Liv Golf Central Thread: Events and News

[RockerFCC]

On 10/12/2023 at 2:39 PM, DaveP043 said:

I definitely think there are a few really good players on LIV.  I'd have no objection to the Majors changing their invitation criteria to include some (small) number of LIV players based on their standing in LIV.  I'd prefer that LIV modify their procedures in an attempt to comply with the OWGR criteria, but LIV has said that they no interest in doing that.  They're saying "I don't care about your rules, we're good, you have to take us".  And by "good" they mean they can regularly beat  Phil and Pat Perez and a bunch of other guys nobody has ever heard of.  

I don't think that is what they are saying at all. I think they are saying your criteria is unfair and possibly illegal, at least from the perspective of a lawsuit. I think they are saying that just because we decide to not play in YOUR league we should not be penalized by a supposedly independent organization because you say we are not competitive enough. And I feel like their point has some validity. This is why I keep saying they deserve some kind of comparative representation of where they stand in the golf world rankings. Would it be fair if the Euro tour ws not affiliated with the PGA to disclude them? 

I suppose the people who have decided that the LIV is not deserving of consideration will never be swayed from that stance, or at least it seems unlikely. Kind of fits our tribal way we all think these days. I include myself too, I imagine those saying LIV is undeserving of points will have a hard time convincing me or anyone who is of the other inclination otherwise. That is OK, I just don't come to those conclusions from my logical standpoint. I feel like the LIV tour, irrespective of their no cut and 3 round policies ARE a competitive organization, and they do deserve consideration. And while I would not have an issue with an argument that they might get lesser points, logically I suppose 75% of the points makes sense, I do feel they are being slighted by total exclusion. I do feel that it a decision that is very much due to the power of the PGAT and I think if and when this goes to court, the PGAT will lose. 

[Preeway]

The only problem with your approach here is that the OWGR existed prior to LIV. The OWGR didn’t change their policies to screw over LIV. And this is an all or nothing deal. The reason why the Euro Tour, and all the other tours, get points is because they meet all the criteria. LIV essentially wants to have their cake and eat it too. I’m in the camp of wanting to see LIV get something if for no other reason than to make this go away. But anything more than 20-25% of a normal tournament point value would be excessive. Until they add cuts and become a truly open shop where anyone can try to qualify for like they do on the other tours they really don’t deserve anything. And it’s sad because there are some amazing golfers there. But they are gladly playing for more money and more down time in lieu of OWGR ranking. In the end I think you have to choose one or the other. 

[Josh Parker]

7 minutes ago, RockerFCC said:

I don't think that is what they are saying at all. I think they are saying your criteria is unfair and possibly illegal, at least from the perspective of a lawsuit. I think they are saying that just because we decide to not play in YOUR league we should not be penalized by a supposedly independent organization because you say we are not competitive enough. And I feel like their point has some validity. This is why I keep saying they deserve some kind of comparative representation of where they stand in the golf world rankings. Would it be fair if the Euro tour ws not affiliated with the PGA to disclude them? 

I suppose the people who have decided that the LIV is not deserving of consideration will never be swayed from that stance, or at least it seems unlikely. Kind of fits our tribal way we all think these days. I include myself too, I imagine those saying LIV is undeserving of points will have a hard time convincing me or anyone who is of the other inclination otherwise. That is OK, I just don't come to those conclusions from my logical standpoint. I feel like the LIV tour, irrespective of their no cut and 3 round policies ARE a competitive organization, and they do deserve consideration. And while I would not have an issue with an argument that they might get lesser points, logically I suppose 75% of the points makes sense, I do feel they are being slighted by total exclusion. I do feel that it a decision that is very much due to the power of the PGAT and I think if and when this goes to court, the PGAT will lose. 

I don't have a dog in the hunt whatsoever.  I think we can all agree that they have some amazing players at LIV.  I also think they knew this was a possibility and made a decision. Right or wrong either direction its a choice every player in any group had to decide.  I don't hate the ones that came out and said yeah the money is too good to pass up.  I just don't feel bad that the outcome is what it is either.  If I make a choice in life that I know could have a negative outcome and I still choose to do it then it's on me to accept it and move forward. 

