Journeyman 123

Golf Digest did a short article based on a post on Phil Blackmar's blog. That post is called Journeyman 123. Both are worth reading.



Phil's point -- which I agree with and have expressed to other people over the years as well -- is that it's not easy to be a "journeyman" and yet the word is used somewhat disdainfully to describe players who don't become the next Jack or Tiger or Jordan or [fill in the blank].

And Phil's post -- which is briefly summarized in the Golf Digest article -- shows just how hard it is to get to the Tour, let alone stay there. Here's one surprising fact from Phil's article:

Since 1980 only 324 players have made at least 250 Tour starts.

Only 324 players in nearly 40 years, folks. That's it. And Phil is #123 on that list with 443 starts -- hence the Journeyman 123 moniker.

Take a few moments to read Phil's post. It'll make you appreciate those players you may not have paid much attention to over the years. And it'll let you know just how hard it is to succeed in professional golf.

The PGA Tour Makes It Harder for Injured Players

Obviously there's no Limerick Summary today because, at the time I'm doing this post, the Zurich Classic isn't finished. So I thought I'd comment on a recent turn of events that bothers me.

I'm talking about Brian Gay and Ian Poulter finally getting their Tour cards back. Don't get me wrong -- I'm very happy that they got them back. What bothers me is the Tour error that almost kept them off the Tour. It's time for a rant!



I'm linking you to a golf.com article that explains the whole thing in more detail, but the short version is that the Tour has changed the way they figure the points for the FedExCup. That's what the Tour is using to figure out when an injured player has played well enough to regain his card.

Again, short version: The Tour has made it harder to get those points since the two men were injured, so it's harder for players coming back from injury to regain their cards. If Brian Gay had not realized what had happened -- and that it shouldn't have applied to him and Poulter -- both men would have lost their cards DESPITE having done enough to get them back.

Brian Gay figured out that something was wrong, went to the Tour and, fortunately, common sense prevailed at Tour HQ and they awarded both men their cards. And I realize most folks would be happy and let it go at that.

But I'm bothered by the Tour's decision to make it harder for a player to come back from a major medical leave. Shouldn't a player trying to return from an injury be granted a slightly easier road back, allowing him to properly return to form?

After all, players keep saying that no matter how much you practice, you need time playing under competitive pressure to genuinely return to form. Logically, players will not finish as well during that "return to form" period.

Yet the Tour has reduced the points that are available for those lower finishes! That puts recovering players in the situation Gay and Poulter found themselves in, and that simply doesn't seem fair to me. If you really want to help players return to the Tour, why would you set the standards so high?

Presumably the Tour has changed the points structure to represent an improved level of play at the top levels of the Tour. I question how making it easier for the top players to gain points while the rank-and-file have to struggle even harder to keep their cards improves the makeup of the Tour. (But since when has the Tour made decisions that are easy to understand?) However, this seems draconian to me.

At the very least, it seems that the Tour should use a different point structure for players returning from a major medical leave -- one that allows them to ease back into the competitive environment of the Tour, rather than expecting them to return in the same form they had before they were injured. As it stands -- using the sample point totals from the golf.com article:

Gay began digging into his FedEx Cup totals for his 2016-17 finishes and only then noticed a lightly publicized change to this season’s points breakdown. The Tour has restructured the distribution, giving fewer points to finishes below 14th. For instance, a 20th-place finish last season was worth 51 points, but this season it brings only 45; 30th place has been devalued from 41 points to 28.

Note that Gay was 28 points short of his requirement, which was 464 (125th in ’14-15). But look at how the changes affect him:

• Two 30th-place finishes -- just outside the Top25, and a reasonable expectation for a player returning from an injury but playing well -- now bring only 56 points rather than the original 82. That's 26 points right there!
• With five Top20 finishes, he would only receive 225 points instead of the 255 awarded before the change -- 30 points less.

For comparison, Ryan Moore is currently 30th in FedExCup points with 538 points in 12 starts (one MC) this season. Moore has only one T3, one T9 and one T15... but he has 7 Top25 finishes. Most of his finishes are between 15 and 35 (plus a T39 at the Match Play and a T61 at the Phoenix Open).

