Jump to content
IGNORED

Na gets a victory but not a trip to Augusta


Note: This thread is 3509 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

0  

  1. 1. Should the winners of the Fall Series events get an automatic invitation to the Masters?

    • Yes
      9
    • No
      8


Recommended Posts

  • Moderator

Kevin Na may have earned a two year exemption and $792,000 for his win at the Justin Timberlake Invitational yesterday but doesn't automatically gardner a bid in the 2012 Masters.

I get it, it's the Fall Series, most of the top players are playing somewhere else or taking some time off but it's still the PGA tour and I think the winners of these last four tournaments should get an automatic invite to Augusta.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I used to think yes, but quite happy that Na is not getting a trip to the Masters for this win.

I can't stand how he gets lined up, backs away and how slow he is.

Don't even get me started on him and his caddy plumb bobbing (doesn't work anyway) 3 foot putts.

The PGA should get serious on slow play, they are spineless on this issue.

I would have voted yes in a second if someone else had won. I'll probably fill in the poll the other way next week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can only let so many players into the masters so they have to set some criteria. If you wanted to let all the fall series winners in then they'd probably have to cut world rankings guys or amateur exemptions. It will probably never be viewed as totally fair but every major has some exemption rule that no one understands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

Originally Posted by clubchamp

They can only let so many players into the masters so they have to set some criteria. If you wanted to let all the fall series winners in then they'd probably have to cut world rankings guys or amateur exemptions. It will probably never be viewed as totally fair but every major has some exemption rule that no one understands.


It'd be one thing if the Masters had a large field. It doesn't. Fields are, what, 90 players, and 10 of those don't really have a chance? Maybe a hundred with 15 not having a chance?

I think Fall Series winners should get in to The Masters. Hell, let the top 5 from the Nationwide Tour money list (previous year) get in too. Why not?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades


If the top 5 previous year's Nationwide money winners got an invitation, the Nationwide Tour might be a "career path alternative" for those who don't want to join the Champions Tour when they turn 50 !

Link to post
Share on other sites



I'm waiting until Frank-0-Sport weighs in. Then I'll cast my all important vote.

Greetings Toodles

Originally Posted by Shorty

If the top 5 previous year's Nationwide money winners got an invitation, the Nationwide Tour might be a "career path alternative" for those who don't want to join the Champions Tour when they turn 50 !



Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

Originally Posted by Shorty

If the top 5 previous year's Nationwide money winners got an invitation, the Nationwide Tour might be a "career path alternative" for those who don't want to join the Champions Tour when they turn 50 !


Sure... except those guys aren't gonna finish top 5 on the NW Tour!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

In the specific case of Kevin Na, he can still earn an invite to the Masters the same way he's gotten in the last two years: by finishing in the top 30 on the money list. After his win, he can do that by simply digging between couch cushions for loose change (though making the cut in one of the remaining events would suffice). But Fall Series winners should be invited to the Masters, regardless.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted "no" because I kind of like that the Fall Series is this sort of purgatory four week swing for the PGA Tour. The invitations have dried up and there's nothing left to care about except winning and your standing on the money list.



Originally Posted by iacas

It'd be one thing if the Masters had a large field. It doesn't. Fields are, what, 90 players, and 10 of those don't really have a chance? Maybe a hundred with 15 not having a chance?

I think Fall Series winners should get in to The Masters. Hell, let the top 5 from the Nationwide Tour money list (previous year) get in too. Why not?


Good points. Makes sense.

Mid-year events like the Reno-Tahoe Open (played the same week as Firestone) don't have a Masters invitation with the winning pay check do they? If they do then I think that's even more reason to give Fall Series Masters invitations since these fields are stronger than events like the Reno-Tahoe that have all the top players missing from them. At least in the Fall Series you've got guys like Nick Watney in the field.



Originally Posted by iacas

Sure... except those guys aren't gonna finish top 5 on the NW Tour!


Off topic and somewhat of a silly question, but how would we quantify the average indexes each of the three tours play at? Would we say the PGA Tour is about a +6, the Nationwide +5, the Champions Tour +4?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator


Originally Posted by JetFan1983

Mid-year events like the Reno-Tahoe Open (played the same week as Firestone) don't have a Masters invitation with the winning pay check do they? If they do then I think that's even more reason to give Fall Series Masters invitations since these fields are stronger than events like the Reno-Tahoe that have all the top players missing from them. At least in the Fall Series you've got guys like Nick Watney in the field.


