Anyone out there watching the women?

[RJ_Daley]

I agree with Ran that watching the women is more what I can relate to in terms of shots and distances comparable to my own game.  I think I get more out of following them on the course and watching how they manage than watching the men, who don't play a game anywhere close to what I can relate to from further than 130yards to the green.  

I went to Women's Open 3 of the 5 days at BWR and one morning followed Oscar Miles and Judy Bell on a couple of holes before the tournament started, watching them set it up. I had a CH Pass on Sunday.  After cruising the course during the day, I avoided the building crowds as the girls came around the horn on 16.  I went up to the CH to watch the finish and somehow managed to be standing with my daughter and I on either side of Ms. Bell when Jenny and Sari made their putts to tie.  Ms Bell let out a gasp and lamented to her assistant that they will have to stay another night.  I followed the play-off all day Monday and thoroughly enjoyed it.  

TV just doesn't do any of the courses much justice.  I could barely recognize Pine Needles on the tube.

I went to Ironwood GC, Futures tour as a guest ofJohn V.  That was also a blast.  But someone will have to show JV where to park his officials cart behind a green.  Who was that adorable Japanese girl who has a voice on helium.  I fell in love with her...

[Gib_Papazian]

Maybe because in my former life I paid attention to stuff like this, but my sense is one of the problems with the LPGA Tour is simply awful camera work - especially ESPN.

The angles are always awkward and wrong, and it seems like everything is framed in the same medium shot. I feel far removed from the action and therefore it is not as visually arresting.

Not enough close-ups either.  Maybe they need a few more cameras out there. As it is now, all they are doing is simply recording the action instead of trying to bring an intimacy to the telecast.

The commentating is puke. Absolute cadavers. No other way to describe it. Bland, measured, non-informative and two dimensional. Put Nancy Lopez or Jan Stephenson in the booth full time and I'll bet the improvement would be immeasurable.

I like Judy Rankin, but she is monotone.  The funny thing is, in person, she is charming, engaging and effusive. Take the shackles off of and encourage her to let it rip.

And dammit, while we are on the subject of the LPGA, let's see if we can't teach that dullard Annika to smile once in a while. She doesn't have to magically become interesting or entertaining, but how about losing the stonefaced grimmace?

Give them a reason to zoom in for a close-up.

[Dan Kelly]

Gib --

I'm sure you're right about the announcers.

Let's kill two birds with one stone: Let's pair the insufferably smarmy Jim Kelly with that horrible motormouth Gary McCord (who was funny till he started reading his clippings, at which point he apparently decided that EVERY WORD OUT OF HIS MOUTH HAS TO BE CLEVER), and put 'em on the LPGA beat. Then I'd never be tempted to listen to either of 'em again -- at least until Ty Votaw figures out some way to make his tour telegenic.

[David Wigler]

I cannot stay out of this topic any longer.  I cannot watch the Women's Game.  It lost any luster it had when they held the US Women’s Am at Barton Hills two years ago.  I saw how they set up the course.  It was significantly easier than the way they set it up for the Men’s Invitational.  They put pins in spots that were so easy it was embarrassing.  Remember the joke on TV this fall.  Having to play men’s tournament pins, Annika hit the single worst putt ever televised only to have Karrie top it three holes later (Or maybe it was the other way around).  To say that these women could beat European tour Pro's is asinine.  

As for the WNBA, it is a train wreck.  Have you been to a game?  It is the worst of the NBA without the best.  You get all the chest bumping and BS that is intended to draw attention to yourself instead of the team, but none of the athleticism.  The fundamentals are not better either.  That is the proverbial "She has a good personality."  I watched an entire game without seeing a single back screen or pick.  I would bet a years salary that my high school men’s team (A state finalist this year) would destroy the WNBA champs.  I cannot figure out how they would get a rebound.  

As for Women’s College hoops, what growth?  This year, less than 20 Women’s college hoops programs will turn a profit.  It exists only because of Title IX.  I am with Matt.  If I want to spend my time in front of the TV, I want to see the best.  I have no doubt that most the Women on the LPGA tour are better than me.  I also have no doubt that if Shooter grew breasts, he would be the Tiger Woods of that tour.  I would rather watch him (He's cuter than most of them as well).

