2026 commits

[Tugu]

1 minute ago, wegobomber31 said:

 

How would that have worked?  You mean he was invited (earned his way) to the tournament originally but didn't accept, then later got added to the field magically?

Nope. Lost the clear invite after having been in that stratosphere. To ensure continued participation, donations were made.

[wegobomber31]

9 minutes ago, Tugu said:

Nope. Lost the clear invite after having been in that stratosphere. To ensure continued participation, donations were made.

 

Well, like I said, that may be true but he didn't have to do that.  His performance more than warranted his spot in every invitational he played in.  But I could see someone with extreme means look to circumvent the system to leave no doubt.  The Ace Grant recipients thank you, Yun family!

Edited December 20, 2024 by wegobomber31

[Tugu]

43 minutes ago, wegobomber31 said:

 

Well, like I said, that may be true but he didn't have to do that.  His performance more than warranted his spot in every invitational he played in.  But I could see someone with extreme means look to circumvent the system to leave no doubt.  The Ace Grant recipients thank you, Yen family!

Instead of gauging with your methodology whether he was worthy or not on the week of events, you can simply ask them if they were nervous of missing or missed any events that they wanted to play and took action to ensure that it never happened again. It's not a huge secret in Norcal. Nor them hiring spotters for both sides of the fairways so their kid never loses a ball. I speak openly about it cause its not a huge secret.

 

I think I prefaced my previous post with that not everyone agrees that paying to ensure a spot is a bad thing. I just personally think it detracts from the meritocracy that sports are based on. I'm reasonably certain that there are others of similar ability who dont have the financial resources to ensure participation in these elite events. I personally like the idea that sport is based solely around ability is all. No problem for me that we disagree on this point.

Edited December 20, 2024 by Tugu

[golferdad8]

29 minutes ago, Tugu said:

Nope. Lost the clear invite after having been in that stratosphere. To ensure continued participation, donations were made.

Junior invitationals (and other prestigious PGA/Korn Ferry events) are run by nonprofits who by nature are sponsored by donors who receive exemptions (and give them to “friends”).
 

Whether the exemptions are given to players from a certain country, region, a certain criteria or a “friend,” I personally don’t fault anyone for trying their best to get in. After all, we’ve heard many stories of players flying to easier states or even countries to get into US Jr Am. In many cases, these new exempted players are at the bottom or the leaderboard, sometimes, they end up doing well & beating top players. 

[leezer99]

3 minutes ago, golferdad8 said:

Junior invitationals (and other prestigious PGA/Korn Ferry events) are run by nonprofits who by nature are sponsored by donors who receive exemptions (and give them to “friends”).
 

Whether the exemptions are given to players from a certain country, region, a certain criteria or a “friend,” I personally don’t fault anyone for trying their best to get in. After all, we’ve heard many stories of players flying to easier states or even countries to get into US Jr Am. In many cases, these new exempted players are at the bottom or the leaderboard, sometimes, they end up doing well & beating top players. 

I think the CEO of the event in Mexico was given 3 invites to give out as he saw fit. Of course, there was vetting of the players, but he could have given one to a friend of a friend if he wanted.

[happygolucky]

1 hour ago, wegobomber31 said:

 

Maybe he paid his way into the 2023 Jackie Burke, his first invitational, but he certainly didn't have to.  His Rolex coming into the week was about middle of the pack for that tournament.  He got 4th there so I'm assuming he more than earned his way into the remaining invitationals he played in 2024.

 

 

 

