Updated from PGA results

- Cam Smith: 8 to 8
- Brooks: 44 to 13
- Neimann: 28 to 30
- Reed: 48 to 44
- Ancer: 43 to 46
- Pieters: 53 to 53
- Mito: 56 to 50
- Varner: 65 to 64
- Gooch: 63 to 67
- Phil: 80 to 79
- DJ: 82 to 82
- Bryson: 214 to 90

The fact DJ and Brooks were 82 and 44 respectively. is laughable.

Except that aside from the masters, Koepka has played awful golf for two years in full tournaments. Injuries knock you down the list. DJ was more the family bump down but also hasn't played well in a while.

We can agree to disagree. I don't think there are 82 players better than DJ. Thats just not reality.

He is only one of two players to win two liv tournaments. 2nd at the masters, 1st at the PGA, and those 2 wins? Easy top 10.

"Full tournaments"

This is like Brandel Chamblee... just because the pga has designated a full tournament 72 holes, doesn't make it wrong for LiV to designate theirs 54 holes...

One doesn't make the other side wrong.

The fact that the LIV guys aren't getting owgr points is ridiculous.

tjones said:

---

This is like Brandel Chamblee... just because the pga has designated a full tournament 72 holes, doesn't make it wrong for LiV to designate theirs 54 holes...

One doesn't make the other side wrong.

The fact that the LIV guys aren't getting owgr points is ridiculous.

---

Yes. It's ridiculous they don't get OWGR points. But a full tournament has been 72 holes for more than 100 years and much longer than the PGAT has existed. Senior PGAT doesn't get points either. Also 54 holes. It absolutely makes a difference. And part of the attraction for the LIV guys (including Koepka at the time he switched) is fewer rounds so less wear and tear.

I'm fully in favor of points but it has to reflect the reality of a shorter tournament, no cut and weaker field.

Other tours get points for 54 hole events, with MUCH weaker fields.

Brandel Chamblee is the king of the ******s, overinflated self worth etc

#1 he's a sip
#2 he has 1 PGA tour win the Greater Vancouver Open

did I mention he's a sip?

I think I said twice in that post they should get points. Something along the lines of that Tiger Hero tourney.

CH3 Giving that ****** Chamblee the business! I love it

https://golfweek.usatoday.com/lists/liv-golf-brooks-koepka-coach-blasts-media/

Quote:

---

"Brandel is a paid actor by NBC and Golf Channel. All he's trying to do is get his lines and shows for the Golf Channel. He's just trying to get lines for Brandel … And I mean, I love him, I think Eamon is a fantastic writer, but for Eamon Lynch and Brandel Chamblee, who worked for NBC Golf Channel to utter the words 'sports washing' when the company they work for televised the last two Winter Olympics in Russia and China with the same leaders that they've had. It's not like they were good leaders back then. It's not like Putin was a good guy, right?"

---

the LIV guys knew they weren't getting OWGR points for LIV events when they went. they decided to take the money and LIV without the ranking points. I don't understand how this is hard for some to understand.

antman8504 said:

---

the LIV guys knew they weren't getting OWGR points for LIV events when they went. they decided to take the money and LIV without the ranking points. I don't understand how this is hard for some to understand.

---

So DJ, Cam Smith and Brooks aren't 3 of the top 25 golfers in the world because they decided to go to another place of employment?

EliteElectric said:

---

antman8504 said:

---

the LIV guys knew they weren't getting OWGR points for LIV events when they went. they decided to take the money and LIV without the ranking points. I don't understand how this is hard for some to understand.

---

So DJ, Cam Smith and Brooks aren't 3 of the top 25 golfers in the world because they decided to go to another place of employment?

---

Nobody is saying that.

RealTalk said:

---

EliteElectric said:

---

antman8504 said:

---

the LIV guys knew they weren't getting OWGR points for LIV events when they went. they decided to take the money and LIV without the ranking points. I don't understand how this is hard for some to understand.

---

So DJ, Cam Smith and Brooks aren't 3 of the top 25 golfers in the world because they decided to go to another place of employment?

---

Nobody is saying that.

---

Yes, no one is saying that, but that's whatbthe owgr are saying by not properly awarding points to the LIV tour. The other junk tours get points, but not the tour with multiple top 25 players in the world? That's just dumb and irrational.

