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

[dcmidnight]

20 minutes ago, Ghost of Snead said:

 

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. 

 

Not one single player anywhere ever had an issue with OWGR before this. No complaints by Euro Tour guys, no complaints by guys on KFT or grinding it out on worldwide tours. It was all fine and good - until it wasnt. And guys knew it would be an issue, they were told *in advance* it would be an issue - then holy cow they are surprised it became an issue.

Edited March 8 by dcmidnight

[Holy Moses]

43 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 just about getting good players. No one is denying that. It’s using a mostly uniform system to rank players in one league vs players in another to fairly distribute points. And LIV won’t do this because their pre-determined business model and Norman/PIF’s stubbornness won’t allow them to adapt their league.

[Holy Moses]

24 minutes ago, dcmidnight said:

 

Not one single player anywhere ever had an issue with OWGR before this. No complaints by Euro Tour guys, no complaints by guys on KFT or grinding it out on worldwide tours. It was all fine and good - until it wasnt. And guys knew it would be an issue, they were told *in advance* it would be an issue - then holy cow they are surprised it became an issue.

European players couldn't complain much because they got a certain minimum number of OWGR points regardless of how strong the field was. That changed when the OWGR changed recently. 

Edited March 8 by Holy Moses

[ahenderX]

Just now, RCGA said:

 

 

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

From the OWGR website:

 

OWGR - How the rankings work

 

The most important phrase from the above link is "Eligible tournament."

 

I think the below is an interesting read:

 

Will LIV Golf be validated by the Official World Golf Ranking? It’s an essential, if thorny, question

 

The above 2022 article indicates that LIV at one time was interested in trying to meet OWGR tour requirements. Clearly not the case anymore.

[jholz]

All of this seems to be nothing more than a pissing contest between highly entitled and safely ensconced entities. 

 

Is Phil Mickelson what makes professional golf special and important?

 

Is it Augusta National?

 

Is it the PGA Tour?

 

Who is more important?

 

In the meantime, they either continue to destroy the game we love or make themselves increasingly irrelevant, depending on who you ask. 

 

But, the local muni remains open and I have a bag full of pretty good clubs. 

 

What we need to realize is that good golfers are a dime a dozen. None of these guys are particularly special. 

Edited March 8 by jholz

[Pastit]

2 hours ago, dcmidnight said:

 

Not one single player anywhere ever had an issue with OWGR before this. No complaints by Euro Tour guys, no complaints by guys on KFT or grinding it out on worldwide tours. It was all fine and good - until it wasnt. And guys knew it would be an issue, they were told *in advance* it would be an issue - then holy cow they are surprised it became an issue.

I remember all sorts of complaints pre LIV. Some on the fact that a ranking could rise or remain constant by failing to play a particular event and thus remain qualified for a Major eg Lee Westwood.  

Edited March 8 by Pastit

[bekgolf]

The points thing is just a PR stunt to bring attention to Liv.  If they really liked competitive golf they would of stayed and they would still be very wealthy people who play a game for a living. 

 

The golfers who left don't want to compete anymore, imo they like being the Harlem Globetrotters of golf.

 

[freeze16172002]

2 hours 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?

yeah you can, comply with the OWGR its  not that hard. 

[Holy Moses]

If the majors wanted LIV players in based on how LIV is currently structured…the majors would have voted with the OWGR board to have them in. LIV has a problem with the majors and LIV thinks that they are trying to do the majors a favor. Yes, the majors are a little hurt by this (but look at who is missing the majors on LIV and it’s really only Gooch that is significant), but it’s LIV’s fault and absolutely no one else’s.

 

You do have to wonder if LIV will have their own “majors” during majors weeks and install new contract wording when players re-sign to force players to play in LIV majors who were already qualified for the traditional majors. 

Edited March 8 by Holy Moses

[BlackDiamondPar5]

12 minutes ago, jholz said:

All of this seems to be nothing more than a pissing contest between highly entitled and safely ensconced entities. 