No, those winners don't get an invite either.  And like Erik said, why not?  In the field you have players like Larry Mize and Sandy Lyle(no disrespect) playing but they are not going to win.  To me, there is a very thin line between the guy's playing in Vegas and the guy's that played in Atlanta for the Tour Championship.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades



Originally Posted by domc36

Why is slow play such an issue? What are they holding up?


They are holding up the people behind them, like all slow players do.

One slow group impacts the entire field, whether in the pros or at your local muni.

Slow play is one of the major issues in golf. It reduces enjoyment and deters a lot of people from playing regularly.

One of the reasons that slow play by amateurs has grown is that they watch someone like Na spend excessive amounts of time lining up putts, getting lined up etc. He is one of the worst.

The thing is, we don't even really get to see how slow Na or Crane or Furyk (putting) are because the TV producers only cut to them after them after they have gone through 80% of their convoluted routines. If they showed the lot, everyone would switch off.

Link to post
Share on other sites



Originally Posted by Sing Golfer

The thing is, we don't even really get to see how slow Na or Crane or Furyk (putting) are because the TV producers only cut to them after them after they have gone through 80% of their convoluted routines. If they showed the lot, everyone would switch off.


I agree with you about the problems of the slow play. But what I have read, not witnessed though, in the last tournament Na's group was not slowing down the field. Maybe there was somebody slower ahead...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings ... I am of the firm belief that the pace of play issue may be one of many factors that has a bearing on how many players Augusta National allows to start the event (currently 90 to 99) and then make the 36-hole cut (Low 44 and ties plus anyone within 10 strokes of the lead). During the period from 1999 to 2006 when PGA Tour wins did not automaticly get players into the Masters, Augusta National expanded the PGA Tour Money Leader category from the Top 30 to the Top 40. It was a very good call as the majority of PGA Tour event winners come from the Top 40 on the Money List. Since 2007, the category has gone back to Top 30. If it were up to me, I'd go back to the 1999-2006 scenario - eliminate the Tour winners category, and then re-expand the Money Leader category back to Top 40. Such a move might have a positive impact on the fields of the Fall Series events. That's my two ¢¢ents worth! Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport
Link to post
Share on other sites


Makes sense (yeah, I just said that). If Na was in that top 40, he's in. He does need to play faster though.

Originally Posted by Frank-0-Sport

Greetings ...

I am of the firm belief that the pace of play issue may be one of many factors that has a bearing on how many players Augusta National allows to start the event (currently 90 to 99) and then make the 36-hole cut (Low 44 and ties plus anyone within 10 strokes of the lead).

During the period from 1999 to 2006 when PGA Tour wins did not automaticly get players into the Masters, Augusta National expanded the PGA Tour Money Leader category from the Top 30 to the Top 40. It was a very good call as the majority of PGA Tour event winners come from the Top 40 on the Money List. Since 2007, the category has gone back to Top 30.

If it were up to me, I'd go back to the 1999-2006 scenario - eliminate the Tour winners category, and then re-expand the Money Leader category back to Top 40. Such a move might have a positive impact on the fields of the Fall Series events.

That's my two ¢¢ents worth!

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport



Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings .... Currently, Mister Na is [url=http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=sportsnetwork&page;=golf-m/stat/pga-top10.htm][b]33rd on the PGA Tour Money List[/b][/url] up thru the JT-Shriners Las Vegas event, and he is in the field at the Fry Dot Com Open where a very good finish gets him into the Top 30. Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport
Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a couple of years ago when Na was playing, he had just gone through a failed lasik surgery and he actually played tournaments with partial vision in one eye - I don't know the exact details. There were a few tournaments where we could see his caddy line up a shot just like in the LPGA. I haven't gotten a recent update of Na's vision, but it possibly could contribute to his slow play.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: This thread is 3509 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    SuperSpeed
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo and the code "iacasfeb21" for 10% off SuperSpeed.
  • Posts

