Stronger Tour: PGA or European?

[Big_M]

I'm fairly certain "color" and "clothing" and "scenery" have little to do with "strength." C'mon guys... topic is strength, not "interest" or "which I'd rather play on".

Man... you're like a topic Nazi lately. I think you called me out the other day for going off topic on a thread I started.

[iacas]

Man... you're like a topic Nazi lately. I think you called me out the other day for going off topic on a thread I started.

I realize you're joking and all, but do me a favor watch the names. If I were Jewish, after all...

[Ruari]

Well, I've done some number crunching and the results look interesting.

What I have tried to do is to identify 'big events' on the the European Tour, outside the Majors/WGCs. The basis for coming into the 'big event' classification isn't prizemoney (as there is a brisk trade in appearance money that will undermine the pure prizefund), rather it's those events with at least four of the Official Golf World Rankings (OGWR) top 20 in the field. It may seem crude but the line has to be drawn somewhere (as a matter of interest, the Byron Nelson Classic would not have qualified, last year. Interesting...)

Anyway, here's the list, in chronological order:

HSBC Champions (China)
MasterCard Masters (Australia)
South African Airways Open (S Africa)
Abu Dhabi Golf Championships (UAE - Abu Dhabi)
Commercialbank Qatar Masters (UAE - Qatar)
Dubai Desert Classic (UAE - Dubai)
BMW PGA Championship (England)
BMW International Open (Germany)
Open de France ALSTOM (France)
The Deutsche Bank Players' Championship of Europe (Germany)
Omega European Masters (Switzerland)
Mercedes-Benz Championship (Germany)
Quinn Direct British Masters (England)
Alfred Dunhill Links Championship (Scotland)
HSBC World Matchplay (England)
Portugal Masters (Portugal) - that surprised me, too.
Volvo Masters (Spain)

17 altogether, which is, I must confess, more than I anticipated - I was thinking maybe 10-12, which would still be respectable.

[CORRECTION - missed the Scottish Open, played the week before the British Open. Seven of the Top 20 at that time, plus Poulter, Westwood, Weekly, Jimenez...

That makes 18, altogether.]


I sought to do the same thing from the PGA Tour but I couldn't find where the website gives entry fields for last year. Obviously, some events immediately suggest themselves - the Playoffs, the Players, Honda Classic, Bay Hill Invitational - but I can't check and (as I said) I was really surprised to see that the Byron Nelson would not have crossed the wire; I'd always thought of it as a big event. Maybe it isn't, now Mr Nelson is dead. If you can, please do the job for me or show me where to find it.

If you have any observations or criticisms of the methodology I'm more than prepared to entertain those offered in a constructive and friendly manner. If you'd rather 10/30, for example, I wouldn't object but the numbers wouldn't be much different - the list would lose a couple but it would gain one or two, as well. If you just think 'the list sucks', that isn't helpful!

What I think it indicates is that the European Tour is stronger below the Majors/WGCs than many give it credit for. That's not to say it's stronger than or even as strong as the PGA Tour in absolute terms - I don't think it is, at the moment, and it hasn't been for several years. However, the gap isn't the gaping chasm some claim, IMHO.

[Ruari]

P.S. For me the Monty story is befuddling. HOW can someone with SO MUCH TALENT (8 Order of Merits?) not win one itsy bitsy tournament here?! Does anyone have any proof that he played any Tier II events, a la Greensboro, John Deere, Reno, etc. or if he only competed in the Majors and Tier I events?

More info on Monty and why he hasn't played the PGA Tour as a regular member.

He turned pro in 1987, aged 23. For the next 10 years, he was playing against the likes of Nick Faldo, Sandy Lyle (Open Champ 1985; Masters Champ 1988 - easy to forget), Ballesteros, Jose-Maria Olazabal, Bernhard Langer (2-time Masters champ), Vijay Singh, Ernie Els, Ian Woosnam, Michael Campbell (who was quite good before he lost it, recovered, won the US Open and then lost it again), Retief Goosen, and others including Darren Clarke, Sam Torrance, Mark James, Ronan Rafferty, etc. In other words, he didn't have to travel to the US to play world-class competition, week-in, week-out - the difference wasn't so great. To be fair, if the finger is pointed at Americans for failing to travel, the same finger has to be pointed at Monty. I think he was mistaken not to work to become a 'world player' but that's water under the bridge. The difference between the Tours started to widen in 1997, and the difference was Tiger. Since he arrived, the purses have rocketed, sponsors have thrown more money at it and TV coverage has expanded hugely - the European Tour has struggled to play catch-up. Monty has probably missed his chance.

