Sorry, but this is a complete falsehood on 2 counts. One being that to characterize Michelle's ability as "really poor" is ludicrous... as bad as she played today , she's still ahead of a handful of guys. Two, sponsers exemptions have been given to all manner of has-beens, never-wases and celebrities long before Michelle came on the scene.
Michelle Wie is a really poor player in men's events. If a 78 isnt a poor first round in a men's event, i dont know what is?
Sponsors have given exemptions to has beens but they did perform well at one time and had at least the chance of brilliance again. For example, Corey Pavin, the guy up until his recent victory this year was doing poorly and had received exemptions in the years following the Major victory against Greg Norman (another one past his prime).
I know it's been beaten to death, but the girl needs to stick to the LPGA for a while, win some tournaments before worrying about playing with the men...this is doing more harm than good for her at this point.
I'm predicting we'll be hearing crickets chirp for a while.
She's playing the John Deere this week, right? (as in next Thursday, of course).
I'm afraid there's a real possibility of a serious backlash in the near future, and I don't care how happy-go-lucky she is, the pressure has got to be getting pretty intense on her at this point.
It's a shame. I just hope her greedy father can roll around in a bed of hundreds and make himself feel better for what he's done to his daughter.
No, the John Deere is over, sorry you missed it.
She will be playing the Lumber, probably another poor course choice.
At least Leadbetter will be with her. It's a joke that he didn't have anyone with her at the Omega Masters.
No, I remember the MC, just got the tournaments mixed up. I hope she enjoys it, because I have a feeling this will be her last men's event for a long, long time.
BTW: 242 off the tee this week. Really bombing 'em out there. And as far as "poor course choice", this course couldn't have been any better - it was playing to 6300 yards due to the elevation.
Can't blame on Ledbetter, can't blame it on the course.
I am predicting a long post by rodney_C in the near future
Bad round, bad tournament, poor driving, poor putting, poor swing.
Hopefully she will find her game with Leadbetter for the next tournament.
She didn't play well in the British Womens Open, where her inaccurate driving cost her. Her driving had been inaccurate at previous tournaments like the Evian, but she got away with it and almost won, because it was a very generous course.
Surely her team would have known that she would have to improve her accuracy to compete well on a course with such narrow fairways and small greens.
Going into the tournament she should have been better prepared for the course in question.
As regards whether she should play mens events, I judge her on all mens tournaments and she has done pretty well so far.
No, I remember the MC, just got the tournaments mixed up.
Actually it was a WD, wrong again nothing new there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr3856a
I hope she enjoys it, because I have a feeling this will be her last men's event for a long, long time.
Actually she will be playing the Casio in November for sure.
Wrong again, nothing new there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr3856a
BTW: 242 off the tee this week. Really bombing 'em out there. And as far as "poor course choice", this course couldn't have been any better - it was playing to 6300 yards due to the elevation.
Length was not an issue, accuracy is an issue. Then again you did get any of the rest of your analysis right either, so what's to be expected.
Sponsors have given exemptions to has beens but they did perform well at one time and had at least the chance of brilliance again. For example, Corey Pavin, the guy up until his recent victory this year was doing poorly and had received exemptions in the years following the Major victory against Greg Norman (another one past his prime).
You are fighting a losing battle on that one. Sponsors exemptions and playing ability have absolutely nothing to do with each other in 95% of cases.
You are fighting a losing battle on that one. Sponsors exemptions and playing ability have absolutely nothing to do with each other in 95% of cases.
I think that's patently false. Has Placido Domingo ever gotten a sponsor's exemption? How about that dude Jared from the Subway commercials? Margeret Thatcher? Nope.
A lot of sponsor's exemptions go to past champions or local up-and-comer's, or, as the other poster said, to players who were once very good but are down on their luck a bit.
Corporate-types often get to play in the pro-ams. Maybe Omega can hook Michelle up with a Wednesday start next year.
September 7th, 2006, 08:09 PM
And as far as "poor course choice", this course couldn't have been any better - it was playing to 6300 yards due to the elevation. 
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
