

 

23 hours ago, billyspan said:

Yes, having played team golf in HS and college, the answer is yes, absolutely.  Coach will be in your ear from the get go.

 

Good thing with LIV then is you have neither the problem of your score potentially counting or not, everyone goes out at the same time and they know before the round whose score that day counts and whose does not.

 

So seems the team part is even less an issue than I initially thought.

[freeze16172002]

5 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

Yes, some are. Did you forget about Mickelson?

Mickelson plays on the champion tour? when was his last start there

[2bGood]

6 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

Yes, some are. Did you forget about Mickelson?

 Or Tom Watson back in the day....

[2bGood]

2 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

 

Good thing with LIV then is you have neither the problem of your score potentially counting or not, everyone goes out at the same time and they know before the round whose score that day counts and whose does not.

 

So seems the team part is even less an issue than I initially thought.

LIV is apparently trying to ramp up the team thing, so hard to say what it will look like in a year or two. Personally I think it would be a more interesting product if they did work in match play and different formats (alternate shot etc'). But I get most people watching don't like this and it would make viewership even worse than it is now.

[Shilgy]

4 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

 

Good thing with LIV then is you have neither the problem of your score potentially counting or not, everyone goes out at the same time and they know before the round whose score that day counts and whose does not.

 

So seems the team part is even less an issue than I initially thought.

They do? Thought they counted the best three?

 

edit…they count two players rounds 1&2 and three players in the final round….they do not know in advance.

 

 

During the first and second rounds, LIV Golf calculates team scores by adding up the best two-stroke play scores for each team. The other two players' scores are thrown out. During the third round, the top three players' scores are added together, and only the lowest score is eliminated.

 

Edited May 21, 2023 by Shilgy

[MUNIGRIT]

On 5/19/2023 at 10:56 AM, Golferpaul said:

I agree.  If you are trying to identify the best golfers you have to include the Sr tour.

For sure in PGA type rankings they aren't. Alker is great on the SR tour and was one of the worst touring pros this week as far as showing.

[King_Slender]

We're back to approving LIV posts?  Okaaaayyy....

 

Anyway, I think of the of the things enabling LIV players unexpectedly was the move of the PGA to May.  Previously there was a 2 month gap between The Masters and the US Open, filled by the Players Championship. LIV guys would have been out of sight, out of mind.

 

Now, with a major every month, it's not much different from a fan perspective because most of those guys were only playing once or twice between majors.  

 

We'll see how this all plays out, but from a fan perspective the majors are better when we see ALL of the best players. 

[woodriff]

Changing the subject a bit. Doing a bit of researching and LIV golf are not reporting viewer stats anymore.