Masters chat thread - PLEASE USE KWINI'S BALLWASHER THREAD.

[I'm never wrong]

Now that Tiger has declared that he will play in the masters, I thought I would create a thread where we can chat about The Masters, without hijacking another thread. (Not that Tigers' declaration is the be all and end all, but you know what I mean)

Anyway, my point is this. here is a list of previous champions who intend to play.
Cabrera, Angel
Couples, Fred
Crenshaw, Ben
Immelman, Trevor
Johnson, Zach
Langer, Bernhard
Lyle, Sandy
Mickelson, Phil
Mize, Larry
O'Meara, Mark
Olazabal, Jose Maria
Schwartzel, Charl
Scott, Adam
Singh, Vijay
Watson, Bubba
Watson, Tom
Weir, Mike
Woods, Tiger
Woosnam, Ian

I reckon no more that 6 will make the cut. I know the history and the heritage of The Masters, but I think several of the above should just turn up for show. Play an exhibition 9 holes as someone mentioned in the past.

[Davie]

I'd be surprised if more than 3 of them make the cut - and much as I dislike Blubba Watson I see him as the only serious contender of that selection

[incontinentia]

I feel Mickelson may contend, word is his short game is in top shape.

[kwinigolfer]

That's not very fair.
Of those 19, 11 are there solely due to Past Champion status, 8 have qualified via other criteria.

I'd say that half, at least will make the cut, so that's an over/under at 10!

[pedro]

I also think around half will make the cut and 4-5 of those could contend (Bubba, Phil, Zach, Scott). Tiger is a long shot, but you never know, and the same goes for Schwartzel and Cabrera.

[I'm never wrong]

To be honest I'm in two minds re this. Part of me thinks that what we think of those past champions who don't appear to have a chance, shouldn't play; but then we get the Tom Watson situation a few years ago at the Open. Who knows if any of them will suddenly shoot a good score. (Not 254 though )

[super_realist]

Fred Couples seems to be perfectly suited to that course, although these days, it seems 18 holes too far.

[SmithersJones]

Look at the rest of the field. If you honestly think absolutely everyone else has a genuine chance of winning then by all means question the policy. Better still, list the 10 players not in the field who'd have a chance of winning if they were given a place instead of the past champs? (Given that this is an invitational tournament with a much smaller field than a typical tournament, they could presumably play as well as the past champs without too much difficulty)

[super_realist]

I doubt many people gave Weir, Schwartzel or Immelman much chance, there would have to be 10 players at that level, not in the field who could replace those old hasbeens.

[sirbenson]

It's a huge deal for the event that Tiger is playing, he is still a huge draw for the sport!


I am sure Rory, Spieth etc are happy that the spotlight will be taken off them.

[pedro]

At least it'll be the last time we see Crenshaw.

[kwinigolfer]

Could be the end for T.Watson also, and possibly T.Woods.

[GPB]

FTR, Tom Watson, Woosnam, Mize etc are NOT taking a spot from anyone.  

If they don't play, no one replaces them.

The amateurs will be paired with a past champion.  I have feeling Corey Conners (US Amateur Finalist) will be paired with his countryman Mike Weir and that would have to be a bucket list item.

The Latino America qualifier will probably get paired with Angel Cabrera.

IMO, the past champs are part of the "aura" of the Masters.  PGA Champions are given a lifetime exemption but most of them opt out of the tournament sometime in their mid 50's when they are no longer competitive.

The difference?  In the PGA Championship, Paul Azinger would be taking a spot away from another player.  Larry Mize is not taking a spot away from anyone.

[GPB]

Bernhard Langer finished in the Top 10 last year!

[I'm never wrong]

FTR, Tom Watson, Woosnam, Mize etc are NOT taking a spot from anyone.  

If they don't play, no one replaces them.

That males a difference to my thinking. I was unaware of that. I was going to suggest a "rule" if whereby you missed 10 consecutive cuts you were "asked" to take a step back. Haven't looked it up so don't know who it would affect.

[I'm never wrong]

Ha! Just checked re 10 consecutive cuts of past Champions. All of them have made at least one cut in past 10 years so under my "rule" they would still all play. Ho hum.

