Kuchar Pays Caddie $5k, Is Shamed, Pays $50k

[JetFan1983]

I'm 100% on Matt Kuchar's side for the many many reasonable points made by others in this thread. And I'm someone people would probably consider an overly generous tipper, to a fault. Regardless of that, these two men negotiated a deal, and that should be that. 

Plus, IMO caddies are overrated as hell. The ones on tour who map greens, know their players' games, and actually do serious prep for are one thing, but some random guy who just carried a bag? And have you guys ever heard Bones or Steve Williams talk about the game? Their heads are so filled with old wives tales and golf myths it's ridiculous. 

Anyway, if it was me, I probably would've tipped the guy an extra 40K, and yea it's a cheap move for Kuch not to have done that. But to shame the guy and essentially force him to shell out the cash is worse IMO.

Edited February 17, 2019 by JetFan1983

[Vinsk]

12 minutes ago, JetFan1983 said:

Anyway, if it was me, I probably would've tipped the guy an extra 40K, and yea it's a cheap move for Kuch not to have done that

So...you’re not really on Kuchar’s side then. Social media is unfortunately a reality these days and people will get called out. Had Kuchar done this and nobody knew about it, it wouldn’t make it less of a ‘cheap move’. 

I agree with the deal being carried out as was determined prior to playing. But giving an extra 1K for winning was ridiculously low balling. You even said you’d given Ortiz 40k. Kuchar gave him 5K. And you’re on his side? I agree with the private matter going public issue..but the bottom line is Kuchar, as you said, made a cheap move.

[JetFan1983]

5 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

So...you’re not really on Kuchar’s side then. Social media is unfortunately a reality these days and people will get called out. Had Kuchar done this and nobody knew about it, it wouldn’t make it less of a ‘cheap move’. 

I agree with the deal being carried out as was determined prior to playing. But giving an extra 1K for winning was ridiculously low balling. You even said you’d given Ortiz 40k. Kuchar gave him 5K. And you’re on his side? I agree with the private matter going public issue..but the bottom line is Kuchar, as you said, made a cheap move.

No I'm definitely on Kuchar's side. Just because I would've tipped more than him doesn't mean I think everyone else should. That's just a personal choice on my part. I think the business agreement two parties make is more important here because honestly if the caddie tried to negotiate for 40K+ in the event of the win, I don't think Kuchar would have chosen him to carry the bag that week. 

Edited February 17, 2019 by JetFan1983

[Vinsk]

2 minutes ago, JetFan1983 said:

No I'm definitely on Kuchar's side. Just because I would've tipped more than him doesn't mean I think everyone else should. That's just a personal choice on my part. I think the business agreement two parties make is more important here because honestly if the caddie tried to negotiate for 40K+ in the event of the win, I don't think Kuchar would have chosen him to carry the bag that week. 

Well I agree but the problem I believe was that there was no ‘what if I win’ deal Right?

This isn’t about Kuchar being legally or business deal wrong...it’s about the ethical/social/kindness whatever issue. There was no specific amount to be given if Kuchar won. And when he did and ponies up an extra 1k, most people I believe feel that is ridiculously cheap. No?

[iacas]

Legally, when you visit a restaurant, you're only obligated to pay the bill, not a tip.

Kuchar was only legally obligated to pay $4k. But that still doesn't mean he wasn't a douche to pay $5k.

[JetFan1983]

2 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Well I agree but the problem I believe was that there was no ‘what if I win’ deal Right?

This isn’t about Kuchar being legally or business deal wrong...it’s about the ethical/social/kindness whatever issue. There was no specific amount to be given if Kuchar won. And when he did and ponies up an extra 1k, most people I believe feel that is ridiculously cheap. No?