Drop down to Branden Grace, also with 12 starts (one MC, one WD) this season. He's 64th with 359 points. He has a T10, T11 and T13... and only 4 Top25 finishes. Most of his finishes are between 20 and 35 (plus a T39 at the Match Play, same as Moore).

Neither of these players were on major medical.

Compare them with Brian Gay, currently at 83rd after 11 events (three MC). He has only 280 points for this season. He has two T6s and a T13 (that's three Top25s)... and nothing else higher than a T28. Yet this is better than he did last year when he first came back from the major medical, when he missed 9 cuts. He only had one Top10 last year, a 6th place finish.

You're probably thinking that Gay played so bad, it's no wonder he didn't get his card. But that's the whole point -- under the old system, HE DID! There are a number of healthy players, in no danger of losing their cards, who don't have three Top10s in that time period. Players coming back from a major medical leave simply don't have the consistency of healthy players, yet they have to conform to a new point system that requires consistency to keep one's card.

The Tour needs to fix this. Situations like Gay and Poulter's simply should not happen. Major medical exemptions should help players work their way back into shape, not penalize them for being injured.

End of rant.

Five Out of Four, Plus Three

The reason for the weird title is simple. There were two unrelated events I wanted to mention today and that's the best title I could come up with. So sue me.

First off, the Sanderson Farms Championship finally finished up. Peter Malnati became the fifth straight first-time winner on the PGA Tour this season in only four weeks (hence my title). So for those of you debating whether Spieth, Day, McIlroy or Fowler will dominate in 2016, you now know NONE of them will win, not even once...

For clearly, 2016 has already been declared a "first-timers only" zone.



And then there was the rather complex announcement of the new Charles Schwab Cup Playoffs on the Champions Tour, scheduled to begin next year. Here's the video of Tim Finchum with the details from Monday's Morning Drive:



You can get all the details from the video clip. But here's the new playoff setup:

• 72 players will make it to the new Powershares QQQ Championship, which will be cut to
• 54 players for the new Dominion Charity Classic, culminating with
• 36 players (up from the current 30) going to the final event, the Charles Schwab Cup Championship.

The events will be held in Los Angeles, California; Richmond, Virginia; and Scottsdale, Arizona. That means the players will be leaping from one coast to the other for three weeks. But it should end the possibility of someone locking up the Cup before the last event is ever played, since you know they intend to create something like the FedExCup race -- which means there will most likely be a points reshuffle before the final event.

You can read a bit more about the Triple-Q at vcstar.com, and about the Dominion at richmond.com. Given the new 20-year sponsorship deal with Schwab, an overhaul like this makes perfect sense.

The photo of Peter Malnati came from this page at golf.com.

Trump Gets His Major... and Then Some

Say what you want about Donald Trump, the man has proven that he has a heart for golf as well as land development. And now he has a men's major to go with it.



Thursday the PGA of America made what most of us already knew official: Trump National GC at Bedminster, NJ will host the 2022 PGA Championship. Not only that, they announced that Trump National GC at Washington DC will host the 2017 Senior PGA Championship.

The PGA will be hosted on Trump Bedminster's Old Course. Let me just quote from the PGA's announcement at their site:

Trump National Golf Club -- Bedminster, built on the 600-acre former estate of sports car magnate John DeLorean, features two courses -- the Old and New Course. The Old Course, designed by Tom Fazio, which will host the 2017 U.S. Women's Open and the 2022 PGA Championship, opened for play in 2004 and plays to 7,560 yards. It has received rave reviews and since 2005 has been ranked among the Top 100 Golf Courses in America by GOLF Magazine and many other rating systems. It is considered one of this country's great golf courses and has the capacity to hold massive numbers of spectators.

Am I the only one who loves the irony the PGA playing a major on a Fazio-designed course located on the old DeLorean estate? That is just sooooo Hollywood!

But Trump's biggest coup may be just a matter of time because something else is official, folks -- Donald Trump finalized his deal to buy the Turnberry Resort in Scotland on Monday night. Does anyone doubt that he'll eventually get an Open Championship?

