Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You said it way more eloquently than I did. Its such a huge problem and continues to divide fans, which is awful for the game.From the article I read the OWGR President Peter Dawson stated that the 54 holes, no cut and 48 man field could be dealt with mathmatically, but the sticking points were they didn't feel it was merit based enough, given captains and contracts that there wasn't enough possiblity of change. But it's hilarious that he admits that they aren't ranking players that should be ranked and it's a problem that needs to get fixed, yet they won't.
So they are basically saying because of contracts and team aspect they may not try as hard for themselves?From the article I read the OWGR President Peter Dawson stated that the 54 holes, no cut and 48 man field could be dealt with mathmatically, but the sticking points were they didn't feel it was merit based enough, given captains and contracts that there wasn't enough possiblity of change. But it's hilarious that he admits that they aren't ranking players that should be ranked and it's a problem that needs to get fixed, yet they won't.
I can get on board with limited points and agree 100% about the hypocrisy. Tour is only one board seat though. R&A, ANGC also on board and are more likely to be impartial I would guess. They made their beds when they left the PGAT and knew this would happen. Will all be moot soon enough anywayStill not entirely true anymore.
But that still goes back to the same thing. Limit the points fine, but its the ******* world rankings, its sole goal is to rank players from everywhere.
Yet in this case, the tour is on the board, therefore setting the rules and changing them (see last year) to limit.
Thats my problem. I dont like LIV Golf. I just hate hypocrisy. OWGR should be independent of the tours that earn from it.
Dont forget the Euro Tour and the Intl Fed of PGA Tours. Thats a lot of seats.I can get on board with limited points and agree 100% about the hypocrisy. Tour is only one board seat though. R&A, ANGC also on board and are more likely to be impartial I would guess. They made their beds when they left the PGAT and knew this would happen. Will all be moot soon enough anyway
Again, that is not what I said. Of course they are....SO IS THE PGA TOUR.
They should have NO part on the board deciding the rules for other tours.
I get the hatred, but the removal of facts to create a point is so on brand for this discussion.
Well LIV can't really make those changes since their basic reason to exist is to only have those top players playing. Kind of at an impasse there but again, if the merger happens seems like it'll fix itself.From the article I read the OWGR President Peter Dawson stated that the 54 holes, no cut and 48 man field could be dealt with mathmatically, but the sticking points were they didn't feel it was merit based enough, given captains and contracts that there wasn't enough possiblity of change. But it's hilarious that he admits that they aren't ranking players that should be ranked and it's a problem that needs to get fixed, yet they won't.
I never said I didnt want rankings tied to majors. In fact the opposite. What I said was that Tours that benefit from rankings should NOT have board seats that decide the rankings.I haven't removed any facts.
And if you want rankings not tied to tours and the majors, there are others like Data Golf, Sagarin, etc.
Well LIV can't really make those changes since their basic reason to exist is to only have those top players playing. Kind of at an impasse there but again, if the merger happens seems like it'll fix itself.
OWGROSOTGSo will they change the name to something new?
Interesting. So I guess what about the PGA tour where Rory has already said he only cares about winning, so he goes super aggressive for a putt on 18, putting it 10 feet past and three putts handing the lead to someone else? It’s the same thing, is it not? The reasoning the OWGR is providing is starting to sound like how my 4yo tries to get out of doing something wrong.Blame Muñoz for the team aspect piece. But really blame the Board because using that as a sticking point is a worse call than one from Angel Hernandez.
View attachment 9212627
Really short and clear, I like it.OWGROSOTG
Official World Golf Rankings of Some of the Golfers
I never said I didnt want rankings tied to majors. In fact the opposite. What I said was that Tours that benefit from rankings should NOT have board seats that decide the rankings.
I don't even understand an argument against it. This isnt about me wanting LIV to get points, I want LIV to go away. This is about basic understanding on rankings and how flawed the approach is to have the tours that benefit the most from other tours being left out, deciding on the rules that leave them out.
Whoa, whoa...lets not get carried away. There is simply nothing in sports that is comparably bad to AHBlame Muñoz for the team aspect piece. But really blame the Board because using that as a sticking point is a worse call than one from Angel Hernandez.
I have observed that when someone takes the time to preemptively tell you something is not the reason they are actually subconsciously announcing that it is the reason.They say it is not political and just technical and it stems from the limited 48 man field.
That's where I was going with it as well. If not, it's like an * next to it.So will they change the name to something new?
The OWGR points earned are not handicapped. If you look at the OWGR site, the 2 "winners" listed for the TC.I don't like the split, but why?
They set rules that pertain only to the tours that they govern over. That is my issue.
The fact that a Tour Championship has less golfers and is ******* handicapped and LIV Golfers can't get ranked is just so weird to me.
I was speaking to the event.The OWGR points earned are not handicapped. If you look at the OWGR site, the 2 "winners" listed for the TC.
Would you be ok with OWGR not giving them points for anything less than a full field?
...that they earned their way into through regular OPEN competition?Why not just less points then? The no points really doesn’t make sense. Don’t people get points for the tour championship and the tournament of champions that have lower fields?
So if the new pga limited field events get it we riot!!! I get it for now but if they do provide points to the PGA limited events then that is bs
Interesting. So I guess what about the PGA tour where Rory has already said he only cares about winning, so he goes super aggressive for a putt on 18, putting it 10 feet past and three putts handing the lead to someone else? It’s the same thing, is it not? The reasoning the OWGR is providing is starting to sound like how my 4yo tries to get out of doing something wrong.
One thing LIV has done is expose the rotting corruption at the top echelons of golf.I never said I didnt want rankings tied to majors. In fact the opposite. What I said was that Tours that benefit from rankings should NOT have board seats that decide the rankings.
I don't even understand an argument against it. This isnt about me wanting LIV to get points, I want LIV to go away. This is about basic understanding on rankings and how flawed the approach is to have the tours that benefit the most from other tours being left out, deciding on the rules that leave them out.
How do we know they are top players though? According to the OWGR they are just a bunch of dudes golfing.I haven't removed any facts.
And if you want rankings not tied to tours and the majors, there are others like Data Golf, Sagarin, etc.
Well LIV can't really make those changes since their basic reason to exist is to only have those top players playing. Kind of at an impasse there but again, if the merger happens seems like it'll fix itself.
Doesn’t matter the why, it’s still limited field. You can’t use that as a reason as a no for one and a yes for another....that they earned their way into through regular OPEN competition?
See above, they earned their way in. It's part of the season. No guarantees for anyone trying to get there.
Rory was trying to win, can you not see the difference? He gave his putt a chance, the other example did not try to win (for himself, tho yes for his team - see the problem in trying to assign that points?)
Surely. I also think that if they had points, you wouldn’t get people giving into the team over self as much as discussed previously. But right now they don’t have that. There are many ways they could make this work, they just don’t want to.Would it make sense to limit how far down the leaderboard a LIV player gets OWGR points? Say only the top 24 each week get points? That essentially would impose a "cut" on the field and solve one of the perceived issues.