It's definitely cheap. But again, I'm fine with it and if it was me as the caddie, I would have accepted the 5K as the deal I made and not made a big stink about it. There's no way in hell if I got the opportunity to carry the bag for a PGA Tour player ranked in the top 40 in the world in a winnable event like this one where all the big names aren't in the field that I'm not making it very clear what the payouts for me will be in the event of a win. The guy didn't do that, and that's his own fault. Plus, he's almost definitely majorly overvaluing his contribution to the win too, and that also annoys me. 

[turtleback]

23 hours ago, Swooshgolf said:

I would think a good local caddie would be far better than their everyday caddie, at their respective course. I believe they have a lot more knowledge that you can't get 7 days out of the year. So to me, that is worth more than 5k and I would feel bad paying that and I am not as nice as Kuchar appears to be.

Well, I guess that explains why tour players always want local caddies rather than their own regular touring caddies /sarcasm.

I'm old enough to remember when the Masters did not allow players to use their regular caddies and insisted they use ANGC caddies.  I remember all the glowing stories about how a poor black caddy helped his player win the Masters because of his local knowledge.

And I also remember when they lifted the ban.  And virtually every player who had a regular caddy brought him, eschewing the services of the ANGC caddies.  Thereby proving by the best of all evidence, acting in their own best financial interest, that the whole local knowledge thing and all of the touching stories about ANGC caddies were complete BS.  As is the notion that the caddy in question, or ANY local  would be better than his regular one.

10 hours ago, MacDutch said:

So a local cadie who cadies the course whole year round, knows less about the course then a pro caddie who visits the course once a year (for a week). Or even less because the pro’s don’t play the course every year.                                     And about not speaking English, what do we know for sure? Even caddies in Marroko at mediocre courses speak enough English, at least enough to caddie. And Matt doesn’t speak a word Mexican/Spanish too? People find ways to communicate.                                             One way or an other, Kuchar was at the top of his form. The way the caddie acted could be more important then is given credit for.

Then why don't they all use local caddies?

Due respect but their actions demonstrate the absurdity of this 'local caddies are better because of local knowledge' argument.

[jamo]

To me, all it comes down to is this: Kuchar, a pretty darn well-off person, had an opportunity to do something nice for someone less well-off than he is - someone who played a part in him winning a golf tournament, and someone he seemed to have a good time with, despite the language barrier, on the golf course for a week - and he decided not to. 

He fulfilled their agreed-upon obligation, yes, but he could have taken the opportunity to do more and he declined, despite the near-insignificant impact it would have had his own life. That says something about Kuchar's character far more than does him saying "gosh golly" after a missed putt.

[criley4way]

3 hours ago, jamo said:

To me, all it comes down to is this: Kuchar, a pretty darn well-off person, had an opportunity to do something nice for someone less well-off than he is - someone who played a part in him winning a golf tournament, and someone he seemed to have a good time with, despite the language barrier, on the golf course for a week - and he decided not to. 

He fulfilled their agreed-upon obligation, yes, but he could have taken the opportunity to do more and he declined, despite the near-insignificant impact it would have had his own life. That says something about Kuchar's character far more than does him saying "gosh golly" after a missed putt.

So we all seem to agree that Kuch wasn’t cheating the Caddie. Then this comes down to he should have given him a bigger bonus.

The bonus is a form of gift. So are people saying that since Kuch is wealthy (or st least has made a lot of $$) we get to judge how generous he should be with his money? Shouldn’t the bonus be between the 2 of them?

Are you all saying that companies that do well should be shamed if you don’t think they give their employees enough? 

 

[jamo]

9 minutes ago, criley4way said:

So are people saying that since Kuch is wealthy (or st least has made a lot of $$) we get to judge how generous he should be with his money?

Not "since he's wealthy," but yes, we "get to judge" how generous he should be with his money like we "get to judge" ... basically anything. 

9 minutes ago, criley4way said:

Are you all saying that companies that do well should be shamed if you don’t think they give their employees enough? 

Yes. I don't know if "shame" is the word I'd use, but if Company X brings in profit hand over fist and pays its employees the dead-bare minimum, I have no issue with trying my best to steer clear of them. 

