New Tournament

[MarinePaul]

Originally Posted by golfnut

There is a place for limited field events MP, Yes in a perfect world there would be an 80-20 ratio of full field to limited field, but that's not the case right now. There should always be some limited field events to reward the top players for playing well and to give incentive for the rank and file to improve their games so that they can qualify as well.

80-20 isn't a bad ratio, but that isn't going to happen anytime soon. Like I said, a limited field event is better than nothing. As far as the limited field events rewarding the top players, that's fine. The problem is, they should be limited to the best players based on stats. With sponsor exemptions, that isn't always the case.

[golfnut]

I agree with you MP on limited fields giving sponsor exemptions, it's stupid. Those events should be something you qualify for, plain and simple as that.

[Saint-Just X]

You're all missing the bigger picture.

These limited field events are damaging to the long-term future of the women's game in the USA.(It's nothing to do with the location of these events,it's to do with the format.)

Does nobody else see this ?...

Pax Vobiscum
Saint-Just X

[Blue]

Originally Posted by Saint-Just X

You're all missing the bigger picture.

These limited field events are damaging to the long-term future of the women's game in the USA.(It's nothing to do with the location of these events,it's to do with the format.)

Does nobody else see this ?...

Pax Vobiscum
Saint-Just X

I agree. I just didn't post yet to say so.

[golfnut]

I disagree Saint. Would you rather the LPGA not play at all, rather than have a limited field event? That's ridiculous. The fact is that companies are not stepping up to sponsor full field events. Another thing, these limited field events aren't coming on board with 20 or 30 player fields. They are coming on board with 50, 60, 70 player fields. In a perfect world, yes there would be a greater ratio of full field to limited field, but alas, it's not a perfect world, and we are just starting to come out of the worst recession since the great depression. It's better that the LPGA have events, full field, limited field, whatever, than not have any events at all.

[Blue]

Originally Posted by golfnut

I disagree Saint. Would you rather the LPGA not play at all, rather than have a limited field event? That's ridiculous. The fact is that companies are not stepping up to sponsor full field events. Another thing, these limited field events aren't coming on board with 20 or 30 player fields. They are coming on board with 50, 60, 70 player fields. In a perfect world, yes there would be a greater ratio of full field to limited field, but alas, it's not a perfect world, and we are just starting to come out of the worst recession since the great depression. It's better that the LPGA have events, full field, limited field, whatever, than not have any events at all.

We don't know that companies aren't stepping up to sponsor full-field events. Why are we making the assumption that the LPGA considers full-field events preferable to limited-field no cut events? Many of the fans here seem to prefer full-field events, but the LPGA may prefer limited field events, for several reasons, including the most important reason that I stated above. It's a way of guaranteeing that star players will be in the tournament for all days of the tournament. This is something the LPGA cares a lot about. That's why we're seeing silly-season events like the Mojo 6 stuck right in the middle of the regular season (oh, by the way -- latest addition to Mojo 6 -- fans pick the 16th contestant from a list of pre-selected players: The Mojo 6 Tournament | HOME | Home Page ... can it get any sillier?)

Given that the purses are not necessary lower in a limited field event, it does not seem to be an economic decision to pursue limited field events, especially internationally, as much as a deliberate marketing decision.

[Saint-Just X]

Originally Posted by golfnut

I disagree Saint. Would you rather the LPGA not play at all, rather than have a limited field event? That's ridiculous. The fact is that companies are not stepping up to sponsor full field events. Another thing, these limited field events aren't coming on board with 20 or 30 player fields. They are coming on board with 50, 60, 70 player fields. In a perfect world, yes there would be a greater ratio of full field to limited field, but alas, it's not a perfect world, and we are just starting to come out of the worst recession since the great depression. It's better that the LPGA have events, full field, limited field, whatever, than not have any events at all.

G-Nut,this really is a 'bigger picture' issue ;in fact,it's a 'much' bigger picture issue.

It's not about having these tournaments or no tournaments,it's about the future for young American women in professional golf.

Seriously.I'm not being at all melodramatic.

I'm also not waving flags.Hell,I'm not even American,and,let's face it,most people on here know that I'd be perfectly content if a Korean or Japanese golfer won every LPGA event from now until the end of time.

But,you see,it isn't about who wins the tournament,it's about the opportunity to play in them.

And,then,it's about what happens when you can't play in them.

I enjoy limited-field events,all the stars,world class fields,who wouldn't enjoy that ? Unfortunately,the ratio of limited field events to full field events,on the LPGA,has grown ridiculous.

It's that which is detrimental to the long term prospects of Americans in women's golf.I'm not talking about the Creamers,the Stanfords,the Kerrs and the Pressels,or that annoying girl from Hawaii,they're fine,they will be in all these events (and with the current set-up,it will be difficult to drop out of the top 50),but,hey,anyone heard from Erica Blasberg,lately ?

The Korean and Japanese youngsters have established tours they can play on.There's still a way for them to earn ranking points,progress to a higher level ;but what if you're a 19 year American girl who wants to turn professional,where do you play ?

The Duramed ? Good luck trying to make a living on that.And even if you top the Futures tour money list,you find yourself shut out of most events on the LPGA.

Mina Harigae says hi.

People have to make a living. If they can't see themselves earning a living at golf,mainly because the opportunity to showcase their talent is denied to them,they will drop out of the game and do something else.

