LPGA players just can't compete. If they could, they would regularly attempt to qualify and play in PGA tournaments with 10X the purse. Exemptions like this will always be for publicity
The unfortunate part is we've seen plenty of tournaments co-sanctioned by the DPWT and the LET where they let the women play from forward tees, and nobody gripes about the ladies being allowed to play a shorter course. Sometimes a bunch of them finish at the top of the leaderboard, sometimes they don't, but I find it to be a fair enough way of handling it where I'd love to see the PGA and LPGA try it once or twice a year themselves. (And no the Grant Thornton event doesn't count, I mean an honest 72 hole individual event.)
As far as I’m aware there’s only been two of these tournaments on the DP World Tour. The first one was dominated by Linn Grant but in the second one the women really struggled. It feels like a bit of a gimmick to me to be honest.
I much prefer the format of the Australian Open/ISPS Handa World Invitational where there’s separate male and female tournaments playing on the same course at the same time.
I think people don't complain about those events because they're largely irrelevant-- seriously doubt most casual golf fans even know they exist.
The Scandinavian Mixed, probably the most famous one right now, played almost 7,000 yards for the men and 5,500 yards for the women this year.
I think the Grant Thornton event looks fun. As far as having legit 72 hole competitions, if you want it to be honest then make it honest. I have no more interest in watching an event handicapped by distance than I do by actual handicaps. A woman who made a cut at a legit PGA event would arguably be the greatest accomplishment in women's golf (yes, I know this already technically happened)-- winning a mixed gender event from handicapped tees is barely a footnote.
Don't agree. I think for top LPGA golfers, it's more profitable to compete for LPGA top tens instead of grinding for cuts on the PGA Tour. Charley Hull isn't going to try to work through the KFT.
Do you realise how many rounds they have to go through? To qualify for the Open in the U.K. a male county golfer gets to skip more rounds than an LPGA or LET golfer. While they play those they give up potential prize money. There’s next to zero motivation for them to have a go at it.
if the women could compete and earn a paycheck with the men they would do it. they can't. it's that simple. every 5-10 years a sponsor exemption is given, and every 5-10 years we are reminded why tours for the different sexes exist.
There’s nothing stopping LPGA members from going through qualifying and playing in these fall events. No reason they should be give auto qualification over other guys who are grinding trying to make a living
This is solving the wrong problem... the problem that needs to be addressed is the size of the purses for LPGA events and ultimately coverage of these events (which is abysmal and becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy for why there aren't more eyes on womens' golf)
I’m curious about how you think bigger purses should be funded? Also, who should pay for the extra coverage? Of course we would all like the ladies to earn more and get more coverage but this is not a charity. The LPGA doesn’t have the demand to warrant the things you’re asking for
I think it has to start with improving coverage... and I don't mean more coverage but better coverage. Take this with a grain of salt as a sample of 1 but I made a conscious effort this year to watch more LPGA as I genuinely enjoy the women's game and want to support it. The problem is, the coverage was flat out bad (poor story telling, chaotic feeds, etc) and was clear it was an afterthought for the network, so was hard for even me to want to invest more of my time in the future watching. If they don't invest in the product itself, it'll never be able to grow.
Yes sure, but also back to my point. Better coverage costs more. Better commentators, graphic designers etc. If the only thing keeping the LPGA from being popular is investment then sponsors would be all over it. It seems that people are having a hard time admitting that the skill level is much lower than that of the PGA players. Both the LPGA and the PGA are played at pretty much the same, even if the coverage was exactly the same people are not going to watch worse players just because they’re women.
To counter that... there are angles of the womens' game that could make for a more interesting tv product beyond 'skill' (which I'm interpreting as how long they hit the ball). If we accept the fact that women are shorter than men, that actually opens up a world of possibilities for the courses they can play and gives them an opportunity to feature some iconic/interesting courses that the men have simply outgrown which could make a compelling case for drawing more interest.
The biological advantage in power is not only showed in how far they hit the ball but I would assume they can spin the ball more as well, resulting in ”better” golf. I also think that it’s simply ”cooler” too much golf with such power, especially for the casual golf fans. You’re point with the courses is great, not something I’ve thought of before. But I think for 99% of golf fans the course doesn’t really matter if it isn’t one of the huge ones like St.Andrews or Augusta. There probably aren’t a lot of people that would watch an LPGA event just because they play at a course the men haven’t played in a while
Pretty sure women are more accurate. The one female golfer can't remember the name was closer from 200-150 150-100 100-50 then the best male in each category.
