I think almost everybody is missing the point here (and I said almost, a few of you get it). All Wie needed to enter the U.S. Open was a handicap index of 2.4 and the entry fee. That's it. She had it, she entered (like any of us could have done with the entry fee and the qualifying handicap), and she has advanced this far because she scored low enough to advance. No gimmees, no hand-outs, just her play scored against the others who were competing against her. Nobody gave her an exemption to this, she's earned her spot. And if she finishes in the top 18 on Monday she will have EARNED her spot in the U.S. Open. There is absolutely no arguing that point, no matter what you think of all the other stuff that she's done. For this one tournament she has done it exactly right, so why fault that? And remember to all the Michelle Wie doubters out there, I remember when Tiger Woods first came out as a pro and everybody was pissed he was making a bunch of money (the chirping from the other pros was brutal). He kind of lived up to the hype, didn't he? Give Wie a chance to prove herself like Tiger did. And yeah, Tiger destroyed the amateur ranks before turning pro but that wasn't Wie and her family's choice. If 10 years from now Wie hasn't won hardly anything then maybe it was a mistake, but let's give her an honest chance to live up to the hype. Personally, a girl her age that whacks 300 yard drives and plays like her is astounding. I think when she does play on the LPGA Tour she'll absolutely dominate in a few years (if not sooner). And if the sponsors want to give her exemptions to some PGA Tour events, then that is THEIR choice. They want to make money and Wie is a big-time draw for spectators, sponsors and the TV people. And could you imagine if she makes the cut and actually is in contention on Sunday in a men's event? The ratings would go through the roof.
chicobangs: And what about her other accomplishments?...Just believe she's a talentless little showpony who belongs behind a cash register at the Gap and not on a golf course, the ever-lengthening list of facts to the contrary be damned? Cool your jets, dude. I neither wrote nor implied anything of the sort. I wrote this after her tie for third in the Kraft Nabisco tourney:
This is where Wie belongs: On the LPGA tour fighting it out at the top of the leaderboard, not struggling to make the cut against men. When she starts winning, then talk should begin about her earning her way onto the PGA tees. But not before.
She has acquitted herself well on her turns on the LPGA tour, before and after going pro. She was DQ'd in her first pro event, true, but came in second in two other tourneys in 2005
(including the Evian Masters, which happened to be the SECOND career LPGA victory for then-EIGHTEEN-year old rookie Paula Creamer, not that anybody noticed...note the ESPN headline). In Wie's two LPGA events in 2006, she's tied for third twice. She's right on the edge of being among the best ladies on the tour. Which raises the question: What's with the nonsense about trying to beat a men's cut when she very well could be winning against women now?
IMHO, it's all about the Benjamins, baby. Wie, her parents, and her handlers (including a former PGA VP) are gambling that she can beat a PGA cut while she is still a minor. Being a prodigy is more "special" (and thus more lucrative endorsement-wise) than being a seasoned professional. To wit: Remember ten years ago, when the news had the story about that kid that went to med school at the age of 15 (Doesn't matter which, there's a new kid every year)? Well, that kid is now a 25-year-old doctor. BFD. There is no doubt Wie is a great golfer for her age. The only question is, is she worthy of all this freaking attention?
As I wrote in another thread: Wie is a multi-millionaire now because people are hoping she becomes the superstar they want her to be. The reality is that despite the fact she's being handed opportunities to shine, she's not delivering. Never mind the stuff they say Wie can do, let's see her -- as her sponsor Nike says -- just do it. And if she can't, get her out of the spotlight until she can.
So far, Wie has yet to prove she can. She's all talk, no results, and yet she's still being shoved in our faces constantly. We all laugh at guys like Freddie Mitchell, who mouthed off as if he was as good as Terrell Owens after having one great playoff game, but everyone is so careful not to be critical of a teenage girl who thinks she's good enough to beat men even though she's failed to beat women. Why? Excuse me for pointing these things out, and not waving pom-poms at her. You may now continue with the sis-boom-bahs.