[BASHERBAKER69]

Im gonna put my head on the block here. When Tiger retires in 10 years time, the two tours, the PGA and the Euro, will gradually enjoy parity with eachother, in terms of prize money and media interest.

[Big_M]

Im gonna put my head on the block here. When Tiger retires in 10 years time, the two tours, the PGA and the Euro, will gradually enjoy parity with eachother, in terms of prize money and media interest.

Tiger has said on numerous occaisions that he intends to play as long as he can win and he thinks that with his fitness that should be into his 50's. So, Tiger isn't going anywhere in 10 years... more like twenty.

[nykfan4life]

PGA by a long shot

[nykfan4life]

Tiger has said on numerous occaisions that he intends to play as long as he can win and he thinks that with his fitness that should be into his 50's. So, Tiger isn't going anywhere in 10 years... more like twenty.

yes, but at 50, he won't be dominating. I think thats what he meant.

[Big_M]

yes, but at 50, he won't be dominating. I think thats what he meant.

well he said "retires"

Not to mention there's no saying Tiger won't keep pace till at least 45 or so. So that's 15 years. Look at the run Vijay had in his mid 40's.

[Ruari]

PGA by a long shot

Is it really a 'long shot', given the number of events on European Tour with quality fields I've identified? I would seriously like to see a comparison with the PGA Tour. I know it's stronger but I was quite surprised at the results I came up with.

Looking back, it's not that long ago that the two Tours were pretty much even, in terms of the main part of the season. Before Tiger came along, you could win the PGA Tour with less than $2 million; it takes a lot more now but, at around the same time, it took about the same in Dollar terms to win the European OOM. That number is escalatating, too; last year, Justin Rose topped the list with €2,944,945, which translates to around $3.6 million; the previous year, Harrington topped the list with a sliver under $3 million equivalent, so we've seen 20 per cent growth - and it isn't all due to exchange rate movements. In 1999, Monty won with about $1.9 million, while Tiger was on the way to setting a new record for single-season earnings. This year, the leader of the OOM (Immelman) has won about $1.2 million already. Yes, Woods has amassed $4.4 million and may well exceed last year's $10.8 million BUT - and you may not be aware of what a big but it is - the European Tour 'proper', if you like, has barely started. With the exception of the Mid-east swing, the purses have been pretty moderate. Whoever wins the OOM this year will probably have to accumulate something around -or probably exceeding - $4 million. The gap is still there, definitely, but it's closing and will be less next year. (Europe tends to have tighter finishes, BTW - Tiger was $5 million ahead of Mickelson, in second place; Rose beat Els and Stenson by less than €500,000. Westwood, in 10th, was just over $2 million behind winner Rose; Aaron Baddeley was $3.5 million behind Mickelson, in second place.) Tiger has made the difference; the Tour has attracted a lot more money since he came along and opened up the gap. It's only since around 2003 that the 'new reality' obliged the European Tour to include five from the World Rankings in the Ryder Cup automatic spots; before then, anyone who wanted to be considered for the team had to play well enough in European events to finish in the top 10 on the OOM - and with no discernible impact on the quality of the team. I don't argue that the European Tour is the PGA Tour's precise equal; it isn't, it lost a lot of ground from 1998 and it's only in the past three-four years begun catching up. But it is operating in growth areas - the Mid-east, China and SE Asia, and even some of the European markets, which you could have thought were saturated - I was surprised to find three German events in the list. I would suggest that, outside the Majors and WGCs (which are jointly sanctioned), the difference between the two Tours isn't as big as some would have us believe. I'd really like for someone to do the same with the PGA Tour as I've done with the European - compare the fields. Not the prizemoney, the fields. It could be interesting stuff.

[iacas]

Looking back, it's not that long ago that the two Tours were pretty much even, in terms of the main part of the season. Before Tiger came along, you could win the PGA Tour with less than $2 million; it takes a lot more now but, at around the same time, it took about the same in Dollar terms to win the European OOM. That number is escalatating, too; last year, Justin Rose topped the list with €2,944,945, which translates to around $3.6 million; the previous year, Harrington topped the list with a sliver under $3 million equivalent, so we've seen 20 per cent growth - and it isn't all due to exchange rate movements. In 1999, Monty won with about $1.9 million, while Tiger was on the way to setting a new record for single-season earnings.