Sorry for no being politically correct.

[Dan Kelly]

David Wigler --

You say that fewer than 20 women's college basketball programs will turn a profit this year.

I have two questions about that:

(1) Is that what college athletic programs are supposed to do -- turn a profit?

(2) Yes or no to No. 1, how many turned a profit 10 years ago?

As the father of two girls who are growing up with infinitely more athletic opportunities (serious competition, and otherwise) than their mother and my sisters had, and as a person who believes that girls and boys can benefit equally from athletic competition, I happen to think that putting money into women's sports is a good thing.

If those women's programs are taking away some money from men's programs, I say: Bully for them! It's about time! Men's intercollegiate athletics have been way overblown in this country for a long time, and I think we're in absolutely no danger of starving young men for athletic competition.

I'm no expert on Title IX. Won't pretend to be.

Tell me, please (and don't worry about being "politically correct" -- a loathsome concept that does not, or at least should not, apply here): What's your objection, as a matter of (a) principle and/or (b) practicality, to Title IX?

[corey miller]

I would be shocked if more than  five college teams turned a profit in womens basketball.  Most games that are televised are only to keep the PC crowd happy in return for the mens games.  

I believe the women need to do something to differentiate the product from the men.  In other sports,  ncaa basketball and football the athletes and teams are not as good as pros in the NBA, and NFL  but the finished product I would argue is more entertaining.  It does not stem from the athlete themselves but the nature of the competition.

When most think of lpga they are thinking of golf and immediately comparing it to sr. pga and pga and then discounting it.  Perhaps, rightly so.  Maybe they can change the product to make it more compelling.

I am not saying it is possible, but what would the ratings be like if they only played ten events a year and they were at National,Merion,Cypress,Sand Hills.  Would they beat the mens ratings at TPC-Heron Bay? or does that just appeal to all the archie junkies here???

[David Wigler]

Dan,

I either worded my post poorly or you misunderstood it.  I have no objection to Title IX.  I have a young daughter as well and I am thrilled that she will have the opportunity to play athletics if she so chooses.  I just wanted to make sure we were calling spades, spades.  

Women's college basketball is both mediocre basketball and not self-sustaining.  The Men's programs pay for the Women's.  Women's golf IMO is boring.  Again, I think that Women should be given every opportunity.  Just don't tell me they are as good or as entertaining as the men.  It simply is not true.

[Dan Kelly]

David --

Thanks for the clarification.

Of course, I don't think anyone here has said that the women are as good as the men. I certainly didn't.

Though: Do you mind if I try to emulate Se Ri Pak's swing?  

I would argue that women's sports can be just as "entertaining" as men's. In fact, I'd be willing to argue that, in general, sports are just as entertaining to watch, at the lower levels, as they are at the top.

Tell me where you can find better sports entertainment than watching a bunch of little kids playing almost any sport.

For my money, the problem with the women's game -- and with the seniors' -- is that it's PRECISELY LIKE THE MEN'S GAME, but they're just not quite so good at it. They do nothing (in terms of format, courses, television coverage, etc.) to distinguish themselves in a positive way, so all comparisons with the men's tour come out on the men's side.

[Gib_Papazian]

Another aspect of the LPGA problem is their lack of appeal to women themselves - and especially girls.

Yet, they do nothing to cultivate interest in the next generation. When was the last time Juli Inkster, who lives right up the road from me, gave a clinic for girls or participated in  any way with the school programs? Zero. And hubby is Head Professional at Los Altos CC.

This is an extremely affluent neighborhood club in one of the wealthiest areas on the planet.  Yet they do nothing to encourage girl's golf.

Go have a look at women's magazines. They are full of articles encouraging self-focus. How to be sexier, how to improve your looks, your clothes, your make-up . . . . maybe most women are too busy battling their own insecurities to find any room to work with kids.

