LIV golf

First topic message reminder :

Probably best for this to have its own thread...

Latest news is that 11 LIV players have sued the PGA tour. Here is a nice article on that https://golf.com/news/phil-mickelson-lawsuit-vs-pga-tour-revelations/?amp=1

Better stock up on popcorn, it looks like we will become privy to lots of juicy information which has been secret up to now.

I presume LIV will move to 72 holes and a cut.

The OWGR system will lose its relevance if it doesn’t include the best players in the world. And so will the Majors. So sooner or later the OWGR or the Majors have to accomodate the LIV players, one way or the other.

pedro wrote:The OWGR system will lose its relevance if it doesn’t include the best players in the world. And so will the Majors. So sooner or later the OWGR or the Majors have to accomodate the LIV players, one way or the other.

I disagree. The LIV players can just decay - there's plenty more talent that just needs some sunlight. Who'd heard of Zalatoris not so long ago? I'm sure there are plenty more like him around. There'll be an OWGR, just w/o the LIV players with any luck.

Also as pointed out - the main LIV players are exempt into majors already anyways for the foreseeable future. Nobody is going to care that Lee Westwood and Ian Poulter aren't rocking up to LA Country Club next year. Folk aren't going to see Smith/DJ going up against Rory/Scheffler at Augusta next year and be thinking, "man if only Kevin Na was here this thing would have legitimacy"

And they can still gain ranking points via the Asian Tour, or, heaven forbid, go through qualifying for the US/British Opens, if they're so desperate in the meantime.

I agree with Super - I suspect the players will force Norman and co to alter their format so they fit into some OGWR criteria, so they can get points.

pedro wrote:The OWGR system will lose its relevance if it doesn’t include the best players in the world. And so will the Majors. So sooner or later the OWGR or the Majors have to accomodate the LIV players, one way or the other.

The LIV fields would have to get a hell of a lot stronger for this argument to work. As it stands they have about 10 decent guys and some dregs.

Also agree with Super. So, there goes the magic "54" number and the no cut events. I can't see anyway around that at this point if they want ranking points.

Imagine if some football teams qualified for international events by playing 67 minute matches?

72 hole events and 15 event minimum ... sounding more like the PGA tour.

And what's with FIGJAM asking to be removed from the lawsuit. Gee whiz Phil ... maybe get a backbone or is your fictional image taking too much of a hit?

https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/09/16/liv-golf-news-chicago-phil-mickelson-lawsuit-pga-tour/

The team element is toe curling. Makes the President's Cup seem decent

Shotrock wrote:Also agree with Super. So, there goes the magic "54" number and the no cut events. I can't see anyway around that at this point if they want ranking points.

Imagine if some football teams qualified for international events by playing 67 minute matches?

72 hole events and 15 event minimum ... sounding more like the PGA tour.

And what's with FIGJAM asking to be removed from the lawsuit. Gee whiz Phil ... maybe get a backbone or is your fictional image taking too much of a hit?

https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/09/16/liv-golf-news-chicago-phil-mickelson-lawsuit-pga-tour/

I don't suppose the 54 hole element was the key to these guys signing up anyway. If they have to play a PGAT length schedule with 72 holes events but get paid crazy money I guess they will get what they wanted. Although it would be funny if the Saudi league had to backtrack on all its marketing about a new "innovative" format.


And yeah Phil, just don't think he is the smartest of guys. In any room.

Shotrock wrote:...And what's with FIGJAM asking to be removed from the lawsuit. Gee whiz Phil ... maybe get a backbone or is your fictional image taking too much of a hit?

https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/09/16/liv-golf-news-chicago-phil-mickelson-lawsuit-pga-tour/

The latter I suspect....

If they get cut the’d still play max. 54 holes on average. They’d even get the weekend off once in a while.

And sr, there are plenty of golf formats that give OWGR points. Cut, no cut, teams, mixed, invitational. Tourneys reduced to 3 rounds (due to weather or monarchs dying) also give points. You can’t compare it with football.

I'd rather not if their formats don't meet OWGR criteria, but perhaps give them OWGR points (awww, bless the little snowflakes), but they should reflect format and rankings of the field. In other words, before too long (given the LIV player rankings are tanking as we speak), they'll get maybe 1 point for a win. Good luck with that and qualifying for the big events on the real tours.

Given the downgrade the ET got in the new OWGR system the current Saudi fields would be treated pretty poorly. You would need to be winning every week to maintain major qualification.

But remember the Saudi guys are not banned from majors, they are just facing not qualifying via the OWGR.

