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

[dcmidnight]

4 minutes ago, ahenderX said:

I’m talking about the PGA and Masters, not events. It’s not a capitulation, it’s just one way all the endless chatter about OWGR could be easily resolved. The universal opinion seems to point to these two majors as having the weakest fields of the four majors. By the way, I’m 100% anti-LIV.

 

That is the universal opinion of LIV fans - no one else. Besides, saying one major field is "weaker" than another is like rating four 5-star restaurants, yes one has to be "the weakest".

 

Besides, there's really no endless chatter to speak of outside of a few players and all the LIV guys. And given that Norman gave in, this is over now.

[smashdn]

13 hours ago, Shilgy said:

OR…they could have done what every other serious tour did and comply with the established regulations.  Which one sounds more “accurate “?

 

Are you sure the tours comply with the rules or were the OWGR rules crafted to fit what was already on the landscape?

[RCGA]

Major winners since 2020

 

Currently on the PGA Tour (8)

Wyndham, Harman, Scottie, JT, Fitz, Matsuyama, Morikawa (2)

 

Currently on LIV (7) 

Rahm (2), Brooks, Cam Smith, Michelson, Bryson, DJ

 

You're telling me you can't find any way to rank these players?

[dcmidnight]

5 minutes ago, RCGA said:

Major winners since 2020

 

Currently on the PGA Tour (8)

Wyndham, Harman, Scottie, JT, Fitz, Matsuyama, Morikawa (2)

 

Currently on LIV (7) 

Rahm (2), Brooks, Cam Smith, Michelson, Bryson, DJ

 

You're telling me you can't find any way to rank these players?

 

Why? I mean at this point in the proceedings, whats the point?

 

Any "strength of field" metric would be so low for LIV that their points would end up being next to nothing - which means their rankings would go nowhere anyway.

 

I do feel bad if there are LIV guys that were sold a bill of goods from Norman and now are "stuck" - and yes by "stuck" I mean stuck with barrels full of money.

[Noles]

7 minutes ago, RCGA said:

Major winners since 2020

 

Currently on the PGA Tour (8)

Wyndham, Harman, Scottie, JT, Fitz, Matsuyama, Morikawa (2)

 

Currently on LIV (7) 

Rahm (2), Brooks, Cam Smith, Michelson, Bryson, DJ

 

You're telling me you can't find any way to rank these players?

They have found a way.  LIV just isn't willing to do it.  It's really that simple.

[ahenderX]

18 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

Are you sure the tours comply with the rules or were the OWGR rules crafted to fit what was already on the landscape?

The basis of OWGR originated in 1986. Prior to 1986, rankings were based on money won. European players complained because US tournaments offered bigger winnings than Euro Tour events.

[RCGA]

1 minute ago, dcmidnight said:

 

Why? I mean at this point in the proceedings, whats the point?

 

 

Because the rankings aren't accurate. Everyone knows it. The fans, the players, vegas odds, data golf....

[idrive]

As mentioned, it no longer matters about liv being ranked by the OWGR.

 

In today's world, you don't get to strong arm people for no other reason than you think you're better than everyone else.

 

[dcmidnight]

7 minutes ago, RCGA said:

 

Because the rankings aren't accurate. Everyone knows it. The LIV fans, the LIV players, vegas odds, data golf....

 

FTFY

[RobS]

59 minutes ago, ahenderX said:

I’m talking about the PGA and Masters, not events. It’s not a capitulation, it’s just one way all the endless chatter about OWGR could be easily resolved. The universal opinion seems to point to these two majors as having the weakest fields of the four majors. By the way, I’m 100% anti-LIV.

The PGA might be perceived as the least prestigious of the Majors but it statistically has the strongest field.  Ironically, many perceive the Masters as the most prestigious Major but it's statistically the easiest of the 4 due to its smaller field size and relative strength of field.  Maybe the Masters and PGA at some point have a qualifying event, not open like other 2 Majors but an invitational for hard to rank or fringe players?

[bcjim]

1 hour ago, smashdn said:

 

Are you sure the tours comply with the rules or were the OWGR rules crafted to fit what was already on the landscape?

What was already on the landscape was legitimate competition. 

[Hawkeye77]

17 hours ago, pgapromex said:

Uh huh, and since Viktor has played golf with all these guys he just might know that owgr rankings are no longer accurate.  The wrx experts think they know better and are sure the LIV guys are now hasbeens who no longer can compete.

 

 

 

World number four Viktor Hovland said on Wednesday that the Official World Golf Ranking (OWGR) is devalued without points for top players competing in the Saudi-backed LIV Golf League.

 

 

Jon Rahm said water in Spain is wet.

[Hawkeye77]

1 hour ago, ahenderX said:

I’m talking about the PGA and Masters, not events. It’s not a capitulation, it’s just one way all the endless chatter about OWGR could be easily resolved. The universal opinion seems to point to these two majors as having the weakest fields of the four majors. By the way, I’m 100% anti-LIV.

