NEWS OWGR Says No to LIV Golf

[henchman24]

Nobody in this deal is interested in "growing the game" particularly the PGAT and USGA. They are in for the money pure and simple. The USGA just offered me an opportunity to "grow the game" buy sending them $1,000 and they will put in a brick at Pinehurst. That's right a brick. Whan has been a disaster and needs to be shown the door.

I didn’t state they were about growing the game. This is money based.

 

[blugold]

I understand the flaw in the owgr (lowercase on purpose) in not having Bryson and Brooks and Gooch and Cam and a few others fairly represented as the best golfers in the world.

But why do the LIV guys want these points so bad? They took the bag with no promise of owgr points.

 

[RealPretendPsychic]

I understand the flaw in the owgr (lowercase on purpose) in not having Bryson and Brooks and Gooch and Cam and a few others fairly represented as the best golfers in the world.

But why do the LIV guys want these points so bad? They took the bag with no promise of owgr points.

The only good marketing LIV has done is portraying these guys as victims.

 

[blugold]

The only good marketing LIV has done is portraying these guys as victims.

Something something cake something something eat it something.

 

[jdlive]

Datagolf have their own ranking system and it seems pretty good. It has different data points to owgr and includes LIV. It looks fairly accurate. If owgr is to continue as the qualification criteria to the majors then it should probably change its name to reflect that.

That would probably be a good idea. And the majors all have other qualifying criteria, so they could easily add one based off Datagolf. Or give LIV exemptions directly, but probably not as many as Bryson suggested.

Maybe it's just me who thinks this, but i find it odd that more info hasn't publicly come out on what would be satisfactory to the OGWR. It seems like maybe LIV isn't trying hard enough, but they are also playing darts here.

I think maybe most can agree that LIV shouldn't have to be exactly the same rules as the PGA tour.

So many players should they have to relegate if 4 is not enough? How many exemptions can they have if 14 is too many?

it would be nice if they could just tell them that, so then everyone can be like "Well that seems reasonable, why isn't LIV doing that"

I believe the comments from the OWGR were that most tours had 20-25% churn so seems like 10-12 would check that box.

 

[JB]

I understand the flaw in the owgr (lowercase on purpose) in not having Bryson and Brooks and Gooch and Cam and a few others fairly represented as the best golfers in the world.

But why do the LIV guys want these points so bad? They took the bag with no promise of owgr points.

Because its a path to play in the majors.
Which according to many are the only tournaments that matter.
Its also a path to prove worth.

The flip side is the same, if its not a big deal, why are so many so hell bent on keeping it out, yet awarding things for tiny invitationals.

 

[blugold]

Because its a path to play in the majors.
Which according to many are the only tournaments that matter.
Its also a path to prove worth.

The flip side is the same, if its not a big deal, why are so many so hell bent on keeping it out, yet awarding things for tiny invitationals.

Of course that's why. They want the money and the legacy with the majors. But for many of them, they had the choice between a whole bunch of money and majors, or a lot of money and no promise to play on the majors. A lot of them have exemptions, which is cool and can get them into more but the rest weighed their options and took the money.

The Rolling Stones sang a song about this, I believe.

 

[henchman24]

It is certainly a big deal for points because of the majors. Majors are legacy, money, and validation. All the best players want to win majors.

The crux of the issue is LIV doesn’t want to change their model or format to adhere to the well established rules. Instead they want the rules to change for them. I get the business reasons why, but they go against the fabric of what professional golf has been.

 

[blugold]

It is certainly a big deal for points because of the majors. Majors are legacy, money, and validation. All the best players want to win majors.

The crux of the issue is LIV doesn’t want to change their model or format to adhere to the well established rules. Instead they want the rules to change for them. I get the business reasons why, but they go against the fabric of what professional golf has been.

I thought the LIV guys wanted to make more money and golf less?

 

[JB]

Of course that's why. They want the money and the legacy with the majors. But for many of them, they had the choice between a whole bunch of money and majors, or a lot of money and no promise to play on the majors. A lot of them have exemptions, which is cool and can get them into more but the rest weighed their options and took the money.

The Rolling Stones sang a song about this, I believe.

Lets not pretend that one tour is all about the money and the other isnt.
TGL is on line 2.

 

[blugold]

Lets not pretend that one tour is all about the money and the other isnt.
TGL is on line 2.

Of course not. Like Wu-Tang said, C.R.E.A.M. But that's for different thread. This is about the OWGR and LIV.

 

[MtlJeff]

Of course not. Like Wu-Tang said, C.R.E.A.M. But that's for different thread. This is about the OWGR and LIV.

They also said "protect ya neck" ---but that is probably for the antitrust thread

 

[blugold]

They also said "protect ya neck" ---but that is probably for the antitrust thread

Don't bring da ruckus. Stay on topic

 

[henchman24]

I thought the LIV guys wanted to make more money and golf less?