Rk	Name	Rolex
1	Jay Leng Jr	77.611
2	Aaron Pounds	44.909
3	Joshua Kim	41.907
4	Henry Guan	41.477
5	Rex Hargrove	31.228
6	Smith Summerlin	28.536
7	Coltrane Mittag	25.044
8	Brooks Simmons	25.024
9	Michael Riebe	24.712
10	Tyler Mawhinney	24.098
11	Carson Bertagnole	23.282
12	Supapon Amornchaichan	22.163
13	Sterling Hurd	20.603
14	Ryan Downes	20.457
15	Andrew Hinson	20.056
16	Jason Shwartz	19.786
17	Nathan Miller	18.596
18	Eduardo Derbez Torres	18.540
19	Dylan Bingwen Ma	18.083
20	Jon Ed Steed	18.028
21	Asher Whitaker	17.444
22	Edan Cui	16.374
23	John Hiller	16.088
24	Zhengqian Li	16.064
25	Sahish Reddy	15.947
26	Liam Pasternak	15.778
27	Ethan Lien	15.227
28	Zach Huang	15.027
29	William Ma	14.983
30	John Daniel Culbreth	14.979
31	Christian Pardue	14.887
32	Brady Rapp	13.745
33	Matthew Diehl	13.524
34	Clark Van Gaalen	13.472
35	Eric Yun	13.416
36	Charles Nelson	13.302
37	Michael Lugiano	13.299
38	Willie Gordon	13.162
39	Jake Albert	13.042
40	Charles Cauthen	12.933
41	Mason Howell	12.931
42	Baron Nguyen	12.906
43	Charles David Beeson	12.870
44	Patricio Gonzalez	12.770
45	Nicholas Logis	12.675
46	Parker Sands	11.952
47	Reese Knox	11.552
48	Charlie Wylie	11.174
49	Davis Gochenouer	10.918
50	Giuseppe Puebla	10.828
51	Lance Smith	10.481
52	Kai Hirayama	10.446
53	Austin Hofferkamp	10.359
54	Davis Wotnosky	10.287
55	Rawson Hardy	10.250
56	Daniel Zou	10.150
57	Ieuan Jones	10.149
58	Mykhailo Golod	9.653
59	Bradford Lacefield	9.021
60	Mitchell Maier	8.838
61	Bowen Ballis	8.223
62	Logan Kim	7.051
63	Tyler Loree	6.800
64	Matthew Lin	6.658
65	Aidan Dortch	6.475
66	Francisco Solorza Gutierrez	3.854
67	Braeden Hoyt	3.496
68	Bradley O'Donnell	1.852
69	Joshua McGown	1.081
70	Ford Montgomery	0.615
71	Stephen Liu	0.215

I’m guessing you can say that from a skill level perspective he belongs in the field. Possibly, at the time invites were sent his ranking didn’t make the cut. But, if he was able to somehow secure a spot, his performance has certainly opened up more opportunities that would not have been possible without that paid spot. 

[wegobomber31]

40 minutes ago, Tugu said:

Instead of gauging with your methodology whether he was worthy or not on the week of events, you can simply ask them if they were nervous of missing or missed any events that they wanted to play and took action to ensure that it never happened again. It's not a huge secret in Norcal. Nor them hiring spotters for both sides of the fairways so their kid never loses a ball. I speak openly about it cause its not a huge secret.

 

I think I prefaced my previous post with that not everyone agrees that paying to ensure a spot is a bad thing. I just personally think it detracts from the meritocracy that sports are based on. I'm reasonably certain that there are others of similar ability who dont have the financial resources to ensure participation in these elite events. I personally like the idea that sport is based solely around ability is all. No problem for me that we disagree on this point.

 

I don't disagree with any of this.  I can see how the security of being in an event, whether merited or not, can help someone play well that week. The spotter thing seems very extreme and unnecessary.  I sincerely hope they were looking for the golf balls of the other kids in the group too.

 

Whether we like it or not, this junior golf scene is never going to be a level of playing field.  My kid has access to golf resources that other kids don't have, just as he doesn't have near the access as many others.  Does that diminish his tournament accomplishments?  Seems like golf is a lot like the real world in this regard.

[BallsBreakFast]

Getting into an elite invitational is not so different than getting into a popular university, concert, country club, restaurant, nightclub....there are always many more that are "deserving" (however way you subjectively define that) than there is space available.  So those with means (money, time, resources) will be tempted to use connections or pay for access (and for schools and golf also better preparation) - either explicitly or through donations.  I think we can all agree that this is how the world works; that "fair" doesn't necessarily mean "equal".  What rubs the wrong way is when those that are deemed not "deserving" (which is subjective) use resources to the extent that their meritocracy is not even consideration and their path of access is not made transparent.  Heck, if it means that an event field could be increased or amenities/conditions enhanced, I'd be favor of a handful of spots being auctioned off to the highest bidder.  And further, I'd even support the money raised being given to top finishers (I think amateurs can accept a prize of $1000) so that the moneyed few can directly support those with less means.

If a parent wants to spend money that way and the kid is willing to be possibly be criticized by peers than I'm ok with it - just be transparent as to how access was obtained then go out and hopefully kill it to show you belong as there will be many haters rooting against you. 

Edited December 21, 2024 by BallsBreakFast

[Tugu]

I think we can all agree that life (and junior golf) is not an even playing field. But what keeps the masses from getting out pitchforks and storming the Bastille is the vague but implicit promise that an equality of opportunity underpins our existence in the US. That there can be social mobility based on one's efforts as opposed birthright being the sole determining factor of life expectancy. This social contract is the separating factor between the US and all other civilizations prior.

