Winning is more important than making cuts. To her, winning a women't event should be the next goal. If she wins at least one LPGA event, then after she turns 18, the PGA may keep giving her sponsor's invotes. Ohterwide, the novelty wears win, and the PGA will probably quit giving her the invites. The novelty is wearing thinner and thinner the longer she goes without a professional win.
I think making pga cuts is far more important to her getting more pga exemptions. I think even if she were to win the next 10 lpga events, if she performed badly at pga events, people would start to complain. But if she actually makes the cut this summer on the pga, I think that should wade off discerning voices.
Winning is more important than making cuts. To her, winning a women't event should be the next goal. If she wins at least one LPGA event, then after she turns 18, the PGA may keep giving her sponsor's invotes. Ohterwide, the novelty wears win, and the PGA will probably quit giving her the invites. The novelty is wearing thinner and thinner the longer she goes without a professional win.
How many 16 year olds do you know that have won professional tournaments? I have recently heard of one women and she won on the Ladies Korean Tour (I think). Never heard of any on the LPGA nor any on the PGA.
It just seems like to you it's been too long for her to be playing without a win because she has been playing on professional tours since she was 13, but, those years have consisted of only a limited amount of tournaments. It may seem like lots but they are equivalent to less than a single season for most professionals and there have been many professionals who have not won in their first year on the LPGA and PGA and all of them older than 16. Many have taken several years to win and I would bet there are players who haven't won at all.
How many 16 year olds do you know that have won professional tournaments? I have recently heard of one women and she won on the Ladies Korean Tour (I think). Never heard of any on the LPGA nor any on the PGA.
It was the Australian ladies tour. She did well to win, but there was only a couple of lpga players in the field. Karrie Webb was playing but it was before she hit form, and she was well down the field.
It was the Australian ladies tour. She did well to win, but there was only a couple of lpga players in the field. Karrie Webb was playing but it was before she hit form, and she was well down the field.
Rodney,
At the Fields, they were saying that Seon-Hwa Lee turned professional at 14 in 2000. That made her the youngest player to turn professional in South Korea. The following year she won the McSquare Championship on the KLPGA and in 2003 she won the Himart Championship on the KLPGA.. She won again when she was on the Futures tour in 2005 I have no idea who the player you are talking about is. If you have a name, I would be interested in knowing.
But, as we know, Paula was the youngest player to win on the LPGA last year when she was 18 years and some months and the youngest to win a full four-day tournament. Should Michelle win this year or even next season, she will become the youngest and then people will be complaining about the "hype" that will follow.
Considering her record in majors thus far, I wouldn't count her out. BTW, how does the tournament in which Michelle made the cut differ from the one where Se Ri Pak finished 10th a couple of years ago.... from a quality standpoint ?
I think both were pretty much club championships. Wasn't MW's event rain shortened to 2 rounds?
I understand she is doing commercials for some developer in Korea. You know she is selling like um those condos which are hmm like those house like thingies.
Wow, the thread never ends, it just changes it's name.
As for the event, it is similar to the Canadian Open, which is both part of the Canadian tour and the USPGA tour. This event was part of the Korean PGA tour and the Asian PGA tour. The online scoreboard was hosted at the KPGA website, linked to by the Asian PGA site.
The field was similar to that of the event Se Ri Pak played against. The average world ranking for the 60 players making the cut was 621 (not including the 12 players not holding a ranking). The average ranking of the PGA tour event that same week was in the 170's.
With that said, the importance was less that she made a cut in a men's event than it was she found a place she can play and be competitive. Am I impressed by this feat, no. Do I think she should play on the Asian Tour more, Yes. She is beloved over there, welcomed by all and competitive.
My problem with all of this is that she hasn't proved much to me, in her deserving all the accolades. Babe deserved the opportunity. Annika deserved the opportunity. Both of these ladies won at ameteur and professional levels. Her resume is thin in comparison. She is a 6 ft tall 16 yr old girl who hits the ball 300 yrds. Lets not forget the Anna Kournikova factor, since she is attractive.
Everyone compares her career to Tiger, and I don't see it. He won 3 straight US Ams, before turning pro. He earned his place before turning pro. She has been given alot.
She wants to compete against the men, and doesn't see the LPGA players as her competition, so it is no wonder the LPGA isn't bending over backwards for her. Her goal is to play with the men, so she views the lpga as a stepping stone. Insult me and then ask for favors, um, don't think so.
I am cool with her wanting to compete against the men if that is what she wants, but then do it the same way the other men do it. Prove your ability elsewhere, and then bring it to the show. Don't eat exemptions from guys who have "earned" their cards, and are trying to keep them. Don't take spots away from guys who are trying to scrape by without a $10 million endorsement deal.
I think she could be the best thing to happen to women's golf ever, but she could also be the worst thing.
Olsons, your entire thread was accurate and well-reasoned and whether or not I agree with your conclusions, I was quite impressed by your post.
Then, you had to go and throw in that old chestnut about her "eating exemptions" and taking spots away from guys trying to scrape by. This has been discussed, dissected, and debated ad nauseum but the short and sweet fact is that she is getting sponsor's exemptions which most likely would go to some local dignitary or pro, not your needy guys.