[super_realist]

[quote="I'm never wrong"]

FTR, Tom Watson, Woosnam, Mize etc are NOT taking a spot from anyone.  

If they don't play, no one replaces them.

That's true, however, I do think they could do with increasing the number of competitors to a level where they have a total field of around 120 which includes the spots for semi-contending past champions.

Seems a ridiculous scenario to have, imagine adding old hasbeens to football teams for instance.

It's a golf major, and as much as I love it as a viewing spectacle, I despise the exhibition element of having a bunch of hackers in it and so it loses a bit of credibility to me. Were it not at the splendour of Augusta it would be 4/4 in majors for me.

[pedro]

If the aim is to have a total field of around 100 players, these guys DO take the spot from someone else.

[SmithersJones]

If the aim is to have a total field of around 100 players, these guys DO take the spot from someone else.

But the aim is to have a total field of around 100 players INCLUDING the past champions. Therefore they don't. It's an invitational tournament. The past champions get an invite, as do the top 50 players in the world. If you ask me, the latter is the criteria that ANGC uses to assess whether someone can win the tournament.

[John Cregan]

My problem is not with them all turning up - it's with them being INVITED. If a past champ is in the OWGR Top 600, let him in.......the likes of Woosnam, Crenshaw should NOT be there. The 7 amateurs invited is pure nonsense.

[pedro]

If the field size was >120 I didn't have a problem with The Masters being a defacto pro-am (like the PGA Championship).

But didn't they change it so new champs only get an 'exemption' for 10 years??

[McLaren]

FTR, Tom Watson, Woosnam, Mize etc are NOT taking a spot from anyone.  

If they don't play, no one replaces them.

Players in the 2015 masters field invited only due to meeting criteria 1 (past champion status) are;

Couples
Crenshaw
Immelman
Lyle
Mize
O'Meara
Jose Maria
VJ
Watson, T
Weir
Woosnam

Unless they are a defending champion I would not invite past champions to any major.


Past champions qualifying via more recent performance are;

Cabrera ( 2014 Greenbrier Classic (criteria 16))
Zach (Played in tour champ and finished 2014 in top 50 (17,18))
Langer (Top 12 in 2014 masters (12)) - only possible because he got into the 2014 masters via past champ status.
Mickelson (Open winner, top 4 last PGA, top 50 end 2014, (3,15,18))
Charl (top 50 end 2014 (18))
Scott (PGA tour win in last year, 2014 Tour champ, Top 50 end 2014, (16, 17, 18))
Tiger (players champ 2013, Top 50 end 2014, (5, 18))
Gerry Watson (won PGAT event in last year, 2014 tour champ participation, top 50 end 2014 (16, 17, 18))


Can only really complain about Langer getting in as he was only able to achieve that due to past champion status.  You could also argue that just winning a pga tour event (as your only qualification criteria) is a bit of a weak invitation.  A player well outside the top 100 could win just one PGAT event, and achieve little else but get an invite over the player ranked 51 who is playing consistently good golf.

Players only in the field for historic performance at other majors (and meeting no other invitation criteria).
criteria 2,3 and 4 for winning one in the last 5 years.
13, 14 and 15 for top 4 finishes in last years other majors;

Darren Clarke (2011 open)
Ernie Els (2012 open)
Compton (Top 4 last years US open)


Are the final group any more worthy than some of those only qualifying via criteria 1?

[John Cregan]

If they wish to keep their Magic 100 field, I would go with :

World Top 80 @ 1st March
Masters winners in past 10 years if inside the Top 200 in World
Last 5 years Major winners regardless of World Ranking
Winners of PGA/Europen Tour Events with a OWGR winners Rabking of 30+ from July previous year
NO AMATEURS

[kwinigolfer]

They're almost certainly going to make a small tweak to ensure a field of less than 100.

Most likely change is to abolish the end-previous-year owgr Top 50 exemption.

I'd do that also, and be more qualitative about past Champions over 55. But wouldn't change much else without it becoming another bog standard Tour event but with fewer players.