I have said in the past that I think Trump's involvement is good for golf. He has continued to invest in golf, even when the economy scared off most other investors. And consider what golf.com reported: "Trump said that he wasn’t looking specifically to buy the Open venue on Scotland’s west coast, but he couldn’t pass it up after an inquiry revealed it might be on the market."

Trump has now rescued both Doral and Turnberry. I think the golf world should be pretty damn grateful!

And lest you're worried that Turnberry will be renovated, you can relax. While he intends to make the hotel "the finest golf hotel in the world," he made his feelings about the legendary course very clear:

“Some of the greatest championships in the history of golf have taken place at Turnberry,” Trump said. “And the golf course itself is considered one of the greatest in the world. Some rate it as the best in the world. I’m not going to touch a thing unless the Royal and Ancient ask for it or approve it. I have the greatest respect for the R&A and for Peter Dawson. I won’t do anything to the golf course at all without their full stamp of approval.”

Like I said, you may question Donald Trump about a lot of things... but the man has a real heart for golf. I think I can forgive him if he decides to call his newest toy "Trump Turnberry."

The photo came from the PGA.com article listed above. In addition to the two articles I linked to in this post, you can read more about the 2022 PGA announcement here.

The New World Golf Hall of Fame Induction Criteria

The World Golf Hall of Fame announced their new WGHoF induction standards on Sunday. We'll see the first results in May 2015.



Here are the new critieria:

• Players will be inducted every other year, instead of every year as in the past.
• A 20-member subcommittee will create a list of potential inductees, and a 16-member selection commission will make the final choices. That 16-member group will be headed by Arnold Palmer, Gary Player, Nancy Lopez, and Annika Sorenstam -- all WGHoF members themselves.
• Inductees must receive 75% of the selection commission's votes to gain entry.
• Inductees will fall into 4 categories -- men, women, veterans and lifetime achievement.
• Players need either 15 wins on approved tours (there are 6 of these for the men and 5 for the women) or 2 majors to be considered, and must be either 40 years old or retired for 5 years. (For the men, 2 PLAYERS Championships can substitute for the majors.)

This does simplify things considerably although not everyone is happy. For example, the media will have a lot less say-so over the inductions since very few of them will get a vote -- only 20 people choose candidates and only 16 people will vote on them. (I suspect many others will approve of this change.) Others say the age should have been raised to 45 or 50. (Gary Player stated rather bluntly that he would rather be alive to enjoy the induction ceremony!)

For the men, the standards have toughened somewhat -- from 10 wins to 15. And the combination of the 75% vote and two-year induction cycle should reduce the complaints, as when Fred Couples and Colin Montgomerie (both worthy members) were inducted with a mere 51% of the vote... and they had the biggest part of the votes. Wins from the following tours count toward admission:

• PGA Tour
• European Tour
• Japan Golf Tour
• Sunshine Tour
• Asian Tour
• Australasian Tour

For the women, the standards are considerably reduced. When I heard the announcement, my first reaction was that Laura Davies is getting in next year. An interesting side note is that the LPGA will continue to use their own points-based criteria for the LPGA Hall of Fame, which is separate from the WGHoF. Randall Mell did a post at GolfTalkCentral listing several of the women who will now become eligible for the WGHoF under the new rules. Wins from the following tours count toward admission:

• LPGA
• LET
• JLPGA
• KLPGA
• ALPG

Despite some of the reservations I've heard voiced over the last couple of days, I think the new criteria are good changes. It's about time that everybody was judged by the same measure, and the new rules are stiff enough to ensure that we don't end up with a mere popularity contest. And by allowing wins from several tours to count, international golfers have virtually the same eligibility opportunities as American golfers.

Alex Miceli at Golfweek has a detailed article about the changes here. (That's also where the photo came from.)

He Said, She Said

Have you heard about the unrest that's been brewing between the LPGA players and the USGA concerning the back-to-back PGA-LPGA majors at Pinehurst this summer? If not, you must have been asleep for a few months.

If you've been confused about the reasons behind it, Beth Ann Nichols did an article for Golfweek a few days back that explains it very well.