It's just collusion among the other tours to disincentivize and punish the players who chose to join the LIV Tour.

It's just that simple.

RealTalk said:

---

It's just collusion among the other tours to disincentivize and punish the players who chose to join the LIV Tour.

It's just that simple.

---

Except they aren't "punishing " the players, they are simply not recognizing the tour those players CHOSE to play on. Not sure why that's so difficult to grasp.

Well it's ridiculous that guys competing against Brooks, Cam Smith and other top 50 players on a regular basis aren't being "recognized", even a little bit.

Again, there's 20+ guys on LIV that are some of the best in the world, they didn't simply get worst by changing where they play.

That's not 100% accurate.

They knew that they currently werent getting them but they were told that LIV was very confident that they would get OWGR.

For as easy as it is to understand they weren't getting them when they left...it should be just as easy to understand why they are fighting for them

Aggie369 said:

---

That's not 100% accurate.

They knew that they currently werent getting them but they were told that LIV was very confident that they would get OWGR.

For as easy as it is to understand they weren't getting them when they left...it should be just as easy to understand why they are fighting for them

---

I get why they are fighting for them. But if the guys who left for LIV (and, in particular, their agents, managers, etc.) believed LIV when LIV told them they would be getting points soon even though their setup met virtually none of the OWGR's criteria (which you have to meet for a full year first and that's before you even get to the political headwinds), then they are fools.

I've already waged this argument many times so don't really want to get into it again. But regardless of your opinion, LIV not getting points was entirely predictable, and I find it very unlikely the players were actually duped by this.

I don't know how each player felt about being told they would get OWGR....I don't think it was a make or break for anyone. The money was deciding factor...I've got no problem with them trying to get points though.

We can all argue semantics but anything called the "Official World Golf Rankings" should include (IMHO), at the very least, the best players in the world regardless of political or other affiliations.

_lefraud_ said:

---

Well it's ridiculous that guys competing against Brooks, Cam Smith and other top 50 players on a regular basis aren't being "recognized", even a little bit.

Again, there's 20+ guys on LIV that are some of the best in the world, they didn't simply get worst by changing where they play.

---

They chose to do it and they knew the rules before they did it. Try blaming them before you fault the established tours for protecting their own interests.

• Chamblee is a ******....no question about that
• LIV guys shouldn't get OWGR points because they don't play 72 hole events when everyone else does. If the LIV events were 72 holes, i might be persuaded otherwise. Although, I think the shotgun start hurts their position also.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

_lefraud_ said:

---

Well it's ridiculous that guys competing against Brooks, Cam Smith and other top 50 players on a regular basis aren't being "recognized", even a little bit.

Again, there's 20+ guys on LIV that are some of the best in the world, they didn't simply get worst by changing where they play.

---

They chose to do it and they knew the rules before they did it. Try blaming them before you fault the established tours for protecting their own interests.

---

That's like saying, if a person wants to start a plumbing business that the state won't grant a license to protect the existing plumbers.

It shouldn't matter what the other tours think, owgr should be impartial.

I think there's an argument for LIV getting points. But just saying it deserves points because it currently has good players is probably the worst one. For one, there's no guarantee it will continue to retain good players. And by that logic, a billionaire paying a couple top 10 players to compete against him every Saturday would require OWGR points (can't ignore 2 top 10 players!). At some point, you have to defend why the tour itself deserves to be recognized, regardless of the players who are in it. And if you can't make a case for why they deserve points without referencing their current players, that's a pretty big indictment for why they don't deserve points.

JCA1 said:

---

I think there's an argument for LIV getting points. But just saying it deserves points because it currently has good players is probably the worst one. For one, there's no guarantee it will continue to retain good players. And by that logic, a billionaire paying a couple top 10 players to compete against him every Saturday would require OWGR points (can't ignore 2 top 10 players!). At some point, you have to defend why the tour itself deserves to be recognized, regardless of the players who are in it. And if you can't make a case for why they deserve points without referencing their current players, that's a pretty big indictment for why they don't deserve points.

---

There are 23 (23!!) tours that get owgr pointo. The Mexican tour, which plays 54 hole events, also get points.

