2013 Women's US Open Discussion Thread

[iacas]

Originally Posted by dave67az

The top-20 PGA Tour golfers currently have a combined scoring average of 69.82.

The top-20 LPGA Tour golfers currently have a combined scoring average of 70.81.

They're playing easier golf courses. So what?

Originally Posted by dave67az

If you're going to find a reason not to watch, you might want to pick something other than how they don't score as well because the numbers don't back you up.

They don't "score" as well. Put them on a PGA Tour level course and see how well they "score." Heck, shorten it to their yardages, and again - see how well they "score." It won't be good.

Originally Posted by dave67az

But the shot-making, particularly in the short game, is just as good as the men (barely a 1-stroke difference) and the scoring shows it.

It's not even close, no. They're not nearly as good. Heck, I could find plenty of guys who can't make a living on the mini tours are better than the vast majority of LPGA players at "shotmaking."

Originally Posted by dave67az

I'd hazard a bet that most people would disagree with you.

I'd bet the opposite, and I can show you their TV ratings to back that up.

Originally Posted by dave67az

Seeing people playing from appropriate tees and scoring consistently below par is what most people find entertaining (read this thread again if you don't agree, because it's a pretty common theme).

That's not entertaining to me. I won't say I hate watching the LPGA, but I would rather vacuum the carpets or power wash the house and windows.

Originally Posted by dave67az

I think what you guys are missing is that the men AREN'T playing longer courses.

Yes they are. Look at the total yardages. Look at the fact that the women will almost all lay up on a 480-yard par five. Yawn.

Are they playing the same length courses if you adjust for their shorter driving distances? Yes, but that's stupid. That's like saying watching the Little League World Series is as exciting as watching THE World Series. After all, they can't run as fast or swing as hard, so their bases are smaller, the fences closer, etc.

They play shorter, easier courses with slower greens, less rough, and wider fairways, easier pin placements, etc.

The best player in the world didn't make the cut at an event she hand-picked as being the easiest course on which a woman could succeed. Michelle Wie never made the cut (but almost qualified for the U.S. Open).

They aren't as good, and as such, it's far less entertaining. It's really that simple.

[Wisguy]

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

That being said, I still find it boring. Part of it the long, loopy swings that most women have. Part of it is the fact that it seems really gimmicky and doesn't pay homage to the tradition and class of the game. I can't put my finger on exactly what it is that makes it boring. I just know I would rather watch paint dry.

I think you have a pants fetish.

Seriously, what makes it boring is that you haven't consciously or subconsciously made any of the LPGA players into heroes or villains, like you have with Tiger vs. Phil, Jack vs. Arnie, etc...

Paying "homage to the tradition and class of the game"??  What does that even mean?  Because one major was named after a snack foods company, the fourth major has changed venues, events, sponsors and finally host countries so many times that no one can keep track of it and they added a fifth major in France,  that it makes the entire tour crass and mean?  Because the media ignored women's sports until Nancy Lopez came along, the sport has no history?  To me, anyone talking about "tradition and class" is creating a pretty strong presumption of snobbishness.

I recently noticed that a course in my state has a female head pro, her name looked familiar, and I looked her up on the LPGA website.  She had played on the LPGA tour over a decade, and had multiple top-5 finishes and multiple top-10 finishes in majors, but what was most astonishing as I flipped through a few of her year's stats from the 90's was how many tournaments where she made the cut but won less than $1000 - as recently as the mid-90's, LPGA tournaments were paying so little that placing worse than 40-50th place didn't pay enough to break even,  not even in terms of gas money to the next tournament, six nights at a Motel 6, and fast food 10+ meals a week.

[dave67az]

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

I don't understand the argument that LPGA isn't interesting because it's bad golf. I've played a few rounds with ladies that were on the LPGA tour at the time, and they were as good as 99% of the men I've played with in my life.

That being said, I still find it boring. Part of it the long, loopy swings that most women have. Part of it is the fact that it seems really gimmicky and doesn't pay homage to the tradition and class of the game. I can't put my finger on exactly what it is that makes it boring. I just know I would rather watch paint dry.

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

I hope your being hyperbolic again?   My weekend watch priority list (currently ... during football season?  forget golf) is something like:

1.  PGA Tour if its a quality tournament with a good field (and not a blowout)

2.  Champions Tour if its a pretty course

3.  The Avengers, Rango, A Few Good Men, Dodgeball, 40 Year Old Virgin, Oceans 13, Italian Job, Princess Bride, or any other frequently shown, very rewatchable movie on Epix, Bravo, Spike, etc.

4.  Dodgers or Angels game if its close or if they're playing the Padres

5.  Last 5 laps of Nascar race.

6.  Installing shelves in laundry room AND painting them, HOWEVER ...

7.  While the paint is drying and nothing else in on TV, I'd much rather watch the women play golf than stare at the walls in the laundry room.