 

I'd be very pro a transparent auction style process for access in all walks of life. I'd be equally curious how many that hold the purse strings would welcome the influence they acquire and peddle be exposed to the transparency of daylight. 

 

Finally the great theater of watching the masses debate where to draw the line would be worth the price of admission. What price to be QB2 at Bama? What price for a spot in US Am? What price for seat on bench at say Duke men's basketball? Or maybe the 7 million a dad donated to Stanford was the right enough amount to get his son "consideration?" Whichever way, I'm supportive/curious of the world's reaction and response if all is made transparent.

Edited December 21, 2024 by Tugu

[MahalNeneng]

We all know that past -4/5 is a farce driven by participation and $ spent for field strength. One doesnt have to play any better to continue to climb one just has to pay and not fall off. 

[leezer99]

For all the talk about paying to get in, gaming the system, etc. I think a lot of people here are discrediting the hard work and dedication that some of these kids are putting into the sport. It's unfortunate that coaches don't always get to see this and go off of a flawed ranking system. 

[LawGenius305]

23 hours ago, RobS said:

I agree.  This whole situation is a complicated mess.  I don't see it happening but they should do a reboot and simplify the regulations before it ends up like the 6,871 page tax code.

On top of it, if a player transfers, go back to having to sit a year.

[leezer99]

1 hour ago, LawGenius305 said:

On top of it, if a player transfers, go back to having to sit a year.

That's like trying to enforce a non-compete clause in the NFL. 

[wegobomber31]

7 hours ago, leezer99 said:

For all the talk about paying to get in, gaming the system, etc. I think a lot of people here are discrediting the hard work and dedication that some of these kids are putting into the sport. It's unfortunate that coaches don't always get to see this and go off of a flawed ranking system. 

 

Yeah, regardless  of how he got into the event, for a 10-month stretch Eric played some of the best golf of any junior in the country.  That can't be explained away by double spotters.  Here was his H2H record over that span over the current highest ranked kids in the country:
 

Blades Brown	1	3	1
Luke Colton	3	0	0
Tyler Watts	3	2	0
Miles Russell	2	3	0
Jackson Byrd	3	2	0
Logan Reilly	2	2	0
Ronin Banerjee	3	0	0
Ashr Vargas	1	0	0
Pennson Badgett	0	1	0
Michael Riebe	3	1	1
Chase Kyes	2	1	0
Henry Guan	4	3	0
Kihei Akina	3	2	0

[golfdad1]

On 12/20/2024 at 1:28 PM, golferdad8 said:

Although JGS is not the end all, I'm curious who you think is #1 for the 2024 class?
 

Sorry missed answering. I'd say Davis if you're looking at consistent play over the 2 years before heading to college. Gross was easily #1 before that but fell off. My point was that you can't use JGS as a comparison right before college because a lot of the top players are prioritizing am events and not doing as many jr events. 
 

Also on the Yun topic, maybe he isn't doing as well because mom and dad aren't paying professional spotters to fly out to find his lost balls in college.

[Tugu]

8 hours ago, wegobomber31 said:

 

Yeah, regardless  of how he got into the event, for a 10-month stretch Eric played some of the best golf of any junior in the country.  That can't be explained away by double spotters.  Here was his H2H record over that span over the current highest ranked kids in the country:
 

Blades Brown	1	3	1
Luke Colton	3	0	0
Tyler Watts	3	2	0
Miles Russell	2	3	0
Jackson Byrd	3	2	0
Logan Reilly	2	2	0
Ronin Banerjee	3	0	0
Ashr Vargas	1	0	0
Pennson Badgett	0	1	0
Michael Riebe	3	1	1
Chase Kyes	2	1	0
Henry Guan	4	3	0
Kihei Akina	3	2	0

How does one completely discount how one gets in? Why even have rules of entry then?

 

At what point does "how it gets done" matter? Can one cheat to get in? Or do all ends justify the means? Surely the line has to be drawn somewhere. Who's to say there aren't kids who earnt their way in and would have otherwise also done well, with the results potentially providing an outsized effect on their lives? But its a big hypothetical as he never got the chance that his efforts would have otherwise afforded him.

 

Remember that previous scandal where some rich and Hollywood stars got their kids into top colleges by cheating and faking extra curriculars? What if all those kids did amazingly once they got there? Would it all be justified?