No chance that LIV isn't a more talented pool of golfers than at least half of the 23 tours currently getting points.

tjones said:

---

JCA1 said:

---

I think there's an argument for LIV getting points. But just saying it deserves points because it currently has good players is probably the worst one. For one, there's no guarantee it will continue to retain good players. And by that logic, a billionaire paying a couple top 10 players to compete against him every Saturday would require OWGR points (can't ignore 2 top 10 players!). At some point, you have to defend why the tour itself deserves to be recognized, regardless of the players who are in it. And if you can't make a case for why they deserve points without referencing their current players, that's a pretty big indictment for why they don't deserve points.

---

There are 23 (23!!) tours that get owgr pointo. The Mexican tour, which plays 54 hole events, also get points.

No chance that LIV isn't a more talented pool of golfers than at least half of the 23 tours currently getting points.

---

72 holes is the standard format for golf at the highest level and what OWGR requires with limited exceptions. But it's not a hill I want to die on. If people want to argue 54 holes should be fine, you won't get much pushback from me. But don't lose sight that LIV knew all of that and purposefully set up a tour that doesn't comply. Maybe ask why they set themselves up to be left out rather than screaming about people not changing their well established rules because someone purposefully chose not to comply?

As for the other tours that get points, most of those tours' available points is miniscule. That's not what liv is looking for. They want to be able to qualify for the majors via LIV. If LIV was given Mexican tour equivalent points, LIV would still be complaining. These have nothing to do with each other.

The dividing line for me is all of these other tours have well established ways to play your way on or off of them. Basically, professional golf is a merit-based pyramid where you either move up or down almost entirely on your performance. LIV sits outside that. There is no way to play your way on or off LIV. That's the main reason all of these tours get points and LIV doesn't (and I'm ignoring the other issue that the OWGR requires a complying tour exist for a full year before getting points).

LIV will eventually get owgr points, it's just going to be a drawn out process.

I just fi d it so fascinating how polarizing the issue is. Fir me, if someone wants to start a new your, have at it. I font get the heartburn it causes so many golf fans. I just don't oppose freedom to start abusiness. .

You can be relegated off LIV at the end of this season I believe....captains have a say in it as well

tjones said:

---

LIV will eventually get owgr points, it's just going to be a drawn out process.

I just fi d it so fascinating how polarizing the issue is. Fir me, if someone wants to start a new your, have at it. I font get the heartburn it causes so many golf fans. I just don't oppose freedom to start abusiness. .

---

That . . . has nothing to do with the conversation.

Not trying to be rude, but I don't get the sense you know the specifics of any of this. Not saying I'm some expert but I have taken the time to look up what OWGR requires for membership. For reasons that only Greg Norman can explain, LIV chose not to comply with virtually any of them. I can't get too upset about someone being denied membership in an organization when they meet none of the organization's membership requirements. You might even call that the freedom to run your business. Surprised a freedom-loving guy like yourself would demand an organization be forced to admit someone who meets none of their membership requirements.

Aggie369 said:

---

You can be relegated off LIV at the end of this season I believe....captains have a say in it as well

---

We can talk about that when it happens but as of right now, no one can say with any certainty how LIV is currently run or will be run in the future. I know you know a significant percentage of their players apparently have no-relegation clauses in their contracts.

100% agree

As I've said 1,000 times....let's see when it happens. But that's the supposed plan...potential relegation if captains want for like the bottom 40 players or something

tjones said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

_lefraud_ said:

---

Well it's ridiculous that guys competing against Brooks, Cam Smith and other top 50 players on a regular basis aren't being "recognized", even a little bit.

Again, there's 20+ guys on LIV that are some of the best in the world, they didn't simply get worst by changing where they play.

---

They chose to do it and they knew the rules before they did it. Try blaming them before you fault the established tours for protecting their own interests.

---

That's like saying, if a person wants to start a plumbing business that the state won't grant a license to protect the existing plumbers.

It shouldn't matter what the other tours think, owgr should be impartial.

---

Instead of being angry, try understanding the issue from the side of the PGAT. They are a sports marketing organization that solicits money from sponsors to hold tournaments. Now why would they invite players from a tour specifically designed to improve the image of the Saudis into the mix? Yes, LIV has a few stud players but why would the PGAT promote these players and allow the LIV to achieve what they want? What about TV contracts? Do they want association with the Saudis? What does the tour have to gain, and what does it have to lose? Have you ever managed risk? In all likelihood, the PGAT can simply keep going as they are going and LIV dissolves and the players can earn their way back.