Here's the basic arguing point: The women seem to like the basic idea of back-to-back US Opens as a publicity tool, but they thought they would be playing Pinehurst first instead of second and are concerned about the course being "divoted up" by the time they get there. So Mike Whan called in USGA Executive Director (and Chief Setup Dude) Mike Davis this week to explain the logic behind the decision... and apparently many of the women don't buy it. The article Nichols wrote is the first I've seen to explain that logic.

Davis says, "Plain and simple, it has everything to do with the agronomics.” He says it's much easier to make the green speeds match if the women go second. (The greens will have to watered more for the women to make them receptive to their shots, which come in lower with less spin.) You can understand that.

The women, however, are upset about the thousands of divots the men will dig out of the course. You can understand that as well.

Nichols also quotes Stacy Lewis as saying that too much of the USGA plan depends on the weather... and the women aren't so sure they like that. Again, you can understand the skepticism. (Hey, I live in North Carolina. The weather has been rather... eccentric during the last few years.)

Let's get one thing clear: The controversy is going to continue until both US Opens have been held. We'll just have to see how everything turns out. But at least you now know what all the hubbub is about.

You can thank Beth Ann Nichols for that. Thanks, Beth!

About the New Latin American Amateur Championship

By now you've all heard about the new Latin American Amateur Championship. In case you missed the official announcement on Wednesday, here are the basics:



The Masters committee, the R&A, and the USGA are combining forces to launch a new amateur tournament to spur the growth of golf in South America. Billy Payne, Peter Dawson, and Mike Davis (from the three groups, respectively) all traveled to Buenos Aires, Argentina to make the announcement.

The new Latin American Amateur Championship will be played just outside Buenos Aires on January 15-18, 2015, and will be open to amateurs from 27 South American countries (or territories, as the case may be).

This event is being patterned after the Asia-Pacific Amateur Championship, in which the winner gets an invite to the Masters. That little perk has already boosted the careers of now-pro Hideki Matsuyama (who is #24 on the OWGR this week) and youngster Guan Tianlang. However, since the R&A and USGA have joined forces with the Masters for this event, the rewards are much greater.

The winner gets:

• an invitation to the Masters
• a full exemption into the British Amateur Championship
• a full exemption into the US Amateur
• a full exemption into any other USGA event for which he is eligible
• a spot in final qualifying for the Open Championship
• a spot in final qualifying for the U.S. Open.

In addition, all of the runners-up (if there's more than one) also get full exemptions into final qualifying for the Open Championship and US Open.

I saw the announcement and, since both Angel Cabrera and Eduardo Romero were featured guests there, I suspect they will figure into the promotions in a big way.

It will be interesting to see if this event meets with the success of the Asia-Pacific, but the timing -- they'll be able to play this new event twice before the Rio Olympics, which have already encouraged increased golf development in South American countries -- along with the number of "prizes" should certainly give it a running start.

The photo came from the ESPN article about the announcement.

The PGA Tour Gives You Your Holly Sonders Fix Today

You'll notice that this post includes the tag "tour business." Let's be honest about things, right? We all know why the Humana Challenge gave Holly Sonders one of the four celebrity invitations. (According to the Golf Digest article where I got the photo, the other invites went to actor Craig T. Nelson, Arizona Cardinals kicker Jay Feely, and singer Michael Bolton.)



Not that I have a problem with that. Regardless of the jokes that the invite has provoked, Golf Digest didn't title their article "Holly Sonders Reaffirms Her Rock Star Status, Receives Invitation to Humana Challenge Pro-Am" for nothing.

Whether we like it or not, pro golf is a business. Events are given the right to issue special invitations and exemptions for that very reason -- to attract more viewers. And even the most cynical of golf fans will admit that Holly Sonders attracts viewers.

More importantly, Holly can play. (GC lists her as a 7 handicap.) If you've watched any of the Playing Lessons shows she's done, you'll frequently see that the pros are impressed with her shots. For all the glamor shoots and such that focus on her looks, the fact remains that she's a very capable athlete.

