smashdn

What is the proper amount?

I doubt the PIF is interested in being wholly altruistic, but perhaps LIV can make enough stateside to subsidize the other events.

Farther away from Nashville but Adam Gary has helped me in the past with driver. I worked with him at Indian Hills CC in Bowling Green. He may be teaching out of other locations now I do not know. He is the head coach for the women's golf team at WKU.

That is one of the best takes on it I have read. I try to give it a chance. My expectations are low in terms of competition. I just don't need it to be the pinnacle of competition playing for "all the marbles" for me to watch and appreciate someone hitting a skillful golf shot. I hope, not for LIV but for the areas of the globe that want it and appreciate it, that it keeps its foothold and continues to serve global golf. If the already overserved US golf fan doesn't care that is still fine too.

Hate that you feel that way. That superfluous stuff goes a long way into making the grass, sand, water and trees function as intended. And it is the intentions in those superfluous things that give us interesting places to hit fairway, green and putt as opposed to straight runways of grass and bunker left and bunker right. I don't really have an interest in the architecture from a snobbery standpoint, I want to understand why what was built the way it was built and what crack of the door the architect left open to more easily play through. Not all doglegs are best to cut. Not all green designs are best to play to the middle. Stuff like that.

USGA Green Section stuff has information on how to build one to USGA specs. It will give you an idea of how a green is constructed with the layers of material and drainage. The Anatomy of a Golf Course - Tom Doak Methods of Early Golf Architecture - MacKenzie, Colt, Tillinghast Grounds for Golf - Geoff Shackleford Forrest Richardson has a few books as well.

Several teams have merch deals with companies providing the team gear (Reebok, Greyson). Same with the bags. JCB (heavy equipment manufacturer) sponsored the UK event. HSBC sponsors LIV as well.

Fried Egg stuff on courses and Golf Digest discussions on architecture are solid content. The more lenses through which I can enjoy Golf the better. There has already come the day when I could care less about equipment and there will come a day when I am physically no longer able to play. I am not entirely sure that I have not already plateaued at the "best" golf I will ever be able to play from a scoring and handicap standpoint.

Are we talking about golf business and entertainment or what is good for Golf? They aren't necessarily exclusive but are also not intrinsically linked either. Taking highest level professional golfers to places like Thailand and back to Australia and South Africa = Good for Golf but not necessarily good for golf business nor good or even easy for the professional golfer. Taking highest level professional golfers to places like Thailand and back to Australia and South Africa = Good for Golf Again, LIV currently does not. But if LIV were what is was designed to be, 50ish of the best players in the world (not just the ones who they could sign to gigantic contracts) playing globally, it would be compelling. It would be major-light and condensed. I disagree that lack of compelling golf is the biggest reason there are few fans and sponsors. LIV is trying to plow the same ground (US) where the PGA has already turned the dirt so to speak. They would get more on-site fans by going to these pro golf starved places but in doing that they run into broadcast timing issues. That is one issue. Secondly, LIV is painted as terrorist supporting org in the US. That isn't going to get US sponsors lining up. Same deal with courses willing to host. There are a lot of reasons why it is not working well. Some very self-inflicted, others not so much. Look objectively at what they are up to and what the plan was, without regard for which specific golfers are playing now and where the support money comes from, and it is not an idea without merit. It just would have obstacles inherent that it would need to deal with, outside of the Saudi issues and the PGAT and DPWT fighting back. Which is why I said if the PGAT were to have spearheaded it, it would be much better than it is currently. I don't think the WGC events were ever really supported well enough and like has been mentioned, COVID killed those off finally. Clearly you can overcome a lot with money. LIV is proving that by hanging in there this long. You remove some of the pushback with different genesis I feel like it would be in a much better place. Even just the TV aspect of it. It could be primetime, live golf on Golf Channel.

I would say that largely depends upon why you are watching golf in the first place. My father-in-law watches more broadcast golf than I do. To my knowledge he has never picked up a club and certainly is not a "golfer." He watches it on Sunday afternoon to put him to sleep. I love golf to the point I can watch just about anything golf related and it scratch my golf itch. I read academic articles on fungicide effectiveness at times. I had two articles on creating tree management plans brought up on the comp and was also researching Ellis Maples restoration specialists if they existed.

Money talks though. Structure it so it is at most 50 guys and they are not paying anything out of pocket to get themselves there. Pay the caddies way as well. Is that not pretty much would liv did, bribe err pay via contract the best players who would agree to come play? LIV got stuck with some bottom of barrel guys though. "Hey, you 50 guys have qualified to play in the Rolex Big Shiny Watch Championship at North Berwick. It is three weeks before The Open. Chartered flight leaves at 8:00 pm from whatever town airport that that particular PGAT event would be from. Serving steak or fish. Full bar. Congrats on the good play." You would create an "all-star" league (the elevated events). Downside is how you soothe the Wyndham folks when the best are further incentivized to skip the Greater Greensboro Open's on the schedule. This past week's 3M Open wasn't exactly dripping with star power though.

I added some stuff to what your wrote. I get that the US is where the bulk of golf fans and the bulk of the money is to be made by both the golfers and the sponsors, but golf is a global game. Certain parts of the world had basically been blocked out of having top level professional golf near them. Maybe the answer is the PGA Tour having more global reach? They killed off the WGC events. LIV sort of attempted to fill that vacuum. Can we agree that there is some appetite in some parts of the world for professional golf where the PGA Tour has siphoned the global talent?