 

Is Phil Mickelson what makes professional golf special and important?

 

Is it Augusta National?

 

Is it the PGA Tour?

 

Who is more important?

 

In the meantime, they either continue to destroy the game we love or make themselves increasingly irrelevant, depending on who you ask. 

 

But, the local muni remains open and I have a bag full of pretty good clubs. 

 

What we need to realize is that good golfers are a dime a dozen. None of these guys are particularly special. 

Great points. If all professional golf disappeared today my life wouldn't be adversely impacted one bit. My enjoyment of playing the game with friends and family would be just "as is" ... Fun and perfect. 

[Titleist99]

14 minutes ago, jholz said:

All of this seems to be nothing more than a pissing contest between highly entitled and safely ensconced entities. 

 

Is Phil Mickelson what makes professional golf special and important?

 

Is it Augusta National?

 

Is it the PGA Tour?

 

Who is more important?

 

In the meantime, they either continue to destroy the game we love or make themselves increasingly irrelevant, depending on who you ask. 

 

But, the local muni remains open and I have a bag full of pretty good clubs. 

 

What we need to realize is that good golfers are a dime a dozen. None of these guys are particularly special. 

Absolutely!.....

 

There's a whole boatload of golfers out there waiting to take their place.

[dcmidnight]

5 minutes ago, Holy Moses said:

You do have to wonder if LIV will have their own “majors” during majors weeks and has new contract wording when players re-sign to force players to play in LIV majors who were already qualified for the traditional majors. 

 

I cant see this being popular *at all* with the upper end LIV guys. No way. No matter what they say publicly, theres zero chance guys like Brooks or DJ or Rahm want to be playing in some clown show counter-major "major" with a $100M purse.

Edited March 8 by dcmidnight

[Holy Moses]

2 minutes ago, dcmidnight said:

 

I cant see this being popular *at all* with the upper end LIV guys. No way. No matter what they say publicly, theres zero chance guys like Brooks or DJ or Rahm want to be playing in some clown show counter-major "major" with a $100M purse.

I don’t think DJ cares anymore. He’s happy with his career if it ended now. He can go back to Augusta when he’s 50 when LIV is done.

[Titleist99]

11 minutes ago, Holy Moses said:

If the majors wanted LIV players in based on how LIV is currently structured…the majors would have voted with the OWGR board to have them in. LIV has a problem with the majors and LIV thinks that they are trying to do the majors a favor. Yes, the majors are a little hurt by this (but look at who is missing the majors on LIV a d it’s really only Gooch that is significant), but it’s LIV’s fault and absolutely no one else’s.

 

You do have to wonder if LIV will have their own “majors” during majors weeks and has new contract wording when players re-sign to force players to play in LIV majors who were already qualified for the traditional majors. 

I'd love to see that along with a PGAT boycott. I just want to see the Major tournaments burn. 😆

[CasualLie]

2 hours 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?

 

I would say both.  A more cynical person would look at the evolution of the OWGR and cry conspiracy.  I call it a room full of dummies retro-fitting formulas to ultimately make sure the PGAT/DP get the most points.  Which is fine, they do have the deepest fields.

 

But look at the OWGR timeline here:

https://www.owgr.com/our-history

 

Just a few minutes glance and it was eye opening just how many tiny tours, tours you have never heard of with players that will never sniff a big tour, have been added and points given out; albeit statistically insignificant points when it comes to impact on the mainstay tours.

 

I will give credit though to OWGR for growing the game though.  The inclusion of all these small tours is a better example of growing the game then LIV will ever do.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

5 minutes ago, Holy Moses said:

I don’t think DJ cares anymore. He’s happy with his career if it ended now. He can go back to Augusta when he’s 50 when LIV is done.

Agreed I don't think DJ cares but I'm pretty certain Brooks and Rahm still care deeply about majors. Brooks made it pretty clear on Full Swing. 