Yeah, and how much of Justin's earnings came in the WGC/majors? That doesn't help your point if a good portion of his earnings came there. After all, he had $2.7M on the PGA Tour too - counting those same eight or nine events on both tours.

So sure the OOM requires more money... but obviously part of that rise is due to the fact that the guy who wins the Masters pulls in $1.3M. Same thing for eight other events in the year. And again, those events are just a wash on both tours.

[Ruari]

Yeah, and how much of Justin's earnings came in the WGC/majors? That doesn't help your point if a good portion of his earnings came there. After all, he had $2.7M on the PGA Tour too - counting those same eight or nine events on both tours.

I don't understand. The WGC/Majors count on all six Tours, so the same point can be made about the PGA Tour, Sunshine Tour, etc. Not all Justin's $2.7 million PGA Tour winnings would count towards his European Tour earnings, nor do his earnings for winning the MasterCard Masters and the Volvo Masters count towards the PGA Tour moneylist - only the Majors/WGCs count on both. If you're going to win either the PGA Tour moneylist or the European OOM, you have to do well in the Majors/WGCs.

So sure the OOM requires more money... but obviously part of that rise is due to the fact that the guy who wins the Masters pulls in $1.3M. Same thing for eight other events in the year.

Again, I'm not clear - sorry. Harrington got $1.3 million (€1.1 million and change) for winning the British Open last year and whoever wins this year will get at least the same, possibly more. Anyone who wins a Major gets something over $1 million. Any winnings in the Majors/WGCs count towards their position on any of the six Tours, whichever they're registered on.

The Majors/WGCs add up to seven in total. Are there other events that count on both to bring it up to nine (...'eight other events in the year.')?

And again, those events are just a wash on both tours.

?? I don't understand the expression 'just a wash'.

The point I am putting forward is about the standard of events underneath the Majors/WGCs. As they figure on all the full Tours, a realistic comparison can only be made by looking at the rest of the calendar. I'm not suggesting the European Tour is stronger than the PGA Tour but I am saying that it's stronger, with more world-class fields, than many people think. As I said, I was surprised at the number - I thought it was a lot less.

[DougM]

PGA is much stronger in depth.. there are 200+ quality players. European falls off quickly after top 60.

I will say this for the European Tour - it is much more entertaining to watch and the players have more 'character' to them.

The PGA is such a big money machine now that the players appear to be ATMs in spikes. Snedeker, Boo, Bubba Watson and Holmes provide some entertainment but the Swedes on the Euro tour are in a class of their own for qwerky and colorful.

[iacas]

I don't understand. The WGC/Majors count on all six Tours, so the same point can be made about the PGA Tour, Sunshine Tour, etc. Not all Justin's $2.7 million PGA Tour winnings would count towards his European Tour earnings, nor do his earnings for winning the MasterCard Masters and the Volvo Masters count towards the PGA Tour moneylist - only the Majors/WGCs count on both. If you're going to win either the PGA Tour moneylist or the European OOM, you have to do well in the Majors/WGCs.

My point was simple. You talked about how much money it took to win the Order of Merit (OOM) as if that proved the European Tour was catching up in terms of dollars.

I countered by suggesting that a good portion of those increased earnings come from events that aren't just European Tour events, but which are sanctioned by several tours (and in which Tiger Woods plays, and which his effect on purses plays a role). I agree that "strength" isn't exactly 1:1 with "purse size," but it's a bit of a factor, and when you consider how much of the OOM winner's earnings come from the 9 majors and WGCs, it's far less impressive for his "European Tour only" earnings.

[Ruari]

My point was simple. You talked about how much money it took to win the Order of Merit (OOM) as if that proved the European Tour was catching up in terms of dollars.

It's still a big gap, no doubt, but it is less than, say, three year ago and the growth is real. The Majors/WGCs obviously make a big contribution but, if anything, they're going backwards in their contribution to the OOM. The agreed purse is in US$ terms and this year it looks like $1.3 million for the winner. Four years ago, that would have been £850-900,000; this year it looks like it will be around £650,000 because of the exchange rate movement. The shift is even bigger in Euro (€) terms because it has appreciated much more against the $ than the £ has. While €1.1 million isn't to be sniffed at, it's actually less than two years ago...

I countered by suggesting that a good portion of those increased earnings come from events that aren't just European Tour events, but which are sanctioned by several tours (and in which Tiger Woods plays, and which his effect on purses plays a role).