If I'm reading the owgr correctly, they have a point system for 54 hole tournaments and looks like it's about a 20-25% reduction in points given. Then it goes into performance and a number of different items I'm not even going to try and comprehend.  Lol. 

At the end of the day, I think with the merger we will see changes and some of the LIV players playing in the majors. It will all shake out somehow. 

[DaveP043]

1 hour ago, jdparker said:

If I'm reading the owgr correctly, they have a point system for 54 hole tournaments and looks like it's about a 20-25% reduction in points given. Then it goes into performance and a number of different items I'm not even going to try and comprehend.  Lol

An important qualifying factor that LIV doesn't have is a route for new players to join a tour, and a route to eliminate poorer performers from the tour.  At the moment, it seems that both of those are basically at  the whim of the LIV organizers.  Pat Perez isn't going to lose his spot because he stinks.  I believe if LIV would make even a token gesture to address those they'd be approved for OWGR points, at a level appropriate for their format and fields.

[Josh Parker]

7 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

An important qualifying factor that LIV doesn't have is a route for new players to join a tour, and a route to eliminate poorer performers from the tour.  At the moment, it seems that both of those are basically at  the whim of the LIV organizers.  Pat Perez isn't going to lose his spot because he stinks.  I believe if LIV would make even a token gesture to address those they'd be approved for OWGR points, at a level appropriate for their format and fields.

I agree.  It's got to be a give/take if they really want to get the points. 

[chisag]

5 hours ago, Preeway said:

The only problem with your approach here is that the OWGR existed prior to LIV. The OWGR didn’t change their policies to screw over LIV. And this is an all or nothing deal. The reason why the Euro Tour, and all the other tours, get points is because they meet all the criteria. LIV essentially wants to have their cake and eat it too. And it’s sad because there are some amazing golfers there. But they are gladly playing for more money and more down time in lieu of OWGR ranking. In the end I think you have to choose one or the other. 

 

... Great post and it just shows money can't always buy everything. Of course it does much too often so I am glad to see it didn't this time. Again we all have our own perspectives and it isn't sad to me at all because of your last statement. They chose the money absolutely knowing liv did not meet the OWGR requirements. End of story. 

[LICC]

On 10/12/2023 at 3:27 PM, RockerFCC said:

I guess we just disagree. I feel that some of the players on LIV ARE some of the top players in the world, and they should be recognized for their play, wherever that is. It's not like it isn't real competition. These are all REALLY good golfers, it isn't being dominated by 1 or 2 people. And I think most people want to see some of them in majors, especially if they have won them before. Just my opinion, I don't know much, generally speaking 

LIV events are real competition, but they don't include the same competition requirements that OWGR needs to validly and fairly compare to other tours. These LIV players knew or should have known that they were going to a tour that is really a money exhibition and not a true competitive tour in the sense of qualifying and having to perform to remain. 

[mardukes]

On 10/12/2023 at 3:14 PM, chisag said:

 

...  I deplore capitalisms love of money over all else. I am a lifelong member of the Screen Actors Guild...

...too bad you didn't take an opportunity to get some education so you might understand what capitalism is.

[mardukes]

7 hours ago, LICC said:

LIV events are real competition, but they don't include the same competition requirements that OWGR needs to validly and fairly compare to other tours. These LIV players knew or should have known that they were going to a tour that is really a money exhibition and not a true competitive tour in the sense of qualifying and having to perform to remain. 

If OWGR fails to provide a legitimate WGR then it becomes obsolete.  They certainly have the privilege to destroy their usefulness but, we still want to see the best fields in the majors.  Someone needs to come up with a way to keep us happy.

[Preeway]

12 minutes ago, mardukes said:

If OWGR fails to provide a legitimate WGR then it becomes obsolete.  They certainly have the privilege to destroy their usefulness but, we still want to see the best fields in the majors.  Someone needs to come up with a way to keep us happy.