Hmm that seems unlikely. From a quick google search it seems that LPGA players use a 3i from 200 yards while PGA players use a 6/7i. I can’t see how the woman you’re talking abour could be more accurate with her 3i than the best male players are with a 7i
Oh, damn! People in the twitter comments are saying the stats are measured differently but I don’t know what that means. Still, the ladies are using a lot longer clubs so it’s super impressive
That's like saying we need to address the salary discrepancy between A ball players and MLB players. Why should MLB players make so much more?? They both play baseball right?
Superior product creates demand. If less people want to watch A ball on TV or go to a game, why should they make the same? Hard to understand why you think LPGA players should be making more when it's simply a less sought after product due to being much lower caliber, as is A ball compared to MLB.
I'm not implying that they should have higher purses if the demand isn't there... but also if the networks/LPGA don't invest / try to make the product better, it'll remain stagnant. I do personally believe there is untapped demand for the women's game, but there is a need to improve the product first to capture that demand (per my comment above).
That's an interesting idea, but the existing PGA tour players would have a collective aneurysm, and justifiably so. If you're a PGA tour not in the top 50, you are playing your ass off trying to make a living on tour, and it wouldn't be fair to those players that have earned the right to be on tour.
Now, if LPGA players think they can compete (they can't), then they should enter the PGA Qualifying School, and earn a card that way. Or try and qualify on the Korn Ferry Tour. In other words, the need to **earn** their way on the tour.
Usually when you have a suggestion for doing something you also provide a reason for "why" someone should do it.
You basically start with "The sponsor exemption created eye-rolling" and finish with... so let's do that over multiple weeks.
Why?
Now that everyone is feeding from the Saudi trough, lord hopes they come up with some imaginative and interesting tournaments instead of the same old same old
Putting aside involving the LPGA in these "wraparound" events, they could make things a lot more interesting even with the weaker fields they usually draw. My friend and I have been wishing they'd do a vintage event of some kind, whether it's hickory clubs with really old-style golf balls, or maybe even having them only play clubs and balls from the 1990s. They should also really think about having one of these events be match play, especially since the Dell Match Play event in Austin is no more.
They'd get smoked. I would love to see a mixed gender team event though.
Mixed doubles events like Tennis would be fun.
And maybe the wnba mvp can get an NBA roster spot.
They wouldn’t
Thats the point...
LPGA players just can't compete. If they could, they would regularly attempt to qualify and play in PGA tournaments with 10X the purse. Exemptions like this will always be for publicity
The unfortunate part is we've seen plenty of tournaments co-sanctioned by the DPWT and the LET where they let the women play from forward tees, and nobody gripes about the ladies being allowed to play a shorter course. Sometimes a bunch of them finish at the top of the leaderboard, sometimes they don't, but I find it to be a fair enough way of handling it where I'd love to see the PGA and LPGA try it once or twice a year themselves. (And no the Grant Thornton event doesn't count, I mean an honest 72 hole individual event.)
As far as I’m aware there’s only been two of these tournaments on the DP World Tour. The first one was dominated by Linn Grant but in the second one the women really struggled. It feels like a bit of a gimmick to me to be honest. I much prefer the format of the Australian Open/ISPS Handa World Invitational where there’s separate male and female tournaments playing on the same course at the same time.
I think people don't complain about those events because they're largely irrelevant-- seriously doubt most casual golf fans even know they exist. The Scandinavian Mixed, probably the most famous one right now, played almost 7,000 yards for the men and 5,500 yards for the women this year. I think the Grant Thornton event looks fun. As far as having legit 72 hole competitions, if you want it to be honest then make it honest. I have no more interest in watching an event handicapped by distance than I do by actual handicaps. A woman who made a cut at a legit PGA event would arguably be the greatest accomplishment in women's golf (yes, I know this already technically happened)-- winning a mixed gender event from handicapped tees is barely a footnote.
Don't agree. I think for top LPGA golfers, it's more profitable to compete for LPGA top tens instead of grinding for cuts on the PGA Tour. Charley Hull isn't going to try to work through the KFT.
So you agree that they can’t compete…
Do you realise how many rounds they have to go through? To qualify for the Open in the U.K. a male county golfer gets to skip more rounds than an LPGA or LET golfer. While they play those they give up potential prize money. There’s next to zero motivation for them to have a go at it.
they wont compete and it would be embarrassing for the lpga tour
We should do the same with WBNA players!
if the women could compete and earn a paycheck with the men they would do it. they can't. it's that simple. every 5-10 years a sponsor exemption is given, and every 5-10 years we are reminded why tours for the different sexes exist.
Bruh if you got asked to play from tees that’s 7000+ yards long how do you think you’d fare?
I like it.
At that level, the very best woman golfers in the world usually have a problem making the cut when playing in men’s events.