He kind of lived up to the hype, didn't he? The Irony (I might be using that word with some poetic license) of the Tiger comparison is that people are still dumbfoundingly critical of Tiger. When he fell to number two in the rankings a year or two back here, everyone said "slump this," and "slump that" (I quoted those possibly a bit liberally as well...). WTF???? The guy spends a couple of months as the second best player in the world, and he's in a slump???? I think Michelle Wie is going to fight the same demons her whole career. Expectations are so damn high for her, unless she comes in first every tourney people are going to be like "This girl has not earned anything!." It's a sad outlook, but there it is none the less.
Smithee, I don't get your point. Its the US Open! If you can go, you go, no matter what's in between your legs, or what year you were born, right? No results? at sixteen she's one of the top five womens players in the world... seems like pretty good results to me. is she worthy of all this freaking attention? Fuckin-A she's worthy of the attention, if you don't like it don't pay attention, or better yet GYOFB with your 500 word essay comments.
I think Michelle Wie is going to fight the same demons her whole career. So true everett, so true.
And Smithee, she is 16 YEARS OLD!!!! I can't say that enough. No golfer in the history of the sport has ever competed at as high a level at that age, men or women. Tiger was missing regular tour cuts by a mile at 16, for a comparison. Sure, he was an amateur monster, but not against the pros, not at that age. Wie is in the top 5 almost every single women's tournament she plays in, and has been since she was 14!!!! If that isn't worth the attention then I'm not sure what is.
everett: Smithee, I don't get your point. Its the US Open! If you can go, you go, no matter what's in between your legs, or what year you were born, right? I didn't write anything about the US Open, which she has a perfect right to qualify for, DID I? No results? at sixteen she's one of the top five womens players in the world... Top FIVE? One word, two syllables: Non sense. You've fallen for the hype. Fuckin-A she's worthy of the attention, if you don't like it don't pay attention, or better yet GYOFB with your 500 word essay comments. If you don't like my 500 word essay comments, don't pay attention to them!
You know, despite everything we've been debating about, the mere fact is the odds of Wie actually qualifying on Monday are pretty low. Let's say she shoots a 68, which would equal her best round in a men's tournament (she shot 68s in 2002 and 2004 at the Sony Open). That probably wouldn't be good enough. The history of the qualifiers for the U.S. Open is that they are almost always low-scoring shootouts. Anybody remember Shigeki's 58 a couple of years ago? So there probably will be a bunch of 64s, 65s and 66s. If Wie shoots 68 she'll make the top 50 but no way will that be good enough for the top 18. If she shoots 72, like she did at the local qualifier, she won't break the top 100. All that said, it's still amazing she can compete at this level at her age.
Re: "The thing to remember about all of this is that Michelle is 16 years old!!! The mere thought of any golfer, male or female, qualifying in today's ultra-competitive environment for the men's U.S. Open at that age is mind-boggling." This story is tired. Count me excited when she actually wins a LPGA event. It's hardly a big deal that she's 16 years old -- many female athletes peak early, whether they be tennis players or gymnasts or figure skaters -- and the physical levels of athletic dexterity required to perform those sports are considerably higher than hitting a prone ball off a tee. If Wie can win a PGA event maybe my mind will be boggled by this story, but right now it's a bore and a snore.
Re: "She is 16 YEARS OLD!!!! I can't say that enough. No golfer in the history of the sport has ever competed at as high a level at that age, men or women." Biology 101. Females mature earlier than males. Much earlier. Teenage girls are amongst the world's elite in gymnastics, track & field, tennis, figure-skating, soccer, ice hockey -- you name it, the women in their early 20s are terrified of the up-and-coming 15yos. Male athletes mature much later. Good on her for qualifying, but forgive me for yawning, imo the girl should focus on winning LPGA events before we get out the PGA pom-poms. She gets more hype than most actual tour winners, the PGA canard says less about her ability to win the event than it does a ploy to drive up her endorsement deals.