[GPB]

Question:  Who is NOT in the Masters field that you think has legitimate chance of winning the 2015 Masters?  And I am talking about a better than 100/1 shot.  Recent Majors Champs Bradley and Dufner are 90/1 and 100/1 at PaddyPower

Sure the "FIELD" of players not playing could win the Masters, but by the time you get 20+ players in the field to get the odds your getting the field to 110+ players (if you cut out the age 55+ players).

And there is absolutely NFW that the Masters is going to a field that size.

[GPB]

If the aim is to have a total field of around 100 players, these guys DO take the spot from someone else.

The Masters would be perfectly content to have 90 players in the field.


The Lifetime Exemption is part of the prize package!!

[McLaren]

Kwini

You don't like limited field events which would make me assume you would prefer a more meritocratic means of qualification for majors. Your comment above seems to suggest however that you are happy for sentiment to enter the equation in order to top up a field? Would the world challenge field with 20 past major champions added be a field that you approve of? (PS I know this is a slightly extreme exaple, but you get the point)


As for dropping the top 50 at the end of the previous calender year invitation (category 18), does anyone know what players would not be in the field this time around if that invitation did not exist?

[pedro]

If the aim is to have a total field of around 100 players, these guys DO take the spot from someone else.

The Masters would be perfectly content to have 90 players in the field.


The Lifetime Exemption is part of the prize package!!

Then they waste our time by having 10 seat fillers in the field.

[McLaren]

pedro

I get your point.

As stated above I would not include the 11 past champions with no other status, Langer or those there from historic major performance (els, clarke, compton). Reducing the field by 15.

I am sure they could fill at least some of those missing positions with top 100 players.

[GPB]

Then they waste our time by having 10 seat fillers in the field.

Huh?  How are they wasting your time?

[pedro]

Then they waste our time by having 10 seat fillers in the field.

Huh?  How are they wasting your time?

Just like watching a pro-am is wasting my time. Too many seat fillers slow down the field. How can watching Crenshaw, Lyle and Mize not be wasting my time? If I want to watch dinosaurs I go to a museum.

[kwinigolfer]

Mac,
I'm just trying to be pragmatic given the criteria laid down by Augusta National.

I'd like to see De Gea in goal for PFC but it's just not going to happen, at least not for a few more years.
Why hypothesise what The Masters should do when they've set their rules? You can only try to tweak it.

It IS a limited field, anyone who doesn't like it should start their own event.

PS: It's not that I'm against some limited fields, I just am dead against giving players "currency" (i.e. owgr pts) just for turning up. I know you'd prefer for the entire Golf season to be one Tiger World Challenge after another, but that ain't gonna happen either.

[GPB]

The Masters is not wasting your time.  You are wasting your time.  No one is holding a knife to your throat to watch it.  

Yes, there will be some focus on Crenshaw as it walks up 18 on Friday afternoon.  But you know what?  There is featured group coverage and Amen Corner at Masters dot com  so you can turn to the internet to watch other guys besides Crenshaw etc.

And there is bunch of more constructive things you can do besides watch the Masters.  You can exercise, you can do some Honey-dos, you can play with the kids or grandkids, you can do the dance with no pants with your significant other.

Still waiting to see a list golfers that have been left out of the Masters that have a legitimate chance to win it.

[McLaren]

Kwini

I enjoy any event with a decent number of top 50 players.

I know you don't just get OWGR points for turning up at ANGC but the points earned are subsidized, and AGNC make no effort to increase the real SOF rating.

[kwinigolfer]

There is at least a cut though, so no owgr points, or official money, for almost half the field.

Regardless, ANGC certainly won't change much.

[SmithersJones]

Since when is the Masters broken? It always provides a great tournament and a worthy winner. Why invite some (more) no hopers to the party?

[John Cregan]

From what I see on the Masters Website there are 99 in this year. Where do people sit on the 7 Amateurs invited?

[I'm never wrong]

Still waiting to see a list golfers that have been left out of the Masters that have a legitimate chance to win it.