    • I've been in a scenario similar before, except I was the player who went over the time and it was an assistant coach who found my first ball as I was addressing my provisional.  Yeah, it really sucks to find the first ball after it's already been declared lost. Knowing that you could have avoided the two strokes if you'd just looked "right over there" instead, but the ball was lost and now at least you aren't out the $4 of a nice ball (assuming you pay for balls, I know many high school/college golfers don't during school tournaments). There was no discussion or arguments on the course, I just told him to toss me the ball and continued to play my provisional, but after the round he pulled me aside to tell me I should have just played the original ball since it was found before I hit the provisional. In all honesty I probably would've scored worse from the position of the original ball (deep in a bush requiring a drop that still would leave me in a bad position), and the ball was already lost. A lost ball stays lost, and if you find it after it's no different than coming out of the woods with an extra couple balls left by earlier golfers. I've also had the coach/caddy of another player in summer tournaments try to twist the rules against me as some kind of "gotcha!" at the scoring tent (where he wasn't even supposed to be allowed) over an event that happened very early in the round. I had pointed out to his player that you can't play from inside of an ESA like you can with other lateral hazards, and apparently that upset him when the player agreed with me rather than him so he claimed I looked too long somewhere on the front 9 for my ball. I hadn't looked for that long, I found it before the other players even started playing their golf balls, but he got himself worked up enough that I just withdrew and left without signing my scorecard or dealing with any of that hassle. This was a guy who made a big deal on the first tee (and multiple other times throughout the round) about being a PGA Professional and that we should all listen to his advice (against the rules) because he was a pro. Those incidents, among others I've encountered along the way, have led me to believe that the people who want to bend the rules are most often the people not actually playing in the event itself, but those who are "indirectly participating" as a caddy/coach/etc. There are no consequences for them directly, if caught the blame lands on the player, but if their players do well they can take the credit. They also usually know enough about the rules to be dangerous, either from intentional or unintentional misinterpretation.
    • After having a golf simulator for 2 months my golf scores have stabilized tremendously. Previously I used to play in the mid to high 90s. My last 3 scores has been 89, 89 and 90 on tough courses. The biggest improvement is that I have completed a golf wedge matrix with 1/3, 2/3 and full swing distances and now I am able to hit the greens over 80% of of the time within 30 yards to 90 yards. This limits most bad holes to bogeys.  There are stretches of 9 holes that I have only 2 over. However, my slices and pulls sometimes resulted in big numbers on a few holes. With the golf simulator, I can see clearly that I still have an out to in swing. When I consciously pretend to have a glove under my right arm pit I hit the balls really well with no pull or slice in practice. However, on the course my pulls and slices often come back which results in double bogeys or even triple bogeys when I lose my balls. I am really optimistic. With the simulator and instant feedback I think I will be able to resolved my out to in swing problem in a few months.
    • Define long term. Because we are past the sixth month you wrote about. Vaccines aren’t new. The vaccine is proving to be pretty damn affective against the current variants and the more people get vaccinated the fewer future variants we will have. This vaccine is not going to stop every coronavirus ever. It’s not a SARS vaccine for example. Or a MERS vaccine. Waiting to see that given the evidence we have now is willful stubbornness. And the answer to your final question is that it will vary but even if it’s one year like the flu vaccine then we can have a lot more of a return to normalcy that you so crave, and fewer dead people, in the meantime and sooner. Look, you showed your hand when you called it an extended “clinical trial.” You don’t know what you’re talking about so you are pretending that you are waiting for more information when all of the information you should need as a member of society is out there. Vaccines are not new science. Even this type isn’t new. At the end of the day what you think are “reasons” are actually just excuses. I’m a contrarian. But I’m also not a moron. I understand and read the science. The data. You’re willfully not doing so, or willfully setting such a high bar to clear that you’re able to justify your inaction. It’s also your duty to protect others, which you are failing to do right now. If I could take a pill that had all the same data and information as the current vaccines that guaranteed to 95% effectiveness that I would never seriously injure someone else in a car accident I would take it immediately. Even though the odds of that are also pretty low.
    • Broke 80 for the first time last night (a 76).  Would love that sub-80 badge, please sir!
    • It's just a small amount of money with everyone chipping in $30 for the pot, with 3 places for F9, B9 and overall. I played yesterday and finished second place with a score of 90 and most importantly didn't blow up in the last two holes.
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. MasonAsher2014
      MasonAsher2014
      (25 years old)
    2. Ryoung3555
      Ryoung3555
      (57 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...