The USGA's Ten-Year Exemption Policy for Winners

[onthehunt526]

I put this in "Tour Talk" for a reason.

Hear me out. The USGA offers a 10-year exemption into the U.S. Open for anyone who wins the championship. They also exempt any champion from local qualifying for life.

The other three majors give a variation of lifetime exemption to champions. I understand the USGA wants to give more spots available from sectional qualifying. I get you only want to have 70 players or so, fully exempt into the championship. It's great they open it up to basically the general public, if they pay a couple hundred bucks (1.4 Handicap Index or lower).

I believe if you win the U.S. Open multiple times, you deserve to be exempt for life (until you are 60). The USGA would only have to worry about 3 such exemptions. Ernie Els, Retief Goosen, and Tiger Woods... That's it. Yeah if Spieth, DJ or Rory win they'd get it, too.

If you win it once, that's all well and good, 10-year exemption. But if you win it twice or more, you never have to qualify again. 

Thoughts? Discuss? For or against? Stupid idea?

[David in FL]

Why?  

[saevel25]

33 minutes ago, onthehunt526 said:

I believe if you win the U.S. Open multiple times, you deserve to be exempt for life (until you are 60). The USGA would only have to worry about 3 such exemptions. Ernie Els, Retief Goosen, and Tiger Woods... That's it. Yeah if Spieth, DJ or Rory win they'd get it, too.

I don't. I think US Open should be only a 5 year exemption. Maybe it is cumulative. So if you win 2 in 4 years, you have 10 years from your first one.

I am not a big fan of lifetime exemptions. It just reduces the level of competition when someone takes a spot of a better golfer.

 

[dennyjones]

7 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

I am not a big fan of lifetime exemptions. It just reduces the level of competition when someone takes a spot of a better golfer.

+1.   Did you see some of the players at this years Masters?   2008 Winner Trevor Immelman... 

[Groucho Valentine]

Im not a fan of the lifetime exception. I think 10 years is about right. If a player wins multiple times, it should just be extended from the last victory. Im guessing this is a topic because its Tigers last year of eligibility.  As far as legacy entries go, I'm sure the USGA can extend an invitation to any great didn't have an exemption if they really wanted to. I may be mistaken, but i think touring professionals may already get some kind of exemption from local qualifying. I rarely see professionals at locals, but they all seem to come out of the woodwork at sectionals. 

[turtleback]

1 hour ago, onthehunt526 said:

I put this in "Tour Talk" for a reason.

Hear me out. The USGA offers a 10-year exemption into the U.S. Open for anyone who wins the championship. They also exempt any champion from local qualifying for life.

The other three majors give a variation of lifetime exemption to champions. I understand the USGA wants to give more spots available from sectional qualifying. I get you only want to have 70 players or so, fully exempt into the championship. It's great they open it up to basically the general public, if they pay a couple hundred bucks (1.4 Handicap Index or lower).

I believe if you win the U.S. Open multiple times, you deserve to be exempt for life (until you are 60). The USGA would only have to worry about 3 such exemptions. Ernie Els, Retief Goosen, and Tiger Woods... That's it. Yeah if Spieth, DJ or Rory win they'd get it, too.

If you win it once, that's all well and good, 10-year exemption. But if you win it twice or more, you never have to qualify again. 

Thoughts? Discuss? For or against? Stupid idea?

I think the demand that past champions die at age 60 will be unpopular,

[Wally Fairway]

30 minutes ago, dennyjones said:

+1.   Did you see some of the players at this years Masters?   2008 Winner Trevor Immelman... 

Look at the leaderboard at the 2017 Open Championship.
Todd Hamilton DFL, Sandy Lyle only a few slots higher and Daly taking up another slot

[HJJ003]

I like the lifetime exemptions for the Masters. Something about the nature of the event really suits it. A USGA event though I dunno, I just don't think its a great fit for the "toughest major". 10 year is fine I believe. 

[Patch]

I am in the 5 year exemption group, such as it is, for any win in a major. One win 5 years, 2 wins 10 years, 3 wins 15 years, with a max of 25 years. 

However, once a past winner is no longer competitive, they shouldn't take up a spot that denies another, more competitive golfer that spot. The over the hill golfer could still play in the major, just don't take up an official, earned spot. 