 

The PGA Championship for years has been considered one of the strongest fields for the majors so lets get the facts straight - so there is no "universal opinion" it has the weakest fields.

 

The Masters is limited by size of field and to some extent the often generous and forward thinking use of invites but so what - it's still a strong field and . . . of all the majors has always led in the category of the tournament most players want to win, more history and tradition and relevance to the game of golf than just about all the other events put together (non-majors) ---- really all you need to know. OWGR irrelevant to its stature.

 

The chatter about OWGR is for LIV folks or people whose favorite player defected or "journalists" who rotate it into a semi-annual clickbait "article".

 

All "spin" and never ends (and seems to never end on here).

[RobS]

46 minutes ago, RCGA said:

Major winners since 2020

 

Currently on the PGA Tour (8)

Wyndham, Harman, Scottie, JT, Fitz, Matsuyama, Morikawa (2)

 

Currently on LIV (7) 

Rahm (2), Brooks, Cam Smith, Michelson, Bryson, DJ

 

You're telling me you can't find any way to rank these players?

The rankings don't really have a significant effect on the recent Major winners on LIV.  Beyond their exemptions for winning, they have opportunities to secure further exemptions by performing well in the Majors.  The Masters, for example, invites the prior year's top 12 finishers and the top 4 finishers from the other Majors.  The other 3 Majors, while not exactly the same, are similar.  I'm not implying that it's easy to top 12 or top 4, just pointing out that if you perform well in the Majors, you can secure future invites.

The players impacted by the rankings are the guys with the potential to be in or remain in that 30-50 range (or better) in the OWGR if they were on the PGA TOUR.  Ancer, Varner, Gooch, Meronk, Pereira, etc.  Not including Niemann because he's earned invites.  Then you also have the young guys fresh out of school.  They may or may not become Major caliber players  but will be on the outside looking in unless they do what Niemann has done which isn't exactly easy.

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, smashdn said:

 

Are you sure the tours comply with the rules or were the OWGR rules crafted to fit what was already on the landscape?

Sure you could argue that.  
 

However…..the board has told them repeatedly(to the board it’s likely ad nauseam) that the 54 holes and no cut are not issues.  Reduced points yes but doable.  The team game is a bit of a sticking point as over the last few seasons there have been instances where players played shots,for,team score rather than their own.

The issue remains though is it being a closed shop. Guys with a contract cannot lose their “card” and with no cuts will continue to get points as if they actually were in the competition.  Like AK last week.

[Hawkeye77]

58 minutes ago, RCGA said:

 

Because the rankings aren't accurate. Everyone knows it. The fans, the players, vegas odds, data golf....

 

But you know darn well that the OWGR isn't meant to serve as the point of reference for fans, Vegas (come on now) and so forth.

 

It has a purpose and serves its purpose and players knew and know what the consequences of certain choices were/are.

 

Again, this has gone on and around and around forever ---- and until LIV stops with the faux talking points and playing the victim I guess it will never stop.

[RobS]

13 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

Jon Rahm said water in Spain is wet.

It doesn't matter what the players think of the OWGR, at all.  It matters what the Tournaments using those rankings think.  If they think they're not getting worthy fields, they'll make changes.  The Majors will always have the very best players.  Using a LIV and a PGA TOUR example, and nothing against these guys as they're very good players, but a Major without a few Gooch's and Poston's won't diminish the relevance one bit.  

[RCGA]

I can't believe I'm defending LIV, but they sign the top 50 players, are you still defending the OWRG's arbitrary eligibility criteria? 

 

I understand the LIV hate (I'm one on them), but I don't understand the simping for the OWRG.  

[Holy Moses]

3 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

 

It’s not a question of there being guys on liv who should qualify for majors. 
 

But liv needs to present its own ranking system to the majors. The majors want the best players so if the system is credible, they will use it

 

In the meantime, how do you rank a guy like Taylor Gooch? Given the resources, you’d think liv could curate a ton of data and apply the enormous amount of analytics software/capability available to do so

 

It should have been the first thing they did. 
 

Ultimately, the majors will end up just taking like the top 5 liv guys. But liv still needs to create a ranking platform to try to get more guys in if they can, 

They don’t want to because they know that an honest appraisal of their players will hurt more of them than it will help

[Holy Moses]

7 minutes ago, RCGA said:

I can't believe I'm defending LIV, but they sign the top 50 players, are you still defending the OWRG's arbitrary eligibility criteria? 

 

I understand the LIV hate (I'm one on them), but I don't understand the simping for the OWRG.  

It’s not arbitrary when the OWGR gave LIV a step-by-step list of things they needed to do to be considered, but LIV won’t conform like relegating poor players out because they have contracts with their captains and they don’t want to push them out of the league to the Asian Tour while they are paying them tons of money.

 

No Laying Up has been eviscerating the LIV defenders online over this and Data Golf rankings.