The masters is invitational so they might not get in there but they can enter qualifying for all the other majors. Anyone can enter US open and Open qualifying and they could get PGA of A membership and enter the PGA professionals championship.

which has as a qualifying criteria

"To earn entry into the PGA Professional Championship, players must have PGA membership, be certified as Class A PGA Professionals, and cannot have more than ten combined starts on professional tours (including various developmental tours, senior tours, and mini-tours) during a preceding twelve-month period, not counting majors"

So do some token teaching gigs and enter this. Assuming the Saudi tour isn't counted for the purposes of playing on a professional tour.

But in any case play 10 Saudi events, do some teaching pro work and enter PGA Professionals championship.

There are routes into the majors if the Saudi guys are willing to put the time in.......

https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/09/27/liv-golf-fox-sports-buy-time-to-air-tournaments/

Oh dear Greg - turns out there wasn't four broadcasters lined up to broadcast LIV then...
Having to buy air time, maybe not even on the network for 2023 and sort out selling your own advertising space in that is embarrassing enough, let alone that it seems you've only managed that meagre deal through some shady links you have with Trump/Kushner and their links with PIF anyways.

Also, isn't the whole appeal of LIV that it's a different product? Surely if it's just going to be loaded with adverts, that severely detracts from the shotgun start element of it all...you get a three hour window of golf, of which like a 1/3 is taken up by adverts - not exactly enticing the viewer in that (the biggest issue with PGA Tour events is just how many bloody adverts there are imo)

Is this our 'own' robopz?

https://www.golfwrx.com/695344/they-cant-give-it-away-latest-viewing-figures-show-worrying-trend-for-liv-golf/

Navy - It's got to be the same guy. Sure miss his insights on this forum.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/09/27/liv-golf-fox-sports-buy-time-to-air-tournaments/

Oh dear Greg - turns out there wasn't four broadcasters lined up to broadcast LIV then...
Having to buy air time, maybe not even on the network for 2023 and sort out selling your own advertising space in that is embarrassing enough, let alone that it seems you've only managed that meagre deal through some shady links you have with Trump/Kushner and their links with PIF anyways.

Also, isn't the whole appeal of LIV that it's a different product? Surely if it's just going to be loaded with adverts, that severely detracts from the shotgun start element of it all...you get a three hour window of golf, of which like a 1/3 is taken up by adverts - not exactly enticing the viewer in that (the biggest issue with PGA Tour events is just how many bloody adverts there are imo)

Of which like? I didn't realise you were a valley girl.

navyblueshorts wrote:Is this our 'own' robopz?

https://www.golfwrx.com/695344/they-cant-give-it-away-latest-viewing-figures-show-worrying-trend-for-liv-golf/

It is Navy - I follow him and "Prince Drac" (as was on our furom - Nosferatu/VC606 on Twitter) and I find them very useful for news and stats

I'm never wrong wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:Is this our 'own' robopz?

https://www.golfwrx.com/695344/they-cant-give-it-away-latest-viewing-figures-show-worrying-trend-for-liv-golf/

It is Navy - I follow him and "Prince Drac" (as was on our furom - Nosferatu/VC606 on Twitter) and I find them very useful for news and stats

Me too

super_realist wrote:

Of which like? I didn't realise you were a valley girl.

What is a "valley girl"?

McLaren wrote:

super_realist wrote:

Of which like? I didn't realise you were a valley girl.

What is a "valley girl"?

You’ve never been for a Saturday night out in Cardiff or Swansea then Mac? Basically working class girls from the Welsh valleys. Eloquence and sophistication perhaps not their forte but they know how to have fun.

ok, but what has that got to do with Olly? Think I am missing something here.

McLaren wrote:ok, but what has that got to do with Olly? Think I am missing something here.

Looks like Supes was having a bit of a dig at Olly’s grammar. That old internet adage, if you can’t find fault with the sentiment, have a dig at spelling or grammar.

JAS wrote:

McLaren wrote:ok, but what has that got to do with Olly? Think I am missing something here.

Looks like Supes was having a bit of a dig at Olly’s grammar. That old internet adage, if you can’t find fault with the sentiment, have a dig at spelling or grammar.

I was referring to the annoying way in which the word "like" is over used. It used to be just part of speech, now it appears people are using it in text needlessly too.

super_realist wrote:

JAS wrote:

McLaren wrote:ok, but what has that got to do with Olly? Think I am missing something here.

Looks like Supes was having a bit of a dig at Olly’s grammar. That old internet adage, if you can’t find fault with the sentiment, have a dig at spelling or grammar.

I was referring to the annoying way in which the word "like" is over used. It used to be just part of speech, now it appears people are using it in text needlessly too.

It is more than annoying. It is f*cking hideous. Bad enough people can't hold a conversation without using like 15 times in a sentence, but now people are using it in written text. I'm slowly giving up on the last vestiges of hope I had for humanity. My kids do it all the time and tell them they are total cretins.