GolfTalkCentral has posted the new pro pairings for Holly. Several different pairing were originally released but apparently the PGA Tour felt they could get more attention from her appearance.

Today she's scheduled to play with John Daly and Jesper Parnevik at 12:30pm ET, according to the GolfTalkCentral post. But she'll still be on the course when GC begins coverage (times are listed at the end of this post). And of course you can be sure GC will have plenty of tape showing her best shots from before the broadcast.

Her tee time on Friday (and, I presume, her pairing) aren't available yet.

And on Saturday she gets the marquee group with Brandt Snedeker and Rickie Fowler at 1:20pm ET, guaranteeing plenty of TV time.

GC will have the PreGame Show at 2:30pm ET, then start regular coverage at 3pm. Enjoy your Holly fix, golf fans!

Why I Like Michael Whan

In case you missed it, Michael Whan (the LPGA commissioner) was on Morning Drive Tuesday morning. GC posted a video of the interview -- it's around 7 minutes long, and I've included it at the end of this post -- but he was on the show much longer than this clip, maybe 40 minutes or so. I wanted to call attention to a few things he said, things that make it clear why I like him..



Not included in the interview clip is the Front 9 segment, where Whan and Phil Blackmar each answered 9 questions... and a few of them concerned Michelle Wie and Charlie Rymer. In case you missed it, somehow Michelle managed to challenge Charlie to a rib eating contest when she was there last week. Charlie agreed to it, and there was talk of involving charity somehow.

That eating competition is actually going to happen! GC announced the next day that it was working on it. The contest will be broadcast on Morning Drive, and Beth Daniel has volunteered to be the judge.

What does this have to do with Michael Whan? He was watching that day and he said that, as soon as the show was over, he was already calling around for sponsors! You gotta love that!

Here are a few other thoughts from his appearance:

• On why so much of the later part of the year is played overseas: “Typically, when the NFL schedule starts it's better for us and TV ratings and for sponsors to move around the world."
• On whether it was a 'no-brainer' to give Lydia Ko LPGA membership: "It was a no-brainer after she won the Canadian Women's Open a second time."
• On why they created the Royal Crown rather than adding Asia to the Solheim Cup: "Korea doesn't want to play with Japan. They want to beat Japan, and vice versa."
• On questions about playing the US Women's Open the week after the men's and the problems it presents (and this is a paraphrase): "We will get more coverage than ever. On Saturday and Sunday of the men's event, we'll have players talking about the women's event on TV... but I'm glad course setup is the USGA's problem."

It's this kind of out-of-the-box thinking -- and honest statements about that thinking -- that makes me like Michael Whan. And I think it's the same way with almost everyone else he meets.

And here's the video clip from GC:



Here's a link to the original clip at GC's website, in case it doesn't embed properly in this post.

The photo came from GC's site also.

The New Race to the CME Globe

It's possible you didn't hear about the newest wrinkle in the LPGA's 2014 season. Other bloggers -- most notably, the Constructivist -- have already done posts about it. You'll definitely want to read his post and the links within it, 3 of which I'll list here just to make sure you know which post is which:

• Brent Kelley's explanation of "how it works" at golf.about.com
• Randell Mell's announcement at GolfTalkCentral (video from Jon Bodany, LPGA CMO)
• Mell's second post at GolfTalkCentral (video with Lexi Thompson and Brittany Lincicome)

This post is my take on the new LPGA season-long points race called the Race to the CME Globe.

The LPGA paid a lot of attention to the FedExCup and Race to Dubai setups, and tried to pick the best aspects of each while minimizing the weaknesses. For example, the points system is simpler so it should be easier for fans to keep up with who needs to do what to win.

The most interesting aspect to me is how they decided to handle the final event. As with the other tours, there's a point reset right before the final event -- which has changed its title from the CME Group Titleholders to the CME Group Tour Championship -- so no player can lock up the points race before the final event. (Shall we call this the Vijay Singh Rule?) Otherwise the points work the same as in the other tours' races... except only 9 players will have a mathematical chance of winning the LPGA's Race. And only the top 3 "control their destiny."