[Titleist99]

12 minutes ago, dcmidnight said:

 

I cant see this being popular *at all* with the upper end LIV guys. No way. No matter what they say publicly, theres zero chance guys like Brooks or DJ or Rahm want to be playing in some clown show counter-major "major" with a $100M purse.

You cannot be serious. Like Lee Trivino once said and I'm paraphrasing, for $100M those guys would play in a parking lot in Istanbul during Masters week.🤣

[smashdn]

2 hours ago, bcjim said:

What was already on the landscape was legitimate competition. 

 

So there is no room for a golf tournament or golf league to deviate from that criteria and be legitimate?

[RobS]

3 minutes ago, Holy Moses said:

I don’t think DJ cares anymore. He’s happy with his career if it ended now. He can go back to Augusta when he’s 50 when LIV is done.

I give DJ credit for being genuine.  He said he was happy to take the money, play less golf and live with the consequences.  He's remained true to that.  He's said multiple times over the last year or so that he isn't practicing as much and put the clubs away for the offseason.  It takes a lot of work to stay at the top of the game and I guess he's at the point in his career where he's satisfied with his accomplishments and the juice of the hard work isn't worth the squeeze anymore.

[smashdn]

1 hour ago, Shilgy said:

Sure you could argue that.  

 

It isn't really an argument though.  OWGR came on the landscape well after tours were configured they way they were.

 

1 hour ago, Shilgy said:

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.

 

No doubt there are issues that as they are constructed cannot be overcome.  

 

My personal preference (and this will benefit LIV but I do not ask this to benefit LIV) is that the OWGR look deeply at the requirements and instead of crafting rules based upon what it is already on the landscape, they craft rules in a manner that preserves the intent of what they are after.  To what you are saying, if they can work around the no cut issue, craft a rule that preserves whatever your intent is for having that rule.

 

The benefit I mention is for other tours, if they come about, in the future will have a clearer, yet broader path, of designing their events to meet those rules.  As currently constructed the OWGR are so restrictive, a new style or format for a tour is nearly impossible.

 

How do you craft a "champions league-esque" type of thing?  If I said the top (arbitrarily picking numbers) 20 PGAT, 15 DPWT, 5 Australasian, 3 Asian, 3 japan, and so forth until you fill 54 slots, were in LIV for the coming year, is that even doable under the current rules?  That would be more inclusive than even the majority of PGAT events.  Those guys essentially would have a contract for a year.

 

In short, I think the OWGR rules paint professional golf into a box unnecessarily.  

[freeze16172002]

3 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

It isn't really an argument though.  OWGR came on the landscape well after tours were configured they way they were.

 

 

No doubt there are issues that as they are constructed cannot be overcome.  

 

My personal preference (and this will benefit LIV but I do not ask this to benefit LIV) is that the OWGR look deeply at the requirements and instead of crafting rules based upon what it is already on the landscape, they craft rules in a manner that preserves the intent of what they are after.  To what you are saying, if they can work around the no cut issue, craft a rule that preserves whatever your intent is for having that rule.

 

The benefit I mention is for other tours, if they come about, in the future will have a clearer, yet broader path, of designing their events to meet those rules.  As currently constructed the OWGR are so restrictive, a new style or format for a tour is nearly impossible.

 

How do you craft a "champions league-esque" type of thing?  If I said the top (arbitrarily picking numbers) 20 PGAT, 15 DPWT, 5 Australasian, 3 Asian, 3 japan, and so forth until you fill 54 slots, were in LIV for the coming year, is that even doable under the current rules?  That would be more inclusive than even the majority of PGAT events.  Those guys essentially would have a contract for a year.

 

In short, I think the OWGR rules paint professional golf into a box unnecessarily.  

Who on LIV or any other tour not in majors that should be in?

Edited March 8 by freeze16172002

[smashdn]

21 minutes ago, CasualLie said:

 

I would say both.  A more cynical person would look at the evolution of the OWGR and cry conspiracy.  I call it a room full of dummies retro-fitting formulas to ultimately make sure the PGAT/DP get the most points.  Which is fine, they do have the deepest fields.

