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

[Hardspoon]

It's a strange argument. I haven't seen anyone saying "they're not very good" when women play a hard course and don't score well; I don't see anyone saying "the course is too short" when they do.

Maybe there is some golf version of Steven A Smith making troll-y arguments like that somewhere, but I haven't seen it.

I am sure she understands the commercial reality of women's golf versus men's; that doesn't mean it isn't frustrating for her. It's also probably never going to change. Women in tennis were able to make headway only because their product was actually MORE popular than the men's, and they were earning disproportionately less.

One other thing to consider: money in pro sports isn't always based on pure commercial viability, as some above suggest. The NBA made a conscious decision to support the WNBA, without regard for its profitability. The PGA Tour could choose to do the same; maybe that's what she's looking for (right or wrong).

[Buckeyebowman]

8 hours ago, Vinsk said:

@DaveP043, @David in FL, I agree completely with both of you guys. I think Inkster 'knows' the reality of the situation but continues to be frustrated by it. The men (PGA) are simply more entertaining to watch. Period. Nobody, well most I believe, are saying the women are lousy, their golfing skills are poor..yada yada..I actually think they are getting exactly what credit is due. Julie needs to come to Jesus and realize that's the way it is and will forever be. The LPGA in and of its own entity has excitement, interest and marketability. However when they start to compare themselves to the PGA is where it gets lost. Most viewers are not going to find Lexi Thompson hitting a 300yd drive on a 380yd par 4 over and over exciting. It's odd though, once Tiger came out and starting hitting it long...all of a sudden the concept of 'Tiger proofing' came along. If Lexi, and others can hit drives 280-300yds ( which is longer than a lot of PGA players) then make them all step up. Make the courses longer. So you're a short knocker? Tough, that's your problem which is exactly the sentiment on the PGA. Why continue to baby the LPGA golfers? Make them truly show what they can do. Because playing tournaments with multiple par 4's less than 400yds and par 5's less than 500yds isn't going to spark excitement. 

Well, you kinda, sorta, have a point. Men's golf changed for the big hitters, why not women's golf? However, I had an Uncle who was a country club pro before WWII. When I started getting interested in golf in the early to mid 60's, he told me to watch the lady pros! "You want to learn how to swing a golf club? Watch them!"

At my stage of life, the ladies game is closer to my own. Even though they hit it by me on a regular basis! It's just that my game isn't in the same galaxy as the men's game any more! 

 

7 hours ago, David in FL said:

So you're the one!

I didn't watch a minute of the Solheim.  For me, the most compelling/entertaining golf of the weekend was the US Am.  Coming down the stretch, both Ghim and Redman both hit 3-woods on their 2d shots on the 585 yd uphill par-5 14th to about 30 feet.  Amazing.  Sorry, you just won't ever see anything like that from the ladies.  No matter how "good" they are, most men just aren't in awe of what they can do on the course.  

Inkster's statement, really is true...

Man! That was great! Mano a mano! So nice to turn to that after the other broadcasts. I was just flipping around and hit on it.

Seems to me that Azinger and Faxon have gotten much better at their jobs, while Buck decides to keep his mouth shut! Thank God!

[Vinsk]

And as for the 'excitement level' sure, good competition is entertaining. However, the big factor is not that any of those LPGA players can run circles around me...they can, it's the shot making that one sees on the PGA that doesnt exist on the LPGA. I'm talking about the drives and the 'going for it' shots. Watching a PGA guy cut a 3W 280-300yds over water is cool. And I cannot do that. When an LPGA 'goes for it' it's usually a distance many of us can handle, no hazard and an open green front to roll it up. I cannot drive the ball as far as many, many ( hell most) pros. I can out drive many many LPGA players. When an LPGA player hits a 7i 135yds within 5' of the pin...yeah...awesome shot...I CAN do that with a 9i. Just not the wow factor....and that's what many people are watching. And as I said before, if even one player can drive the ball 300yds...(which is true) then the ladies need to be challenged with longer holes. The ladies have no chance against the men...but I would like to see how the women would fair against themselves with more PGA like conditions.

Edited August 22, 2017 by Vinsk

[StefanUrkel]

I watch sports to watch the best athletes. Serena lost to a division 3 college player.

[jamo]

It feels like we've been having close versions of this same thread every couple months for a while now.

[Phil McGleno]

LPGA is not watched by as many people and sponsors want eyeballs.-Bottom line for them-Simple.

[Midpack]

23 minutes ago, Phil McGleno said:

LPGA is not watched by as many people and sponsors want eyeballs.-Bottom line for them-Simple.

The new LPGA dress codes should increase viewers and therefore sponsors (or more suitable sponsors?), otherwise why would they have made the change?

[GolfLug]

I do not think at all that Inkster is remiss on the market dynamics. She is much too smart for that. Maybe some see it as a thinly veiled accusation of market sexism (I don't) and/or some believe she is trying to oversell but in either case, all power to her. It can only help. 

If nothing else, it is certainly a well timed pitch. 

 

 

[GolfLug]

14 hours ago, Hardspoon said:

One other thing to consider: money in pro sports isn't always based on pure commercial viability, as some above suggest. The NBA made a conscious decision to support the WNBA, without regard for its profitability. The PGA Tour could choose to do the same; maybe that's what she's looking for (right or wrong).

Yes, it could be a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts. 

(Apologies for the multiple posts. I didn't read this post until later..)

Edited August 22, 2017 by GolfLug

[ghalfaire]

I must be a minority here as I do watch the LPGA.  I do also watch the PGA.  But if the LPGA is playing a major or something like the Solheim Cup I will watch those if I am watching golf at all. I do know how the market works and so does Ms. Inkster I suspect.  Her point about there are some great players on the LPGA is accurate I believe and it must be frustrating for them. 

[Valleygolfer]

41 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

I do not think at all that Inkster is remiss on the market dynamics. She is much too smart for that. Maybe some see it as a thinly veiled accusation of market sexism (I don't) and/or some believe she is trying to oversell but in either case, all power to her. It can only help. 

If nothing else, it is certainly a well timed pitch. 

 

 

Or a request for more pandering.

[boogielicious]

32 minutes ago, Valleygolfer said:

Or a request for more pandering.

Why is it pandering? She is someone who has spent her entire life playing and promoting a sport and is trying to get more folks to watch and sponsor. Do you blame her for trying? I think she understands it is a hard sell and that is why she is pitching it.

[14ledo81]

I think she is trying to "guilt" sponsors/viewers.  In today's world, it just might work.

[StefanUrkel]

2 hours ago, boogielicious said:

Why is it pandering? She is someone who has spent her entire life playing and promoting a sport and is trying to get more folks to watch and sponsor. Do you blame her for trying? I think she understands it is a hard sell and that is why she is pitching it.

I do blame her for trying. She should feel guilty

[iacas]

5 hours ago, Midpack said:

The new LPGA dress codes should increase viewers and therefore sponsors (or more suitable sponsors?), otherwise why would they have made the change?

They gave their reasons. Some of them included sponsor complaints.

[Valleygolfer]

6 hours ago, boogielicious said:

Why is it pandering? She is someone who has spent her entire life playing and promoting a sport and is trying to get more folks to watch and sponsor. Do you blame her for trying? I think she understands it is a hard sell and that is why she is pitching it.

That is fine but the product hasn't changed. Asking for more for the same service.

[MSchott]

On 8/21/2017 at 0:47 PM, Patch said:

On another note, I wonder how many male, amateur golfers have a better golf game than the LPGA golfers when they play those longer courses. 

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.

[Vinsk]

52 minutes 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.

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.