 

I'm not for a second saying that there was any cheating here. But the "regardless of how" comment seems to be disregarding a key part of junior golf or even life, namely that the kids are encouraged to earn what they get. The stats are tone deaf, but surely the wielder of the stats cannot be.

Edited December 22, 2024 by Tugu

[Tugu]

20 minutes ago, golfdad1 said:

Also on the Yun topic, maybe he isn't doing as well because mom and dad aren't paying professional spotters to fly out to find his lost balls in college.

Making the line up would be a start. But then he may be able to make a donation to get into the lineup. If he then does well, all would be fine right? Because apparently nowadays how one gets somewhere no longer matters. 

[wegobomber31]

47 minutes ago, Tugu said:

How does one completely discount how one gets in? Why even have rules of entry then?

 

At what point does "how it gets done" matter? Can one cheat to get in? Or do all ends justify the means? Surely the line has to be drawn somewhere. Who's to say there aren't kids who earnt their way in and would have otherwise also done well, with the results potentially providing an outsized effect on their lives? But its a big hypothetical as he never got the chance that his efforts would have otherwise afforded him.

 

Remember that previous scandal where some rich and Hollywood stars got their kids into top colleges by cheating and faking extra curriculars? What if all those kids did amazingly once they got there? Would it all be justified?

 

I'm not for a second saying that there was any cheating here. But the "regardless of how" comment seems to be disregarding a key part of junior golf or even life, namely that the kids are encouraged to earn what they get. The stats are tone deaf, but surely the wielder of the stats cannot be.

Okay, he bought his way into a tournament that he earned his way into and would’ve been invited to anyways. He didn’t take a spot from anybody at the Jackie Burke Invitational. He would’ve been invited anyways. Sounds like nothing more than a waste of money, but to each their own. That would’ve happened once, because every other tournament from there he would’ve been on the initial invite list. He then reeled off a string of top 10 performances over the next 10 months, beating a lot of top golfers. How many times in a year does a top junior golfer lose a ball and have to re-tee? Two or three a year? The double spotters also sounds like a waste of money. But again, to each their own. 

 

So unless you’re saying these wayward balls are being magically found, it sounds like these scores were justified and he deserves credit for his tournament performances. As far as him struggling as a freshman in college, isn’t that a story as old as time? William Jennings is another former number one from 2024 and can’t find his way into the lineup.

 

 

Edited December 22, 2024 by wegobomber31

[wegobomber31]

On 12/20/2024 at 8:28 AM, golfdad1 said:

You can't ever go by JGS rankings the summer before entering college. Most of the top kids are playing amateur heavier schedules and JGS is not indicative of the best players. Granted, he caught a hot streak, but he was up there for a hot minute.

This is one thing I do find odd about EY’s scheduling. I can get playing junior events in the spring, but at some point you need to start playing in Am events leading into college. He did play in the Canadian Am. But I can’t see many benefits of playing in the Junior PGA a couple weeks before starting college. 
 

 

[Tugu]

9 minutes ago, wegobomber31 said:

Okay, he bought his way into a tournament that he earned his way into and would’ve been invited to anyways. He didn’t take a spot from anybody at the Jackie Burke Invitational. He would’ve been invited anyways. Sounds like nothing more than a waste of money, but to each their own. That would’ve happened once, because every other tournament from there he would’ve been on the initial invite list. He then reeled off a string of top 10 performances over the next 10 months, beating a lot of top golfers. How many times in a year does a top junior golfer lose a ball and have to re-tee? Two or three a year? The double spotters also sounds like a waste of money. But again, to each their own. 

 

So unless you’re saying these wayward balls are being magically found, it sounds like these scores were justified and he deserves credit for his tournament performances. As far as him struggling as a freshman in college, isn’t that a story as old as time? William Jennings is another former number one from 2024 and can’t find his way into the lineup.

 

 

You are making this assumption that they need not have paid their way in based on the fact he was eligible the day of event. This is golfwrx, but the stats would be insufficient for such a conclusion if in a professional financial environment. Nor can a regression analysis sufficiently predict the various potentially consequential permutations should his family not have or be unable to partake in pay for play.

 

Lets not go down the straw man route re spotters. For me it merely highlights character and MO of parents.

 

Moving on from a dry stats conversation, I'd still like to know where you would draw the the line at pay for play? Can he now pay to get a playing spot in his college team? Can he skip internal qualifiers if his parents pay? Or is the line drawn at AJGA invitational and its not ok once a kid gets to college?

 

 

[Tugu]

Perhaps if this topic is of greater interest, I'll start a new thread for it. 

