As does yours. While Michelle has been busy missing cuts, Tiger was busy winning USGA championships over and over and over and over and over and over again. 6 in a row. Did he belong on the PGA Tour at 16? No. Nobody does. Once he won everything he could win at the level he was playing at, he stepped up to the next level.
Again wrong. Tiger had won NO ADULT TITLES when he got those exemptions.
For exemption 1, he had 1 juniors boys title.
For exemptions 2, 3 & 4, he had 2 junior boys usga titles.
For exemptions 5, 6 & 7, he had 3 junior boys titles, and still had no adult usga titles.
In the adult event, before his 5th attempt, he got knocked out at the last 32 stage.
He had NO adult usga titles for any of those 7 exemptions. All he had was potential. Sound familiar?
How many of those pga events did Tiger get invited to as opposed to earned the right to play? How many of those pga events did Wie get invited to as opposed to earning the right to play? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
Neither of them qualified for any of the mentioned events.
For both of them they were sponsors exemptions.
Tiger's first 7 pga tour events were sponsors exemptions.
He qualified for his 8th pga tour event.
I appreciate the question, because alot of people misunderstand these points.
Let's compare, Tiger's first Professional attempts with Wie's attempts since turning professional. I figure you have this somewhere.
I do have Tiger's first pro stats, but why would I compare a guy who had about 6 years of top class amateur experience with someone who turned pro much earlier? That would hardly prove anything.
The questions are, what did she learn from her experience this week and will she put that knowledge and experience to good use next week? "Full steam ahead" is a poor decision if she doesn't do what it takes to avoid running into another brick wall. I don't think even Wie's biggest fans expect her to win next week, but certainly a much improved performance is in order. If she flirts with the cut line, all will be forgiven. If she crashes an burns again..............well, let's wait and see.
For anyone who's curious, here in Western PA, we've been hit with massive amounts of rainfall for approximately the last two weeks. I'd be surprised if they can get Nemacolin Woodlands' course dry before next week, unless the temperatures bump up siginificantly and we get no more moisture. I believe that alone will prevent her from having any chance to make the cut on the 7500+ yard course.
I do have Tiger's first pro stats, but why would I compare a guy who had about 6 years of top class amateur experience with someone who turned pro much earlier? That would hardly prove anything.
Ok, so you compare the two when it's convenient, but dismiss the comparrison when it's not? Figures.
This is just getting silly. There's no rhyme or reason to the justifications given for this travelling circus. If one excuse/reason doesn't work, make up another one. If that one doesn't work, go back to the first one.
"She hits it 300 yards, this course fits her game."
MC averaging 242 off the tee.
"The course didn't fit her game and her coach wasn't there."
It just gets old, and all the while the results are pilling up: MC, MC, MC. The results speak for themselves.
The PGA Tour is not a daycare center for teenage girls with huge sponsorship deals.
I do have Tiger's first pro stats, but why would I compare a guy who had about 6 years of top class amateur experience with someone who turned pro much earlier? That would hardly prove anything.
She, meaning the Wie camp, chose to turn professional at 16. She bypassed the opportunity to get the years of top class ametuer experience. You have said previously that winning ametuer events has little to do with competing as a professional. An argument that you have used to defend her turning pro at 16.
I think if you are going to compare Michelle's play against Tiger, I think we should compare them starting at the time they each decided they were good enough to compete professionally.
Event 1: Woods mc by 6. Wie mc by 1.
Event 2: Woods mc by 7. Wie mc by 7.
Event 3: Woods mc by 5. Wie mc by 2.
Event 4: Woods mc by 8. Wie mc by 3.
Event 5: Woods mc by 10. Wie wd
You've compared her to Woods before. Why not now?
We can't let the facts get in the way of our opinions!
Event 1: Woods mc by 6. Wie mc by 1.
Event 2: Woods mc by 7. Wie mc by 7.
Event 3: Woods mc by 5. Wie mc by 2.
Event 4: Woods mc by 8. Wie mc by 3.
Event 5: Woods mc by 10. Wie wd
You've compared her to Woods before. Why not now?
I've compared them in their first pga events, to show that it is silly for people to be writing off, considering she is doing better than Tiger was when he was 2 years older than she is.
She has alot to learn, but she has done very well in pga events.
The point is he remained an ametuer, because he knew he didn't belong on the PGA Tour yet. Let's see how they have compared in non-women's events, as professionals. Once they each decided, it's time to step up to the plate, and say I am a professional golfer, this is what I do.
I have no idea what the comparison will look like, just thought it would be interesting.
She, meaning the Wie camp, chose to turn professional at 16. She bypassed the opportunity to get the years of top class ametuer experience. You have said previously that winning ametuer events has little to do with competing as a professional. An argument that you have used to defend her turning pro at 16.
I think if you are going to compare Michelle's play against Tiger, I think we should compare them starting at the time they each decided they were good enough to compete professionally.
First of all Tiger was a far better player when he turned professional than Michelle was, is anyone denying that?
The problem is that you and others are putting forward a view that when she turned professional, she should suddenly have become this all round perfect player. It doesn't work that way.
The point I have put forward on winning amateurs not helping to win pro events is one that has not changed.
However that 5 years from 16 to 21, whereever Tiger played golf, he would have been improving assuming he had the proper coaching setup.
That's the key 5 years of improvement. Then he was able to win pga tour titles.
Just because Michelle turned pro at 16 does not mean that she should have suddenly jumped into a player who had been playing amateurs for 5 extra years and be as good as those players.
September 8th, 2006, 12:39 PM
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