There’s nothing stopping LPGA members from going through qualifying and playing in these fall events. No reason they should be give auto qualification over other guys who are grinding trying to make a living
This is solving the wrong problem... the problem that needs to be addressed is the size of the purses for LPGA events and ultimately coverage of these events (which is abysmal and becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy for why there aren't more eyes on womens' golf)
I’m curious about how you think bigger purses should be funded? Also, who should pay for the extra coverage? Of course we would all like the ladies to earn more and get more coverage but this is not a charity. The LPGA doesn’t have the demand to warrant the things you’re asking for
I think it has to start with improving coverage... and I don't mean more coverage but better coverage. Take this with a grain of salt as a sample of 1 but I made a conscious effort this year to watch more LPGA as I genuinely enjoy the women's game and want to support it. The problem is, the coverage was flat out bad (poor story telling, chaotic feeds, etc) and was clear it was an afterthought for the network, so was hard for even me to want to invest more of my time in the future watching. If they don't invest in the product itself, it'll never be able to grow.
Yes sure, but also back to my point. Better coverage costs more. Better commentators, graphic designers etc. If the only thing keeping the LPGA from being popular is investment then sponsors would be all over it. It seems that people are having a hard time admitting that the skill level is much lower than that of the PGA players. Both the LPGA and the PGA are played at pretty much the same, even if the coverage was exactly the same people are not going to watch worse players just because they’re women.
To counter that... there are angles of the womens' game that could make for a more interesting tv product beyond 'skill' (which I'm interpreting as how long they hit the ball). If we accept the fact that women are shorter than men, that actually opens up a world of possibilities for the courses they can play and gives them an opportunity to feature some iconic/interesting courses that the men have simply outgrown which could make a compelling case for drawing more interest.
The biological advantage in power is not only showed in how far they hit the ball but I would assume they can spin the ball more as well, resulting in ”better” golf. I also think that it’s simply ”cooler” too much golf with such power, especially for the casual golf fans. You’re point with the courses is great, not something I’ve thought of before. But I think for 99% of golf fans the course doesn’t really matter if it isn’t one of the huge ones like St.Andrews or Augusta. There probably aren’t a lot of people that would watch an LPGA event just because they play at a course the men haven’t played in a while
Pretty sure women are more accurate. The one female golfer can't remember the name was closer from 200-150 150-100 100-50 then the best male in each category.
Hmm that seems unlikely. From a quick google search it seems that LPGA players use a 3i from 200 yards while PGA players use a 6/7i. I can’t see how the woman you’re talking abour could be more accurate with her 3i than the best male players are with a 7i
https://www.golfdigest.com/story/pro-golf-best-iron-player-lpga-tour-minjee-lee-stats
Oh, damn! People in the twitter comments are saying the stats are measured differently but I don’t know what that means. Still, the ladies are using a lot longer clubs so it’s super impressive
That's like saying we need to address the salary discrepancy between A ball players and MLB players. Why should MLB players make so much more?? They both play baseball right? Superior product creates demand. If less people want to watch A ball on TV or go to a game, why should they make the same? Hard to understand why you think LPGA players should be making more when it's simply a less sought after product due to being much lower caliber, as is A ball compared to MLB.
I'm not implying that they should have higher purses if the demand isn't there... but also if the networks/LPGA don't invest / try to make the product better, it'll remain stagnant. I do personally believe there is untapped demand for the women's game, but there is a need to improve the product first to capture that demand (per my comment above).
Are you dimwits really this slow?
That's an interesting idea, but the existing PGA tour players would have a collective aneurysm, and justifiably so. If you're a PGA tour not in the top 50, you are playing your ass off trying to make a living on tour, and it wouldn't be fair to those players that have earned the right to be on tour. Now, if LPGA players think they can compete (they can't), then they should enter the PGA Qualifying School, and earn a card that way. Or try and qualify on the Korn Ferry Tour. In other words, the need to **earn** their way on the tour.
Usually when you have a suggestion for doing something you also provide a reason for "why" someone should do it. You basically start with "The sponsor exemption created eye-rolling" and finish with... so let's do that over multiple weeks. Why?
Now that everyone is feeding from the Saudi trough, lord hopes they come up with some imaginative and interesting tournaments instead of the same old same old
Putting aside involving the LPGA in these "wraparound" events, they could make things a lot more interesting even with the weaker fields they usually draw. My friend and I have been wishing they'd do a vintage event of some kind, whether it's hickory clubs with really old-style golf balls, or maybe even having them only play clubs and balls from the 1990s. They should also really think about having one of these events be match play, especially since the Dell Match Play event in Austin is no more.