 

I am genuinely curious that for all the parents who realize that the world is unfair and that people peddle/use influence/financial might to further the cause of their choosing, how many would be so sanguine if it was "their own" kid that missed out? How many would literally advise their kid to accept that their efforts were in vain because well "those people" paid and we didn't? How far are we willing as a society to extend the "pay for play" concept? Can said player genuinely skip internal qualifiers at college if the amount donated to college is sufficiently generous? Would patents be OK with this?

 

Edited December 22, 2024 by Tugu

[wegobomber31]

5 hours ago, Tugu said:

You are making this assumption that they need not have paid their way in based on the fact he was eligible the day of event. This is golfwrx, but the stats would be insufficient for such a conclusion if in a professional financial environment. Nor can a regression analysis sufficiently predict the various potentially consequential permutations should his family not have or be unable to partake in pay for play.

 

Lets not go down the straw man route re spotters. For me it merely highlights character and MO of parents.

 

Moving on from a dry stats conversation, I'd still like to know where you would draw the the line at pay for play? Can he now pay to get a playing spot in his college team? Can he skip internal qualifiers if his parents pay? Or is the line drawn at AJGA invitational and its not ok once a kid gets to college?

 

 

 

Well I guess for starters the AJGA could not accept pay to play, but it seems to happen at every invitational. But they seem to have rationalized the benefit to the Ace Grants program is worth giving up the spots.  

 

The AJGA does have published “rules of entry” into its invitationals. Who is to say how these “additional tournament spots” should be doled out? What does “helping the AJGA conduct the event” entail? They do say that soliciting the AJGA and tournament organizers is strongly discouraged, but they also could’ve worded that more strongly and snuffed it out completely. 
 

Yun seems to be the rare exception in that he actually was of a skill level consistent with the players in the field. I’m not sure why he is being singled out, other than the fact he played well? Or that his family is extremely wealthy? Most of these other guys are taking spots from more deserving players and shooting 78+. That seems more egregious to me. 
 

I probably have a right to be salty about this because I believe my son was the first one out of an AJGA honorable mention last year and a Rolex TOC invite, which I guess went to Yun instead. But you know what, my kid could’ve also played one stroke better in any one of 40 tournament rounds.
 

As far as your other hypothetical examples, those are obviously more extreme takes. Yeah, I’d probably draw the line there, to answer your question. But I’m also not a college golf coach. Hasn’t this sort of legacy/donor stuff been happening at different college programs before? Maybe your typical donor kid is okay being the 12th man and never playing. Maybe the coach feels compelled to give them a token start. I have no idea what the Princeton coach would or wouldn’t do but believe any coach is generally trying to do what’s best for his program.
 

 

Edited December 22, 2024 by wegobomber31

[Tugu]

5 hours ago, wegobomber31 said:

 I’m not sure why he is being singled out.

It's the only example I can cite beyond a reasonable doubt as opposed to on the balance of probabilities. Similarly if we were discussing strategic withdrawls, there'd also be a specific player cited as he has proven the most adept and repeated offender who used this strategy to the maximum benefit.

 

5 hours ago, wegobomber31 said:

Most of these other guys are taking spots from more deserving players and shooting 78+. That seems more egregious to me. 

 

If one earns their way in via merit, it would be hard to make the case that there are more deserving. How one does once they earn their right should have no bearing on the righteousness of their claim. On the contrary if one cheats to get in any activity, any subsequent result should rightfully be invalidated. Point being that subsequent results do not alter the prior action.

 

The question I pose is where the line for pay to play is drawn. You seem to draw it at no pay for play once a kid gets to college. I would personally draw the line alot earlier than this. My hypothesis is that junior golf and America at large would be worse for wear should a pay for play system supercede a merit based system.

 

My personal anathema for any non merit based system is why I would advocate an asterisk next to the player's rank. This move doesn't invalidate what he subsequently did, but also recognizes he isn't operating under the same conditions. Anyone who's ever played high level competitive golf knows that circumstances, conditions and potential outcomes have an outsized effect on performance. Otherwise many others could be elite.

Edited December 22, 2024 by Tugu

[wegobomber31]

9 hours ago, Tugu said:

Who's to say there aren't kids who earnt their way in and would have otherwise also done well, with the results potentially providing an outsized effect on their lives? But its a big hypothetical as he never got the chance that his efforts would have otherwise afforded him.