Jesus, I am in full agreement with a S_R post. I'm off for a lay down, not sure whether I'll, like, wake up from it.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

super_realist wrote:

JAS wrote:

McLaren wrote:ok, but what has that got to do with Olly? Think I am missing something here.

Looks like Supes was having a bit of a dig at Olly’s grammar. That old internet adage, if you can’t find fault with the sentiment, have a dig at spelling or grammar.

I was referring to the annoying way in which the word "like" is over used. It used to be just part of speech, now it appears people are using it in text needlessly too.

It is more than annoying. It is f*cking hideous. Bad enough people can't hold a conversation without using like 15 times in a sentence, but now people are using it in written text. I'm slowly giving up on the last vestiges of hope I had for humanity. My kids do it all the time and tell them they are total cretins.

Jesus, I am in full agreement with a S_R post. I'm off for a lay down, not sure whether I'll, like, wake up from it.

I don't know whether to like like or unlike this post.

Galted wrote:

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

super_realist wrote:

JAS wrote:

McLaren wrote:ok, but what has that got to do with Olly? Think I am missing something here.

Looks like Supes was having a bit of a dig at Olly’s grammar. That old internet adage, if you can’t find fault with the sentiment, have a dig at spelling or grammar.

I was referring to the annoying way in which the word "like" is over used. It used to be just part of speech, now it appears people are using it in text needlessly too.

It is more than annoying. It is f*cking hideous. Bad enough people can't hold a conversation without using like 15 times in a sentence, but now people are using it in written text. I'm slowly giving up on the last vestiges of hope I had for humanity. My kids do it all the time and tell them they are total cretins.

Jesus, I am in full agreement with a S_R post. I'm off for a lay down, not sure whether I'll, like, wake up from it.

I don't know whether to like like or unlike this post.

l*l out loud.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

super_realist wrote:

JAS wrote:

McLaren wrote:ok, but what has that got to do with Olly? Think I am missing something here.

Looks like Supes was having a bit of a dig at Olly’s grammar. That old internet adage, if you can’t find fault with the sentiment, have a dig at spelling or grammar.

I was referring to the annoying way in which the word "like" is over used. It used to be just part of speech, now it appears people are using it in text needlessly too.

It is more than annoying. It is f*cking hideous. Bad enough people can't hold a conversation without using like 15 times in a sentence, but now people are using it in written text. I'm slowly giving up on the last vestiges of hope I had for humanity. My kids do it all the time and tell them they are total cretins.

Jesus, I am in full agreement with a S_R post. I'm off for a lay down, not sure whether I'll, like, wake up from it.

Lay down? Surely, it's a lie down.

Lay means "to place something down flat," while lie means "to be in a flat position on a surface." The key difference is that lay is transitive and requires an object to act upon, and lie is intransitive, describing something moving on its own or already in position.

Ahhh, I see. You're going to lay (yourself) down in the transitive sense.

There's no way I'd "lay with you in a field of stone", Tino. Sounds very uncomfortable. That bloody Judy Stone song was so annoying.

Pal Joey wrote:

There's no way I'd "lay with you in a field of stone", Tino.

Like who are you like trying to kid, Pee Jay.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Pal Joey wrote:

There's no way I'd "lay with you in a field of stone", Tino.

Like who are you like trying to kid, Pee Jay.

I lay me case before ya, yer honour.

Now can I go and have a lie down?

Can anyone see this MENA tour thing working for Saudis?

And if this strategy does work then why didn't they make a "strategic alliance" with the Asian tour, which they have already invested heavily in. Are the Saudis elevated Asian tour events now just going to be forgotten about?

McLaren wrote:Can anyone see this MENA tour thing working for Saudis?

And if this strategy does work then why didn't they make a "strategic alliance" with the Asian tour, which they have already invested heavily in. Are the Saudis elevated Asian tour events now just going to be forgotten about?

I don't see how it'll work personally - seems like a bit of a PR stunt to me, to try and whip up more outrage (if there even is any?) that they aren't getting points.
Also if it is successful...the points they'll get will be miniscule anyways - so that feeds into my PR stunt theory...albeit maybe I'm giving Greg a bit too much credit that he would be thinking like this...!

I share your surprise they haven't teamed up more with the Asian Tour. Seemed a logical step

A side not to all this "will the Suadis get OWGR points" is how unlikely it now is that we will see a shake up of top pro golf formats. The OWGR taking such a strong stance against non 72 hole events means we are probably stuck with 72 holes strokeplay for the vast majority of top level events for the foreseeable future. I get people complain about other formats translating to TV along with some other issues but I am not sure the OWGR points issue for other formats was discussed before the Saudi stuff. It just makes a format mix up even more unlikely.