So a major has 160+/- players to start. Not a big deal. Trim off the bottom 20, and ties after day one. Then a regular cut after day two. 

[onthehunt526]

Ok @saevel25, I'll buy that. But a multiple champion, Is probably an all-time great.

[HJJ003]

Just now, onthehunt526 said:

Ok @saevel25, I'll buy that. But a multiple champion, Is probably an all-time great.

Just like Andy North? 

[onthehunt526]

8 minutes ago, HJJ003 said:

Just like Andy North? 

Andy wouldn't count as he is too old for my example.

My main issue is, they don't stop the clock for multiple wins in a 10 year span. It just keeps running. For example... Ernie won the U.S. Open in 1994 & 97. His exemption for winning, ended after he played in 2007 at Oakmont. (I think he's gotten in the field in some way the last 10 U.S. Opens). 

Ok, I see what you guys are saying. If they are still relevent, and great players will get into all four majors.

I think they should at least considering "banking the 10-year exemption" when the first 10 runs out. Or give them an additional 5 years or whatever for two wins.

[Frank-0-Sport]

Greetings ...

10 years for winning the US Open itself, and five years for winning one of the other three majors, is more than fair enough.

If you're a one-hit wonder who's never heard from again,, well then so be it -- enjoy your five or ten free passes and then be on your way, or else try to re-qualify like any other golfer.

The only change that I would make would be if someone achieves a calendar year grand slam (winning all four majors within a given calendar year), then give that person a lifetime exemption. No one's ever achieved a professional calendar year slam, and the odds of even doing so are  way off the charts, so there's no need to worry much about one-or-more of the 156 field spots being swallowed up by some old has-been 30-40 years down the road.

The US Open is "open" for a reason, and that is how it should stay.

Edited March 15, 2018 by Frank-0-Sport

[dsc123]

51 minutes ago, HJJ003 said:

I like the lifetime exemptions for the Masters. Something about the nature of the event really suits it. A USGA event though I dunno, I just don't think its a great fit for the "toughest major". 10 year is fine I believe. 

I agree with this.  I like a lifetime exemption for the masters.  But to me, the US Open is different.  Anyone can qualify.  Its a meritocracy.  I'd rather see them eliminate the exemption than lengthen it. 

[HJJ003]

2 minutes ago, onthehunt526 said:

Andy wouldn't count as he is too old for my example.

He is too old now sure. But he won his second US Open in 85 and was 38 years old. Under a lifetime exemption he would be playing that event and stealing a spot from someone deserving for a very long time. 10 years was enough for him. 

[brocks]

31 minutes ago, Frank-0-Sport said:

The only change that I would make would be if someone achieves a calendar year grand slam (winning all four majors within a given calendar year), then give that person a lifetime exemption. No one's ever achieved a professional calendar year slam, and the odds of even doing so are  way off the charts

Tiger did it.

Americans think their calendar is the only one that matters.  But Tiger is half Thai, and the Thai New Year, called Songkran, begins April 13.  So by that calendar, Tiger won all four in a calendar year.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

[NM Golf]

10 years is plenty, after that you chance getting a bunch of guys in the field who aren't relevant. If you look at it the field in the Masters it's weakened considerably by the several of the past champions who aren't competitive anymore. Remember years back The Masters received some criticism because they sent letters to a few guys like Billy Casper telling them not to play anymore. 

Now if you could get the PGA Championship to stop letting in all the club pros...

[Buckeyebowman]

5 hours ago, saevel25 said:

I don't. I think US Open should be only a 5 year exemption. Maybe it is cumulative. So if you win 2 in 4 years, you have 10 years from your first one.

I am not a big fan of lifetime exemptions. It just reduces the level of competition when someone takes a spot of a better golfer.

 

I have to agree. Under the proposed format both Andy North and Curtis Strange would be exempt. I think both are too classy to take up a spot, but look what happens at the Masters seemingly every year. Some old past champion (with a lifetime exemption) comes out, shoots 88-89 in the first two rounds, and then goes away. Isn't it enough that Augusta gives them an honorary membership, and they can go play the course anytime they please?