Some of this lack of interest lies in the attitude that women bring  to the game. I have a female friend who is an outstanding teaching professional in our area. After reading one of my recent pontifications in the Times, she lamented to me that the vast majority of women who come to the beginner clinics she hosts are there either because hubby wants her to learn or she is tired of being a golf widow.

i.e. If they cannot beat 'em, join 'em.

But that is not a good  reason to take up the game - you gotta love it with all your heart like we do.

Another example is this bullshit "Executive Women's Golf Association." Its stated goal is to teach women to play golf under the theory that it is a good business tool.

Not for the love of the game, just a means to an end. . . . . . and they cannot understand why I refuse to write a single word about them.

What an example to set.

The boys on my golf team all look up to the PGA Tour guys, yet the girls on the team are more interested in the men's tour than the LPGA.

For the average normal girl, what reason do they have to look up to these women as heros? What qualities do the LPGA
players demonstrate that would pique their interest?

Just what every little girl aspires to, playing on a tour surrounded by stonefaced, frumpy, poorly dressed, personality-challenged women. And one that does almost  nothing  to counter the public perception that the LPGA is dominated by lesbians.

We know this is not true, but corporate sponsorship is all about public perception.

Nobody wants to admit it, but Ben Wright was absolutely correct.  

[David Wigler]

Actually Dan it wasn't you but someone had posted that some of the Women "Could kick the crap out of the European tour players".  That was the comment that drew me off the sidelines.  It is a ludicous statement.  

You summed up my opinion.  They do the same thing as the men, just not as well.  I do not think that different formats would change my opinion though.  Fortunately for the LPGA tour, I am not the demographic they need, though.

[Matt_Ward]

This thread isn't about whether young women should have the opportunity to play sports. They should and I personally am for all the gains they've made through Title IX 100 percent.

This topic is about watching professional women's golf and why so few watch it.  The answer is (as most surely know) simple -- a game few really care about. When Nancy Lopez was there you had real star power and personality on par with the King himself -- I don't need to see robotic Annika and Karrie! Whatever happened to Big Moma, Laura D. and even Jan Stephenson, to name just a few.

Why do I say this? Just ask Ty Votaw himself and the reason 150 plus LPGA golfers were mandated to appear at his big mtg in Phoenix. They were discussing why the LPGA Tour is hurting. They are losing events ... losing sponsors ... losing it all UNLESS they really understand the market place. It's unfortunate but the LPGA will get hit on the chin harder than the gang in Ponte Vedra. That's unfortunate but that's what the market dictates.

Yes, there are glum types who play the PGA Tour -- who do not smile, and quite a few of them are real p*i*ks! But the bottom line is the TOP PLAYERS IN THE WORLD play on that circuit and that is what drives the decisonmakers who actually decide to sponsor events and the fans who pay the $$ at the turnstiles. Viewers (mostly male) are not interested in second or third rate level play. That sounds harsh but most of us know it to be true. When people say you can relate to what the women are doing -- I chuckle at that ... the people who go see golf want to see Daly bust it or Phil flop it. They go to see what they CANNOT do.

Don't get me wrong the PGA Tour had better see beyond the era of Tiger because just like the NBA when Jordan left the air went out of the bag there after years of Bird, Magic and Michael. That day won't be here for awhile but who is to say how long Tiger will play want to play?

If the LPGA can succeed in the Madison / Wisconsins; Mobile /  Alabamas; Burlington / Vermonts -- that's where it can establish itself. The LPGA needs to move away from direct competition with the PGA Tour -- that's a losing prospect. Create an identity in markets where the men don't go and build identity among players who have personalities (even if it's a bit edgy or controversial) and move away from the robots -- they're plenty of them already on the PGA Tour.

The women have a definite place but it's time the leaders in the LPGA started to market themselves and their product in the place where they can grow. Taking on the PGA Tour is like p*ssing in the ocean -- it won't do a darn thing to change things.

[RJ_Daley]

I agree with much of Gibs comments.  But Gib, have you gone to any of the Futures tour events?  I only went to one.  BTW, they play soon at Barona!    I saw John Vs photo album of the tour and from what I could detect my one day attending an event, it seemed vibrant and very appealing on a personable level.  If women's golf can build on that, it might have a good future.  But, they need to get off the politically correct platform and have an announcer that can bust it up.  They have some fine looking women (Stefania Croce) and why hide that fact; flaunt it!

