Stu1961

The criteria was listed on the Golf Channel last night. There was a lot to unpack with the revised OWGR that took effect in August. Here's what I found. Like I said there's a lot to unpack. Here's just some of what is cited.

https://www.globalgolfpost.com/featured/revamped-owgr-a-mess-for-liv-to-untangle/

"LIV does not meet several criteria that the OWGR lists as mandatory to be considered, and all of those criteria would have to be in place for at least one year prior to the application being accepted.

The OWGR has long asked that tours have a 36-hole cut, play 72 holes (developmental tours are exempt from this rule), carry an average field size north of 75, and stage qualifying to gain entry into both the tour and each individual tournament.

It’s expected that LIV will try to leverage the Asian Tour, the already OWGR-sanctioned tour which they own, to meet some of the criteria. They could also try to use relegation as proof of a qualifying system. However, these could both pose a problem because the Asian Tour is sponsoring LIV in their OWGR application, which is the opposite of how normal professional golf feeder systems work.

The OWGR has long been based on two-year windows with significant weight being added to recent results. Without accruing points, LIV players are set to drop in the rankings. And it won’t take much time at all. Projections show that it’s possible no LIV players could be in the top 50 by the end of this year. There could easily be none in the top 100 by the end of 2023. The majors could take no course of action and watch the majority of LIV golfers fall by the wayside. At the same time, some majors like the Masters could tweak their qualification system to add more non-LIV players to the field while trying to stop LIV defectors.

And then there is the revamped system itself. The new format will gradually show its effects each week as the old system slowly filters out, a process that will take two years. It’s impossible to know exactly what will happen moving forward, but it seems heavily in favor of the PGA Tour and heavily against LIV.

The OWGR is now the end result of a metric called the Strokes Gained World Ranking. The SGWR is a measure of a player’s score against the relative difficulty of how everyone else in the event fared each day. The concept is similar to strokes gained statistics used by the PGA Tour, and strokes gained inventor Mark Broadie is a part of creating this new metric. The key difference is that the SGWR is adjusted for strength of field across all tours, so players get more points for playing against other top players. These SGWR’s are combined at each tournament and that becomes the strength of field points being divided that week. There are some early issues with the SGWR system that will likely be sorted through naturally over time."

      Sneakylong The OWGR has long asked that tours have a 36-hole cut, play 72 holes (developmental tours are exempt from this rule)

      I'm confused a bit, about these 2 excerpts in bold.
      If 'asking', it is not a rule. If it's a rule, they are telling, not asking.
      Which is it?

          Par4QC I'm confused a bit, about these 2 excerpts in bold.
          If 'asking', it is not a rule. If it's a rule, they are telling, not asking.
          Which is it?

          The way I read it (it) sounds like a rule because they include the 72 hole criteria. Then they mention the exemption for developmental tours.

            Sneakylong
            I read a similar article… but those changes are about HOW points will be awarded not IF they will - which is all LIV is after. I really wish the article would have cited a source for the “mandatory (with approved exceptions)” criteria rather than the author just stating it.
            Frankly, given who runs OWGR, I would think it easier for LIV to create their own ranking system (based off the established rankings of players when they left the PGA) and petition the majors directly based off those. The majors already accept entry from the senior tour and amateurs … both of which have their own ranking systems.
            I would love to see the Masters (if their mission truly is to have the best field represented) offer invitations to LIV’s top performers - and even more importantly, openly defend their position of wanting the best-of-the-best as their reason for doing so. Just because players chose to leave the PGA tour does not mean their skills have vanished. If OWGR is flawed in its ability to still recognize and rank these golfer’s there’s no reason a major couldn’t establish new criteria to include them.

                Stu1961

                That’s the whole issue. Whether LIV ever meets the criteria to get OWGR. As for the Majors. If I had to bet I’d bet that LIV players will be excluded from the Majors.

                Just reading the tea leaves from what has been said by the governing bodies of the 4 Majors. And the fact that they’ll continue to fall down the world ranking points list.

                The only ones that could get to play are past Champions. Unless they can come up with a way to exclude them as well.

                  The whole purpose behind OWGR was to produce a fair equitable system to rank the World’s best golfers. LIV has 13 who were ranked inside the top 50 (a typical number for inclusion in majors). The fact that these players rankings are dropping has nothing to do with diminished skills. The OWGR is failing golf - intentionally - because it is controlled by those who wish to maintain leverage over their work force (source of their billion dollar per year industry and their exorbitant salaries) … to keep them under their thumb. The LIV players are being used like heads on pikes. “54 holes”, “no cuts”, “less than 75 man fields” is all just distraction.
                  If the majors were to exclude proven qualified players - they would be cheating golf history. But I’m sure if enough pressure and/or money is applied “fairness” can be overlooked.

                    Stu1961 I'm curious to see what, if anything, The Masters does. They control everything associated with their tournament right down to the TV & commercials. They merely play by the rules of golf, not rules of the PGA. And it is by invite only; and I believe that to mean even past winners. It is a ton different than the other 3 majors. What they do, or don't do, may well set the trend.

                    "Phil is a three-time Masters champion and is invited in that category and many other categories......."

                      If they decide to exclude 13 of the world's top 50 players, will the majors really still be majors?

                        rsvman2 It's going to be egg-on-face if the Majors cut these guys out. Esp. if they are a Masters winner, who get automatic invites to the other 3. Doesn't say you have to be a member of anything/anywhere.

                        How will it look to the whole world of sports, if 'rules of exclusion' are added to 1 sport, perhaps the oldest sport, after 100's of years??

                            Par4QC I agree it would be a bad look for the Masters to cut out past winners just because they went to Liv. They could have retired and still played. Jack and Arnie weren't actively playing any tours and they were playing in the Masters.

                              How about a little pot stirring......
                              Why do LIV player give a crap about so called Majors when it is all about the $$$$$$$ ? 🙄🤑

                                The majors can do as they wish, but I'm not going to watch if Cameron Smith is healthy and not invited to play. Doubt they'll miss me, but I won't miss them much either.

                                Eguller Why do LIV player give a crap about so called Majors when it is all about the $$$$$$$ ?

                                ...because it isn't ALL about the money.
                                That's the "look over here" distraction Monahan the Magician wants you to pay attention to.

                                  Eguller Why do LIV player give a crap about so called Majors when it is all about the $$$$$$$ ?

                                  The Majors pay a LOT too! And winning those may get them back some endorsement money.

                                      KCee The Majors pay a LOT too! And winning those may get them back some endorsement money.

                                      Counterpoint.... What does the most lucrative major pay ? Not $4M like the 1st LIV paid and you have to
                                      play your ass off against strong fields - too much work. Endorsements ? Too hot to handle now....
                                      Take the $$$$ and go have fun.