# Annika at the Colonial: What do you think? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 13, 2003, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025 "2003-05-13T19:46:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2003, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/101 "2003-05-17T17:43:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Cavalier \* > I see no reason for the LPGA to exist. Women aren’t as good at golf as men, but I’m not as good as those men either, where’s my People Who Can’t Play Golf PGA? The idea of a championship for the incompetent is laughable. The LPGA is a freak show, a novelty act, a circuc clown act. > > The LPGA has no validity. > > I have nothing against women playing in PGA competitions, if they go through the proper procedures as men would do, but I do object to clique-ish leagues of women who, like many men, would like to compete professionally but just aren’t good enough and do so anyway because of their sex. If the LPGA was on the same level as the PGA, I wouldn’t have a problem, but people being paid just for their sex to perform their Keystone Kops routine gets on my nerves. > > Why should men be better at snooker and archery? Stronger, faster, better hand eye co-ordination and spacial acuity, better fine motor control. > > You also say: “ **they swing like guys**!”. I know next to nothing about golf, how else would they swing? > > The purses are different at Wimbledon, with men making more. Rightfully so, too, as men play more sets per match at a higher level of quality. That’s an interesting idea, that there should just be a tiered system of tours based on pure talent, irrespective of gender. But to say “the LPGA has no validity” ignores the fact that sports are business. Apparently there is a greater market for the LPGA than for the Nationwide (2nd tier mens) Tour. The prize money tells that story in unarguable black and white. As for “swinging like guys”, a lot of women have nice, smoothe swings but w/o the power (club head spead at impact) that the guys have. If you’ve ever seen some of the up-and-comers like the 13 yr old M/ Wie, their swings have **power**. ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2003, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/102 "2003-05-17T18:47:42Z")
I think **Cavalier’s** post should be sent to the LPGA for Annika’s locker this week. That might spur her to a 70-68. OTOH, realistically, 79-76 isn’t out of the question. Since she’s the best female player, possibly ever, that would be bad for women’s golf. ---
**Author:** ![Yookeroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yookeroo/32/323_2.png) [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2003, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/103 "2003-05-17T19:06:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > \*\*As for “swinging like guys”, a lot of women have nice, smoothe swings but w/o the power (club head spead at impact) that the guys have. If you’ve ever seen some of the up-and-comers like the 13 yr old M/ Wie, their swings have **power**. \*\* Speaking of Wie: [Wie to be first female to play on PGA Tour’s jr. circuit](http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/story?id=1554007&contentType=Story) ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2003, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/104 "2003-05-17T19:12:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > \*\*Kuehne? > \*\* Dunlap. [Scott](http://www.golftoday.co.uk/tours/2000/pgachamp/round1report3.html) and [Page](http://services.golfweb.com/ga/bios/lpga/dunlap_page.html) [Dunlap](http://www.golfweb.com/players/00/60/36/bio.html). > [@](#): > > Sister Page is former LPGA member and former women’s golf coach at Vanderbilt…Enjoys discussing politics. Conservative, that is. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2003, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/105 "2003-05-17T19:53:51Z")
Maybe when Annika meets up w/ Singh next week she’ll slug him. Given the way she’s been pumping iron lately, she might have a better chance at beating him mano-a-mano than on the course. If Singh wins this week (I think he’s only 1 stroke back now), his win will be badly tarnished, as well it should be. Frankly, I’ve never liked the guy anyway. He’s got the personality of a sea slug. There’s more to sports than winning. Being a bad sport is just indefensible. ---
**Author:** ![Zoff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/6de8d8/32.png) [@Zoff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoff)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2003, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/106 "2003-05-17T20:01:34Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Cavalier_ > Having competitions for the aged is one thing, they have been capable and declined. Competitions for the young players are completely acceptable, these players are still developing. Having competitions for the inadequate is a stupid idea. The LPGA has no validity. If there are any players in the LPGA capable of it they should play in the PGA. The PGA is a competition for the best in the sport, the LPGA isn’t even a competition for rejects, just people with no chance of success given a chance to compete against other inadequates of the same birthgroup. Women are physically different than men. That’s a simple fact. Why would it be OK for leagues for younger groups? They are just as “inadequate” under your definitions. The fact is that most women will never develop the strength of men just as most 12 year olds will not have the strength of men. You’ve simply made an arbitrary decision that age is an excuse for not being as physically good but gender isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Cavalier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/97f17d/32.png) [@Cavalier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cavalier)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2003, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/107 "2003-05-18T06:40:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zoff \* > Women are physically different than men. That’s a simple fact. I am physically different to those men too. Why do they get paid for being unable to compete and others don’t? > [@](#): > > Why would it be OK for leagues for younger groups? They are just as “inadequate” under your definitions. The fact is that most women will never develop the strength of men just as most 12 year olds will not have the strength of men.