Futures tour ?????

xman5 · 08-22-2008, 09:04 AM

Ok let me get this straight.

There is no more concept of exempt, non exempt.

Those that meet the criteria on that list are eligable to play. They are considered members.

The priority list structure determines who can play by priority. So 1-80 you have no problem basically, as well as if you are in some of the other top groups in the list. YOu are similar to the old Exempt status. You will get into all tournaments no problem. Most likely the same for the middle priority groups.

The categories on the bottom of the list may or may not get into a tournament based on the priority order of that list. So those guys are like the old non exempt category.

SO those 6-10 from the futures do not get much of a break, they are toward the bottom of the list.

x-admin · 08-22-2008, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by notaxbill

Maybe there is a player somewhere that couldn't make it thru q school
that they might want on the lpga

That's a good conspiracy theory.

Originally Posted by PW

If you want to be paranoid, you could look at it as a way to make it harder for non-US players to get a card since it's easier for someone to come over and play 2 q-school touraments than a season on the FT. It looks like they are still taking the same number from q-school though, at least for now.

I don't think it will. There are plenty of non-US players on the FT.

I think the main reason is that it's now the LPGA that owns the FT and they want to give more attention to that tour and be more rewarding to the girls who play it.

NTB · 08-22-2008, 02:25 PM

If there is a player that might be embarrassed by failing in the q school.
They are unable to make it thru the tour exemptions.
They choose to try the futures and don't make the top 10 they can always claim they were really there only to sharpen their game and it wasn't a serious effort on thier part.
then all the loyal followers can still hold their heads high.

MarinePaul · 08-22-2008, 03:04 PM

While I don't buy into any conspiracy theory, I also don't like change for the sake of change. That's all this is, really.

NTB · 08-22-2008, 03:11 PM

MP and Admin I don't think it is anything less then to try to get a young lady a tour card by hook or crook. minimum amount of effort on her part.
Also to keep as much peace as possible among the better players that have to earn every penny they make with hard work and no d---- freebes

golfnut · 08-22-2008, 09:18 PM

i think this is a great move by the lpga. i would rather see more spots go to the futures tour than to a qualifying tournament where someone can get hot and ride it to a tour card. with the futures tour you have to play 18-20 events per year against good competion to advance to the lpga tour. the nationwide tour has proven that it is a better determining factor for success than the pga tour's qualifying event. i just dont see why so many people are against this.

x-admin · 08-22-2008, 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by golfnut

i think this is a great move by the lpga. i would rather see more spots go to the futures tour than to a qualifying tournament where someone can get hot and ride it to a tour card. with the futures tour you have to play 18-20 events per year against good competion to advance to the lpga tour. the nationwide tour has proven that it is a better determining factor for success than the pga tour's qualifying event. i just dont see why so many people are against this.

I agree with you, nut!

golfnut · 08-23-2008, 09:06 PM

i would like to see about 25 events per year with every event at at least 100,000. but the competion aspect is what sets it apart from q-school. i believe the depth of the lpga tour would benefit even more if even more spots would be moved to the futures tour.

MarinePaul · 08-23-2008, 09:50 PM

Then why have Q-school at all? It kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?

Buzzer · 08-24-2008, 11:56 AM

Perhaps eliminating Q-School would be the best thing. That way all "future" players coming off the Futures Tour would have experience and would be more viable players on the big tour.
I'm not saying this is yhe best thing to do, but am throwing this thought out trolling for imput. N'est-pas?

Viva Annika

08-22-2008, 01:35 PM	#12
x-admin Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 344	Originally Posted by notaxbill Maybe there is a player somewhere that couldn't make it thru q school that they might want on the lpga That's a good conspiracy theory. Originally Posted by PW If you want to be paranoid, you could look at it as a way to make it harder for non-US players to get a card since it's easier for someone to come over and play 2 q-school touraments than a season on the FT. It looks like they are still taking the same number from q-school though, at least for now. I don't think it will. There are plenty of non-US players on the FT. I think the main reason is that it's now the LPGA that owns the FT and they want to give more attention to that tour and be more rewarding to the girls who play it.

08-22-2008, 02:25 PM	#13
NTB Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: hot springs village arkansas Posts: 2,288 Images: 4	If there is a player that might be embarrassed by failing in the q school. They are unable to make it thru the tour exemptions. They choose to try the futures and don't make the top 10 they can always claim they were really there only to sharpen their game and it wasn't a serious effort on thier part. then all the loyal followers can still hold their heads high. __________________ God Bless America \"Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants.\" - William Penn

08-22-2008, 03:04 PM	#14
MarinePaul Moderator Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Warren, Ohio Posts: 8,001	While I don't buy into any conspiracy theory, I also don't like change for the sake of change. That's all this is, really. __________________ Happiness isn't getting what you want, it's wanting what you have.

08-22-2008, 03:11 PM	#15
NTB Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: hot springs village arkansas Posts: 2,288 Images: 4	MP and Admin I don't think it is anything less then to try to get a young lady a tour card by hook or crook. minimum amount of effort on her part. Also to keep as much peace as possible among the better players that have to earn every penny they make with hard work and no d---- freebes __________________ God Bless America \"Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants.\" - William Penn

08-22-2008, 10:10 PM	#17
x-admin Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 344	Originally Posted by golfnut i think this is a great move by the lpga. i would rather see more spots go to the futures tour than to a qualifying tournament where someone can get hot and ride it to a tour card. with the futures tour you have to play 18-20 events per year against good competion to advance to the lpga tour. the nationwide tour has proven that it is a better determining factor for success than the pga tour's qualifying event. i just dont see why so many people are against this. I agree with you, nut!

08-22-2008, 09:04 AM	#11
xman5 Contest Statistician Join Date: May 2006 Location: NYC Posts: 3,902	Ok let me get this straight. There is no more concept of exempt, non exempt. Those that meet the criteria on that list are eligable to play. They are considered members. The priority list structure determines who can play by priority. So 1-80 you have no problem basically, as well as if you are in some of the other top groups in the list. YOu are similar to the old Exempt status. You will get into all tournaments no problem. Most likely the same for the middle priority groups. The categories on the bottom of the list may or may not get into a tournament based on the priority order of that list. So those guys are like the old non exempt category. SO those 6-10 from the futures do not get much of a break, they are toward the bottom of the list.

08-22-2008, 09:18 PM	#16
golfnut Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Mandeville, Louisiana Posts: 484	i think this is a great move by the lpga. i would rather see more spots go to the futures tour than to a qualifying tournament where someone can get hot and ride it to a tour card. with the futures tour you have to play 18-20 events per year against good competion to advance to the lpga tour. the nationwide tour has proven that it is a better determining factor for success than the pga tour's qualifying event. i just dont see why so many people are against this.

08-23-2008, 09:06 PM	#18
golfnut Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Mandeville, Louisiana Posts: 484	i would like to see about 25 events per year with every event at at least 100,000. but the competion aspect is what sets it apart from q-school. i believe the depth of the lpga tour would benefit even more if even more spots would be moved to the futures tour.

08-23-2008, 09:50 PM	#19
MarinePaul Moderator Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Warren, Ohio Posts: 8,001	Then why have Q-school at all? It kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it? __________________ Happiness isn't getting what you want, it's wanting what you have.

08-24-2008, 11:56 AM	#20
Buzzer Moderator Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Hilton Head, SC Posts: 2,831 Images: 13	Perhaps eliminating Q-School would be the best thing. That way all "future" players coming off the Futures Tour would have experience and would be more viable players on the big tour. I'm not saying this is yhe best thing to do, but am throwing this thought out trolling for imput. N'est-pas? Viva Annika

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode