Julie Inkster says LPGA not given due credit....

[Valleygolfer]

1 hour ago, MSchott said:

I doubt that many are. Some of these women are very long these days and I would bet that they hit more fairways, have better short games and putt better than the vast majority of male amateur golfers. Most of all they are more consistent. I'd hate to play a match game against Cristie Kerr. She's an assassin.

An assassin with 250 yard drives? Yea haw. Try 300 plus Rory with assassin or the 340 average of US Open amateur, Cameron Champ.

18 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

College golfers are amateurs and they would easily beat the top LPGA players. Some people grossly underestimate the distance factor, green speed and rough. A college player on a PGA course with an LPGA player on the same tees...LPGA loses.

Lpga analysts also hype the women's game to make interesting TV.

[Papa Steve 55]

The order is..

1 Have a compelling product

2 viewership goes up

3 Sponsors follow

4 Product starts to suck

5 Viewership drops

6 Sponsors find the 'next big thing'.

[Vinsk]

I know JI was excited to see the girls win again. But really, 8 of the top ten LPGA players weren't even in the tournament. With Asia and the Phillipines not even represented, it was a rather mundane victory. 

[MSchott]

On 8/22/2017 at 10:23 PM, Vinsk said:

College golfers are amateurs and they would easily beat the top LPGA players. Some people grossly underestimate the distance factor, green speed and rough. A college player on a PGA course with an LPGA player on the same tees...LPGA loses.

Why would you handicap the ladies by making them play the same tees as the men? There's no question low handicap men hit it further than women. I guess when I think amateur I didn't think of college scholarship players. These guys at larger schools are barely amateur and are certainly minus handicap players from the back tees. I was thinking along the lines of really good plus handicap amateurs like the best guys on most public and private courses.

On 8/22/2017 at 10:50 PM, Valleygolfer said:

An assassin with 250 yard drives? Yea haw. Try 300 plus Rory with assassin or the 340 average of US Open amateur, Cameron Champ.

Lpga analysts also hype the women's game to make interesting TV.

You are cherry picking. I said some of the women are long. Lexi is damn long as are some of the other women. Not the average LPGA player. I will concede that top amateur players like those competing at the US Am will beat the LPGA girls. These guys are basically pros but aren't yet getting paid.

[Valleygolfer]

50 minutes ago, MSchott said:

You are cherry picking. I said some of the women are long. Lexi is damn long as are some of the other women. Not the average LPGA player. I will concede that top amateur players like those competing at the US Am will beat the LPGA girls. These guys are basically pros but aren't yet getting paid.

Watching Lexi drive a golf ball is nothing like watching Bubba or even the amateur Cameron Champ.The only people watching women play golf are other women golfers (which probably isn't very many), men who just love golf and a handful of guys who are groupiesk. If lesser able athletes doing sports was an attraction, then AA and AAA ball guys would be making coin. I think the women should be ecstatic with the rise in their current tournament payouts as is.  Your last statement says it. They have not proven themselves to be competitive with the best, so no money. LPGA is clearly not the top talent in golf and can only increase in payout if they sell product, a product that is not the "a" material.

[Hardspoon]

1 hour ago, Valleygolfer said:

If lesser able athletes doing sports was an attraction, then AA and AAA ball guys would be making coin.

True - that's why nobody watches college football. 

I'm not saying your point is invalid, but you're vastly oversimplifying what makes sports popular.

[MSchott]

1 hour ago, Valleygolfer said:

Watching Lexi drive a golf ball is nothing like watching Bubba or even the amateur Cameron Champ.The only people watching women play golf are other women golfers (which probably isn't very many), men who just love golf and a handful of guys who are groupiesk. If lesser able athletes doing sports was an attraction, then AA and AAA ball guys would be making coin. I think the women should be ecstatic with the rise in their current tournament payouts as is.  Your last statement says it. They have not proven themselves to be competitive with the best, so no money. LPGA is clearly not the top talent in golf and can only increase in payout if they sell product, a product that is not the "a" material.

Who is saying the LPGA is the top talent in golf? That's not the point. They are terrific golfers and I enjoy watching them play. They are the best female golfers in the world and they compete among themselves not against men. If that doesn't work for you that's fine but that's your issue.

[Valleygolfer]

47 minutes ago, Hardspoon said:

True - that's why nobody watches college football. 

I'm not saying your point is invalid, but you're vastly oversimplifying what makes sports popular.

You are using one example and basing your whole argument on this? College football is not a comparison. People have an investment in these teams. A good reason to watch. Head slap yourself indeed. College football is exciting. Most other college sports are relatively unwatched sans basketball.

39 minutes ago, MSchott said:

Who is saying the LPGA is the top talent in golf? That's not the point. They are terrific golfers and I enjoy watching them play. They are the best female golfers in the world and they compete among themselves not against men. If that doesn't work for you that's fine but that's your issue.

The best 3rd place entertainment? In this case they compete against men for viewership and sponsors. Sponsors aren't stupid. I said before I do watch the women play but nothing I see makes me want to run out and buy what they are selling. The amount of lady golfers are considerably less than men, plus most of the lady golfers aren't watching. I'm not saying they are not entertaining, just not where Inkster thinks they should be.

[Hardspoon]

3 hours ago, Valleygolfer said:

ou are using one example and basing your whole argument on this? College football is not a comparison. People have an investment in these teams. A good reason to watch.

Exactly! People watch college basketball, or college football, or women's tennis, or Major League Soccer, or the Little League World Series, even though they could easily watch the same sport played at a higher level.

So...the LPGA's lack of popularity relative to the PGA is not an absolute simply because they aren't as good as the men.

That's all I was saying. No more, no less.

[Vinsk]

3 hours ago, Hardspoon said:

Exactly! People watch college basketball, or college football, or women's tennis, or Major League Soccer, or the Little League World Series, even though they could easily watch the same sport played at a higher level.

So...the LPGA's lack of popularity relative to the PGA is not an absolute simply because they aren't as good as the men.

That's all I was saying. No more, no less.

Well, then what it is it? My original point was that Julie stated 'they don't get the credit they deserve.' And by that she means the purses. She's wrong. The LPGA doesn't generate the viewership that the PGA does. Period. Why that is really doesn't matter but many people have different reasons. For me, I like watching golfers hit drives where there's no way in hell I could do it. Cut shots from behind tress with a 3w that go 285. Par 4's that are 500+ yds...Par 5s +600....fast as hell greens with difficult pin placements...crazy thick rough..etc. None of this happens on the LPGA. Smooth swing, minimal hazards, light rough and slower greens. Meh. If Lexi can drive it 300yds...then there's no reason for her to be playing on shortened courses. Actually, a good number of the ladies can bomb it pretty good...so why not lengthen their courses and make it a little more interesting? 

[Marty2019]

Of course she's putting the cart before the horse.   Viewers come first.   The sponsors follow the viewers.  

As for me, if I'm going to watch golf, I would rather watch the world's greatest golfers than the world's greatest women golfers.  The PGA tour is open to anyone who can make it.    The LPGA is only open to women.   If a female golfer wants to make as much money as a male golfer, she can try out for the PGA Tour.  

So, I don't see any unfairness at all. 

 

[14ledo81]

On 25/08/2017 at 5:45 PM, Hardspoon said:

Exactly! People watch college basketball, or college football, or women's tennis, or Major League Soccer, or the Little League World Series, even though they could easily watch the same sport played at a higher level.

So...the LPGA's lack of popularity relative to the PGA is not an absolute simply because they aren't as good as the men.

That's all I was saying. No more, no less.

I think your point would have been better taken without the condescending head slap.

[MSchott]

Inkster is just defending her sport and tour. She's being passionate about it but not rational. Nothing wrong with that, especially a week after an inspiring Solheim Cup.

[Vinsk]

1 minute ago, MSchott said:

Inkster is just defending her sport and tour. She's being passionate about it but not rational. Nothing wrong with that, especially a week after an inspiring Solheim Cup.

This is true. I just didn't get as much thrill from the Solheim as the top female golfers were basically not involved. I mean, we took our best against Europe's best....but the best...were not there. 

[ghalfaire]

On 8/25/2017 at 7:49 PM, Vinsk said:

Well, then what it is it? My original point was that Julie stated 'they don't get the credit they deserve.' And by that she means the purses. She's wrong. The LPGA doesn't generate the viewership that the PGA does. Period. Why that is really doesn't matter but many people have different reasons. For me, I like watching golfers hit drives where there's no way in hell I could do it. Cut shots from behind tress with a 3w that go 285. Par 4's that are 500+ yds...Par 5s +600....fast as hell greens with difficult pin placements...crazy thick rough..etc. None of this happens on the LPGA. Smooth swing, minimal hazards, light rough and slower greens. Meh. If Lexi can drive it 300yds...then there's no reason for her to be playing on shortened courses. Actually, a good number of the ladies can bomb it pretty good...so why not lengthen their courses and make it a little more interesting? 

I suspect the reasons why people don't watch the LPGA in as large numbers as watch the PGA are many and varied.  I personally believe the fact the LPGA cannot hit the ball the same distance as their male counterparts has little to do with it.

I can remember watching an annual TV event called the "Three Tour Challenge" (or something closes to that) where the Senior tour, PGA, and LPGA competed over a two day period.  The course was set up in an attempt to have each tour player hitting the same clubs for the drives and second/third shots, i.e. there were three sets of tees to try to accomplish this.  My recollection is that the PGA did not dominate this event and often the Senior and LPGA won the challenge.  I only bring this up to point out that apparently when you remove distance advantage the PGA has the ladies and old folks are as good at negotiating the ball from the tee to in the hole as the men are.  Not sure what Julie's point was but maybe they don't get the credit they deserve simply because they are not as big and strong as men. 

For whatever it's worth I think lengthening the courses has made the PGA less interesting.  It is not a pure power game it seems and there is no place for a small fellow with surgeon like skills such as Tom Kite, Corey Pavin, Gary Player, etc. in today's PGA.  I think that is a shame.

[14ledo81]

1 hour ago, ghalfaire said:

I suspect the reasons why people don't watch the LPGA in as large numbers as watch the PGA are many and varied.  I personally believe the fact the LPGA cannot hit the ball the same distance as their male counterparts has little to do with it.

I can remember watching an annual TV event called the "Three Tour Challenge" (or something closes to that) where the Senior tour, PGA, and LPGA competed over a two day period.  The course was set up in an attempt to have each tour player hitting the same clubs for the drives and second/third shots, i.e. there were three sets of tees to try to accomplish this.  My recollection is that the PGA did not dominate this event and often the Senior and LPGA won the challenge.  I only bring this up to point out that apparently when you remove distance advantage the PGA has the ladies and old folks are as good at negotiating the ball from the tee to in the hole as the men are.  Not sure what Julie's point was but maybe they don't get the credit they deserve simply because they are not as big and strong as men. 

For whatever it's worth I think lengthening the courses has made the PGA less interesting.  It is not a pure power game it seems and there is no place for a small fellow with surgeon like skills such as Tom Kite, Corey Pavin, Gary Player, etc. in today's PGA.  I think that is a shame.

 

Now it takes a bomber that also has "surgeon like" skills.

[Vinsk]

2 hours ago, ghalfaire said:

  I only bring this up to point out that apparently when you remove distance advantage the PGA has the ladies and old folks are as good at negotiating the ball from the tee to in the hole as the men are. 

This may have occurred, or may occur occasionally ...but I believe the stats say otherwise. Also, it's not just shorter tees that the LPGA plays with. They play slower greens as they cannot produce the trajectory or spin the men do to hold the super fast greens the men can. Remember the US OPEN at Oakmont (IIRC). They not only played shorter tees but the ground crew cut the rough and watered the greens prior to the LPGA playing. Spieth is no bomber yet I'd say he's doing pretty well which goes against your last comment. The arguably greatest female golfer ever played a course where distance wasn't a major factor and she got her ass handed to her.

[Hardspoon]

It is interesting - and very relevant - that the LPGA competes directly with the PGA for viewers.

I can't think of another example where the premier women's league (or an "inferior" men's league) in a given sport is scheduled at the same time as the "big league".  College football plays on Saturdays, while the NFL is on Sundays.  Women's tennis specifically schedules their matches to avoid conflict with the men's.  The WNBA doesn't start in earnest until the NBA winds down.  Even in the Olympics, they do a good job of scheduling to avoid direct conflicts (in some cases, like gymnastics or figure skating, that's to protect the viewers of the men's sport!)

To a large extent it's unavoidable, given the nature of golf tournaments (you can't exactly have them in primetime on a weekday)...but I'd certainly watch more women's golf if it wasn't a choice between PGA vs. LPGA.