I think John has one excellent gig there on that futures tour...

[Gary Smith (Guest)]

"Big Momma" Gunderson had soul, and I hope she is enjoying life.

As far as the LPGA goes, I wouldn't walk across the street to see a tournament. It's not about camera angles and announcers. It is all about people preferring to see a game played at it's highest level, as has been posted several times already.

I watch maybe 6-7 golf tournaments a year on TV, including the 4 majors, and that's enough for me. I rather be out doing things.

[Slag_Bandoon]

Watching Pro golf in either gender is a practice of vicarious anemia.  How about instead of sand traps, the ladies have Jello pits to wrestle in.  That'd keep 'em from aiming for them.  The men could wear fatigues and paint their faces in camo warrior designs and shoot paint balls in mid-swing ... aw crikey!    I'd rather play than watch overpaid debutantes and pampered glory boys gripe about sponsorship cuts and how tough life is golfing for a living.  "That missed putt cost him $100,000."  GOOD! I just can't relate to caring about the troubles of the best and the rich and the holiest, etcetera, while GETTING to play.    Why does the world care more about celebrities than they do their own dog?  

 !!! University of Oregon Duck Women take WNIT Championship trophy in basketball!  Woo hoo! It did not get top billing in Sports page in Oregonian.  The TrailBlazers got the lead.  

"Just beneath the surface of the mud, there's more mud there."   D.Crosby        

[RJ_Daley]

An odd double post deleted.

[Slag_Bandoon]

Actually, I'd love to watch the ladies but it would be a parole violation.  

[Jim_Kennedy]

Gib,
I think your calling the EWGA "bullshit" is a bit harsh.  
Our state chapter of the EWGA sponsors clinics, has LPGA golf programs for girls in the 7 to 17 year old range, offers leagues and weekday playing groups, a tournament schedule, handicaps, etiquette workshops, instruction programs for new or novice golfers, etc.,etc.,etc..
This organization is promoting women in golf, it is not just about golf as a business tool, although that facet exists too and was a catalyst for them. Guys have been doing business on golf courses forever. We  have burnt up more expense account money wining, dining and golfing with clients than most country's have as their gross national product. What is the problem with women learning to do this along with the other programs EWGA offers?? So what if that's how they come to the game. Not everyone can come from the caddie ranks or the country club life. You'll never learn to have an abiding respect for the game if you don't get out there and try it.

[corey miller]

i would rather have women golfers who have a respect for the game and perhaps were never exposed to it at a younger age(business or not) than the fifty year old 35-handicap hamponite who pays $300,000 to join a place because it is the "thing to do"

[Gib_Papazian]

Jim,
Just out of curiosity, which state do you live in?

The literature in our local branch is focused on golf as a business opportunity, first and foremost. The even have clinics on how to "do business" on the golf course.

So I say again: Bullshit.

When I see them reaching out to the girls on my golf team then they will get some ink. Until then, my opinion remains the same.

Learning how to play golf for the expressed purpose of using it as a business tool makes me ill. I play customer golf - and some of it is with women. But the gals play it because they love the game and nary a word of business is spoken out there. It is not the time nor the place, and for an organization to use our beloved game in such a manner is wrong wrong wrong.

Just what we need, a bunch of social climber women, taking up golf so they can work over a client at some expensive CCFAD.

Anybody with half a brain can see right through that kind of baloney.

The very soul of golf shrieks.

PS: Because golf is only viewed as a tool, it has been my experience that these women do not devote the appropriate amount of time to the game. Therefore, they go out to these CCFAD's and simply hack and chop their way around the golf course, invariably paying more attention to their lame ass sales pitch than who is away.

[Brian Phillips]

If you have been bored of the ladies golf just watch Suzann Petersen from Norway.  Here is a girl who is self taught, loud mouthed, good looking but also has the game and brains to go with it.

When I was really interested in the golf swing (when I had a hcp of 4 and could play to it not like now where I have a handicap of 9 and play to 19..) I used to watch the ladies play as the silky swings they had are a joy to watch.

