News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Open final qualifying change
« on: September 01, 2011, 09:58:33 AM »
The R&A have announced that local final qualifying for the Open is changing from 2014 to four regional final qualifying venues, these will be Royal Cinque Ports, Glasgow Gailes, Hillside and somewhat strangely Woburn.

http://www.opengolf.com/en/News/LatestNews/2011/08/RQ-Annoncement.aspx
Cave Nil Vino

Tom Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #1 on: September 01, 2011, 01:54:01 PM »
Seems fairly sensible, but I guess that is going to p-off a fair few current final qualifying courses. Lots of them use "Open Final Qualifying Venue" as a great advertising point, which they aren't going to be able to do anymore. It was always a fairly good pointer on less famous courses worth a visit too if you didn't know the area.

I also fear it also might make the atmosphere of final qualifying seem a bit different. I went to watch a friend play at Kingsbarns last year in final qualifying and I thought the atmosphere was great. Everybody had made the special trip up and the feeling of TOC sitting just down the road waiting for who ever qualifies added something to the day. My mate also had Michael Campbell in the group behind him, I think the highlight of his day was when Campbell walked into the practice bunker next to him and proceed to fluf two balls into the face of the bunker straight away....seeing a major winner who had beaten Tiger down the stretch do that gave my him some hope! I doubt this would happen under the new format as I guess the tour pros will pick their region or go into a special final qualifying comp away form the 'normal' guys.

Unfortunately my mate struggled that day and then followed it up by missing out by one shot this year!

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #2 on: September 01, 2011, 03:05:36 PM »
Thomas it's rare for tour pros to play LFQ as they tend to go for International Final Qualifying where there are more spaces. I guess it will reduce costs for competitors especially as LFQ is now a couple of weeks before the Open rather than the previous weekend.
Cave Nil Vino

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #3 on: September 01, 2011, 03:09:49 PM »
The Pickleheads strike again! They are determined to ruin it and I am sure they will succeed.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Andy Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #4 on: September 01, 2011, 03:36:17 PM »
Are these four going to host every year? Or, is it going to change year to year as it currently does?

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #5 on: September 01, 2011, 03:46:34 PM »
It appears to me that 16 regional's will now go into 4 lots of 4 that is basically regional.

Making in two weeks before destroys the charm.
Making the final quals distant destroys the charm.

My guess is the 4 regional final courses would be on a 5 year cycle like the regionals.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Tom Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #6 on: September 01, 2011, 05:24:35 PM »
Thomas it's rare for tour pros to play LFQ as they tend to go for International Final Qualifying where there are more spaces. I guess it will reduce costs for competitors especially as LFQ is now a couple of weeks before the Open rather than the previous weekend.

When I was there last year there were half a dozen tour pros or former tour pros at Kingsbarns. None as big a name as Campbell but I recognised a few of them. I understand not many go that route with all the different methods of qualifying through the Scottish Open/US tour event, international qualifying etc but some tour players end up trying a few different ways and then final qualifying is last chance saloon so you get the odd famous guy here and there. With the new system that isn't going to happen. Wasn't there talk of Monty trying final qualifying this year as he failed to get in the other routes? He didn't bother in the end but still.

Quickly looking down the list this year these guys all tried. I'd have been pretty chuffed as an Amateur to turn up and play with any of these, it would make it feel a touch more special than some random club pro or another amateur;

Paul Broadhurst
Marcel Siem
Markus Brier
Peter Baker
Jin Jeong
Jarmo Sandelin
Elliot Saltman
Zane Scotland
Michael Campbell (again)

Bruce Katona

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #7 on: September 01, 2011, 06:17:29 PM »
Adrian: Picklehead....that term brings back very fuzzy memories mof my college days....thanks !

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #8 on: September 01, 2011, 07:26:09 PM »
Thomas - out of around 240 players in LFQ the group you have quoted would be nice to play with but wouldn't exactly fill the spectator parking lot. Monty came 72nd and last finished at IFQ at Sunningdale.

Adrian - IFQ made a massive difference to qualifying taking place often months beforehand.
Cave Nil Vino

Tom Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #9 on: September 01, 2011, 07:48:15 PM »
Mark

I wasn't meaning it was good for these type of players for the spectators, but for the players competing who have qualified from the regional fields. These guys may may only get the chance to compete against the 'big' boys once or twice in their life at events like final qualifying. Even one or two players with tour history will make the event seem that little bit more special for them, especially if you get the odd old Ryder Cup player or even Major winner 'a la' Michael Campbell. It just adds to the romanticism of the the whole event as does the location which will no longer be the case with these changes.

I thought the system seemed to work fairly well, was there any other reason to change it other than making it easier for players to get to?

