LIV Golf (Saudi PIF), "Mergers," and More

[ShawnSum]

This whole week I was hoping one of these guys would have a fire lit under their ass and actually speak up about it. Very fitting it ended up being Rory with his 21st win, just one more than someone else. LOL, what a damn Legend. Mic drop.

[Shindig]

3 hours ago, Abu3baid said:

What’s interesting is that there is currently 0 coverage of the LIV tour in KSA… like nothing, as if it doesn’t exist.  When they have the tournament here in Jeddah I’m sure it will be a side note that there is a tournament, but no, there isn’t advertising of the millions being paid out..

I was wondering about local-to-KSA coverage a few days ago and thought of you.  Thanks for letting us know! 

38 minutes ago, ShawnSum said:

This whole week I was hoping one of these guys would have a fire lit under their ass and actually speak up about it. Very fitting it ended up being Rory with his 21st win, just one more than someone else. LOL, what a damn Legend. Mic drop.

Ha!  I did not realize Greg Norman had "only" twenty wins.  No wonder he wants to associate with a league whose events stop at 54 holes.

[saevel25]

Suck it Norman! 😛 

 

[iacas]

FedExCup Season Points for Non-Members | PGA TOUR Stats

---

Points | Rankings

[Shindig]

19 minutes ago, iacas said:

FedExCup Season Points for Non-Members | PGA TOUR Stats

---

Points | Rankings

Poor Takumi Kanaya, he fell eight spots in a week through no fault of his own.

At least no one above him is competing with him for a 2022-23 season tour card. 

[chspeed]

On 6/11/2022 at 7:49 PM, iacas said:

Oh brother.

Easy, just let them play from the senior tees.

[jbishop15]

 

[nevets88]

15 hours ago, iacas said:

FedExCup Season Points for Non-Members | PGA TOUR Stats

---

Points | Rankings

If you look long and close enough, you can see the subheading, The Sh*t List.

[Big Lex]

On 6/12/2022 at 7:10 AM, iacas said:

It had no prestige.

For decades.

Really? What do you base that on? Something you read? I'm curious. 

Maybe you're just using the term loosely and giving your opinion on its strength of field? 

Not being alive at that time, I don't know from experience obviously what anyone thought of that tournament from the 1940s-1980s, but I can't imagine it had "no prestige." It was the championship of the R&A. Prestige means universal respect, and wasn't the R&A universally respected? 

It clearly had weak fields (comparatively), low purses, and poor organization for a long time, but I don't see how that robbed it of ALL the prestige. 

What is the definition of prestige for a golf tournament? If it's only the strength of the field, then the Players' Championship is the most prestigious event in golf (at least if you believe the Tour's contention for many years that it was the strongest field). I think there's a bit more to it than that.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Big Lex said:

Really? What do you base that on? Something you read? I'm curious. 

The facts. 🙂

I know a lot about the history of the game. Almost nobody played in it. It had no real prestige. @turtleback answered it above, but it had about as much prestige as, say, the Italian Open does these days, or some other national open that isn't even the Canadian or Australian (or obviously the U.S. or British).

Look at the field for the 1959 British Open and tell me if you think it had "prestige." Nobody really cared. As late as the 80s or 90s, highly ranked American players would still skip the event.

Hell this is from 2003:https://www.golfchannel.com/article/golf-channel-newsroom/hoch-bypass-british-open-again

1 hour ago, Big Lex said:

Maybe you're just using the term loosely and giving your opinion on its strength of field?

If it was prestigious, the game's best players would have made the trip. Instead, we find that Ben Hogan went over once. Sam Snead went like five times or something.

It wasn't prestigious.

1 hour ago, Big Lex said:

Not being alive at that time, I don't know from experience obviously what anyone thought of that tournament from the 1940s-1980s, but I can't imagine it had "no prestige." It was the championship of the R&A. Prestige means universal respect, and wasn't the R&A universally respected?

Not really, no. American golf was super dominant at the time. Which is why very few people respect Peter Thompson's five British Opens as all that great (you rarely hear about Peter Thompson except in the context of the British Open).

And you didn't have to be alive then, because you can read about the history of golf.

The R&A can be respected as a ruling body or as the club/organization without one of their events having "prestige." They run other events, so, do they all have the same level of prestige as the British Open? Does the PGA have the same level of prestige as the Masters? Even on the PGA Tour, Riviera has more prestige than… some Fall Series event, though they're hosted by the same PGA Tour.

1 hour ago, Big Lex said:

It clearly had weak fields (comparatively), low purses, and poor organization for a long time, but I don't see how that robbed it of ALL the prestige.

It didn't have prestige. Prestige is a level, not a scale. It was not a prestigious event. On a scale of 1-10, it was a 4 for awhile. Prestige starts at 8, maybe.

1 hour ago, Big Lex said:

What is the definition of prestige for a golf tournament? If it's only the strength of the field, then the Players' Championship is the most prestigious event in golf (at least if you believe the Tour's contention for many years that it was the strongest field). I think there's a bit more to it than that.

FFS.

[chspeed]

I watched the last couple of hours of LIV in the morning and then watched the last couple of hours of the Canadian Open.

The timing could not have been better for the PGA Tour. The most popular players in the field make it to the final group while a raging crowd goes bananas vs. a washed-up pro cruising to victory in front of a relatively sparse crowd. And by the way, the shotgun start just detracts from the drama IMO, not enhances it.

[iacas]

Vote in my poll. 🙂

[saevel25]

I voted yes, but not past champions. I was torn between yes and the middle ground option. Yea, I believe The Masters, being very traditional, rule conforming, must follow procedures will ban at minimum those who are not past champions who went to LIV. 

I am not sure they will be willing to negate the tradition of allowing past members to play. Though, we haven't had a situation like this. 

[iacas]

I think Jimmy Dunne has a lot to say on this.

[Dr. Manhattan]

9/11 is reason enough to ban them from all 3 of the American majors. Not sure if they will be able to do it though. I think we might see a tidal wave of players jump to LIV when we get to November/December. They are hoping the media attention will die down when the golf season is pretty much finished. The players want the money and they don't care where it comes from, but they want to make the jump when the media attention is way more quiet. 

[Shindig]

I will find my Twitter log in info tomorrow to vote.

3 hours ago, saevel25 said:

I voted yes, but not past champions. I was torn between yes and the middle ground option. Yea, I believe The Masters, being very traditional, rule conforming, must follow procedures will ban at minimum those who are not past champions who went to LIV. 

I believe Langer was threatened with having an invitation revoked for slow play during a Tuesday round a few years ago.  I think the tournament chairman told him something like "remember, the Masters is an invitational tournament, even for past champions" -- or something like that.  I don't have a source readily available, I'll search through the books that might have it if anyone wants me to see if I can find one.

[boogielicious]

Angel Cabrera can’t play either the Masters or US Open, so I don’t think the LIV players should be able to. Association with murderous dictators should be enough.

[GolfLug]

1 hour ago, boogielicious said:

Angel Cabrera can’t play either the Masters or US Open, so I don’t think the LIV players should be able to. Association with murderous dictators should be enough.

I agree 100% on principle.