I think can learn a lot more from the ladies game than you can watching Tiger or other PGA players as our swings are at about the same speed as these girls.

I enjoy it...I'd rather watch ten Swedish women pros having a ball on the course than ten normal pros on the PGA tour..

Brian

[Bob_Huntley]

Like most men here, I would not cross the street to see an LPGA event. However to see some of the most effective swings in golf one should come to MPCC each year for the California Girls Championship. To see young girls, much less that five feet tall and weighing eighty to ninety pounds drive a golf ball much further than our average member, is a delight. They are attractive, smart and are the future of ladies golf. Their only drawback is that they have some of the most obnoxious, driven parents ever created.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Gib,
Connecticut. I looked at our site and the chapter in SF. I don't see them to be devoted solely to business.
I haven't played golf with any women from this org. so I cannot say whether or not they devote the required time to learning golf. They do seem to have many teaching programs that include etiquette and instruction in fundamentals. They are partnered up with the LPGA and they do have fundraisers for girl's golf. It doesn't appear to be an org. with a narrow focus, as you suggest.

[Gib_Papazian]

Jim,
Oh I get it, because they are affiliated with the LPGA, that must give them legitimacy.

I have no idea how things work out in Connecticut and have do doubt they do great work in reaching out to kids, growing the game yadda yadda yadda.

However, on the left coast where Ellen DeGeneres and Rosie O'Donnell are revered as role models, our "liberated" women's groups tend to be run with self-focus.

After all, they have ISSSSSUES. No time for kids, just like those dullards on the LPGA.

In fairness, a couple years ago we had a Futures Tour event at Crystal Springs (Players West, actually) and the gals were awfully nice . . . . . what happens between there and the LPGA I do not know.

But if it would seem I am railing against women only, I plead that this is what the discussion is about. In truth, I find Yuppy men who take up the game for business purposes even more distasteful. They are the worst slow-play offenders, take carts, smoke cigars  and bring their 16 handicaps to the black tees.

Remember the thread "When Golf Was Good?" . . . . . . just another brick in the wall.

[J. Francis]

I have no problem with the LPGA, it can be a good show, particularly to attend in person, even better when on a great golf course.

I don't think there is any comparison to the WNBA and Women's college hoops, which are just subsidized mediocrity. Golf is a game where women have a great ability to display some skill, whereas with hoops the skills required are so heavily oriented towards men and speed, strength.

I don't think anyone would oppose equal opportunity to play sports in college for women, but how Title IX has been implemented makes it one of the worst legistlation ever passed. To mandate that colleges must spend the same money dollar for dollar on women's and men's sports is a joke, particularly since 'mens' sports are not strictly men's sports, it is the women's sports that discriminate.

Title IX should have been implented as having as many women's sports as men's sports and left it at that. But that wasn't good enough for the strident feminists in the social engineering lobby.

[Patrick_Mucci]

George, et. al.,

What caused the Men's PGA tour to grow and prosper ?

Good golf ?
Good golf courses ?
courtesy cars ?
large purses
or none of the above.

Wasn't it personalities ?
The charisma of the players ?
The colorful, unique players ?
The diversity of the players ?

Tommy Bolt,
Arnold Palmer
Gary Player
Jack Nicklaus
Gene Littler
Tom Weiskopf
Lee Trevino
Chi Chi Rodriquez
Ken Venturi
Ben Hogan
Sam Snead

And countless other exceptional playing golf pros with unique personalities, and appeal that helped shape and expand the PGA tour.

Pros who threw balls to the fans, signed autographs, talked to the fans, smiled at the fans, played to the fans.  
Players who showed emotion, "the thrill of victory, the agony of defeat".  Pros whose swing or demeanor people wanted to emulate.

And, didn't everybody want to play with, and hang out with those guys ?

They turned a skill sport into an entertainment sport requiring great skill.

Is any of this missing from the LPGA ?

Are there any interesting personalities that light you up ?
Are the players fan friendly ?
Are the players CAMERA friendly ?
Does anybody want to hang out with them ?

I know when I'm being force-fed, and I'm tired of it !