How about if we compare them all in tournaments they play in together this year? Debating the odds of winning based on the number of events they play is silly. I say the proof will be there when they play in the same events. If it happens to only be 8 (due to Wie's limited eligibility) then so be it. How will they do head to head in those 8 tournaments? Is there a fairer way to settle this debate?
I think that is a very fair way of doing it.
I think that Creamer could win that, with Wie second, and Pressel last.
Wie was 5-3 against Creamer last season, but Creamer was ahead in 3 of the last 4, I think this was due to Creamer getting more and more lpga experience.
I realize that you and I just will never see eye to eye on this one...to me, a win's a win and that's the only "obvious" thing about that aspect of it. Like I said though, I believe both will win this season, so then we can argue if one win is better than another.
Surely you agree a win is easier to achieve if you play 25 events instead of 8.
Leadbetter said that people won't know just what Wie is capable of until she is playing week in, week out.
If they both win, and one is a major, I think we would agree that, that was the better title.
For other lpga tournaments, we can probably argue it out through 10 or 11 pages of discussion.
They played 8 exhibitions last year? Interesting, I didn't know that!
You have quoted something I posted on the 24th January. That is 21 days ago. You must be really bored to start up the Wie debate again.
For the record, Wie finished ahead of Creamer 5 times and Creamer finished ahead of Wie 3 times in the 8 lpga events in which they both played.
Creamer has a better record than Wie in the events that Wie didn't play. Well done.
For the record, Wie wanted to play this weeks event.
However with her limited number of exemptions she decided to skip it. She did ask to be allowed an extra exemption so she could play it, but she was denied it.
So Wie's first event will be The Fields Open, on Thursday 23rd February.
In other words, you have no way to rationalize your claim. Ok.
Okay, I'll rationalize it, but I think this has been done before, on many occasions.
Wie was 5-3 versus Creamer last year, meaning in the 8 events they played together, Wie did better than Creamer in 5 of those, and Creamer did better than Wie in 3 of those.
I don't think that is the perfect system for analysing their play. However, it is the best available, given that Creamer played 25 events versus 8 for Wie.
It could be even closer this year. It could well be 4-4, or 5-3 to one or the other.
By the way, Pressel failed to win her first event.
She was in a tie for 5th place. I would say that that was a good finish.
However, by the standards of many of those guys who are anti-Wie, Pressel's finish was very poor, because she did get into contention in the final day. However she lacked the bottle to CLOSE THE DEAL. She failed to FINISH THE JOB.
Maybe she should have learned how to win on the amateur ranks so that she would have learned how to close the deal and finish the job.
Oh hold on, she did win lots on the amateur circuit. Guess that makes a mess of that point!!!! What could have happened, wasn't it said that learning to win on the amateur aids winning.
By the way, Pressel failed to win her first event.
She was in a tie for 5th place. I would say that that was a good finish.
However, by the standards of many of those guys who are anti-Wie, Pressel's finish was very poor, because she did get into contention in the final day. However she lacked the bottle to CLOSE THE DEAL. She failed to FINISH THE JOB.
Maybe she should have learned how to win on the amateur ranks so that she would have learned how to close the deal and finish the job.
Oh hold on, she did win lots on the amateur circuit. Guess that makes a mess of that point!!!! What could have happened, wasn't it said that learning to win on the amateur aids winning.
Just think of where Pressel would've finished without her amateur experience.
Just think of where Pressel would've finished without her amateur experience.
But you are missing the point.
What good is 5th? She might as well have finished 55th.
Winning is all that counts. according to some of our friends. Tut Tut, she just didn't get the job done.
But you are missing the point.
What good is 5th? She might as well have finished 55th.
Winning is all that counts. according to some of our friends. Tut Tut, she just didn't get the job done.
We do at least know that Pressel knows how to win.
We do at least know that Pressel knows how to win.
And my name isn't "Tut Tut."
We know that Pressel is able to win a US Amateur Title, but that is a long way off winning on the lpga. Neither Wie or Pressel have won on that stage as of yet.
So we do not know if Pressel knows how to win at that level. By the way, in an interview, Pressel was asked about what she hoped to do on the lpga, and she said she just hoped to play well, now that she would be playing at a much higher level. So obviously Pressel recognises that the lpga is a much higher level.
For either Pressel or Wie, given 25 events I would expect either of them to win at least one event.
If Pressel wins 1 event out of 25, please people don't insult your intelligence by saying this proves she is a better winner than Wie.
If Wie plays 25 events in a season, I would be absolutely supremely confident that she would win. Even with 8, I think she has a pretty good chance, but have to admit that the greater chance lies with the one who has 3 times as many tournaments.
Still, Wie has a very good chance to solve this debate next weekend.
January 24th, 2006, 02:50 PM
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