The OWGR isn’t failing to provide a legitimate ranking. In fact, it provides a very accurate ranking of all players who play on a tour that meets all the requirements. LIV is the odd duck here and there isn’t an accurate way to compare apples to oranges. I agree that we all prefer to see the very best fields in all four majors but that doesn’t change the fact that a small handful of the worlds best took themselves out of consideration. 

[chisag]

28 minutes ago, mardukes said:

...too bad you didn't take an opportunity to get some education so you might understand what capitalism is.

 

cap·i·tal·ism

/ˈkapədlˌizəm/

noun

an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit.

[LICC]

7 hours ago, mardukes said:

If OWGR fails to provide a legitimate WGR then it becomes obsolete.  They certainly have the privilege to destroy their usefulness but, we still want to see the best fields in the majors.  Someone needs to come up with a way to keep us happy.

No one other than entitled LIV players will consider OWGR obsolete for not degrading its criteria for an exhibition tour. 
As for the majors, the ones not already in can try to qualify for the Opens. And I really don’t care if I don’t see Talor Gooch play the Masters or the PGA. 

Edited October 17, 2023 by LICC

[LICC]

7 hours ago, chisag said:

 

cap·i·tal·ism

/ˈkapədlˌizəm/

noun

an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit.

I have to agree that if you take this as “love of money over all else” then you don’t really understand it. 

[RockerFCC]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but subjectivity does not make fact. Just because someone says that something is not competitive does not make it not competitive. If the people giving points for the OWGR, which, correct me if I am wrong here, is a separate entity from the PGAT, and supposed to be determining who the best players on the planet are, decide that players on LIV are not "competitive enough" to earn points, that is a subjective decision. Just like all the opinions here that 54 holes and no cuts are not deserving of points. And to take a position that there is no basis to think otherwise, just because the current criteria says that is how it is, well that might turn out to be very inaccurate when this goes to court. I cannot understand an argument that claims that these players do not deserve ANY consideration for where they rank in the world of competitive golf. And statements such as they knew what they were doing, that only a couple players deserve ranking (ALL the tours have only a small number of the "best" players), that they took the money and now must have "consequences, or any of these type of considerations don't seem to hold much water, at least to me, and I would bet to a court of law in the big picture of who are the best golfers in the world. LOTS of things throughout history have seemed right at one time then been shown to not be so later. And irrespective of whether someone agrees with (fill in the blank) on LIV, if you take subjective bias out of this equation, I think the question becomes easy. Are there players on the LIV tour who are in the top (whatever number you pick) out of all the golfers in the world. And if the answer is yes, which I think almost everyone agrees it is, to give them zero consideration for world ranking points, which undoubtedly DOES affect their career opportunities, is likely going to turn out to be wrong at best, and illegal at worst. 

[cnosil]

1 hour ago, RockerFCC said:

If the people giving points for the OWGR, which, correct me if I am wrong here, is a separate entity from the PGAT, and supposed to be determining who the best players on the planet are, decide that players on LIV are not "competitive enough" to earn points, that is a subjective decision.

 Are there players on the LIV tour who are in the top (whatever number you pick) out of all the golfers in the world. And if the answer is yes, which I think almost everyone agrees it is, to give them zero consideration for world ranking points, which undoubtedly DOES affect their career opportunities, is likely going to turn out to be wrong at best, and illegal at worst. 

While the OWGR committee is separate; The tours are the representatives on the governing bodies https://www.owgr.com/about-owgr so they have a say in how to determine who the best players are. 
 

we may think the LIV players are some of the best but that is based on past performances when they played in events that offered points.   We also have to look into the future when there is a turnover in players  and objectively determine if these players are some of the best in the world.   The OWGR system is objectively defined https://www.owgr.com/how-the-ranking-works.  What LIV is doing is basically asking them to rewrite the rules for OWGR because they decided  not to follow the defined rules.  