We all laugh at guys like Freddie Mitchell, who mouthed off as if he was as good as Terrell Owens after having one great playoff game, but everyone is so careful not to be critical of a teenage girl who thinks she's good enough to beat men even though she's failed to beat women. Why? Well, Freddie Mitchell goes out and makes those statements, whereas Michelle Wie lets people on a messageboard put those words in her mouth. Where has Michelle ever made a statement that inflammatory? Every single interview I've ever seen of her, she's humble and graceful. She has none of the qualities you're implying she has. As well, could it not be people like you who look at the LPGA tour as a lesser tour (insomuch that you seem to believe she should have to win there to earn the right to play with the men) who might help push her towards the PGA tour? If you're a professional athlete who trusts your talents, wouldn't you want to play with the best, not just the best of your gender?
dfleming has a point. There seem to be a lot of people (in this thread and elsewhere) who see the LPGA as deeply flawed, lacking in credibility and inherently inferior to the "Men's" tour. If you were Michelle Wie, and you felt you could play with the guys, then no matter what you thought about the LPGA, you'd want to give the league with actual credibility a shot too, wouldn't you? If the LPGA is such a subpar piece of crap that anyone involved with it has no business being anywhere the "real" golf tour, then why would anyone bother settling for mediocrity, especially a phenom who's been called the future of her sport?
I don't really care if Wie tries qualifying for the U.S. Open. If you're allowed to try, it doesn't matter who you are, you should still have that shot. However, if her best round is a 68 playing with dudes, unless the men royally screw up, there isn't much of a shot that she'll make it. Plus, I'm kinda tired of the hype this girl gets. Blast at me all you people want, but I ain't gonna get excited over her until she finally wins a tournament.
However, if her best round is a 68 playing with dudes, unless the men royally screw up, there isn't much of a shot that she'll make it. You have to remember, she's only played a dozen or so rounds (not tournaments, rounds) on the PGA Tour. Again, most men don't break 70 in their first dozen rounds on the PGA tour neither. And you guys do know what the "Open" in US Open means, right?
Smithee, I love it. You're a great contrarian blowhard. This is where Wie belongs: On the LPGA tour fighting it out at the top of the leaderboard, not struggling to make the cut against men. When she starts winning, then talk should begin about her earning her way onto the PGA tees. But not before. Sorry, my friend - you don't get to tell people where they belong. Not in an Open format. Hey - rules are rules (I know you respect the rules). So far, Wie has yet to prove she can. She's all talk, no results, and yet she's still being shoved in our faces constantly. You are the very epitome of truthiness. At the age of 15 she had come in the top five in two LPGA majors. Not worthy of even a mention in your misguided diatribe? In a limited number of events last year her earnings would have put her in 8th place. At the age of 16. But again, no indication of this being even remotely exceptional? (Which it obviously is.) No of this is remotely impressive to you, for some reason. Is it because it has to be a win? No win = no respect? Sorry - wrong game. Frankly I think you react like this because you're pissed that she's a media darling - which for some reason makes her a fraud. Do you even like golf? Do you even watch it? All I ever see you do around here is find a topic and bitch; picking those facts that seem to support your theory and casually ignoring the rest. Just because the media has decided to over-hype the girl doesn't mean she's not exceptional. And if you even gave a cursory examination of her game (length especially), you'd reallize that she's the most obvious example of a woman who's game could cross over. You are a poor scientist, Dr. Venkman.
"yes its true your honor... this man has no dick"
TRT, you point out that women mature earlier than men. True, but not overly valid unless you're comparing 16 year old Wie to 16 year old Woods. Girls go through puberty earlier, which is why you sometimes see 8th graders looking like their ready for the pages of Playboy, but by the late teens, it's usually evened out for the most part. Are you really going to try to claim that among the athletes in a given senior class, the girls are far more developed than the guys? With the exception of gymnastics (where you can only have a long career if you're genetic make up makes you 5 foot nothing and 80 some pounds naturally), female athletes aren't near their best in their mid teens. Chris Everrett was great at 16, but she was better at 21. When was the last time you saw a 16 year old sprinter win a world class event? I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but most of them are in college or older. If it did happen, you can bet the girl who's winning at 16 will be even better (barring injury) after a couple more years. This is true of sport after sport. There may be girls who nudge their way into the elite ranks at 15, but they aren't at their peaks until years later.
