How is she being embarassed? Was Tiger embarassed when he hit 80, 77 at the Nestle Invitational on his 5th sponsors exemption on the pga tour?
If everyone who got a bad score in their first events quit trying, then you would be missing not only Tiger but most of the other top players as well.
How about getting experience at the top level of play, in order to help her game and help her later when she is trying to go through q school.
It should give her a significant advantage over some other players going through q school, who would have little experience of that sort of pressure.
Also remember, she will probably be going up against plenty of players who lost their tour cards at q school, so they will have loads of experience, and it is good for her to have experience also.
What your impression was of Tiger, when he missed his first 7 cuts on the pga tour? You may have thought he embarassed himself?
Proabably a safe bet, since his results were much worse than Michelle's were.
But it's also probably a safe bet, that this experience helped Tiger alot.
Evidently Tiger shouldn't have been embarassed because he was a good 2 years older and more experienced than Wie during his first attempts. Loren Roberts, Tom Lehman, Fred Funk shouldn't have been embarassed by their early performances either because they were into (well into) their 20's.
According to many here, only young ladies who generate 40% increases in gate/revenue should be embarassed.......
and for those expecting/hoping her drawing power to wane, I recommend you NOT compare the 2006 84 Lumber Classic's TV ratings & Gate figures with the 2005 84 Lumber Classic.
I hope she cherry picks the same Butler that we had a couple of weeks ago there..... cracking good chap.
Any player with any pride in themselves would be embarrased by a performance like Wie's at the Omega. To think that she wasn't embarrased discredits her competitive spirit.
But the original poster said she is repeatedly embarassing herself, which means in more than one event. That is just not accurate.
One can only assume that the original poster considers missing the cut at the 2006 Sony by 3 shots as an embarassment. If so, that's well off the mark.
Quote:
Originally Posted by leaguegolf
She seems to be going in the wrong direction with all this experience she's gaining. At this point, you have a hard time convincing me that Wie playing in the Omega and the 84 Lumber is about gaining experience for Q-School. Sponsor obligations seems more likely, especially given her school schedule and lack of support by her high profile coach.
I don't agree with the event choices either.
The Omega was going to be a struggle for her to make the cut in her best form, not to mind her worst form. It's a far tougher course than most pga courses.
As regards the Lumber, it's not a sponsors obligation. The course owner knows the family well, and it's more like a personal favour.
I'd rather she had gone back to school and concentrate on that until the Samsung, adding in those 2 events at the start of the school term doesn't make much sense in my opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by leaguegolf
I sure will be glad when Wie reaches the number of PGA Tour events Tiger played in before he started winning everything in sight. Then maybe, just maybe, we won't have to read this tired argument any longer.
The Tiger example is perfectly fine, because it shows that people are being silly to dismiss or demean her performances. That doesn't claim that she will achieve anthing in particular in her next events, it just shows that people who attack her first performances are being silly at best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by leaguegolf
Wie played about as poorly as she could play at the Omega and hopefully she'll use the "experience" to fare better this week.
Hopefully, it's about performance though, because a cut is probably way too optimistic on that course.
Yes, it's a fact, but it's the basis for one side of a repetitive "argument." We all know Wie's early PGA Tour results have been better than Tiger's. We're waiting to see if that "result/fact" has anything whatsoever to do with her future progress. Hopefully her performance at the Omega will motivate her this week.
I doubt anyone is claiming that she will continue to do better than Tiger.
But the comparisons are a good reminder of how well she is doing so far.
Evidently Tiger shouldn't have been embarassed because he was a good 2 years older and more experienced than Wie during his first attempts. Loren Roberts, Tom Lehman, Fred Funk shouldn't have been embarassed by their early performances either because they were into (well into) their 20's.
What they really mean to say is Tiger was a male, so it was okay for him to not do so well.
I doubt anyone is claiming that she will continue to do better than Tiger.
She hasn't done better than him, period, so it would be a good thing if people stopped using that completely baseless and entirely irrelevant comparrison entirely.
Still want to compare Tiger's PGA Tour record with Michelle "MC" Wie?
That was YEARS later but it does back up the point that you couldn't glean much from his actual first events as a sponsor's exemption on the PGA Tour when he was only a few years older than Wie.
And in those first events, she did better than him, period (even though she was two years younger.
In fact Wie at 14 y/o fared much better than Tiger did at 18 y/o:
Tiger
80 - 77 (He might have been, gulp, "Dead Last" Oh the humanity!)
Wie
72 - 68
Thanks for all your support!!!
Last edited by jimmigan : September 11th, 2006 at 01:36 PM.
Who said anything about claiming she will continue to do better than Tiger? My point was once she reaches the same number of PGA Tour events Tiger played in before being successful, this specific comparison starts leaking water. Wie is not Tiger, nobody is Tiger, and she should be judged on her own merits.
As long as we have you around we certainly won't need any "reminders" on how well Wie has played in some PGA Tour events.
I've already brought up how she has done as a pro in Tour events compared to how well she has done. Surprisingly, Rodney dismisses the comparrison.
That was YEARS later but it does back up the point that you couldn't glean much from his actual first events as a sponsor's exemption on the PGA Tour when he was only a few years older than Wie.
And in those first events, she did better than him, period (even though she was two years younger.
In fact Wie at 14 y/o fared much better than Tiger did at 18 y/o:
Tiger
80 - 77 (He might have been, gulp, "Dead Last" Oh the humanity!)
Wie
72 - 68
Thanks for all your support!!!
You are doing well to explain that jimmigan, but I doubt some people would understand that Tiger at 21 with 19 pga events behind him should be expected to do a bit better than someone at 16 in their 5th pga event.
You are doing well to explain that jimmigan, but I doubt some people would understand that Tiger at 21 with 19 pga events behind him should be expected to do a bit better than someone at 16 in their 5th pga event.
He didn't turn pro at 21 with 19 PGA events behind him.
The 'bringing in more money to the tour' arguement is something of an irrelevancy. If Natalie Gulbis was playing I dont imagine the added crowds would be any less. Heck if we just wanted money at the gates we would have playboy bunnies playing in bikinis!
But really it doesnt matter whether Wie were to be paralysed from the neck down, the fanatics would still be convinced she could compete. I dont understand why... you having nothing to gain with this line of thought and only earn yourself distain from the majority of knowledgeable golfers... you know im tempted to wonder whether that is part of the reason.
Waxing poetic about Tiger playing in a women's event? I suppose F. Funk's skirt would fit him but it might show too much leg...... that's too much knowledge for me.
September 11th, 2006, 11:27 AM
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