All the self-congratulatory high-fiving at the LPGA,and the praise for Micky Whan,can't gloss over the fundamental problems that occur when you choose to ignore the growing disparity between the elite player and the average player on tour ;and the concomitant effect that will have at the grassroots level of American girls' golf.

Phew,it turned into an essay,really...

Pax Vobiscum
Saint-Just X

[Saint-Just X]

Originally Posted by Blue

That's why we're seeing silly-season events like the Mojo 6 stuck right in the middle of the regular season (oh, by the way -- latest addition to Mojo 6 -- fans pick the 16th contestant from a list of pre-selected players: The Mojo 6 Tournament | HOME | Home Page ... can it get any sillier?)

I wish there was an opportunity to vote for that event to disappear into a black hole.

Of course,if they don't like who the fans voted for,they can always pretend someone else won the popular vote...

Pax Vobiscum
Saint-Just X

[dangerbob]

Originally Posted by Saint-Just X

G-Nut,this really is a 'bigger picture' issue ;in fact,it's a 'much' bigger picture issue.

It's not about having these tournaments or no tournaments,it's about the future for young American women in professional golf.

Seriously.I'm not being at all melodramatic.

I'm also not waving flags.Hell,I'm not even American,and,let's face it,most people on here know that I'd be perfectly content if a Korean or Japanese golfer won every LPGA event from now until the end of time.

But,you see,it isn't about who wins the tournament,it's about the opportunity to play in them.

And,then,it's about what happens when you can't play in them.

I enjoy limited-field events,all the stars,world class fields,who wouldn't enjoy that ? Unfortunately,the ratio of limited field events to full field events,on the LPGA,has grown ridiculous.

It's that which is detrimental to the long term prospects of Americans in women's golf.I'm not talking about the Creamers,the Stanfords,the Kerrs and the Pressels,or that annoying girl from Hawaii,they're fine,they will be in all these events (and with the current set-up,it will be difficult to drop out of the top 50),but,hey,anyone heard from Erica Blasberg,lately ?

The Korean and Japanese youngsters have established tours they can play on.There's still a way for them to earn ranking points,progress to a higher level ;but what if you're a 19 year American girl who wants to turn professional,where do you play ?

The Duramed ? Good luck trying to make a living on that.And even if you top the Futures tour money list,you find yourself shut out of most events on the LPGA.

Mina Harigae says hi.

People have to make a living. If they can't see themselves earning a living at golf,mainly because the opportunity to showcase their talent is denied to them,they will drop out of the game and do something else.

All the self-congratulatory high-fiving at the LPGA,and the praise for Micky Whan,can't gloss over the fundamental problems that occur when you choose to ignore the growing disparity between the elite player and the average player on tour ;and the concomitant effect that will have at the grassroots level of American girls' golf.

Phew,it turned into an essay,really...

Pax Vobiscum
Saint-Just X

How can they make a living? If they're mediocre golfers and had to come up with $3,000 or $4,000 to play in the Far East and them miss the cut? That's a losing proposition, anyway you look at it. Plus, they have to pay the expenses of their caddies. Remember...most of this limited field are in the Far East and are newly form tournaments. Like Golfnut says, "They're better than nothing for the start." Once they come up with more sponsors and more prize money to pay the players, maybe they'll make into full field tournaments. So let's be patient!

[Blue]

Originally Posted by dangerbob

How can they make a living? If they're mediocre golfers and had to come up with $3,000 or $4,000 to play in the Far East and them miss the cut? That's a losing proposition, anyway you look at it. Plus, they have to pay the expenses of their caddies. Remember...most of this limited field are in the Far East and are newly form tournaments. Like Golfnut says, "They're better than nothing for the start." Once they come up with more sponsors and more prize money to pay the players, maybe they'll make into full field tournaments. So let's be patient!

Still not buying it. A touring pro knows there are costs involved with staying on Tour. Travel expenses are part of it. Again, these costs don't stop lots of players from going to Europe every year to play in the Evian and British Open, just to miss the cut. Or just look at the field at the ANZ Ladies Masters this week, with players from all over the world. Many them will miss the cut. No LPGA player is going to think, "Gee, I don't want to spend the money to go to [fill in far away country] because I'm not very good so I might miss the cut." They would not be on the LPGA Tour if they thought of themselves that way. They know the risk of missing the cut is there every week, but they don't plan on it. If there is any obstacle, it's simply the travel at any cost. Players don't want the hassle of going to Asia or Mexico for one weekend on a crappy plane, to stay in crappy accommodations, and eat crappy food, and play on a crappy course. This is why the LPGA schedules these events back to back and the tournaments have vastly improved the accommodations and amenities and the courses are usually in really good shape.

The whole point of the "everyone plays" events, especially in new countries is to showcase the established LPGA stars for the duration of the tournament and also to allow the local players who either qualify or (mostly) are let in on sponsor exemptions also have a guarantee to play the weekend.

Who does this hurt? It hurts the regular LPGA Tour players who are not invited and have no place on the LPGA to play or who will spend an equal amount of money to play in Europe or elsewhere that weekend. And it hurts fans who don't get to see the top ~130 players in the world battle it out for all four days. They're seeing a watered-down tournament with the top ~20-60 players depending on the event and a very generous sprinkling of local players, and everyone's given an automatic bye to the weekend.