I mean… DJ would probably like to skip majors at this point.

 

[Bosco...]

You can’t fix politics with math because it works every time. A 14 year old kid with an iPhone and a bag of Cheetos could write an algorithm to rank golfers.

 

[Hacker67]

It is certainly a big deal for points because of the majors. Majors are legacy, money, and validation. All the best players want to win majors.

The crux of the issue is LIV doesn’t want to change their model or format to adhere to the well established rules. Instead they want the rules to change for them. I get the business reasons why, but they go against the fabric of what professional golf has been.

OWGR has no patent on golf rankings and can be replaced.
PGAT is borrowing money from future TV contracts but sure let's just keep operating the same way since since 1764. Golf needs to progress and adapt to new formats, cultures, and generations. The problem is the old men on the OWGR board are shortsighted and can't see past the "this is how we always did it attitude"

The only thing constant is change and the OWGR needs to change or be left behind in the 15th century.

 

[GolferDad66]

If the players in the Tiger tournament with no cuts and a very limited number of golfers (20?) can get OWGR points, I find it hard that OWGR can give no points to the LIV tournaments. It seems like a very inconsistent ruling. Not that I necessarily support LIV, but other PGAT supported no cut tournaments are getting points.

 

[Hacker67]

Oh look, the Aramco Series is in Saudi this weekend, they get world rankings for this.

 

[Birdieputt]

If the players in the Tiger tournament with no cuts and a very limited number of golfers (20?) can get OWGR points, I find it hard that OWGR can give no points to the LIV tournaments. It seems like a very inconsistent ruling. Not that I necessarily support LIV, but other PGAT supported no cut tournaments are getting points.

When the people making the decisions are trying to protect their power base, no matter if it is good for golf or not (it isn't), then it is easy to understand. Of course it is hypocritical, dishonest, self serving and wrong but they have money/power to protect.

 

[henchman24]

OWGR has no patent on golf rankings and can be replaced.
PGAT is borrowing money from future TV contracts but sure let's just keep operating the same way since since 1764. Golf needs to progress and adapt to new formats, cultures, and generations. The problem is the old men on the OWGR board are shortsighted and can't see past the "this is how we always did it attitude"

The only thing constant is change and the OWGR needs to change or be left behind in the 15th century.

OWGR doesn't have a patent and it probably won't be the system 100 years from now. Right now, as long as the majors rely heavily on it for their own qualifications, it has a significant impact. Which is why LIV wants the points so bad.

What this comes down to is the OWGR (and the major tournaments since they basically decided this) believe that the meritocracy of golf should be preserved. The no cut, smaller field can be adjusted for. What they want is LIV to make it realistic for players to earn spots on the tour without a contract and for the ability to fall off the tour despite a contract. It isn't so much about how it has always been done, but more that part of the fabric of golf has always been if you're good enough, you can compete anywhere and against anybody. That's a huge if for 99.99999% of golfers... but that is out there. LIV by the tour's nature is the anthesis of that. It is a closed shop with only one spot that can clearly be earned. There are legitimate business reasons to want to move away from meritocracy which is why LIV is adamant about not opening up.

If the players in the Tiger tournament with no cuts and a very limited number of golfers (20?) can get OWGR points, I find it hard that OWGR can give no points to the LIV tournaments. It seems like a very inconsistent ruling. Not that I necessarily support LIV, but other PGAT supported no cut tournaments are getting points.

I personally don't feel that tournament should get points (and it gets way too many), but it is a bit dishonest in portraying that as the normal. The vast majority of professional events can be qualified for. Either directly through Monday Qualifying or tournaments, or through previous results. The Hero World Challenge doesn't even count for PGA money or rankings... it shouldn't get OWGR.

 

[jdlive]

If the players in the Tiger tournament with no cuts and a very limited number of golfers (20?) can get OWGR points, I find it hard that OWGR can give no points to the LIV tournaments. It seems like a very inconsistent ruling. Not that I necessarily support LIV, but other PGAT supported no cut tournaments are getting points.

1) I don't think the Zozo should get points but they did make a lot of changes to make OWGR happy and got them
2) The issue with LIV isn't that, it's the "closed shop", i.e. same 48 guys playing each week that is the bigger problem

 

[Hacker67]

OWGR doesn't have a patent and it probably won't be the system 100 years from now. Right now, as long as the majors rely heavily on it for their own qualifications, it has a significant impact. Which is why LIV wants the points so bad.

What this comes down to is the OWGR (and the major tournaments since they basically decided this) believe that the meritocracy of golf should be preserved. The no cut, smaller field can be adjusted for. What they want is LIV to make it realistic for players to earn spots on the tour without a contract and for the ability to fall off the tour despite a contract. It isn't so much about how it has always been done, but more that part of the fabric of golf has always been if you're good enough, you can compete anywhere and against anybody. That's a huge if for 99.99999% of golfers... but that is out there. LIV by the tour's nature is the anthesis of that. It is a closed shop with only one spot that can clearly be earned. There are legitimate business reasons to want to move away from meritocracy which is why LIV is adamant about not opening up.



I personally don't feel that tournament should get points (and it gets way too many), but it is a bit dishonest in portraying that as the normal. The vast majority of professional events can be qualified for. Either directly through Monday Qualifying or tournaments, or through previous results. The Hero World Challenge doesn't even count for PGA money or rankings... it shouldn't get OWGR.

How was LIV ever going to get off the ground without big-name contracts?
They already said they are getting away from contracts in the future but they had to start somewhere.

LIV tried to get sanctioned by the DPWT just like the Aramco series did with LET.

How many times do we have to beat this fact to death?

Jay and Pelley took a different approach and went to war instead. They were threatened by an 8 or 14-event league.

There was no real threat to PGAT or DPWT. Just the opposite it was going to enhance these Tours and put more money in their players's hands.

Has the Aramco series in any way destroyed women’s golf?
Did the Saudis try to take over women’s golf entirely?
Do Aramco team series women get Rolex World Rankings? You betcha.

LIV was going to be no more than a carbon copy of the Aramco series. LIV tried to do the right thing at the very start but had to pivot after being rejected.

Unfortunately, Jay has anxiety issues which distorted his judgment and he made the biggest mistake in professional golf ever and it has leaked into the OWGR and Majors.

This mess was all avoidable. I digress because the whole thing is beyond stupid and not really worth my energy.

 

[blugold]

I'm still not sure why the LIVers (without exemptions) don't just accept watching the majors at home with their big bags of money.

Who cares about OWGR points when you have $100,000,000 in prize money.

 

[jdlive]

Looks like LIV has replaced OWGR in their qualifying tournament criteria with these rankings:

The Universal Golf Rankings

The world's most accurate, understandable, all-inclusive, and unbiased golf rankings

tugr.org

 

[Hacker67]

I personally agree. If it was pure open competition and the best get spots that they can also lose, it becomes a more compelling product IMO.

On the wins... I think we have already seen that. This will sound more critical than I mean it for Gooch (I think he is a much better golfer than this will sound)... but this is a guy who only won once on the Web.com tour and once on the PGA tour. The two years prior to that win (19 and 20), he was a golfer in the 100-200 range on the OWGR pretty consistently. The year of that win he was having a great year climbed into the 50-100 range. The win pushed him near 30. In 22 he mostly maintained that range, though only 2 top 10s in OWGR eligible events. His highest finish in a major is 14th in the 2022 Masters. His only other finish better than 34th is 20th in the 22 PGA. His last 5 major appearances he's missed the cut 3 times. Taking all that in, he sounds like a pretty average PGA tour player. Essentially this is the same resume as Lucas Herbert. Yet Gooch won 3 times on LIV and won the season points. That alone shows some of the quality issues within it. I certainly think Gooch is a top 60 golfer and arguably top 50 who should be in each major. I'm not saying he's terrible... just saying he's a clear example of the strength of the fields being low.



I know Whan is on that board... but 3 other board members voted with him to make this a unanimous decision. It was not Whan alone who decided this. Certainly he had a powerful voice, but USGA decisions are not OWGR decisions.

Whan (and other major tournaments) are allowed to make the changes they see fit for their tournaments. All of them have changed over the years. They could go the LIV direction and include the top 12 guys if they wanted to. I'm sure you'd be applauding that move. The OWGR has guidelines on how to get points and tours that abide get points. They are very consistent in their measuring, it is more that LIV doesn't want to abide. They want the OWGR to bend to their will and have been very backhanded about it.

On the growing the game... that's not what LIV is doing. They don't care about growing the game. This is about money. They want a breakaway superstar tour that they can have under a for-profit umbrella with huge margins. They want team owners that buy in for huge franchise fees and foot the bill for players, while PIF gets a cut. They want courses and clubs to bid for the rights to host tournaments. They want a prime TV deal that pays billions to broadcast the events. When either side says it is about growing the game, that's a pure lie. This is about money pure and simple. Some of the PGA guys will say legacy and history (and surely there is some of that, but it is minor)... but they have their hand in the cookie jar too.

You're going full Phil on the last statement.

How is the PGAT growing the game when they're suspending non-tour members for even qualifying for LIV? They're stifling professional players from golf opportunities. How the hell does a not-for-profit get away with this monopolistic behavior?

One of the main stipulations of the exemption status is to grow the game. Good thing the DOJ Anti-Trust violation investigations are still ongoing.

Look at the Aramco Series this weekend, which is growing women's golf, and to quote Lexi when she was asked about playing Aramco and the blood money she said "I will play wherever to grow women's golf".

Of course, both leagues want to make money but the PIF didn't ban Lexi after she played a PGAT event the other week, unlike the paranoid PGAT.