I don't know, I just repainted my living room and kitchen this year and it was pretty damn satisfying watching the paint dry while sucking down an ice cold brew.  lol

I honestly think the reason the LPGA is so painful to watch for some people (and so difficult to get into to begin with) goes back to what Erik said about being able to identify and relate with the players.  I really enjoyed watching Stacy Lewis because we share that great Lewis name and I wondered if we were related (I do a lot of genealogy work so I wonder that a lot when I run into other Lewis families).  After watching for a while, I got to know more about the other golfers, got to know their games (who's a good putter, who's good from greenside traps, etc).  Now when I watch coverage, I "know" someone in just about every group they show on the telecast.

With any sport, it's always easier to watch when you know the players and their histories.  NASCAR is a lot more interesting when you know about the dynamics both on and off the track.  Baseball is a lot more entertaining when you know who the most loved and hated players are on any given team.

I loved watching that 14-year-old Chinese kid at the Masters even though I'd have to Google it to remember his full name.  But the reason I enjoyed it was because they made it a point to give us the back-story, shots of him back home at his Junior High School, and background so we COULD relate to him.  Had they not done that, I wouldn't have cared one iota whether or not he made the cut.  He played great golf for a teenager, but that still didn't make it enjoyable because I didn't know who he was.

I'd bet that if most of you started watching on a regular basis, you'd find the LPGA just as entertaining as any other sport you committed to watching on a regular basis.  I doubt you'll get through your first few tournaments, though.  The pace of play makes the PGA Tour look like speed golf, and if you're anything like me you'll be yelling at the caddies to mind their own damn business and stop trying to line up every freaking shot (INCLUDING TEE SHOTS!).

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Wisguy

I recently noticed that a course in my state has a female head pro, her name looked familiar, and I looked her up on the LPGA website.  She had played on the LPGA tour over a decade, and had multiple top-5 finishes and multiple top-10 finishes in majors, but what was most astonishing as I flipped through a few of her year's stats from the 90's was how many tournaments where she made the cut but won less than $1000 - as recently as the mid-90's, LPGA tournaments were paying so little that placing worse than 40-50th place didn't pay enough to break even,  not even in terms of gas money to the next tournament, six nights at a Motel 6, and fast food 10+ meals a week.

Yeah… because so few people care to watch women play golf.

[jamo]

7.  While the paint is drying and nothing else in on TV, I'd much rather watch the women play golf than stare at the walls in the laundry room.

That's high praise. FWIW, I can count on one hand the amount of hours I've spent watching LPGA Tour golf. I can say the same for the Champions Tour. And Mad Men . It's simply not as entertaining.

[dave67az]

Something tells me we're going to be revisiting this topic in a year when both the men and women are playing on Pinehurst #2 for the US Open and US Women's Open on consecutive weeks.

[Slice of Life]

Bottom line for me:

I watch professional sports to see the best of the best at their respective sport play at the absolute highest level.

Women golfers are not the best of the best, and they don't play at the highest level. Tiger on an off day would crush the competition in an LPGA event.

Same with basketball, worst team in the NBA would embarrass the best WNBA on the court.

I can go on and on...

[Slice of Life]

Example...Luke Donald's average driving distance is 277 yards. Only 2 yards longer than Nicole Smith's average driving distance.

Who do you think is winning if they go head to head on the same course from the same tees? We'll move Luke back 2 yards to keep it fair...

[dave67az]

Originally Posted by Slice of Life

Bottom line for me:

I watch professional sports to see the best of the best at their respective sport play at the absolute highest level.

Women golfers are not the best of the best, and they don't play at the highest level. Tiger on an off day would crush the competition in an LPGA event.

Same with basketball, worst team in the NBA would embarrass the best WNBA on the court.

I can go on and on...

Hope you're not a Browns fan.  lol  (just kidding...I mean seriously...I'm a Raiders fan...I certainly don't watch them because I think they're the best of the best)

[Slice of Life]

Originally Posted by dave67az

Hope you're not a Browns fan.  lol  (just kidding...I mean seriously...I'm a Raiders fan...I certainly don't watch them because I think they're the best of the best)

You know I almost put a disclaimer after "playing at the highest level."

[dave67az]

Originally Posted by Slice of Life

You know I almost put a disclaimer after "playing at the highest level."

I hear ya.

I guess when I watch the LPGA, I feel like I AM watching ladies golf at the highest level in the world.  Clearly when a lot of guys watch ladies' sports, they can't get past comparing them head-to-head against men and don't enjoy it because of that comparison (that's pretty sad, as far as I'm concerned).  To me, that's an apples-to-oranges comparison.  Ladies aren't built the same.  They don't have the advantage of natural testosterone when it comes to building strength which is why they only drive it 88% as far as the men.  But golf is more of a game of finesse than strength (evidenced by what I saw at Merion) which is why I'd happily go out on a limb and say that next year the ladies will show that their scoring will be very similar to the men when they both play Pinehurst.  I'll watch with interest to see if they cut the rough shorter for the ladies, give them easier pin placements, and slower greens.  I'm just saying that from what I've seen so far this year, the greens and pin placements don't seem to me to be much different between the LPGA and PGA Tour events.

[Golfingdad]

I think the thing I like most about golf on TV, and by that the thing that makes me want to watch a tournament, are the courses.  Good courses that I am familiar with.