\*\* “Will never develop” and “will not have”, very different things. Youth competitions are about development, the players will one day move up and compete and the highest level and succeed or fail according to their ability, their development is aided by competing in youth tournaments first. The women, on the other hand, aren’t developing and will never make the step up to the highest level to be a valued member of the tour. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2003, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/108 "2003-05-18T06:46:04Z")
The reason there are men’s leagues and women’s leagues is because someone went to the effort to set them up, and people watched. Other leagues may have been tried, but failed. It makes perfect sense to separate the sexes, because they are in fact two different natural categories. It is valuable to women to see how good other women can be. Why should they be forced to play with the men and be destined to come in a distant second all the time? Let’s just acknowledge the difference, and have separate leagues. That said, I think it makes sense that the more powerful league keep the door open to allow outstanding women to test themselves at the next level. Why not? Again, it’s interesting and valuable to all humans to see just how far any individual can climb, regardless of sex. If a woman can beat the top men at Golf, that’s interesting to know. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2003, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/109 "2003-05-18T07:35:20Z")
Let’s hope Annika can handle the media circus that this looks like it’s going to turn into. I’ve noticed that USA network, which carries the tour coverage on Thursdays and Fridays, is already planning “extended coverage” (beyond the usual 2 hrs) depending on Annika’s tee time. And I take back my comment earlier that I doubted a woman would try to compete regularly on the PGA if she qualified. Clearly any $$ she might lose from actually winnings (as compared to what she could make on the LPGA) would be more than offset by endorsements, and the added $$ that all the fame and attention would bring her. I’d be happy to see this when and if it occurs. It’ll probably be a bit like Ty Tryon, He was the youngest player to earn his card and the media hype was ridiculous. But after he played a few tournaments and never did much, the coverage dried up quicker than spit on hot asphalt. She’ll get her time in the limelight, but it won’t last unless she can actually get on the leaderboard. ---
**Author:** ![Zoff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/6de8d8/32.png) [@Zoff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoff)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2003, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/110 "2003-05-18T13:26:50Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Cardinal_ > I am physically different to those men too. Why do they get paid for being unable to compete and others don’t? Because people pay them and they don’t pay you. Your argument that it’s “invalid” is rebutted by the fact that the league exists and women get paid. You might not like women’s sports and be a little bitter they exist, but the proof is in the pudding. I also assume your “invalid” remarks apply to lower men’s golf, right? They are incapable of competing at the PGA level. And, heck, they’re men, so they actually have the biological edge on women. If the LPGA is invalid then the .com tours really suck. > [@](#): > > Youth competitions are about development, the players will one day move up and compete and the highest level and succeed or fail according to their ability, their development is aided by competing in youth tournaments first. The women, on the other hand, aren’t developing and will never make the step up to the highest level to be a valued member of the tour. Not all youth leagues are about development into the pros. But that’s irrelevant. My point is that you decree one league to be valid and another to be invalid based on your mere opinion or bias. Younger athletes are physically different from grown men. Grown women are physically different from men. So it’s appropriate to have different leagues for both. And if Annika makes the cut, your argument that women can’t compete in the men’s league is gone and you’ll have to fall back on arguing percentages. ---
**Author:** ![notfrommensa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f14d63/32.png) [@notfrommensa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notfrommensa)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2003, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/111 "2003-05-18T14:17:21Z")
I wonder how many posts about the Colonial tournament there would be if Annika was not playing in the tournament? Annika’s invitation is doing is exactly what the sponsors wanted it to do. Give the tournament an identity ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2003, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/112 "2003-05-19T06:46:36Z")
Not: Well, it’ll get a new identity this year, but it won’t get any more viewship next year just because Annik played there next week. We’ll see how much press Vijay gets tomorrow on his win, and how much of the content is spent on his recent _faux pas_. I hope he is man enough to apologize to her face sometime this week. ---
**Author:** ![BF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b5ac83/32.png) [@BF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BF)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2003, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/113 "2003-05-19T12:02:20Z")
Well, that’s were I have to disagree with you **John**. I don’t think Veej has anything to apologize for, especially in light of the fact that the reporter did say his comment was taken out of context. And now it’s moot since he’s taking his 1+ mil paycheck and going home and skipping the Colonial. ---
**Author:** ![Zenster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/cdc98d/32.png) [@Zenster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zenster)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2003, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/114 "2003-05-20T06:58:03Z")
She sounds like an incredibly talented player. I hope she makes the cut and kicks a little grass. ---