Edited March 8 by Holy Moses

[RCGA]

Just now, Holy Moses said:

It’s not arbitrary when the OWGR gave LIV a step-by-step list of things they needed to do to be considered, but LIV won’t do things like relegate poor players out because they have contracts with their captains and they don’t want to push them out of the league to the Asian Tour while they are paying them tons of money

 

All of which are arbitrary. Someone just made these rules up and apparently the rules change all the time.  

[italianstallion]

14 minutes ago, RCGA said:

I can't believe I'm defending LIV, but they sign the top 50 players, are you still defending the OWRG's arbitrary eligibility criteria? 

 

I understand the LIV hate (I'm one on them), but I don't understand the simping for the OWRG.  

Devil’s advocate, and a straw man argument here: what if the players 51-100 were younger, hit the ball further, and had better recent results than those top 50 guys, but were ranked 51-100 only because they were new to the scene and hadn’t played enough tournaments yet? The top 50 guys, recognizing that their reign at the top is over, then decide to head to LIV to “protect their points.” Nobody would ever be able to break into the top 50 because all those guys are only playing against one another on their closed shop tour. Thats why the criteria matters. 

[Titleist99]

 

I've said this many times on this very Forum:

 

"Padraig Harrington has claimed LIV Golf should reimburse the PGA Tour financially if players opt to jump ship to the Saudi-backed breakway league.

The likes of Jon Rahm, Brooks Koepka and Cameron Smith have all caused controversy by opting to play in the new competition.

LIV are expected to try and entice more big names in the future, too.

Harrington insists he doesn't mind the rivalry between the PGA Tour and LIV. However, the Irishman would like to see the former compensated should more A-listers continue to cross the divide."

 

It Amazes me that the PGAT hasn't found a way to protect its talent. You don't want to stop players from going elsewhere, you just want to be compensated for it.

[goalie]

16 minutes ago, RCGA said:

I can't believe I'm defending LIV, but they sign the top 50 players, are you still defending the OWRG's arbitrary eligibility criteria? 

 

I understand the LIV hate (I'm one on them), but I don't understand the simping for the OWRG.  

Yeah, the fact that, in theory, if LIV "poached" the top 50 it wouldn't work is why it doesn't work if they only "poached" ten of the top fifty, but we can't think about that.......

 

(FWIW, I literally hate the Saudis, hated being in the middle east, and am not a fan of LIV, but the bottom line is ALL the top 100 could go to LIV, and they would all suddenly lose OWGR over time no matter what.)

[Ghost of Snead]

1 hour ago, RCGA said:

 

Because the rankings aren't accurate. Everyone knows it. The fans, the players, vegas odds, data golf....

 

The ranking were accurate before Norman found an open wallet to exact his revenge tour with Mickelson's help. And if & when LIV shuts down, I'm sure that over time the rankings will be adjusted and the best will play against the best. 

[Titleist99]

3 minutes ago, italianstallion said:

Devil’s advocate, and a straw man argument here: what if the players 51-100 were younger, hit the ball further, and had better recent results than those top 50 guys, but were ranked 51-100 only because they were new to the scene and hadn’t played enough tournaments yet? The top 50 guys, recognizing that their reign at the top is over, then decide to head to LIV to “protect their points.” Nobody would ever be able to break into the top 50 because all those guys are only playing against one another on their closed shop tour. Thats why the criteria matters. 

Plus, TGL sign the top players how do you deny them OWGR points if you throw out the criteria? 

 

Just a little ridiculousness.😎

[bscinstnct]

17 minutes ago, RCGA said:

I can't believe I'm defending LIV, but they sign the top 50 players, are you still defending the OWRG's arbitrary eligibility criteria? 

 

I understand the LIV hate (I'm one on them), but I don't understand the simping for the OWRG.  

 

LIV needs to use it’s resources to harvest all the data and present it ti the majors to make their case

 

They just spent 600MM on JR

 

You’d think they can spend a few measily millions on the analytics software and a team to make their case

 

Maybe that’s what they are going to do but they should have already done it

[ahenderX]

14 minutes ago, RCGA said:

 

All of which are arbitrary. Someone just made these rules up and apparently the rules change all the time.  

The ranking algorithm changes, not the tour requirements to be eligible.  

[RCGA]

 

4 minutes ago, ahenderX said:

The ranking algorithm changes, not the tour requirements to be eligible.  

 

Says right here the rankings are based on tournaments, not tours. 

[ahenderX]

2 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

The PGA Championship for years has been considered one of the strongest fields for the majors so lets get the facts straight - so there is no "universal opinion" it has the weakest fields.

 

The Masters is limited by size of field and to some extent the often generous and forward thinking use of invites but so what - it's still a strong field and . . . of all the majors has always led in the category of the tournament most players want to win, more history and tradition and relevance to the game of golf than just about all the other events put together (non-majors) ---- really all you need to know. OWGR irrelevant to its stature.

 

The chatter about OWGR is for LIV folks or people whose favorite player defected or "journalists" who rotate it into a semi-annual clickbait "article".

 

All "spin" and never ends (and seems to never end on here).

Thanks. I misinterpreted the “least important major” many have as an opinion with it having a weaker field.

Edited March 8 by ahenderX