Can an LPGA player win on PGA tour?

[Vinsk]

What I'd really like to see is a four round tournament at Augusta or Oakmont with the course set up exactly as it is for Masters/US OPEN and have the LPGA play it.  I'd love to see the scores and how they'd play the course(s).

[iacas]

14 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

What I'd really like to see is a four round tournament at Augusta or Oakmont with the course set up exactly as it is for Masters/US OPEN and have the LPGA play it.  I'd love to see the scores and how they'd play the course(s).

The LPGA (or any of the players) would be stupid to agree to such a thing.

[Midpack]

Did someone specify which tees the women would be playing from? Same as the men? For those trying to compare LPGA vs PGA stats, wouldn't you have to factor in course/hole lengths and which courses they were on respectively to make a meaningful comparison? Comparing stats as-is would be suspect.

This is always a silly argument, balancing being PC vs physical ability men vs women. There are some things men will always do better than women. There are some things women will always do better, and there are some things where men and women can compete on an equal footing.

The NPR interviewer set McEnroe up, though his answers were reasonable. Where he went wrong was saying Serena would have been ranked "like 700th in the world." She wouldn't be first or in the top ten, but she'd probably do better than 700th. Subsequently Serena added fuel to the fire with her tweet, the classy thing would have been to ignore McEnroe, but she had a right to challenge his careless 700 ranking...

Billie Jean King has even come to McEnroe's defense in USA Today. "We never said we’re better than the guys in any way,” King said. “I think she’d be better than 700. But, the best women cannot beat the best men … ever. So we never argued that."

Edited June 29, 2017 by Midpack

[MuniGrit]

Not a chance. 

[iacas]

27 minutes ago, Midpack said:

Did someone specify which tees the women would be playing from? Same as the men?

Of course. They're playing a PGA Tour event. The PGA Tour doesn't specify what gender you have to be, or an age limit. So everyone plays the same tees.

27 minutes ago, Midpack said:

Where he went wrong was saying Serena would have been ranked "like 700th in the world." She wouldn't be first or in the top ten, but she'd probably do better than 700th.

You don't know that, either. For all you know she could be ranked 800th and McEnroe gave her too much credit.

[Midpack]

41 minutes ago, iacas said:

Of course. They're playing a PGA Tour event. The PGA Tour doesn't specify what gender you have to be, or an age limit. So everyone plays the same tees.

You don't know that, either. For all you know she could be ranked 800th and McEnroe gave her too much credit.

I guess I should have explained further. WRT tees/courses, I was addressing those who've suggested comparing LPGA players stats to PGA players stats. There aren't any stats on the same basis, so the insight there would be limited at best beyond driving distances maybe.

And WRT McEnroe's Serena comments, your right we don't know how she'd fare on the men's tennis tour - that wasn't the central point. My POV was simply he shouldn't have casually suggested a ranking, and an unflattering one at that.

Edited June 29, 2017 by Midpack

[Vinsk]

4 hours ago, iacas said:

The LPGA (or any of the players) would be stupid to agree to such a thing.

Well, they got McGregor and Mayweather to fight. Just as stupid of an event. But entertainment value, sure why not.

[Vinsk]

22 hours ago, Midpack said:

My POV was simply he shouldn't have casually suggested a ranking, and an unflattering one at that.

But that's the mistaken mindset of the interviewer. What's flattering about saying Serena would have zero chance against Roger Federer? Nothing. But it's 100% true as Serena herself admitted. McEnroe was giving his assessment based on a professional view point of Serena's talent vs a male pro. He preceded that by saying she's the best female tennis player of all time. Absolutely nothing unflattering about it. The interviewer is a typical, ignorant PC brainwashed puppet who thinks SAYING a female athlete is inferior to a male is wrong despite the fact that anyone with half a brain knows it's simply and unarguably true.

Edited June 30, 2017 by Vinsk

[mdl]

There's a huge difference between never happen and extremely unlikely.  I like the 3rd poll question.  That's the right way to think about it.  And if you could put Lexi Thompson in 10,000 PGA events that weren't crazy long – say 7,200 yards or less – I'd say the chances she wins zero times is itself near zero.

On the Serena thing, I think the issue is that he thinks he has to say female.  Sure, men are stronger and faster, so the best woman in the world at a sport that requires strength and speed isn't going to compete against the best men in the world.  But given the physical athletic limitations of being a woman versus a man, she has separated herself from the competition perhaps more dramatically than any other person in the history of sport.  Definitely than in the history of tennis.

We don't feel like we need to say Babe Ruth is (one of) the best white baseball players ever.  But if you think it's correct to qualify Serena as one of the best female athletes ever, instead of one of the best athletes of all time, then you should call Ruth one of the best white baseball players of all time to make sure you always qualify rankings like that with the competition the athlete was competing against. 

[iacas]

15 minutes ago, mdl said:

And if you could put Lexi Thompson in 10,000 PGA events that weren't crazy long – say 7,200 yards or less – I'd say the chances she wins zero times is itself near zero.

I wouldn't.

What is her career winning percentage against the LPGA Tour? < 10%?

And that's if I grant you the 7200 yards. I'm not willing to do that. So her odds drop again.

She is not as good as an average PGA Tour player at anything.

15 minutes ago, mdl said:

But given the physical athletic limitations of being a woman versus a man, she has separated herself from the competition perhaps more dramatically than any other person in the history of sport.  Definitely than in the history of tennis.

So?

15 minutes ago, mdl said:

We don't feel like we need to say Babe Ruth is (one of) the best white baseball players ever.  But if you think it's correct to qualify Serena as one of the best female athletes ever, instead of one of the best athletes of all time, then you should call Ruth one of the best white baseball players of all time to make sure you always qualify rankings like that with the competition the athlete was competing against. 

