If LIV players are allowed OWGR points, they should have to start at zero. They wouldn't get credit for points earned on tours that they are no longer members of.

EKUAg said:

---

AgLA06 said:

---

AustinCountyAg said:

---

Harry Stone said:

---

Michael Block playing the champions tour in 4 years?

---

He said in an interview last night that he isn't.

---

Maybe he doesn't need the money.

But based on that article I posted most of the players that only turned pro or had never had success until the Champions Tour all said they weren't going to play it either.

I find it hard to believe that someone with his skill set would turn down the opportunity to travel the world and make a couple million dollars playing the game he loves for a couple of years of "retirement" at age 50.

I think it would be crazy for him to try to play the PGAT at this point in his career against kids half his age, but being the youngest guy on the champions tour and having enough game to place top 15 at a PGA championship should put him in the driver seat on the Champions Tour.

---

Sounded like he valued his family time from what he said.

---

I can appreciate that. And good on him if that's the case.

Not sure my wife would if it meant turning down a shot at millions of dollars.

aggietony2010 said:

---

I Am A Critic said:

---

If LIV players are allowed OWGR points, they should have to start at zero. They wouldn't get credit for points earned on tours that they are no longer members of.

---

This makes no sense.

---

Very little of the PGAT side of the argument does if it's about what's actually best for golf in the long run. Just protecting the PGAT.

To hell with all the other tours, growing the game internationally, innovating, or improving the fan experience or broadcast.

I think that's why I can't believe so many people have fallen hook, line, and sinker for their soviet style propaganda at the fan's expense and PGAT gain.

Only in golf is more somehow worse.

AgLA06 said:

---

AustinCountyAg said:

---

Harry Stone said:

---

Michael Block playing the champions tour in 4 years?

---

He said in an interview last night that he isn't.

---

Maybe he doesn't need the money.

But based on that article I posted most of the players that only turned pro or had never had success until the Champions Tour all said they weren't going to play it either.

I find it hard to believe that someone with his skill set would turn down the opportunity to travel the world and make a couple million dollars playing the game he loves for a couple of years of "retirement" at age 50.

I think it would be crazy for him to try to play the PGAT at this point in his career against kids half his age, but being the youngest guy on the champions tour and having enough game to place top 15 at a PGA championship should put him in the driver seat on the Champions Tour.

---

He had a great week but I'll bet you a steak dinner he doesn't make the cut at Colonial or RBC. The champions tour isn't easy. It's probably harder to make than the PGA tour.

There's a story of a + handicap in his late 40's going to Harvey Pinnick for help making the champions tour in a couple of years. Harvey smiled and took the guy to the driving range he was at. Harvey pointed at a man grinding over range balls and told the aspiring golfer that this man is also trying to make the champions tour. That man was Tom Kite.

Before LIV gets any OWGR points, it needs to solve its access issue. They need a promotion and relegation system. As it stands right now, they don't have a system to get new players and there are no standards for keeping the level of competition up.

This was posted on the other thread by Swollen Thumb.

I see the OWGR matter pretty simplistically...

• What is the sole purpose of the OWGR? To identify and rank the current top performers in the sport.
• Has the current format served that purposes within reason? Most would say Yes.
• Has the professional golf landscape changed in a fundamental way? If LIV survives....unquestionably.
• Does the current format serve its intended purposes in the context of this new landscape? No it would not.
• So if the OWGR is genuinely committed to achieving its singular purpose in a credible manner, shouldn't the discussion be about how to modify/adapt their system to this new landscape (as opposed to whether or not it should)?

This should be the discussion. Or all the people that have cried "for the good of the game" are hypocrites.

Sure, right now they have some of the best players in the world. The way we know that's true is because these players proved themselves in a meritocracy. We know they weren't just beating a bunch of Smylie Kaufmans because the Smylies of the PGAT get kicked out when they stink it up.

At the moment, that's not the case in LIV -- they have good players. What's it going to look like a few years from now, though?

From what I've seen, there are no eligibility requirements for LIV other than being invited. This seems based only on how big of a draw they think you'll be. Who's to say that they won't start inviting Tony Romo and Johnny Manziel to join the league in the future? And if they do, under what circumstances would they be asked to leave?


I think this is all fixable, and I hope they figure it out. I'm not anti-LIV at all, but I understand why the OWGR won't recognize them. It's a set of exhibitions more than a professional golf league right now.

I don't think the ranking points issue is all that hard - just find a comparable PGAT event based on mix of players participating and multiple by .75.

Simple.

Duckhook said:

---

Selection for the US Ryder Cup team is going to be pretty interesting. Faxon seems like he's okay with LIV guys making the team. Chamblee might just commit hari-kari live on Golf Channel if it happens.

---

And for that reason…

AgLA06 said:

---

This was posted on the other thread by Swollen Thumb.

I see the OWGR matter pretty simplistically...

• What is the sole purpose of the OWGR? To identify and rank the current top performers in the sport.
• Has the current format served that purposes within reason? Most would say Yes.
• Has the professional golf landscape changed in a fundamental way? If LIV survives....unquestionably.
• Does the current format serve its intended purposes in the context of this new landscape? No it would not.
• So if the OWGR is genuinely committed to achieving its singular purpose in a credible manner, shouldn't the discussion be about how to modify/adapt their system to this new landscape (as opposed to whether or not it should)?