 I guess I’m not sure what you meant here. I interpreted it that if Yun hadn’t pay his way into the Jackie Burke, someone else more deserving would’ve earned his way in and maybe seized that tremendous opportunity. 
 

 

[wegobomber31]

On 12/20/2024 at 4:29 PM, Tugu said:

Nope. Lost the clear invite after having been in that stratosphere. To ensure continued participation, donations were made.

 

Can I ask what evidence do you have that this was the case, "beyond a reasonable doubt"?

 

Edited December 22, 2024 by wegobomber31

[wegobomber31]

Let's take a walk down memory lane, thanks to the power of Google Sheets.

 

Here is the invite list for the Jackie Burke Cup, as of 6/23/23.  The shaded names would've been sponsors exemptions (all Houston-area players).

For reference, Eric Yun was 375th in Rolex at this time and not in the initial invite list.
375    -83    Eric Yun        2024    4.1    5

 

Jackson Koivun	1	Camden Smith	26	Chase Kyes	50
Preston Stout	2	Phillip Dunham	27	Pongsapak Laopakdee	51
Ethan Gao	3	Kush Arora	28	Jaeyoung (Jeffrey) Kwak	52
Byungho Lee	4	Tyler Watts	29	Kihei Akina	53
Blades Brown	5	Johnnie Clark	30	Jack Turner	54
Nicholas Gross	6	Max Jelinek	31	Nicolas Dominguez Alvarez	55
Aaron Pounds	7	Smith Summerlin	32	Jack Roberts	56
Jeffrey Guan	8	Boston Bracken	33	Mason Snyder	57
Jay Leng Jr	9	Jake Maggert	34	Matt Moloney	58
Bryan Kim	10	Max Herendeen	35	Brady Smith	59
Ethan Fang	11	JP Odland	36	Kyle Haas	60
Henry Guan	12	Ethan Paschal	37	Carson Bertagnole	61
Carson Kim	14	Rex Hargrove	38	Alex Long	62
Ryder Cowan	15	Nicholas Prieto	39	Chase Nevins	63
Miles Russell	16	Rowan Sullivan	40	John Hiller	64
Cayden Pope	17	Tyler Mawhinney	41	Nathan Miller	65
PJ Maybank	18	Adam Miller	42	Connor Williams	66
Billy Davis	19	Ryan Downes	43	Boyi (Barry) Zhang	67
Will Hartman	20	Jack Jerge	44	Asher Whitaker	68
Eduardo Derbez Torres	21	Taishi Moto	45	Braeden Hoyt	162
Wheaton Ennis	22	Eric Zhao	46	Charlie Wylie	167
William Jennings	23	Brooks Simmons	47	Joshua McGown	>700
Gerardo Gomez	24	Rylan Shim	48	Ford Montgomery	>700
Joshua Kim	25	Jack Gilbert	49	Bradley O'Donnell	>700

 

Given a lot of 2023's would've been starting college right around the time of this tournament and/or playing in the U.S. Am the following week, you get the large number of invitation declines and then the AJGA sends out the next wave of invites.  This Wave would've dipped to 113 in the Rolex rankings with another sponsors invite (from Mexico)

Eric Yun was 347th in Rolex at this time and not yet in the field

347    28    Eric Yun    4.668 

 

WAVE 2 - 6/28/23

Jacob Modleski	24	Jake Albert	92
Noah Kent	38	Logan Reilly	93
Supapon Amornchaichan	47	Zhengqian Li	94
Coltrane Mittag	58	Alejandro Fierro Saul	95
Michael Riebe	64	Alex Zhang	96
Treed Huang	66	Jay Brooks	98
Kale Fontenot	68	Rocco Salvitti	99
Jon Ed Steed	72	Mitchell Maier	100
Dylan Bingwen Ma	73	Peter Kim	101
Jay Mendell	74	Stephen Liu	102
Ethan Whitaker	75	Joshua Chung	103
Joshua Bai	76	Connor Henry	104
Cooper Claycomb	79	Kristoffer Kuvaas	105
Grant Gudgel	81	Warren Thomis	106
Preston Cooper	82	Zach Huang	107
Liam Pasternak	83	Brock Blais	108
Jeremy Chen	84	Camden Braidech	109
Finley Bartlett	85	Nolan Haynes	110
Andre Zhu	86	Charles Cauthen	111
Trey Marrion	87	Luke Colton	112
William Ma	88	Charlie Palmer	113
Jason Shwartz	89	Francisco Solorza Gutierrez	180

 