Obviously, great fields help (Tiger, Rory, Phil) and people accomplishing great things (pretty sure I'll be watching the womens british this year for the first time ever if Inbee is in contention), but save for any other compelling stories, I think I just like good courses.

[geauxforbroke]

Originally Posted by dave67az

Something tells me we're going to be revisiting this topic in a year when both the men and women are playing on Pinehurst #2 for the US Open and US Women's Open on consecutive weeks.

There's a reason that the men's US Open is first. Much easier to cut rough in a week than grow it out.

I'll be really curious to see how the set-ups compare. And I'll be much more compelled by the women's open. Hell I might even watch some of it.

[Wisguy]

It's a catch-22 - there's little interest in the sport because it's viewed as not being very competitive and it's not very competitive because there's little interest in the sport and it is not attracting as many skilled athletes at any level of the game.  I have heard the very easiest of all college athletic scholarships to obtain is women's golf - any high school girl who can shoot in the 80's can get a free education somewhere.  On other threads, people have practically ridiculed young guys asking about golf scholarships who aren't regularly scoring, if not breaking, par.  Part of the problem is that from a young age, many girls are discouraged from playing or watching sports in the US.  For every elementary school girl in my neighborhood who is doing some sort of sport, there are probably two taking dance instead.  But hey - I'm at least trying.  We've had our daughter in the First Tee program the past two summers (every course in the area that has a kids program offers it mid-morning on weekdays, impossible when both parents work.

I agree that the LPGA does need a strictly implemented new policy to speed up the game.  Slow sports are boring sports.  I remember back in high school I saw an Ivy League men's basketball game in the era before the shot clock, when Princeton's coach had basically ordered his team to play keep-away once they had an eight point lead about ten minutes into the game.  Final score:  Princeton 24, Columbia 18 (seriously, I'm not making that up).  The students started sarcastically counting out loud the number of passes without a shot and the chants got over 100 several times.

Still, I think the "boring" labels are based more on bias than on actual deficits in entertainment value.  Women's tennis is fun to watch, even though no woman could compete with a top level men's player (I think Serena, who is the strongest and best female tennis player in the history of the sport, recently admitted she wouldn't win more than a point or two, if any at all, against Andy Murray and she'd have to go at least 300 deep in the men's rankings before she'd beat a male pro).  Same with women's volleyball.  Soccer - well, once you get beyond age 6 or so, soccer truly is more boring than watching paint dry regardless of the gender of the players.

Finally, to go back to a point made earlier, the fact that Annika did not make the cut in the single PGA tournament that she entered is a pretty meaningless fact.  No one on this board put under that much pressure and scrutiny could shoot within 5 strokes of his handicap.  Tiger misses cuts and so did practically everyone but Byron Nelson (and even he and Hogan missed some in their less-than-best years).  Two weeks ago at Merion some guys missed the cut shooting 15-16 over - does that mean they're crappy golfers with no potential to compete?  I think Messieurs Cabrera, Olazabel, Furyk, and Clarke would think otherwise.

[geauxforbroke]

Originally Posted by Wisguy

Still, I think the "boring" labels are based more on bias than on actual deficits in entertainment value.  Women's tennis is fun to watch, even though no woman could compete with a top level men's player (I think Serena, who is the strongest and best female tennis player in the history of the sport, recently admitted she wouldn't win more than a point or two, if any at all, against Andy Murray and she'd have to go at least 300 deep in the men's rankings before she'd beat a male pro).  Same with women's volleyball.  Soccer - well, once you get beyond age 6 or so, soccer truly is more boring than watching paint dry regardless of the gender of the players.

I'm not biased against women or women's sports. I actually prefer ladies tennis, just because there's more finesse and they play the way the game was meant to be played. Most men just blast it and hope the other guy messes up.

And soccer is not boring, sir.

[dave67az]

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

There's a reason that the men's US Open is first. Much easier to cut rough in a week than grow it out.

I'll be really curious to see how the set-ups compare. And I'll be much more compelled by the women's open. Hell I might even watch some of it.

I actually thought the same thing!  lol  After Erik's comment that they cripple the courses for the ladies (my wording, not his), I wondered if this was why the men are playing the week before.  I'll be watching for sure, and I'll be paying attention to the pin placements and green speeds.  I know the ladies have played the same courses as the men in the past, and outscored them, too, but it was never in consecutive weeks (at least not that I could find) and without weighing all the factors there's no way to fairly compare their games.

[Slice of Life]

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

I'm not biased against women or women's sports. I actually prefer ladies tennis, just because there's more finesse and they play the way the game was meant to be played. Most men just blast it and hope the other guy messes up.

And soccer is not boring, sir.

Agree to disagree.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by Wisguy

Soccer - well, once you get beyond age 6 or so, soccer truly is more boring than watching paint dry regardless of the gender of the players.

Originally Posted by geauxforbroke

And soccer is not boring, sir.

Yes.  Wisguy, for the record, your thumbs-up was for the other points you made on that post, not for your dig against soccer.  That part I do not agree with. ;)