One of the good things that the LIV tour does is to allow players to break away from the absurd rule of having to wear trousers.
Does help to make golf look a bit more of a "sport".

I assume the no shorts thing in golf comes from a long gone era where shorts were seen as lacking in decorum or something.

super_realist wrote:One of the good things that the LIV tour does is to allow players to break away from the absurd rule of having to wear trousers.
Does help to make golf look a bit more of a "sport".

Yeah; I'll give them that. The 'no shorts' reg for the regular tours is just stupid.

On the other hand it has saved us for 20 years of watching TW’s sparrow legs, eh super?

Talk of the LIV Tour going to 72 holes and a cut. Didn't we predict this?

Don't understand the obsession with 72 holes and cuts. If a male tennis player decided only to play best of 3 set tourneys he would get away with it. Points would probably be lower, but still.

Another implication of this would be that 72 holes with a cut would allow for a larger field, hence more PGA refugees.

super_realist wrote:Another implication of this would be that 72 holes with a cut would allow for a larger field, hence more PGA refugees.

If they stick with a shotgun start they could have as many as they like?

super_realist wrote:Another implication of this would be that 72 holes with a cut would allow for a larger field, hence more PGA refugees.

Would also need to be renamed the LXXII Tour......

pedro wrote:

super_realist wrote:Another implication of this would be that 72 holes with a cut would allow for a larger field, hence more PGA refugees.

If they stick with a shotgun start they could have as many as they like?

Not sure I understand that. You could only have about 22 groups on a course at once under a shotgun start.

ralphjohn69 wrote:

super_realist wrote:Another implication of this would be that 72 holes with a cut would allow for a larger field, hence more PGA refugees.

Would also need to be renamed the LXXII Tour......

Pronounced Lexi?

pedro wrote:

ralphjohn69 wrote:

super_realist wrote:Another implication of this would be that 72 holes with a cut would allow for a larger field, hence more PGA refugees.

Would also need to be renamed the LXXII Tour......

Pronounced Lexi?

Indeed.

Pedro it is about the field size and what that means for the depth and access. With a cut you can start with more players, and if you have more players you are ensuring the depth of field is high.

It is to stop hand picked exhibition style closed shop events becoming the norm for top level golf.

A tour that is awarded OWGR points also has to be linked to a feeder series. Bigger fields mean that each season there are spots for those who have performed well in the feeder tour.

We only have to look at the last Saudi event to see what happens when the field depth is poor. I am sure that Eugenio Chacarra had an ok week but he probably didn't attain the strokes gained numbers required to beat a full PGAT field. There is now an accepted understanding that collectively those ranked in bottom 50 or 25% of a PGAT field are actually pretty tough to beat even for a top player.

super_realist wrote:

pedro wrote:

super_realist wrote:Another implication of this would be that 72 holes with a cut would allow for a larger field, hence more PGA refugees.

If they stick with a shotgun start they could have as many as they like?

Not sure I understand that. You could only have about 22 groups on a course at once under a shotgun start.

Modified shotgun then. Everybody just wouldn't start and finish at the same time. Not sure it would make sense, but in theory it could work.

pedro wrote:

super_realist wrote:

pedro wrote:

super_realist wrote:Another implication of this would be that 72 holes with a cut would allow for a larger field, hence more PGA refugees.

If they stick with a shotgun start they could have as many as they like?

Not sure I understand that. You could only have about 22 groups on a course at once under a shotgun start.

Modified shotgun then. Everybody just wouldn't start and finish at the same time. Not sure it would make sense, but in theory it could work.

Or two shotgun starts.

McLaren wrote:Pedro it is about the field size and what that means for the depth and access. With a cut you can start with more players, and if you have more players you are ensuring the depth of field is high.

It is to stop hand picked exhibition style closed shop events becoming the norm for top level golf.

A tour that is awarded OWGR points also has to be linked to a feeder series. Bigger fields mean that each season there are spots for those who have performed well in the feeder tour.

We only have to look at the last Saudi event to see what happens when the field depth is poor. I am sure that Eugenio Chacarra had an ok week but he probably didn't attain the strokes gained numbers required to beat a full PGAT field. There is now an accepted understanding that collectively those ranked in bottom 50 or 25% of a PGAT field are actually pretty tough to beat even for a top player.

You don't need a feeder tour at all. You just need a certain number of spots coming from a Q School.

On the subject of LIV, was good to see Sergio supporting his national Open as one might expect. Ah...

Super

Ok, but realistically you are going to have to have a feeder tour of sorts to find people to enter your Q school. The point still stands that you need a bigger field (and therefore a cut) to accommodate new players.