Wave 3 would've occured over the next week, as they get closer and closer to filling the field.  They dip down to 143 Rolex at this point (EY still ranked 266 and not yet in the field, but moved up after a 4th place finish at the AJGA CT Pan)

WAVE 3 - 7/4/25

Will Gordon	118
Bowen Ballis	121
Jackson Byrd	122
Baron Nguyen	124
Brady Rapp	131
Mason Howell	132
Edan Cui	133
Shawn Coultoff	134
Patricio Gonzalez	135
Will Baker	136
Kevin Mu	138
Jacob Lang	139
Tyler Loree	140
Christian Pardue	141
Ethan Lien	142
Reggie Zhu	143

 

 

Wave 4 occurs around Juy 10th, dipping down to 149 in Rolex. Eric Yun was ranked 245th at this time and not yet in the field.

 

Mykhailo Golod	146
Bradford Lacefield	147
Matthew Lin	148
Rawson Hardy	149

 

Finally, Wave 5 occurs after the 7/18 ratings update.  Eric Yun is included in the field upon moving up to 143 in Rolex after a 2nd place finish (30 pts) to Tyler Watts in the AJGA Keith Mitchell

 

Charles Nelson	113
Charles David Beeson	120
Andrew Hinson	130
Aidan Dortch	138
Eric Yun	143
Daniel Zou	149
Kai Hirayama	150
Parker Sands	154
Yinxuan Wu	166

 

So looking at this timeline, is this not a merit-based system working as intended? Shouldn't Eric Yun be celebrated for playing well enough in July 2023 to earn his way into the field (and doing something with it), just like Charles Nelson and others?  But by all means, let's not let facts get in the way of a juicy alt-narrative. 

 

 

Edited December 22, 2024 by wegobomber31

[Golfquant]

Not sure how it relates to 2026 commits, but I find this thread fascinating

 

I don't understand the hate on EY; while he isn't the #1 player among 2024 grads (probably not even top 10), he played some really great golf in big events and ultimately seems to have deserved the invites

 

I highly doubt anyone who was crowded out or just missed making the invite list would have played better than him or even been competitive

 

He's obviously not prioritizing golf now, so whether he makes the lineup or plays in college at the same level he did as a junior golfer seems irrelevant? 

 

He played well enough to use golf as a means to an end, which is what most aspire to anyway (even if they don't admit it)

[happygolucky]

1 hour ago, wegobomber31 said:

Let's take a walk down memory lane, thanks to the power of Google Sheets.

 

Here is the invite list for the Jackie Burke Cup, as of 6/23/23.  The shaded names would've been sponsors exemptions (all Houston-area players).

For reference, Eric Yun was 375th in Rolex at this time and not in the initial invite list.
375    -83    Eric Yun        2024    4.1    5

 

Jackson Koivun	1	Camden Smith	26	Chase Kyes	50
Preston Stout	2	Phillip Dunham	27	Pongsapak Laopakdee	51
Ethan Gao	3	Kush Arora	28	Jaeyoung (Jeffrey) Kwak	52
Byungho Lee	4	Tyler Watts	29	Kihei Akina	53
Blades Brown	5	Johnnie Clark	30	Jack Turner	54
Nicholas Gross	6	Max Jelinek	31	Nicolas Dominguez Alvarez	55
Aaron Pounds	7	Smith Summerlin	32	Jack Roberts	56
Jeffrey Guan	8	Boston Bracken	33	Mason Snyder	57
Jay Leng Jr	9	Jake Maggert	34	Matt Moloney	58
Bryan Kim	10	Max Herendeen	35	Brady Smith	59
Ethan Fang	11	JP Odland	36	Kyle Haas	60
Henry Guan	12	Ethan Paschal	37	Carson Bertagnole	61
Carson Kim	14	Rex Hargrove	38	Alex Long	62
Ryder Cowan	15	Nicholas Prieto	39	Chase Nevins	63
Miles Russell	16	Rowan Sullivan	40	John Hiller	64
Cayden Pope	17	Tyler Mawhinney	41	Nathan Miller	65
PJ Maybank	18	Adam Miller	42	Connor Williams	66
Billy Davis	19	Ryan Downes	43	Boyi (Barry) Zhang	67
Will Hartman	20	Jack Jerge	44	Asher Whitaker	68
Eduardo Derbez Torres	21	Taishi Moto	45	Braeden Hoyt	162
Wheaton Ennis	22	Eric Zhao	46	Charlie Wylie	167
William Jennings	23	Brooks Simmons	47	Joshua McGown	>700
Gerardo Gomez	24	Rylan Shim	48	Ford Montgomery	>700
Joshua Kim	25	Jack Gilbert	49	Bradley O'Donnell	>700