Frankly, you and others of your opinion have too many valid objections to Michelle's career path to need to twist the facts. As for those poor guys trying to scrape by, as Mr. Nicklaus said instead of worrying about losing a spot to a 'celebrity', "they need to play better".
I have no idea who the player you are talking about is. If you have a name, I would be interested in knowing.
The player is Amy Yang. She is a 16 year old amateur and she won the 2006 ANZ Ladies Masters on the womens astralasian tour (alpgtour).
Karrie Webb was in a tie for 33rd place.
It was held 2-5 February, 2006.
A great win for Amy Yang, but not near lpga standard.
I think both were pretty much club championships. Wasn't MW's event rain shortened to 2 rounds?
It was shortened to 3 rounds not 2.
However getting the number of rounds wrong was better than your attempt at stating the tournament status.
It is a top class Asian tour event with world ranking points going to the top 17 players. Se Ri Pak's tournament was closer to a club championship, with no world ranking points available for anyone in it.
Wow, the thread never ends, it just changes it's name.
As for the event, it is similar to the Canadian Open, which is both part of the Canadian tour and the USPGA tour.
Comparing Wie's event to a pga tour event, is leaving you in danger of losing your anti-Wie badge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by olsons3
The field was similar to that of the event Se Ri Pak played against.
No it wasn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by olsons3
With that said, the importance was less that she made a cut in a men's event than it was she found a place she can play and be competitive. Am I impressed by this feat, no. Do I think she should play on the Asian Tour more, Yes. She is beloved over there, welcomed by all and competitive.
By that logic, that means that if she makes the cut at the John Deere, she has found a place where she can be competitive ie. on the pga tour.
Quote:
Originally Posted by olsons3
Everyone compares her career to Tiger, and I don't see it. He won 3 straight US Ams, before turning pro. He earned his place before turning pro. She has been given alot.
Actually he got a whole heap of sponsors exemptions before winning any amateurs. He did not earn his place in pga events. When Tiger got his first pga exeption, all he has was one BOYS amateur title.
The truth of Tiger is often misunderstood so I'll try to explain it well:
When Tiger was 18, he had received 7 sponsors exemptions for the pga tour. At this time he had absolutely NO MAJOR MENS AMATEUR TITLES. Then he won one soon after.
The point is, all he had was BOYS titles.
At 15, Michelle Wie got to the quarter final of the us amatuer MENS publinx championships. By 17, Tiger had only got to the last 32 of the MENS amateur championships.
So although Michelle's amateur exploits are very limited, she did get further on the MENS stage at 15, than Tiger had by 17.
That's where people get confused alot about Tiger's earlier success, and they claim that he got his earlier exemptions based on his amateur titles, whereas all he had were JUNIOR amateurs, playing against boys 17 or younger.
So if he deserved a shot, so does she.
Quote:
Originally Posted by olsons3
Don't eat exemptions from guys who have "earned" their cards, and are trying to keep them. Don't take spots away from guys who are trying to scrape by without a $10 million endorsement deal.
If she doesn't get the exemptions, they will not go to the guys who are trying to scrape by. These are SPONSORS EXEMPTIONS. They do not go to the next most deserving guys who just about failed to qualify. They go to who the sponsor wants them to, and whether Michelle takes them or not, they will not go to the most deserving nearly qualifier.
Olsons, your entire thread was accurate and well-reasoned and whether or not I agree with your conclusions, I was quite impressed by your post.
Then, you had to go and throw in that old chestnut about her "eating exemptions" and taking spots away from guys trying to scrape by. This has been discussed, dissected, and debated ad nauseum but the short and sweet fact is that she is getting sponsor's exemptions which most likely would go to some local dignitary or pro, not your needy guys.
Frankly, you and others of your opinion have too many valid objections to Michelle's career path to need to twist the facts. As for those poor guys trying to scrape by, as Mr. Nicklaus said instead of worrying about losing a spot to a 'celebrity', "they need to play better".
What is so valid about people's objections to Michelle's career path. She follows the rules. She plays what she is allowed on the LPGA. She accept exemptions that are given to her as many others have before her (including Mr. Woods) and she hasn't finished last or near the bottom while playing on the PGA and she is doing pretty darn good on the LPGA. Even considering the money she will earn this year on the LPGA, she is highly likely to have been within the top 125 (probably already is above what number 125 will end up with at the end of the season) had the earning been considered official but she will still be stuck needing exemption s on the LPGA. Should she make cuts on the PGA and/or win on the LPGA, the song will not change with those that are complaining and as far as I can see, there is no basis for their complaints.
Perhaps 'valid' is the wrong word. What I am trying to convey is that people objecting to Ms Wie's career path are entitled to their opinions but not entitled to skew the facts.
As the father of another sixteen year old girl who does not always follow the rules and behave in a manner approved by all adults, I think Wie is entitled to paly anywhere anytime. She has a long career and at present she should , like any other sixteen year old, be enjoying herself.If that means playing with boys, so be it.
I am concerned that her schedule is driven by dollar signs, not the development of her career, and by a father who does not consider her future as much as his self gratification. I may be wrong ,but my nose is twitching on this one.
As of right now she's just a sideshow out there to recoup Nike's investment. (I was actually avoiding the SQ because of Wie, but it is a good product.) Anyhow, someday she may turn out to be a female Tiger, but until then she's just a corporate token.
May 13th, 2006, 02:27 PM
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