[mvmac]

Talked to a Japan tour player today and this topic came up. He said when he brings a caddie to a tournament the standard deal is $1,200 for the week and 10-7-5. 10% for a win, 7% for a top 20 and 5% for making the cut. If he uses a local caddie he pays them the local rate.

16 hours ago, GolfLug said:

Also, nobody would say pay him same as John Wood i.e.. $120k.

I've seen a lot of people saying Ortiz should have been paid the 120K on social media.

[DingoZoot]

Agreement between two full-grown men.

Financial agreement for work performed was not broken by either.

Men are assessed on track record and their word. This caddie is the only one whose track record is tarnished. He'll never have a tour player's bag again.

 

In this situation, only Matt Kuchar is acting in an honorable way. The caddie is an adult man who was capable of negotiating in the beginning for better terms. 

 

Now Kuchar, a man of good repute is losing hysterical emotional male fans losing their composure and being called all sorts of names for holding up his end of the bargain. It's embarrassing to see people behave in this way.

 

I'd love to know who would give a temp in their office 10% of their salary for doing something really groundbreaking in the 5 days their normal secretary wasn't there. It sounds to me like good ol fashioned virtue signalling. 

 

The saddest part of all of this is Kuchar apologizing to the public for a non-issue. Now the hyenas and vultures all have some more ammo to attack him with saying "YOU SEEEEE!!??"

 

Get a grip, let's act like men again.

 

 

[iacas]

6 hours ago, DingoZoot said:

This caddie is the only one whose track record is tarnished.

That may be the case for you, but it's clearly not the case generally.

6 hours ago, DingoZoot said:

I'd love to know who would give a temp in their office 10% of their salary for doing something really groundbreaking in the 5 days their normal secretary wasn't there.

They don't give the regular office secretary any of their salary, so that's not a valid comparison.

6 hours ago, DingoZoot said:

Get a grip, let's act like men again.

One could say that real men are generous, too.

[Nutsmacker]

I think that it is clearly stated that what he did was pretty cheap.  He wasn't required to do anything more than he promised but his actions as a high profile professional athlete were rather stupid.  The reason there are the 5-10 million dollar purses are because people pay to watch and we glorify these pro's to some degree.  Having some generosity would have gone a lot farther with Kuchar's long term income potential then shorting the guy 40-50K after winning over a million.  I guess that skecher's commercial will not have the same panache as it did before knowing that Kuchar is just another stereotypical entitled pro golfer in the eyes of the public; instead of the friendly next door neighbor that he was purported to be.  

Edited February 18, 2019 by Nutsmacker
typo

[Squid_350]

It can be "Fair" and still "Not a good look"

This wasn't a good look. Glad Kuch made it right, but shouldn't have let it reach this point. 

[Nutsmacker]

12 minutes ago, Squid_350 said:

It can be "Fair" and still "Not a good look"

This wasn't a good look. Glad Kuch made it right, but shouldn't have let it reach this point. 

Yea, but he should have done it upfront.  His less then generous behavior most likely cost him much more then 50 grand.  He got some bad advice from someone.

[Vinsk]

1 minute ago, Nutsmacker said:

e got some bad advice from someone

Well I think it may be an issue to blame his management team for in a sense. When Kuchar won you’d think they’d have a plan in place for such an occurrence and ensure their client doesn’t get wrapped up in a mess such as Kuchar’s. Someone on his mgmt. team should’ve been able to foresee this issue as damaging and take action promptly. 

[Nutsmacker]

2 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Well I think it may be an issue to blame his management team for in a sense. When Kuchar won you’d think they’d have a plan in place for such an occurrence and ensure their client doesn’t get wrapped up in a mess such as Kuchar’s. Someone on his mgmt. team should’ve been able to foresee this issue as damaging and take action promptly. 

Yea, pretty much.  In today's world almost anyone in a position like that needs to have a PR management team that thinks about these issues. Sad but true.