 

Given a lot of 2023's would've been starting college right around the time of this tournament and/or playing in the U.S. Am the following week, you get the large number of invitation declines and then the AJGA sends out the next wave of invites.  This Wave would've dipped to 113 in the Rolex rankings with another sponsors invite (from Mexico)

Eric Yun was 347th in Rolex at this time and not yet in the field

347    28    Eric Yun    4.668 

 

WAVE 2 - 6/28/23

Jacob Modleski	24	Jake Albert	92
Noah Kent	38	Logan Reilly	93
Supapon Amornchaichan	47	Zhengqian Li	94
Coltrane Mittag	58	Alejandro Fierro Saul	95
Michael Riebe	64	Alex Zhang	96
Treed Huang	66	Jay Brooks	98
Kale Fontenot	68	Rocco Salvitti	99
Jon Ed Steed	72	Mitchell Maier	100
Dylan Bingwen Ma	73	Peter Kim	101
Jay Mendell	74	Stephen Liu	102
Ethan Whitaker	75	Joshua Chung	103
Joshua Bai	76	Connor Henry	104
Cooper Claycomb	79	Kristoffer Kuvaas	105
Grant Gudgel	81	Warren Thomis	106
Preston Cooper	82	Zach Huang	107
Liam Pasternak	83	Brock Blais	108
Jeremy Chen	84	Camden Braidech	109
Finley Bartlett	85	Nolan Haynes	110
Andre Zhu	86	Charles Cauthen	111
Trey Marrion	87	Luke Colton	112
William Ma	88	Charlie Palmer	113
Jason Shwartz	89	Francisco Solorza Gutierrez	180

 

Wave 3 would've occured over the next week, as they get closer and closer to filling the field.  They dip down to 143 Rolex at this point (EY still ranked 266 and not yet in the field, but moved up after a 4th place finish at the AJGA CT Pan)

WAVE 3 - 7/4/25

Will Gordon	118
Bowen Ballis	121
Jackson Byrd	122
Baron Nguyen	124
Brady Rapp	131
Mason Howell	132
Edan Cui	133
Shawn Coultoff	134
Patricio Gonzalez	135
Will Baker	136
Kevin Mu	138
Jacob Lang	139
Tyler Loree	140
Christian Pardue	141
Ethan Lien	142
Reggie Zhu	143

 

 

Wave 4 occurs around Juy 10th, dipping down to 149 in Rolex. Eric Yun was ranked 245th at this time and not yet in the field.

 

Mykhailo Golod	146
Bradford Lacefield	147
Matthew Lin	148
Rawson Hardy	149

 

Finally, Wave 5 occurs after the 7/18 ratings update.  Eric Yun is included in the field upon moving up to 143 in Rolex after a 2nd place finish (30 pts) to Tyler Watts in the AJGA Keith Mitchell

 

Charles Nelson	113
Charles David Beeson	120
Andrew Hinson	130
Aidan Dortch	138
Eric Yun	143
Daniel Zou	149
Kai Hirayama	150
Parker Sands	154
Yinxuan Wu	166

 

So looking at this timeline, is this not a merit-based system working as intended? Shouldn't Eric Yun be celebrated for playing well enough in July 2023 to earn his way into the field (and doing something with it), just like Charles Nelson and others?  But by all means, let's not let facts get in the way of a juicy alt-narrative. 

 

 

I’m mind blown by this wealth of info. Just curious, do you collect this in for yourself (as in watch as invites go out and look up players rankings) or is there a source with all of this info out there somewhere?

[wegobomber31]

2 hours ago, wegobomber31 said:

 

Can I ask what evidence do you have that this was the case?

 

 

6 minutes ago, happygolucky said:

I’m mind blown by this wealth of info. Just curious, do you collect this in for yourself (as in watch as invites go out and look up players rankings) or is there a source with all of this info out there somewhere?

 

I happened to be tracking this one closely because my son moved up to 112 and was in the bottom edge of the second wave of invites.  Then he pulled out after qualifying for the US Amateur a couple weeks later.

[Tugu]

3 hours ago, wegobomber31 said:

 

Can I ask what evidence do you have that this was the case, "beyond a reasonable doubt"?

 

It's based on direct (as opposed to indirect or second hand) personal testimony. I'm not the only one on the board who knows this for a fact as well. But it's up to said person whether to identify themselves as I believe they may have a personal relationship.