I disagree. Babe Ruth played the sport at the highest level against the hardest competition. Serena has not.

[Golfingdad]

19 minutes ago, mdl said:

There's a huge difference between never happen and extremely unlikely.  I like the 3rd poll question.  That's the right way to think about it.  And if you could put Lexi Thompson in 10,000 PGA events that weren't crazy long – say 7,200 yards or less – I'd say the chances she wins zero times is itself near zero.

On the Serena thing, I think the issue is that he thinks he has to say female.  Sure, men are stronger and faster, so the best woman in the world at a sport that requires strength and speed isn't going to compete against the best men in the world.  But given the physical athletic limitations of being a woman versus a man, she has separated herself from the competition perhaps more dramatically than any other person in the history of sport.  Definitely than in the history of tennis.

We don't feel like we need to say Babe Ruth is (one of) the best white baseball players ever.  But if you think it's correct to qualify Serena as one of the best female athletes ever, instead of one of the best athletes of all time, then you should call Ruth one of the best white baseball players of all time to make sure you always qualify rankings like that with the competition the athlete was competing against. 

Good post Matt.

4 minutes ago, iacas said:

So?

@mdl can correct me if I'm assuming wrong here, but I think I know what he's saying because I had the same thought when reading the interview.  When the interviewer was asking McEnroe why he felt the need to qualify the statement, I don't know that McEnroe took that question the same way it was intended.  Consider how we think of the question of greatest athlete - we don't compare across sports, we compare their dominance against their competition.  Calling Serena the greatest tennis player of all time and maintaining that she could not beat the best men are not mutually exclusive ideas when you consider the question in that context.

Granted, it's a slight tangent from the topic at hand and doesn't have any bearing on a woman winning on tour, but I think this is what he was getting at.

12 minutes ago, iacas said:

I disagree. Babe Ruth played the sport at the highest level against the hardest competition. Serena has not.

The hardest competition that was allowed to play.  Many of the greatest baseball players of the era were not permitted to play in the major leagues because they weren't white.

[iacas]

8 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Calling Serena the greatest tennis player of all time and maintaining that she could not beat the best men are not mutually exclusive ideas when you consider the question in that context.

She's nowhere near the greatest tennis player of all time.

And there weren't THAT many black players at the time. Even if there are the same number as whites he's still in the top whatever small percentage.

These two situations are not all that comparable. The numbers are vastly different.

[Golfingdad]

9 hours ago, iacas said:

And there weren't THAT many black players at the time. Even if there are the same number as whites he's still in the top whatever small percentage.

There were entire leagues.  But the quantity doesn't matter - the point is that they weren't allowed in the league at all so it can't be known if Babe Ruth is the greatest player of that era or only the greatest white player.

There have been only a tiny handful of successful black golfers ever, but if they weren't allowed to play on the pga tour would we say Phil Michelson is the greatest golfer of the 2000s?  I suppose we could, but if we did, we'd be wrong.

[dennyjones]

5 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

There were entire leagues.  But the quantity doesn't matter - the point is that they weren't allowed in the league at all so it can't be known if Babe Ruth is the greatest player of that era or only the greatest white player.

There have been only a tiny handful of successful black golfers ever, but if they weren't allowed to play on the pga tour would we say Phil Michelson is the greatest golfer of the 2000s?  I suppose we could, but if we did, we'd be wrong.

 

Like saying Usain Bolt isn't the fastest man in the 100 meter dash?   I'm sure in some African tribe, there is a Tarzan that can run faster but he isn't competing.  Does that distract from people calling Bolt the fastest man alive?  Nah...It becomes good beer banter. 

[iacas]

6 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

There were entire leagues.  But the quantity doesn't matter - the point is that they weren't allowed in the league at all so it can't be known if Babe Ruth is the greatest player of that era or only the greatest white player.

That's not what you said. You said one of the greatest. He would still be one of the greatest if the size of the field doubled. (I know my baseball history too. Their numbers were not huge. And they had less training and opportunities.)

Serena would not be one of the greatest even if the size of the male field was cut in half. If we are debating whether she'd be top 700 NOW she's not a great tennis player. She's a great FEMALE tennis player.

[Midpack]

I remember when this wouldn't have been at all complicated, but those days are gone in this PC world. Everyone has a right to be offended over anything these days, and make a big issue of it. Now back to golf...

Edited July 8, 2017 by Midpack

[Gator Hazard]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

That's not what you said. You said one of the greatest. He would still be one of the greatest if the size of the field doubled. (I know my baseball history too. Their numbers were not huge. And they had less training and opportunities.)

Serena would not be one of the greatest even if the size of the male field was cut in half. If we are debating whether she'd be top 700 NOW she's not a great tennis player. She's a great FEMALE tennis player.

One question (and sorry is off topic), I don't know baseball near as good as you guys but did pitchers get the same type of rest as they do currently or did they pitch day after day? I wonder if Babe would hit as many home runs in this era of baseball is all. 

[Golfingdad]

2 hours ago, iacas said:

That's not what you said. You said one of the greatest. He would still be one of the greatest if the size of the field doubled. (I know my baseball history too. Their numbers were not huge. And they had less training and opportunities.)

Serena would not be one of the greatest even if the size of the male field was cut in half. If we are debating whether she'd be top 700 NOW she's not a great tennis player. She's a great FEMALE tennis player.

You're right.  But in this case "one of" was used because he's not the consensus greatest across all eras, and only his era is affected by the segregation issue.  Should have said "best of his era."

And my argument about Serena was not that she was better than men but how that question is interpreted.