Edited October 17, 2023 by cnosil

[Preeway]

19 minutes ago, cnosil said:

While the OWGR committee is separate for. The tours, they are the representatives on the governing bodies https://www.owgr.com/about-owgr so they have a say in how to determine who the best players are. 
 

we may think the LIV players are some of the best but that is based on past performances when they played in events that offered points.   We also have to look into the future when there is a turnover in players  and objectively determine if these players are some of the best in the world.   The OWGR system is objectively defined https://www.owgr.com/how-the-ranking-works.  What LIV is doing is basically asking them to rewrite the rules for OWGR because they decided  not to follow the defined rules.  

Absolutely nailed it. This is the only aspect of LIV that I can't stand. The expectation for the rest of the world to change and refusing to accept the fact that they chose to be a square peg in a land of square holes. I know egos are big with the likes of Norman and Mickleson but the absolute refusal to accept reality and the conjectures of conspiracy theories just amaze me.

[LICC]

1 hour ago, RockerFCC said:

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but subjectivity does not make fact. Just because someone says that something is not competitive does not make it not competitive. If the people giving points for the OWGR, which, correct me if I am wrong here, is a separate entity from the PGAT, and supposed to be determining who the best players on the planet are, decide that players on LIV are not "competitive enough" to earn points, that is a subjective decision. Just like all the opinions here that 54 holes and no cuts are not deserving of points. And to take a position that there is no basis to think otherwise, just because the current criteria says that is how it is, well that might turn out to be very inaccurate when this goes to court. I cannot understand an argument that claims that these players do not deserve ANY consideration for where they rank in the world of competitive golf. And statements such as they knew what they were doing, that only a couple players deserve ranking (ALL the tours have only a small number of the "best" players), that they took the money and now must have "consequences, or any of these type of considerations don't seem to hold much water, at least to me, and I would bet to a court of law in the big picture of who are the best golfers in the world. LOTS of things throughout history have seemed right at one time then been shown to not be so later. And irrespective of whether someone agrees with (fill in the blank) on LIV, if you take subjective bias out of this equation, I think the question becomes easy. Are there players on the LIV tour who are in the top (whatever number you pick) out of all the golfers in the world. And if the answer is yes, which I think almost everyone agrees it is, to give them zero consideration for world ranking points, which undoubtedly DOES affect their career opportunities, is likely going to turn out to be wrong at best, and illegal at worst. 

The OWGR is not supposed to be determining who are the best players on the planet. It is supposed to be ranking the players who play in events on tours that have sufficiently similar competitive attributes. 

When Mickelson and Tiger and Rory and JT et al play for millions of dollars in The Match events, no one would think the OWGR should award points for it. But they are playing for a significant dollar amount and they are among the top talented golfers on the planet. But those matches don't have the competitive tour elements to compare to events on tours that get OWGR points. 

If LIV had a more competitive qualification and relegation process, I'm guessing OWGR would give its events some level of points reduced from PGA Tour events.

[Donn lost in San Diego]

OWGR, imoh, should come up with a way.  Now, OWGR says there is only 1 type of competition: 72 hole, cut, compete to even get in many events.  It is monopoly.  The reps from the majors who are on the OWGR have not spoken, have they?

 

A 3 round event is just as competitive, because if you have a bad round, you have less time to make it up.  You have to be more consistent.  On TOUR events, much has been written about an All or Nothing approach by many golfers, shooting at every flag, bombing for most distance, hoping to shoot a miracle round, as compared to a consistency model.  Strategy differs between a 3 round vs 4 round event, but the cream rises to the top in both 3 and 4.

 

The notion that you have to qualify, via Monday qual, or via earning your TOUR card for a year, to get into a point earning event, is not a legit argument, because we are talking about earning OWGR points by the best scoring LIV golfers, not the middle and bottom, and the top guys would otherwise be strong points guys in TOUR events. 

 

OWGR should negotiate.  LIV is not cast in stone.  TOUR isn't either, witness the yearly change in the Cup Finale qualifying.  I hope that the orgs that run the majors will see to it that a nego agreement happens.

[RickyBobby_PR]

42 minutes ago, Donn lost in San Diego said:

OWGR should negotiate.  LIV is not cast in stone.  TOUR isn't either, witness the yearly change in the Cup Finale qualifying.  I hope that the orgs that run the majors will see to it that a nego agreement happens.