**Author:** ![BF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b5ac83/32.png) [@BF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BF)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2003, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/115 "2003-05-20T12:18:32Z")
Someone posted earlier about stats for sponsors exemptions, I got this from Golf Digest senior editor Ron Sirak: “Consider this: Last year, 194 sponsor exemptions were granted to PGA Tour events. Of those, only 73 made the cut. That means that 63.4 percent of sponsor exemptions last year missed the cut. Only six of those 194 sponsor exemptions finished in the top 10. And, at Colonial last year eight of the 10 sponsor exemptions missed the cut and the average score for the 10 over the first two days of the tournament was 74.5 – 4.5 strokes over par.” ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2003, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/116 "2003-05-20T16:09:13Z")
BF: Thanks for looking up those stats. Good amunition for the folks who think she’s not good enough to play. I’d guess she’ll at least fall comfortably in the middle of that performance metric, and has a good chance to do better. Still, if you want to see Annika play, you better tune in on Thurs or Friday. If you wait for the weekend, she’ll likely be on her way home to prepare for her next LPGA event. Too bad she isnt playing 4 or more PGA events, as suggested by Tiger. Then we’d really get a sense of how she stacks up. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2003, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/117 "2003-05-20T16:42:02Z")
Anyone here read [Boswell’s column](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12743-2003May19.html) this morning? What Boz says is that we already have a great deal of data on the effect on scores of the difference between the men’s and women’s tees. > [@](#): > > You would think that no one had ever calibrated the difference in difficulty between one set of tees and another, then, after examining thousands of rounds, reduced that difference to a simple number. Yet exactly such numbers are on the scorecards of almost every first-rate golf course. > > You would think that nobody had ever noticed that men on the Champions Tour (formerly the Senior Tour) play on courses of similar length to many LPGA events. In fact, there’s no great difference in how a normal Champions Tour event and many top LPGA events are “set up.” > > Given the parallels between conditions on the Champions Tour and the LPGA Tour, you’d think everybody would intuitively ask: “Well, how many strokes higher do Tom Watson and Ben Crenshaw shoot when they take a crack at the PGA Tour? Annika will shoot about that much higher, too.” So, what’s the frequency, Boz? > [@](#): > > This week, Sorenstam will have to play a 7,036-yard course. That’s about 500 to 600 yards longer than the courses on which the women’s majors are played. From the hubbub, you’d assume no one in golf had any data on how an additional 550 yards would affect scores. In reality, every course has a rating that approximates its par to a scratch golfer. If you want a fierce debate, just try to get Pine Valley or Augusta National’s rating changed by a 10th of a stroke. These are not imprecise gauges. > > For example, the Olympic Club, a frequent U.S. Open site, is rated 74.4 from the back tees, but 71.5 from a set of tees that are 658 yards shorter. So what’s 658 yards worth at Olympic? Just 2.9 shots. At Congressional, another U.S. Open site, the difference between the rating from the back tees and a set of tees 361 yards shorter is 1.9 strokes. So Annika should expect to use an extra 2.5 to 3 strokes per round, right? > [@](#): > > By any and all available statistical methods, it is reasonable to assume that Sorenstam’s average score, if she played the PGA Tour, would be about 71, perhaps 71.5 – compared to her stroke average of 68.7 on the LPGA Tour last year. Above 72 is almost out of the question. > > In other words, if Sorenstam played the PGA Tour full time, she’d probably crack the top 100, make the cut about half the time and, perhaps a couple of times in her career, win a regular weekly Tour event. It looks good to me, but then I’m really not that knowledgeable about golf and golf stats. I _do_ know baseball stats, though, and I’m familiar with Boz’s occasional misuse of numbers there, so I’m wondering if there’s a hole in his argument that I don’t see, due to my ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2003, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/118 "2003-05-20T18:33:44Z")
Of course Annika is _good enough_ to play. I can’t believe anyone would question that one. She’s the best female player in the world right now. That’s why the hype is, ah, going to eleven. OTOH, as I said, she’s carrying a lot of women on her shoulders when she tees it up. While another, lesser of stature, female player might not be so burdened. But, again, she’s tough. I’m excited about this week. Usually I get up for the majors. This week feels like a carnival of some kind, if not a major. Excitement in golf, I’ll take it. C’mon, I’ve seen teenagers get sponsors exemptions. She’s over qualified. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2003, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/119 "2003-05-20T20:10:11Z")
RTF: That’s a pretty good analysis, but it’s really just a starting point. There are many other factors, pecular to course conditions during a tournament, that are not reflecting in a course rating type of analysis. Those are: Rough hight, green speed, and the very unpredictable media effect (how does a player react to intense media presence). For the latter, just look at how the PGA players often crumble when paired w/ Tiger because they’re not used to so much attention during the course of play. So, start with Boz’s numbers then ratchet up a bit. I wish I had the cite available, but I saw something the other day where someone had run Annikas stats and the Colonial info thru a golf score modeling program that predicted a two day score of something like 145 (or maybe even higher), which is 5 over par and well above what the cut is expected to be. Dave Pelz (short game guru) has an artivle in golf mag this month where he tries to predict her performance based on her stats. His conclusion is that she has a slight chance to make the cut. It’s currently raining at the Colonial, so if the conditions remain soft, she may have someone improved chances. ---
**Author:** ![plnnr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ea924/32.png) [@plnnr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/plnnr)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2003, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025/120 "2003-05-20T20:18:27Z")
It isn’t as if she’s never been exposed to pressure, and when she’s good (as Boswell points out in the WP), she’s incredibly good. Shel’ll make the cut easily. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/annika-at-the-colonial-what-do-you-think/175025.md?page=7)