And only 3 players get payouts. The winner gets $1mil, second gets $150k, third gets $100k. This is really close to a winner-take-all situation. That's definitely more interesting, don't you think?

In addition, CME Group will run a season-long program for the Wounded Warriors Project. Every eagle made during a weekend round at any LPGA event will result in a donation of $1000.

Based on what I've heard so far, this sounds like a great publicity generator for the LPGA. (Just consider how much the FedExCup sparked buzz for the PGA Tour.) It sounds like they've avoided most of the big problems that the other tours had to tweak in their points races. And at a point where many players are considering staying on their home tours and avoiding the LPGA's travel schedule, it's a huge carrot to lure those players back.

But most of all, it seems to highlight how well Michael Whan has managed the LPGA during hard times... and how attractive it has become to sponsors. After the economy tanked and hurt the Tour so badly, did we ever expect to see a Corporate Race to the LPGA? Yet it appears that's exactly what we have here. If the International Crown event (the new 8 country team competition in July) works out as planned... and the Race works out as planned...

Who knows what we might see next from the LPGA?

European Tour for Sale?

I've included a list of reference articles at the end of this post, for those of you interested in getting the whole story -- such as we know it.

You probably heard the rumors Tuesday that the PGA Tour was in the market for some new property... Europe. The UK's Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph both reported that the Tour was making a bid to purchase the European Tour -- reports that Tim Finchem bluntly denied:

"Certain news reports today have indicated that the PGA TOUR has made an offer to acquire the European Tour. Those reports are inaccurate."

However, Finchem's statement (I've been searching for the complete text but haven't found it yet) certainly seems to have left the possibility of a future merger open:

"However, as I have stated publicly on several occasions, the integration of professional golf can create additional value for our players, sponsors and fans.

"Such integration has been ongoing since 1994, with the founding of the International Federation of PGA Tours, and has led to the establishment of the World Golf Championships in 1999 as well as the World Cup as a Federation-sanctioned event.

"More recently, all the major golf bodies around the world worked together to bring golf back to the Olympic Games."

Finchem said talks among the various tours within the federation would continue "as we explore additional collaborative efforts for the presentation of our game."

"To the extent any of those efforts prove feasible, additional information will be provided at that time."

That sounds a bit vague to me. At the very least, it sounds like they haven't ruled a merger out.

Golf Channel mentioned European Tour members who were unsatisfied with the current business perspective of the ET. The articles I checked indicate that this came primarily from Paul Casey, who is on the ET's Tournament Players Committee. Casey says it took three months just to appoint a global search firm to find a new chairman after the old one retired. Quote, "Why on earth would that simple step take three months?”

Given the PGA Tour's recent purchase of the Canadian Tour, it's clear that they aren't against acquiring other tours. But buying the ET is another thing entirely, don't you think? Other than getting all the revenue from the Ryder Cup, I don't see how taking on the ET's current problems benefits them in any way; the ET is a huge organization, not a satellite tour. Their financial problems aren't going to be solved by a simple infusion of money. And the various articles suggest that there might be a popular backlash against the PGA Tour if it did take over the ET, something which wouldn't improve the tour's value at all.

The problem here, as Casey suggests, appears to be a problem of vision within the ET itself. And I'm uncertain that the necessarily US-centric viewpoint of the PGA Tour holds the solution to that lack of vision. The discrepancy in purses between the two tours -- which is apparently a large part of the rationale behind the reports -- is a matter of perceived value by sponsors. Just adding a PGA Tour logo to the events is unlikely to change that perception.

Let's be honest about this: We do things differently here in America. That's something we Yanks take great pride in (and rightly so, I might add) but that doesn't mean our way of doing business works as well everywhere else in the world. If there's one thing the PGA Tour might be able to offer the ET, it's the determination to be true to who they are.

The ET doesn't need a new owner. It simply needs a clearer vision of what European golf should be going forward, and leaders who are willing to see that vision through.

I took some of my information from this FoxSports article by Adam Schupak, this ESPN article by Bob Harig, this Google posting of a AFP report and this GolfTalkCentral post by Rex Hoggard.