They basically did. They were going to let LIV continue using the format they have as long as they did away with how they don’t drop anyone for poor play or have a way for someone to join.

it’s really not that hard. Liv entered the pro golf world and Norman who has made it his goal to destroy the current pro golf scene for a world tour thought he was going to be able to ramrod his concept down the OWGR board and get his way. The OWGR board shouldn’t bend for LIV or any new tour that wants its members to get ranking points.

You don’t burn the house down over some new kid on the block that wants to do things their way

[Donn lost in San Diego]

25 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

They basically did. They were going to let LIV continue using the format they have as long as they did away with how they don’t drop anyone for poor play or have a way for someone to join.

it’s really not that hard. Liv entered the pro golf world and Norman who has made it his goal to destroy the current pro golf scene for a world tour thought he was going to be able to ramrod his concept down the OWGR board and get his way. The OWGR board shouldn’t bend for LIV or any new tour that wants its members to get ranking points.

You don’t burn the house down over some new kid on the block that wants to do things their way

I didn't know, never heard, that OWGR did offer that.  I do know that Greg Norman is mad for long time about TOUR rules.

[DaveP043]

1 hour ago, Donn lost in San Diego said:

OWGR, imoh, should come up with a way.  Now, OWGR says there is only 1 type of competition: 72 hole, cut, compete to even get in many events. 

That's not accurate, some tours with 54 hole events get (reduced) points, and some no-cut events get points.  There are a number of qualifications a tour must meet, all of which are known to LIV.  From what I've read, the primary concern is that there is no route for a player to qualify for entry into LIV, its completely by invitation only.  Consequently, there's no direct competition between LIV players and non-LIV players, except in a few of the Majors, so there's no reasonable way to compare one against the other.  And LIV, knowing this is a problem, has chosen not to change their process.  A secondary concern is the combination of Individual and Team competitions, and the effect that the team aspect might have on an individual player's choices.  It seems that LIV is insisting that the OWGR bend to LIV's will, because somehow these 48 (very rich) players are much mre important that the thousands of other players currently playing in OWGR-ranked tours and events.

[DaveP043]

9 minutes ago, Donn lost in San Diego said:

I didn't know, never heard, that OWGR did offer that.  I do know that Greg Norman is mad for long time about TOUR rules.

Sometimes the reporting doesn't cover all of the information, there just isn't time (or attention span).  Its interesting to read the official OWGR response here:

https://www.owgr.com/news/owgr-denies-liv-golf-s-application-for-eligible-tour-status

 

[Preeway]

1 hour ago, Donn lost in San Diego said:

OWGR, imoh, should come up with a way.  Now, OWGR says there is only 1 type of competition: 72 hole, cut, compete to even get in many events.  It is monopoly.  The reps from the majors who are on the OWGR have not spoken, have they?

 

A 3 round event is just as competitive, because if you have a bad round, you have less time to make it up.  You have to be more consistent.  On TOUR events, much has been written about an All or Nothing approach by many golfers, shooting at every flag, bombing for most distance, hoping to shoot a miracle round, as compared to a consistency model.  Strategy differs between a 3 round vs 4 round event, but the cream rises to the top in both 3 and 4.

 

The notion that you have to qualify, via Monday qual, or via earning your TOUR card for a year, to get into a point earning event, is not a legit argument, because we are talking about earning OWGR points by the best scoring LIV golfers, not the middle and bottom, and the top guys would otherwise be strong points guys in TOUR events. 

 

OWGR should negotiate.  LIV is not cast in stone.  TOUR isn't either, witness the yearly change in the Cup Finale qualifying.  I hope that the orgs that run the majors will see to it that a nego agreement happens.

So, as a school teacher, I create a syllabus, curriculum, grading guidelines and communicate these with all my students on the first day of class. Then, halfway through the semester I have one of my brightest students who has not turned in any homework but does really well on a test wants an A in my class even though it was clear on the syllabus that homework constitutes 30% of the overall grade. Am I supposed to change everything about my class just to accommodate this one student? Somehow it's now my responsibility to create a grading scale that reflects how smart he is rather than the work he completes? My point is we don't ask everyone else to change to accommodate the one. We don't change all the existing structures governing a sport just because one group wants to do something different. There is nothing wrong with LIV or it's structure. And there isn't any debate regarding how good some of the players are on LIV. But every person who moved over to LIV made the jump simply for an opportunity for more money and less time away from family. They made this choice knowing their ranking in the OWGR would be impacted.

