Fed Ex Cup - How to Win and How Not To Win to Win It All

[Frank-0-Sport]

Greetings ....

The final leg of the chase for the Fed Ex Cup's $10 million grand prize (with a 5-year PGA Tour exemption) begins Thursday morning at The Tour Championship in Atlanta. Links to articles about winning the Cup are provided below.

1. -- All the ways that any one of the 30 Tour Championship participants can win the Fed Ex Cup

2. -- Paul Casey can win the Fed Ex Cup without winning an event

YES-You read that second article link headline right. Paul Casey, winless in 2010, is fifth in the current standings. By finishing solo 2nd at the Tour Championship while the other four Top Five leaders finish lower than him, Casey could win the whole thing.

Already, I hear certain little birds going "tweak, tweak"!

My suggestion RE the potential Casey win - In the future, if any player without a tournament victory in the Fed Ex Cup season wins the Cup, then such a player will receive only a $3 million cash prize (the same that is awarded for 2nd place in the Cup Race) as well as only a three-year PGA Tour exemption.

The Casey situation strengthens my arguments (in other posts) that tournament wins should become an important part of the Fed Ex Cup equation. My suggestion -- Any player who has at least one PGA Tour victory and wins the Fed Ex Cup can claim a $5 million cash prize, plus a 5-year PGA Tour exemption. Any player who has three or more PGA Tour wins (with permutations therein) and wins the Fed Ex Cup can claim a $10 million cash prize, plus a 10-year PGA Tour exemption.

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport

[max power]

Or stop worrying about it so much. It's a game.

[Shorty]

My suggestion -- Any player who has at least one PGA Tour victory and wins the Fed Ex Cup can claim a $5 million cash prize, plus a 5-year PGA Tour exemption. Any player who has three or more PGA Tour wins (with permutations therein) and wins the Fed Ex Cup can claim a $10 million cash prize, plus a 10-year PGA Tour exemption.

Your suggestion is as arbitary as any other ideas pertaining to the Fedex Cup.

Why shouldn't Paul Casey win without winning an event? So what? It's a year long contest with finals at the end. Good for him if this scenario plays out. I'm sure he won't mind.

[zeg]

I'm not a big fan of the format, but this doesn't bother me at all. Someone who consistently finishes near the top can make a very legitimate claim to having had the best season. Heck, all else being equal, a few 2nds and 3rds in a year is probably a better season than a single win.

[B-Con]

I'm not a big fan of the format, but this doesn't bother me at all. Someone who consistently finishes near the top can make a very legitimate claim to having had the best season. Heck, all else being equal, a few 2nds and 3rds in a year is probably a better season than a single win.

This. While placing emphasis on winners makes sense, outright winning isn't everything. 1st place guy beat 110 competitors. 2nd place guy beat 109 competitors. Doesn't make sense to discount the second guy's achievement just because guy #1 happened to show up to the tournament. Often the only thing that separates 1st from 2nd is a stroke or two, which over the course of four days can often be just luck of the draw with one slightly more or less errant tee shot.

[jamo]

I think it kinda sucks that someone could win the Cup without ever winning, but it'd be stupid to punish someone for beating the system. If Casey does win (which I would say is unlikely), it's not like he was scheming at the beginning of the year how to win the Cup without ever winning. It would be something that just happened.