 

But look at the OWGR timeline here:

https://www.owgr.com/our-history

 

Just a few minutes glance and it was eye opening just how many tiny tours, tours you have never heard of with players that will never sniff a big tour, have been added and points given out; albeit statistically insignificant points when it comes to impact on the mainstay tours.

 

I will give credit though to OWGR for growing the game though.  The inclusion of all these small tours is a better example of growing the game then LIV will ever do.

 

I would just say even with the multitude of the small tours that are represented, aside from deviating the 72 hole norm, they are all essentially the same correct?

 

Just seems like there should be another way to format things that is fresh and new, and potentially draws in a different demographic and yet still is legitimate competition.

[smashdn]

3 minutes ago, freeze16172002 said:

Who on LIV or any other tour not in majors that should be in?

 

Not sure I understand what you are asking me.

[freeze16172002]

Just now, smashdn said:

 

Not sure I understand what you are asking me.

yeah I wasnt that clear. What LIV player is excluded from playing majors this year because of the OWGR

[wedgegame]

25 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

So there is no room for a golf tournament or golf league to deviate from that criteria and be legitimate?

Just because you can, doesn't always mean you should.  Sure you CAN change the criteria, but it should be for when a legitimate case is made for the need for changes.  How has LIV proved that their model is legitimate when the same 15 guys just beat up on Lee Westwood 14 times a year? LIV made their case for changing the criteria and was found wanting.  Instead of taking a good faith look at their product and trying to improve it, they threw a fit and took their balls and went home.

Edited March 8 by wedgegame

[Pops99]

11 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

I would just say even with the multitude of the small tours that are represented, aside from deviating the 72 hole norm, they are all essentially the same correct?

 

Just seems like there should be another way to format things that is fresh and new, and potentially draws in a different demographic and yet still is legitimate competition.

Like what though? LIV is a hit and giggle, closed shop where Greg invited 50 buddies. No points for that is absolutely the right call. Please give an example of a tour that would start up and be legitimate and how would they be innovative? It's golf. People don't want innovation, ie) look at LIV's viewership numbers. You want something new and creative, watch the YouTube golfers y'all are so fond of. 

Edited March 8 by Pops99
.

[bcjim]

55 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

So there is no room for a golf tournament or golf league to deviate from that criteria and be legitimate?

The criteria are pretty forgiving already. And compliance could be achieved rather easily. This is not an owgr problem,  it's a liv problem.  

At this point I think they realize the points they would get are not enought to be meaningful anyway, so rather than change, they're just going to whine. And GN is a world class whiner if nothing else. 

Edited March 8 by bcjim

[Shilgy]

On 3/8/2024 at 9:35 AM, smashdn said:

 

It isn't really an argument though.  OWGR came on the landscape well after tours were configured they way they were.

 

 

No doubt there are issues that as they are constructed cannot be overcome.  

 

My personal preference (and this will benefit LIV but I do not ask this to benefit LIV) is that the OWGR look deeply at the requirements and instead of crafting rules based upon what it is already on the landscape, they craft rules in a manner that preserves the intent of what they are after.  To what you are saying, if they can work around the no cut issue, craft a rule that preserves whatever your intent is for having that rule.

 

The benefit I mention is for other tours, if they come about, in the future will have a clearer, yet broader path, of designing their events to meet those rules.  As currently constructed the OWGR are so restrictive, a new style or format for a tour is nearly impossible.

 

How do you craft a "champions league-esque" type of thing?  If I said the top (arbitrarily picking numbers) 20 PGAT, 15 DPWT, 5 Australasian, 3 Asian, 3 japan, and so forth until you fill 54 slots, were in LIV for the coming year, is that even doable under the current rules?  That would be more inclusive than even the majority of PGAT events.  Those guys essentially would have a contract for a year.

 

In short, I think the OWGR rules paint professional golf into a box unnecessarily.  