[RockerFCC]

All of you who are supporting the current OWGR position never answered my question. Are there players on the LIV tour who are (lets just say) top 50 in the world? Period, are there? If so, you all say they should have no representation in the ranking of the top players in the world? And believe that doesn't legally deprive them of opportunity they would otherwise have in their profession, one they have proven they are equally good at? I don't know man, I think a court will say it's not fair. Regardless of what the current status quo is. They are literally challenging the rules they disagree with. Isn't that how things work in everything if people disagree with the rules of either their or a rival representation? LIV is saying the rules are not fair. The PGAT says it is. Likely, a court will decide one way or another. Everything else, very single argument being made here is just subjective, opinion. Even what a court decides will be somewhat subjective, even if it is based on antitrust, or labor law,  sporting law or whatever criteria they use. I believe a court will at some point decide, and I think it will be for the players on LIV.  I think the PGAT knows this., I think it's why they made concessions and I think we will see more.  None of this is because I like one more than the other, it just seems like common sense to me. 

Many of you are talking in absolutes. I don't like that.

Only a Sith talks in absolutes. 

[RockerFCC]

8 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

That's not accurate, some tours with 54 hole events get (reduced) points, and some no-cut events get points.  There are a number of qualifications a tour must meet, all of which are known to LIV.  From what I've read, the primary concern is that there is no route for a player to qualify for entry into LIV, its completely by invitation only.  Consequently, there's no direct competition between LIV players and non-LIV players, except in a few of the Majors, so there's no reasonable way to compare one against the other.  And LIV, knowing this is a problem, has chosen not to change their process.  A secondary concern is the combination of Individual and Team competitions, and the effect that the team aspect might have on an individual player's choices.  It seems that LIV is insisting that the OWGR bend to LIV's will, because somehow these 48 (very rich) players are much mre important that the thousands of other players currently playing in OWGR-ranked tours and events.

I think this is probably the best point the PGAT can make in court. But I disagree with your assessment that they are trying to affect changes for the reasons you say. If they disagree with the rules, what choice do they have but to challenge them? Enough time has passed to allow negotiations or changes to the criteria. One can argue it's the PGA tour who won't compromise. I think that will be their court argument

[RockerFCC]

8 hours ago, Preeway said:

So, as a school teacher, I create a syllabus, curriculum, grading guidelines and communicate these with all my students on the first day of class. Then, halfway through the semester I have one of my brightest students who has not turned in any homework but does really well on a test wants an A in my class even though it was clear on the syllabus that homework constitutes 30% of the overall grade. Am I supposed to change everything about my class just to accommodate this one student? Somehow it's now my responsibility to create a grading scale that reflects how smart he is rather than the work he completes? My point is we don't ask everyone else to change to accommodate the one. We don't change all the existing structures governing a sport just because one group wants to do something different. There is nothing wrong with LIV or it's structure. And there isn't any debate regarding how good some of the players are on LIV. But every person who moved over to LIV made the jump simply for an opportunity for more money and less time away from family. They made this choice knowing their ranking in the OWGR would be impacted.

Interesting. So what if that student can prove in court that your grading criteria is unfair? And that you control the opportunity for the quality of the degree they get, to secure better employment in the future. And they try to get it changed after this school year? You cool with that?

[RockerFCC]

9 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

They basically did. They were going to let LIV continue using the format they have as long as they did away with how they don’t drop anyone for poor play or have a way for someone to join.

it’s really not that hard. Liv entered the pro golf world and Norman who has made it his goal to destroy the current pro golf scene for a world tour thought he was going to be able to ramrod his concept down the OWGR board and get his way. The OWGR board shouldn’t bend for LIV or any new tour that wants its members to get ranking points.