This should be the discussion. Or all the people that have cried "for the good of the game" are hypocrites.

---

Thanks for sharing that post here!

I'm not pro LIV or anti LIV. I'm not emotionally invested on either side. The simple reality is that (whether one likes it or not) several of the best golfers in the world now play on the LIV tour....and those players have got to be acknowledged in some form or fashion within the OWGR for the rankings to have any sort of legitimacy.

What that looks like is up for debate, but THAT is the debate that should be taking place. Not if, but how?

Good stuff!

Such a cool moment between Michael Block and caddie John Jackson 🤜🤛

Jackson did the math on what his paycheck will be from this week. Their reaction is priceless.

$20,183.31 💰 pic.twitter.com/UBlhRh1qmu

— Golf on CBS ⛳ (@GolfonCBS) May 22, 2023

bagger05 said:

---

Sure, right now they have some of the best players in the world. The way we know that's true is because these players proved themselves in a meritocracy. We know they weren't just beating a bunch of Smylie Kaufmans because the Smylies of the PGAT get kicked out when they stink it up.

At the moment, that's not the case in LIV -- they have good players. What's it going to look like a few years from now, though?

From what I've seen, there are no eligibility requirements for LIV other than being invited. This seems based only on how big of a draw they think you'll be. Who's to say that they won't start inviting Tony Romo and Johnny Manziel to join the league in the future? And if they do, under what circumstances would they be asked to leave?


I think this is all fixable, and I hope they figure it out. I'm not anti-LIV at all, but I understand why the OWGR won't recognize them. It's a set of exhibitions more than a professional golf league right now.

---

I think the comparative results in majors each year will provide a very accurate reflection of the relative strength of at least the top end of the LIV field. Build a system around that. But you can't just pretend these players don't exist and then call yourself the official world golf rankings (without a massive asterisks).

I think they will need to change the criteria to make it fit but will eventually figure it out.

The no-cut combined with no eligibility requirements leaves me confused about how it would work. I'm sure they can come up with something.

Why is it the OWGR job to adapt to LIV? Shouldn't LIV adapt to the OWGR like every other tour that receives points?

guadalupeag said:

---

Why is it the OWGR job to adapt to LIV? Shouldn't LIV adapt to the OWGR like every other tour that receives points?

---

Because in theory the OWGR wants to be legit and taken seriously. They're job is to accurately rank the golfers currently playing the best golf. Not define how golf is played.

So he wouldn't have to go to Thailand and Singapore and ends of the earth to golf with a newborn? Unless he, like all the others, really cares about growing the game??

AgLA06 said:

---

guadalupeag said:

---

Why is it the OWGR job to adapt to LIV? Shouldn't LIV adapt to the OWGR like every other tour that receives points?

---

Because in theory the OWGR wants to be legit and taken seriously. Their job is to accurately rank the golfers currently playing the best golf. Not define how golf is played.

---

A significant part of professional golf is promotion/relegation. You don't automatically get to be in a group and stay there forever. You have to earn your way in and play well enough to earn your keep. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that if that's not part of your basic system then you don't get to be recognized.

The other thing is the team aspect. The OWGR is an individual ranking and LIV has a team aspect. Personally I doubt the team aspect has any bearing on the individuals' play. But it is another factor that makes LIV less than an apples to apples comparison.

HighFlyers go go go!!!

bagger05 said:

---

AgLA06 said:

---

guadalupeag said:

---

Why is it the OWGR job to adapt to LIV? Shouldn't LIV adapt to the OWGR like every other tour that receives points?

---

Because in theory the OWGR wants to be legit and taken seriously. Their job is to accurately rank the golfers currently playing the best golf. Not define how golf is played.

---

A significant part of professional golf is promotion/relegation. You don't automatically get to be in a group and stay there forever. You have to earn your way in and play well enough to earn your keep. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that if that's not part of your basic system then you don't get to be recognized.

The other thing is the team aspect. The OWGR is an individual ranking and LIV has a team aspect. Personally I doubt the team aspect has any bearing on the individuals' play. But it is another factor that makes LIV less than an apples to apples comparison.

---

Completely agree, and that's not what I'm suggesting at all. If the LIV players generally become uncompetitive in majors over the next 1-3-5+ years (if it still even exists) then that should certainly be taken into account when ranking the top players in the world. But as of now, there are several that have proven through direct competition in majors that they are among the worlds best players. So any legitimate world ranking (by definition) must somehow take those players into account rather than simply pretending they don't exist. Again, how they go about doing that is a very reasonable topic for debate. But they should make an honest effort to figure something out. Otherwise you simply cannot say that so and so is the 50th ranked player in the world, when everyone knows there are at least 10 active golfers in the world who are better but excluded from the ranking.

What I don't know is what reasonable debate has taken place between OWGR and LIV. If OWGR is simply shutting LIV out then that's BS, but at the moment I see a couple of roadblocks to "we should just rank the LIV guys somehow."

I'm honestly not too worried about it. If LIV is legit then the OWGR will get figured out.