Andy Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #10 on: September 01, 2011, 10:38:47 PM »
I always liked that for a long time everyone had to qualify, Champion Golfer of the Year included. That's long gone of course. It seems like these changes make it much easier (and cheaper) on the lesser/amateur player, which is nice. Maybe it will lead to a more egalitarian field?

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #11 on: September 01, 2011, 10:50:19 PM »
The press release talks about a more convenient route into the championship. It may have come from player feedback? Travelling 100s of miles for a couple of practise rounds and the event would obviously be expensive for amateurs and lesser pros. Maybe some LFQ venues spend lots for a couple of days every 8-10 years? It may also be more cost effective for the R&A? I have zero insight into this.
Cave Nil Vino

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #12 on: September 02, 2011, 03:58:43 PM »
Mark

I read the same press release and it struck me that what they meant was it was more convenient for the Tour pro's who have failed to get in by right. When the Open was at Turnberry a couple of years ago FQ was at G Gailes, Western and Barassie and there was quite few "names" playing including the Saltman boys, Olazabal, Van der Velde, Aitken (the young South African) who has featured in a quite a few tournaments since.

Niall

Melvyn Morrow

Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #13 on: September 02, 2011, 05:32:59 PM »

Its great to know that we are all in the capable hands of The R&A.



As in all they do, they do not do it for Golf. At least there is not much need for technology in this hand movement otherwise they might get confused as to what is their real intention.

Melvyn

PS Can anyone give them some advice on their grip, seems to be missing something.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2011, 05:37:30 PM by Melvyn Hunter Morrow »

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #14 on: September 02, 2011, 06:48:10 PM »
IFQ was started as lots of overseas players wouldn't travel to qualify.

I'm guessing this may help the young pros and amateurs for whom a 3 or 4 day trip to the other end of the country gets very expensive in order to have a 3/80 chance of qualifying. Romance is one thing but a £1000 qualifying trip is another.
Cave Nil Vino

Andy Stamm

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #15 on: September 02, 2011, 07:08:32 PM »
I'm guessing this may help the young pros and amateurs for whom a 3 or 4 day trip to the other end of the country gets very expensive in order to have a 3/80 chance of qualifying. Romance is one thing but a £1000 qualifying trip is another.

I hope that's it. Or at least that that's the result.

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #16 on: September 03, 2011, 04:11:41 AM »
Mark - I think IFQ is a good idea. I like the idea of final qualyfying moving around and the proximity to the OPEN itself, to many regional pro's getting through stage 1 to the LFQ is 'their' open.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #17 on: September 03, 2011, 04:32:30 AM »

Its great to know that we are all in the capable hands of The R&A.



As in all they do, they do not do it for Golf. At least there is not much need for technology in this hand movement otherwise they might get confused as to what is their real intention.

Melvyn

PS Can anyone give them some advice on their grip, seems to be missing something.

Melvyn

I've said it before, you may have a family gripe against the R&A over the Open Belt but there is no doubt in my mind that what they do is firmly for the good of the game. You may disagree but I would rather have a benign dictator like the R&A rather than some commercial organisation who are just out to totally rip the arse out of it and to hell with the consequences for the game.

With regards to staging the qualifier on the same courses each year it does make sense from the practical point of view for the R&A. Every time they hold a qualifier they need to do the inspection of the courses (well in advance), they need to make all the arrangements for the day working out how it will work at each individual course and while they have full time staffers, a lot of that work is down to members volunteering their time. It makes sense therefore if they don't have to start from scratch each year.

Niall

Melvyn Morrow

Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #18 on: September 03, 2011, 07:38:52 AM »

Niall

Your first point, the R&A core business is no longer golf, its money.

As for my attitude to the R&A is not about The Belt, my dad’s old Home, it’s about many things, missed opportunities perhaps but all seem to be about The R&A and money, as far as I see it. It is as if they do not know what they are doing or even what they have and how to promote the game – everything is a fudge, nothing is positive for the game or GB Golf – they just seem to miss the point.  I was told of a conversation an R&A guy had last year in the States, re the ball,  he apparently seemed to be living on another planet, understanding little, so why send someone like that to observe anything, just plain out of touch with their core business GOLF. That’s why I want to see a major shake-up at The R&A, even  to the point of stripping them of their right to Govern. (last resort).

As for your second point, I do not altogether disagree but I wonder why the R&A are not more aware of the GB clubs.

Melvyn

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #19 on: September 03, 2011, 02:39:08 PM »
If the changes are all about travel, costs and general admin for the R & A then why not use 1 course for the Final Qualyfying and have 12 spots from a 156 field. Just create less spots to get to FQ from the 16 Regional's (which might need to go to 20)
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Brian_Ewen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #20 on: September 03, 2011, 05:09:51 PM »
I wont miss the rise in green fees each time these courses can (again) name themselves as an Open Qualifier.