No doubt Tiger has an effect on purses - but it isn't all one way as he requires huge appearance money to attend - something like $1.5 million. That may be less than it was in €/£

but it's still a lot of money to come from the marketing budget/prizefund.

I agree that "strength" isn't exactly 1:1 with "purse size," but it's a bit of a factor,

No doubt at all

and when you consider how much of the OOM winner's earnings come from the 9 majors and WGCs, it's far less impressive for his "European Tour only" earnings.

Well, I hve to agree - strip the 7 (I can only find seven - four majors, three WGCs - where are the other two?) out of the PGA Tour and you still have a lot of money but it, too, has an effect.

I don't disagree about the cash difference outside of the Majors/WGCs - the winner of a pretty minor event on the PGA Tour can pick up $5-$600,000. On the European Tour, an event like this weekend's BMW Asian Open will pay less than $300,000 (€243,507, to be precise). But, as we agreed, the purse isn't everything and it is distorted by appearance money. It's the fields I've looked at in compiling the list, not the loot and booty. What I would say strongly is that no-one can count the MAjors/WGCs as 'PGA Tour events that those funny foreigners are allowed to play in'. They're world events, sanctioned by the six tours. The WGCs shouldn't all be in the States, they were supposed to take world-class golf around the world, but they will be till 2011. After that - who knows? But for the moment, they are wherever Tiger wants them to be. But as they are 'world' events, they should not be stripped out of any tour when looking at the order of merit, moneylist, whatever. But I think that's beside the point - it's outwith those events that tour strength should really be compared. Oh - and it's worth noting that Tiger wins more from the Majors/WGCs than anyone else, anyway. And not a little bit - loads and loads.

[Ruari]

PGA is much stronger in depth.. there are 200+ quality players. European falls off quickly after top 60.

Sorry, Doug, you'll have to point out who the other 100 are (I'm generously conceding the top 100 - i'd actually go for just the top 75, if pushed, and a lot of them are 'international' players). And with players like Darren Clarke (recovering from family bereavement) and David Howell (recovering from injury) outside Europe's top 60, as well as Luke Donald, THomas Bjorn, Gregory Havret, Bradley Dredge, Hennie Otto, Shiv Kapur, Robert Allenby, Justin Rose

and others outside the top 60, I don't think 'trailing off quickly' is exactly the right phrase...

I will say this for the European Tour - it is much more entertaining to watch and the players have more 'character' to them.

The French and Spanish can put on a bit of a show, too. it's only the boring old Brits who drag it down...but most of them are on the PGA Tour anyway, aren't they

.

[iacas]

I don't disagree about the cash difference outside of the Majors/WGCs - the winner of a pretty minor event on the PGA Tour can pick up $5-$600,000.

Let's be real: the average winner's check on the PGA Tour is about a million dollars. The "cheap" events pay out $850k or so. I don't consider the "Fall Series" to be worth much. It's a glorified Q School. The "PGA Tour Season" ends with the Tour Championship...

And with players like Darren Clarke (recovering from family bereavement) and David Howell (recovering from injury) outside Europe's top 60, as well as Luke Donald, THomas Bjorn, Gregory Havret, Bradley Dredge, Hennie Otto, Shiv Kapur, Robert Allenby, Justin Rose

I think most people would consider those players to be inside the top 60, and since many of them play more events on the PGA Tour than they do on the European Tour, that's not really a "winning" list for you.

Look, you've said your piece, we've said ours, and the votes are in place. Is there really more to continue talking about here?

[Ruari]

Let's be real: the average winner's check on the PGA Tour is about a million dollars. The "cheap" events pay out $850k or so.

Yes, I was inaccurate - the lower ones are in the $700K (€600K) range. I'm not sure about 'average' but let it go...

I think most people would consider those players to be inside the top 60,

possibly so, but they aren't, at the moment. Any more than, say, David Toms.

Iand since many of them play more events on the PGA Tour than they do on the European Tour, that's not really a "winning" list for you.

Ah...oh, never mind.

Look, you've said your piece, we've said ours, and the votes are in place. Is there really more to continue talking about here?

I'm v busy at the moment (you'll probably be happy to hear) so can't spend more time on this. Yes, the PGA Tour is stronger - I never argued it wasn't. The MAjors/WGCs are jointly sanctioned and influence everything. The European Tour is a full tour - I don't think you ever suggested otherwise and were good enough to divert the 'Nationwide' distraction. It's investing for the future and is closing the gap - which is still significant.

So if there are no more postings crying out for debate/disagreement/correction then I'll call it a day. Back to work...