Women's Professional Golf Has a Problem in the U.S.

[pganapathy]

16 hours ago, iacas said:

Huh?

Lorena earned just under $2.6M in 2006. Annika won just under $2M.

http://www.lpga.com/statistics/money/official-money?year=2006

#32 on the men's money list won more than Annika, and everyone from positions 1 through 20 earned more than Lorena.

http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.109.2006.html

I agree if you are looking at it in terms of tournament prize money.  But Annika and Lorena were making a greater percentage of their income in sponsorships.  But overall I do agree with you in how women golfers are underpaid compared to the men, for what they do.

[iacas]

32 minutes ago, pganapathy said:

I agree if you are looking at it in terms of tournament prize money.  But Annika and Lorena were making a greater percentage of their income in sponsorships.  But overall I do agree with you in how women golfers are underpaid compared to the men, for what they do.

They weren't making that much.

Tiger, Jim Furyk, Adam Scott, Vijay Singh, Geoff Ogilvy, Phil Mickelson… should I stop there?

The women, even two of the top three, were not making much money in comparison. Annika and Lorena earned very little, relatively, off the course in sponsorship dollars.

Because men dominate the athletics landscape. People didn't care who sponsored Annika or Lorena.

[pganapathy]

16 hours ago, iacas said:

They weren't making that much.

Tiger, Jim Furyk, Adam Scott, Vijay Singh, Geoff Ogilvy, Phil Mickelson… should I stop there?

The women, even two of the top three, were not making much money in comparison. Annika and Lorena earned very little, relatively, off the course in sponsorship dollars.

Because men dominate the athletics landscape. People didn't care who sponsored Annika or Lorena.

Very true.  Tiger earned something like 90% of his income from sponsorships.

[rehmwa]

17 hours ago, iacas said:

The women, even two of the top three, were not making much money in comparison. Annika and Lorena earned very little, relatively, off the course in sponsorship dollars.

Because men dominate the athletics landscape. People didn't care who sponsored Annika or Lorena.

And yet people still bemoan that many women golfers are doing their best to be marketable for advertising, modeling and website careers.....seems like a very smart move by the ladies if they want to make a good living and still golf

[gatsby47]

Brooke has become very marketable and has deals with Ping, Titleist, CP rail, BMW, Sunice, RBC and a couple of others whose name escapes this old brain.  She has a pleasant personality, cute too, but combining that with talent enough to win, places her way above, more glamourous but less talented golfers like Blair or Paige.  She has a huge following of golfers in Canada, But even with victories, she can't make up the difference that Adam Hadwin  got for his one victory and other high finishes.  The way of the world of sports

[dzjc]

I enjoy watching the LPGA on TV and had a blast following the women at the their U.S. Open here in Colorado Springs a few years ago.  Most men, whether they admit it or not, have swing speeds that are in line with women than men professionals.  Do I wish the U.S. players were more dominant?  Of course, but right now the South Koreans are truly head and shoulders above everyone else (as a group).  I'm more curious as to *why* the U.S. players are not keeping up talent-wise.  

Dale

[Vinsk]

On 7/13/2017 at 7:28 PM, ChrisP said:

Orientals