Best answer I can come up with for your Premier League question at the end….

If you want the best players why are you filling it so restrictively?  Wouldn’t you want the best 54 regardless of where they play?

 

Thats probably my biggest issue with LIV getting points….or getting exemptions into majors….with a set number of players.  If they don’t allow churn of the bottom players-no matter who they are- how can you just give them X number of exemptions?

Edited March 9 by Shilgy

[jdl]

17 hours ago, CasualLie said:

 

Most accurate would have been for OWGR to straight away let LIV provisionally in, give 6 points to the winner and .2 increments down to Chase Koepka Anthony Kim getting 1 point for DFL.  

 

This.....is "accurate? OK

 

2 hours ago, bekgolf said:

The points thing is just a PR stunt to bring attention to Liv.  If they really liked competitive golf they would of stayed and they would still be very wealthy people who play a game for a living. 

 

The golfers who left don't want to compete anymore, imo they like being the Harlem Globetrotters of golf.

 

 

Agreed, it's pretty clear now LIV never intended to get OWGR points. Why else would you deliberately avoid so many of the eligibility requirements by design, cry about not getting them and then dropping the whole thing? It's all an act.

 

1 hour ago, smashdn said:

 

It isn't really an argument though.  OWGR came on the landscape well after tours were configured they way they were.

 

 

Sure because (and you know this), it's not really a "ranking of all golfers" system, it's an eligibility ranking for the tours and majors. Developed by them. For their use. 

 

No reason it can't evolve, maybe LIV could have started out compliant, got their points and maybe a seat on the board, then worked with the governing bodies and other tours to adopt changes and be more flexible to other formats.

 

Or...hey! If you really want to be "innovative" come up with an alternative ranking system that works for everyone. Propose that and then OWGR would look really bad if they didn't see the light.

Edited March 8 by jdl

[RobS]

8 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

It isn't really an argument though.  OWGR came on the landscape well after tours were configured they way they were.

 

 

No doubt there are issues that as they are constructed cannot be overcome.  

 

My personal preference (and this will benefit LIV but I do not ask this to benefit LIV) is that the OWGR look deeply at the requirements and instead of crafting rules based upon what it is already on the landscape, they craft rules in a manner that preserves the intent of what they are after.  To what you are saying, if they can work around the no cut issue, craft a rule that preserves whatever your intent is for having that rule.

 

The benefit I mention is for other tours, if they come about, in the future will have a clearer, yet broader path, of designing their events to meet those rules.  As currently constructed the OWGR are so restrictive, a new style or format for a tour is nearly impossible.

 

How do you craft a "champions league-esque" type of thing?  If I said the top (arbitrarily picking numbers) 20 PGAT, 15 DPWT, 5 Australasian, 3 Asian, 3 japan, and so forth until you fill 54 slots, were in LIV for the coming year, is that even doable under the current rules?  That would be more inclusive than even the majority of PGAT events.  Those guys essentially would have a contract for a year.

 

In short, I think the OWGR rules paint professional golf into a box unnecessarily.  

I could understand this rationale if you were trying to unify multiple organizations under one system.  You however have 20 organizations that are already unified and 1 that isn't.  Rebuild the system for one group that wants to do things differently?  I'm cool with a new style or format but they can exist without being incorporated into the commonly recognized system.  Saying you want to do things differently or innovate but at the same time want to be treated the same as everyone else just doesn't work sometimes.  LIV aspires to be a team/franchise league.  The impact that the OWGR has on LIV is the ability to attract talent, not for them to function as a team league.  It's not like the OWGR is asking LIV to cap or do away with signing bonusses.  They're looking for a reasonable degree of compliance.  I personally don't care about the OWGR one bit and wouldn't care if they figured out a weighted ranking to incorporate LIV.  If or when a player, playing at an elite, major contending level gets excluded from a Major, I might care but I don't foresee that happening anytime soon.  The Majors will get the truly elite players in their tournaments one way or another.