The tossing of toys from the LIV crib is an almost daily occurrence now as the reality of their circumstances sets in.
sports.yahoo.com
LOL
I've been critical of LIV for various reasons but this writer is spitting venom like a sprinklerhead with asps tied to it.
He does raise an interesting point though:
Last week in Singapore, Bryson DeChambeau panned the world golf rankings as “obsolete,” while simultaneously demanding LIV be included in said obsolete system. LIV isn’t afforded ranking points because it is non-compliant in many areas, and has made clear it doesn’t intend to become compliant. Nevertheless, DeChambeau (and Mickelson) insist the ranking is broken because it grants points to tours, not based on the past accomplishments of individuals now competing in a closed circuit where they’re contractually protected from the consequences of poor play.
What BD and other LIVers want is a ranking system that, I dunno, respects their previous level of competitiveness? Or somehow includes a formula to account for their change in format and pay structure?
Don't those things significantly alter just about every aspect of the competition, from pre-round prep (and consultation about the course among teammates vs mostly caddies) all the way through the psychology and consequences of bad play one week to the next which can greatly change decision making as well as execution and stamina?
Maybe BD can come up with that formula to help things along. Otherwise, what's the difference between that and throwing the door open to world rankings that include ALL golfers worldwide? If we're just going by skill level and not actual performance on analogous, peer-level tours, then what about the amateurs and lower level pros out there who are +2 to +5 handicaps and only play in club events or local tournaments?
Shouldn't they also be ranked?
www.baltimoresun.com