You don’t burn the house down over some new kid on the block that wants to do things their way

Norman definitely has an ax to grind, don't disagree. I think the question in court will be does that define what LIV wants, and is what they want fair to all the players. No one is trying to burn anything down,  and at this point I am not sure they are just the new kids. Maybe they are just saying they think the criteria should be changed to include their playing results in the world rankings. Maybe they are right. maybe they are wrong.

[RockerFCC]

14 hours ago, Preeway said:

Absolutely nailed it. This is the only aspect of LIV that I can't stand. The expectation for the rest of the world to change and refusing to accept the fact that they chose to be a square peg in a land of square holes. I know egos are big with the likes of Norman and Mickleson but the absolute refusal to accept reality and the conjectures of conspiracy theories just amaze me.

 

14 hours ago, cnosil said:

While the OWGR committee is separate; The tours are the representatives on the governing bodies https://www.owgr.com/about-owgr so they have a say in how to determine who the best players are. 
 

we may think the LIV players are some of the best but that is based on past performances when they played in events that offered points.   We also have to look into the future when there is a turnover in players  and objectively determine if these players are some of the best in the world.   The OWGR system is objectively defined https://www.owgr.com/how-the-ranking-works.  What LIV is doing is basically asking them to rewrite the rules for OWGR because they decided  not to follow the defined rules.  

I think ithier argument is based on some pretty recent results in majors. And I think if you took the lower 50% of the PGAT and put them against the lower 50% of LIV it just might be closer than you think.

[Preeway]

7 hours ago, RockerFCC said:

Interesting. So what if that student can prove in court that your grading criteria is unfair? And that you control the opportunity for the quality of the degree they get, to secure better employment in the future. And they try to get it changed after this school year? You cool with that?

Absolutely. If my grading system is biased, discriminatory, or is otherwise arbitrary and/or capricious then absolutely. But that isn’t the claim against the OWGR. The only claim is, it isn’t fair or but the best players on LIV can’t get points. The OWGR isn’t the villain here. Norman has a decades old grudge against the PGAT and this is his way of trying to settle it.

IMO, all the better players on LIV are finally realizing they were fed a line by Norman who clearly over promised. I see the PGAT open to litigation as we’ve already begun to see so hopefully 2024 clears up the rumblings about a path back so some of these players can earn points again. Because clearly LIV isn’t going to do anything to legitimize their tour in the eyes of the OWGR. 

[Preeway]

7 hours ago, RockerFCC said:

All of you who are supporting the current OWGR position never answered my question. Are there players on the LIV tour who are (lets just say) top 50 in the world? Period, are there? If so, you all say they should have no representation in the ranking of the top players in the world? And believe that doesn't legally deprive them of opportunity they would otherwise have in their profession, one they have proven they are equally good at? I don't know man, I think a court will say it's not fair. Regardless of what the current status quo is. They are literally challenging the rules they disagree with. Isn't that how things work in everything if people disagree with the rules of either their or a rival representation? LIV is saying the rules are not fair. The PGAT says it is. Likely, a court will decide one way or another. Everything else, very single argument being made here is just subjective, opinion. Even what a court decides will be somewhat subjective, even if it is based on antitrust, or labor law,  sporting law or whatever criteria they use. I believe a court will at some point decide, and I think it will be for the players on LIV.  I think the PGAT knows this., I think it's why they made concessions and I think we will see more.  None of this is because I like one more than the other, it just seems like common sense to me. 

Many of you are talking in absolutes. I don't like that.

Only a Sith talks in absolutes. 

Yes, there are a handful of top 50 guys on LIV. Or at least there were. Brooks has proven he still is. Cam certainly is. Anyone else? Maybe. But my point remains how do you compare apples to oranges? LIV is demanding that the OWGR create a new system just for them. You can’t simply tweak the existing algorithm and then apply it to all tours evenly. The current algorithm is based on the structure that all other tours abide by. I’m still waiting for a coherent argument as to why the current algorithm is unfair. All we currently have are grown men complaining that they were told they wouldn’t get points anymore and now they aren’t getting points anymore.