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #21 on: September 03, 2011, 08:48:17 PM »
Melvyn - who would you replace the R&A with and how would it be financed? You make these statements all the time so I'd be interested to hear what you'd do rather than just dissing the incumbents.

Brian - I guess the clubs charge what the market accepts, if no one turned up the cost would plummet. There is clearly still a high end market that succeeds and a low end that is suffering. It's not the  makers of BMW, Audi or Mercedes that have had financial woes it's been the cheaper end of the market. Local jewellers close and Graff rocks.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2011, 08:56:10 PM by Mark Chaplin »
Cave Nil Vino

Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #22 on: September 03, 2011, 09:58:56 PM »
Melvyn,

You say the R&A are only interested in money, have you ever read any of their financial reports? Very little is left in the Club's coffers after distributions to golf organizations around the world.

I think a lot of people on this site wonder about your animus toward the R&A. Surely it cannot be about equipment; your own kin took advantage of the same thing which today, seems to get under your skin.

My only complaint about the body is that they elected Prince Andrew to the captaincy; his relationship to the Qadaffi clan was known a long time ago.

Bob

James Boon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #23 on: September 04, 2011, 04:54:50 AM »
Chappers,

I'd missed this so thanks for posting.

When my brother got through to Final Qualifying down at Deal in 2003 it was a great few days, and one thats given us both plenty of stories to live off. As mentioned above it was as close as he is likely to get to an Open so a great experience. One of the best bits for me was leaving work on the Friday before travelling to Deal on Saturday and basically saying I'll either see you on Tuesday or if I'm not in look out for me and my brother on TV and I'll see you in a weeks time!  ;D

At that stage Final Qualifying really did feel part of the tournament. Now with it being a couple of weeks before and there being International Qualifying, its not what it used to be. I can understand all the arguments, and even this new system of 4 courses across the country, though for a links based event Woburn seems a bit odd, perhaps it could have been Hunstanton or Burnham?

I suspect for local amateurs and club professionals the magic of the qualifying system has gone, which for me is a real shame as it was very much part of it being The Open.

Cheers,

James
2023 Highlights: Hollinwell, Brora, Parkstone, Cavendish, Hallamshire, Sandmoor, Moortown, Elie, Crail, St Andrews (Himalayas & Eden), Chantilly, M, Hardelot Les Pins

"It celebrates the unadulterated pleasure of being in a dialogue with nature while knocking a ball round on foot." Richard Pennell

Melvyn Morrow

Re: Open final qualifying change
« Reply #24 on: September 04, 2011, 06:33:15 AM »

Mark

Given the option I would keep the R&A but I want its accountable to the clubs. I want to see it more assessable to the likes of the professional bodies, be they the Golfers, Designers or Clubs.  Pre an AGM I would like to see an open week for a Conference (Convention, I believe is the word in the States) where interested parties voice opinions or propose actions, so by the AGM the  Governing Body has a serious understanding of what others think and feel. This in turn may generate small association of interested parties which feed the feeling of the great unwashed back to the Governing Body. A Governing Body working with its people is nearly unheard of in this modern world of ours

Working Bodies set up to really take into account the feelings of those interested in the game. I would also personally like to see some emphasis on GCA being included, as from my experience many golfers do not even understand what it stands for let alone what it represents.

I am not seeking a simple kick up the bum, but a proper re organisation. They has assets that they have done zero with, which just shows, let’s just call it the slowness of their minds.

As for the finances, are you taking the piss, you know the money in the game. The finances are not the problem nor do I see any problems there, just a case of money going to the right causes.

The current regime have had years of opportunity and money to resolve some of the minor issues. We have moved into the 21St Century with an organisation still trying to understand its own identity, let alone decide its direction.

I am a one man band seeking to look at the problems of the game and try to inject first a debate on the subjects, then if possible groups of interested people willing to try to take things further. My moans and groans are there for a constructive purpose, not just joyfully banter or a simple rant. For all my faults I am at least willing to try to do something. I had hoped that this site might have had the people with balls enough to stand up for what they believe in. Ran’s given us the site and subject, but all we seem to do is attack each other for daring to have an opinion that differs from others. 

I do not have all the answers, far from it but we have enough interesting Members who can do something from simple organising to actually suggesting certain forms of action to generate interest and publicity.

I hope, for what its worth, that the above has answered your question regards my thoughts re The R&A.

Melvyn

PS Hi Bob,
I welcome most Royals but in Andrew we have the wrong one and he should never have been elected Captain of The R&A, IMHO.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back