No, it doesn't. See the proliferation of youtube golf channels. Apparently a huge subset of people viewing golf don't care if much of anything is on the line at all. Bryan Bros is a good example. They folded the story of their course and them trying to qualify for and play in different tournaments along with sometimes just the two of them playing against one another. It is fairly successful. That is just one that I watch occasionally. I am sure there are others that are similar. I don't know what all Fat Perez and Rick Sheils do on their channels. I see BDC doing stuff as it will show as recommended. Saw the Hyflers/Phil stuff that is more swing related that is pretty fair. Outside of the a number of majors or number of wins, do people even remember. Without looking it up, who won the 2024 ATT Pebble Beach Pro-Am? Who can rattle that off? Also, don't forget, LIV is not functioning as it was first intended. It was supposed to be fluid from year to year as to who qualified. Promotions and relegation or qualification. The contracts to the players they have currently were required because of the risk the players took on and now that they cannot go back to either tour and also seems they aren't much closer to getting OWGR points. ^I am not excusing the fact that all of that has happened. It happened due to selling a bad bill of goods. And I know the old saying about my aunt being by uncle instead, but if it were functioning as first conceived, would the events be meaningless if all the top 35-45 players in the world were playing the same format and there was pro/rel/qualification for the year? There wouldn't be the "useless filler" save for any guy who was just having a terrible year after qualifying. There are guys with majors exemptions who currently don't have games worthy of being in the fields, especially The Masters with their exemption/invitation rules.

This sounds a bit like WWE. Golfers just want to watch golf. See the threads regarding the actual broadcasts. Two of the most riviled aspects of a golf broadcast are the breaks from golf to hear from the CEO of whomever the sponsor is and the human interest pieces about a golfer's sister's battle with gluten intolerance and how it shaped him into the player he is today due to his hatred of bread. I would contend that if this were the case and it involved neither the PIF/Saudis and Greg Norman, it would have went over swimmingly. If PGAT had created an upper-echelon event with no cut where the best of the best played in other locales in the world it would have been well received. I mean, the response was to create signature events and bolster the bottom placer's earnings, sort of like no cuts and guaranteed money.

Not saying it is this way but you could win three out of four and miss the cut in one and not make that list. Quick glance at it and I did not see Gotterup on there. He has had a pretty good last two months. Apparently was not in the field for The PGA or Masters.

It could be that it has proven to just be a certification that the public is not willing to pay extra for. I get lessons (when I want them) from guys that I trust and that know how to show me my swing in a way that I can make the changes to get me fixed or better. A certification or title from PGAofA does not insure that to be the case nor does the absence mean the guy cannot teach the swing. I would think the same holds true for managing a club or course or shop. If you can manage a blend of retail and service businesses, I would think it would not take long for a person familiar with golf or that also plays golf to get that unique aspect of it figured out. --- I see the value of certain certifications and levels of training ebb and flow in my line of work as well. If you watch the job listings in the environmental, health and safety field the CSP and CHMM accreditations will go through periods where they are on every job listing and other times a masters degree is more oft found. It sort of changes every 3-5 years as to which or in which combination job posters place emphasis on these. Or not.

Math alone would likely preclude that.

So what then of the converse when an "average pro" bests the best players in the world? More so curious what that makes the best in the world when they get beaten. ( I reread your post. I see you have already baked in an excuse for the best.) I am not trying to make the case that Niemann is one of the "best in the world" either. Guys get on tears and do well. Guys get into a groove. Guys have certain courses/types of courses that they do well on. They do well in situations that are comfortable to them. I am sure majors are "not like every other tournament" to most and certainly a stark departure from a LIV tournament in terms of atmosphere and structure.

That is a pickle then. I get money is of course always a factor but the saying about the best time to plant a tree comes to mind. Or that it is never too late to do the right thing.

If the redesign/refresh is not what the members wanted, waste no time in getting what you want built by someone who can fix what has been done. Character and conditioning are two major selling points for a club. Sounds like you all might be having issues with both at the moment. Ron Forse (his company) has done many Ross restos. Might be money well spent to get someone who understands the Ross/Maples style and provide at minimum a plan that can possibly be executed in-house or even with local contractors. Might even give Dan Maples a call if he is still active. His email and number are listed on the ASGCA website. I would imagine that the longer the "incorrect"/undesirable design changes are in place the harder they will be to correct. As well as there being less appetite to do so. [Well intentioned] people may start to come to like the out-of-place and out-of-design-character changes.

I've asked that same thing before, maybe even in this thread. I am not retired and play three, 18-hole rounds per week and one 9-hole scramble from time-change in spring to time-change in fall. We sand our divots at my club. I want to say I have been in exactly one ever at my club in two years and one ever before that. Been on hardpan more often and have even played shots off a cart path twice. Been in more footprints in bunkers than divots.

Can a golfer not do well in certain settings, set-ups and formats of competitions and not others? Maybe the compressed format (54 holes and shorter day on the course) just suits him better. I don't know but I got to think there is likely more than one reason and more than just, these guys are has beens and nobodies. Bryson is out there not lighting LIV on fire but doing decent in majors. Majors were sort of flukey to begin with and might be even more so with essentially three tours coming together to play them. You get some odd winners and odd names on the leaderboard.

That happens as you get older.

I never said it would be only two events. I said if it were to follow the OWGR methodology the more recent events are weighted more than further ago performances. That makes sense. In that vein you would see Robert Macintyre much higher than say Colin Morikawa to use your example. Should he be though? No.

It is still in the way on your table to further your poor analogy. And you can smell it.