I understand what you are saying GPB, it's there ball etc..
But how about these?
Warren, English, M Jones, Levy, The Spaceman, Coetzee, F Molinari, Fleetwood. I think they would be more competitive than some of the previous winners.

[I'm never wrong]

....and here is something to keep you amused whilst watching the tournament. The Masters Drinking Game

[beninho]

If its about the competiveness of the event then surely everyone should be loving the us pga. Doesn't that have a really strong field. But it still gets derided, some want it moved out if America. The masters is what it is. It has a history with amateurs so I have no issue with this, it has a history of giving exemptions to past winners. That's fine by me. People know the criteria. I don't want the masters to be a run of the mill event.

[GPB]

Still waiting to see a list golfers that have been left out of the Masters that have a legitimate chance to win it.

I understand what you are saying GPB, it's there ball etc..
But how about these?
Warren, English, M Jones, Levy, The Spaceman, Coetzee, F Molinari, Fleetwood. I think they would be more competitive than some of the previous winners.

What have they done to warrant an invite?

Warren, Levy, Fleetwood and Molinari have been sitting at #50-#70 for the first three months of the year.  All Warren had to do was finish T28th last week and he could not do it.  If he can't finish T28th in the Valero Texas Open when he needs to do it, what makes you think he can contend for the Masters?

Levy has finished better than 20th all year.  And he missed the cut in Morocco last week when he was the highest ranked player in the field.

Molinari has dropped from #55 to #65 this year.

Fleetwood has dropped from #51 to #66 this guys.

These guys didn't need to do much to get inside the Top 50 last Monday and they failed to do it.  That tells me that they don't deserve an invite.

Coetzee and Sullivan won a couple of subsidized Sunshine Tour Events.  Sullivan has missed three straight cuts trying to crack the top 50.

Sorry, there is nothing in those guys resumes that suggest they deserve an invite to the Masters.

[GPB]

From what I see on the Masters Website there are 99 in this year. Where do people sit on the 7 Amateurs invited?

Let them play!  If a 14 yr old amateur from China can make the Masters cut why shouldn't amateurs be invited if they win certain qualifying events.

Remember, the Masters is the legacy of Bobby Jones the GAGOAT (Greatest Amateur Golfer of all Time.)

[kwinigolfer]

I agree! (With GPB Perhaps the European Tour can have a Joe Carr or Bonallack Masters - nah, that requires sponsorship . . . . )

Everyone looks forward to The Masters, sure everyone might think of different variations, but we all love it as it is - second best tournament in April every year. After Hilton Head of course.

[Be_the_ball]

Jeez Kwini, ya don't see Joe Carr mentioned too much these days. Although I was in Wooden Bridge Wicklow recently, sadly not playing the course but did get to see the recent memorial that was erected to the Wicklow men that lost their lives in WW1. A lot of them in Gallipoli.

[kwinigolfer]

Joe Carr was the Irish Bobby Jones when I was growing up - only died a few years ago I think, but rightfully in the World Golf HOF.

We don't learn enough about Gallipoli . . . . . me anyway. All the best B.

[John Cregan]

From what I see on the Masters Website there are 99 in this year. Where do people sit on the 7 Amateurs invited?

Let them play!  If a 14 yr old amateur from China can make the Masters cut why shouldn't amateurs be invited if they win certain qualifying events.

Remember, the Masters is the legacy of Bobby Jones the GAGOAT (Greatest Amateur Golfer of all Time.)

GPB, you seem to be missing my point, which is that I don't agree that all these amateur events should lead to Masters Qualification. 7 is quite excessive IMO.

[raycastleunited]

I'd much rather watch Freddie Couples and Langer than Colt Knost or Harris English or some other pro with a high world ranking who misses out.

You guys are forgetting that this is entertainment.. We always get the best golfers contending and then a bit of nostalgia. Love it, best major of the year.

[sirbenson]

The pairings are out usually Monday right!?

[sirbenson]

A bit unfair to bracket Harris English with Colt Knost....Knost isn't even in the top 250 of the world.

[John Cregan]

The pairings are out usually Monday right!?

Always Tuesday.........

[Sponsored content]