Weedy McSmokey: You are the very epitome of truthiness. At the age of 15 she had come in the top five in two LPGA majors. Not worthy of even a mention in your misguided diatribe? Maybe if your monitor wasn't obscured by wafts of burning doobie, you would have been able to read this:
She has acquitted herself well on her turns on the LPGA tour, before and after going pro. She was DQ'd in her first pro event, true, but came in second in two other tourneys in 2005 (including the Evian Masters, which happened to be the SECOND career LPGA victory for then-EIGHTEEN-year old rookie Paula Creamer, not that anybody noticed...note the ESPN headline). In Wie's two LPGA events in 2006, she's tied for third twice. She's right on the edge of being among the best ladies on the tour.
That's not "truthiness," that's TRUTH. Can you handle it?
Do you even like golf? Do you even watch it? Yes, but not as much as team sports, and yes, when I have nothing better to do.
All I ever see you do around here is find a topic and bitch; picking those facts that seem to support your theory and casually ignoring the rest. Your theory that's my modus operandi pulled up lame, as I illustrated above. I never said she wasn't impressive, I just don't think she is worthy of the breathless coverage to the exclusion of other golfers who are just as good as she is and who are actually WINNING. It's amusing that so many think that it's only a minor point (pun not intended) that she hasn't won a tournament over world-class peers rather than amateur and sectional events (never mind PGA events she got exemptions for). Victories against the best are how all-time greatness is measured; it's why Phil Mickelson's place in golf history will be elevated over that of Greg Norman. Unless you are talking about NCAA Div. 1 football, it doesn't matter who has the most talent, how strong your competition is, or how good you might be in the future, it matters who WINS. Ask the Detroit Pistons about that about now, they'll tell you.
Miss Wie is recieving very bad advise. She would be wise to compete on the LPGA. She would do very well there. People like her that is always trying to prove a point, usally winds up hurting their career. She will not come close to qualifying for the open. NUFF SAId. Grampsw
You can love or hate her, say she belongs in the PGA, LPGA, or on a high school team somewhere. All I can say on the topic is that I have been golfing since she was born and I am 6' tall, 200 pound male and I have not a snowflakes chance in hell of either driving a ball 300 yards or cracking par on a PGA course. Anyone who does not respect the accomplishments of any 16 year old who can play golf as well her has probably never tried to hit a golf ball.
Just sayin'.
good call lbb
Look here & here for more idiotic opinions of Michelle Wie and her game. She's a kid, for crying out loud. Name another child her age who brings more to the table with her abilities, critics.
Freddy Adu.
The Red Terror, I was talking about in the history of golf. I wasn't talking about any other sports. Just golf. Ok, do we have that down now? Now that we understand what sport we're talking about, name one other player who almost won an LPGA major tournament at the age of 14. There is none, period. And ctal1999, you are absolutely right. Female athletes do tend to develop sooner but most of them are much better (with the exception of gymnastics) when they get into the college years (18 to 22 years old). For a girl to perform at the level Michelle Wie has from 14 years old to 16 years old is amazing. And kyrilmitch_76, I couldn't have said it better myself. Having been a lifelong golfer who's lowest score ever was an 82, I can appreciate Wie's talents even more. What she is doing is unreal.
Adu is OK for a part time starter. I don't see him in the same category of knocking walls down as Micheelle Wie is. Idiots, Open means Open. Always has, always will.
mjkredliner I agree that Wie is talented and should be able to play wherever she wants. But "knocking down walls?" Are you seriously putting her in the same category as Billy Jean King? Because I can't think of any other walls unless you are referring to her age. If it's age you're talking about, how can you so easily dismiss Adu? Let's not forget that when he was 13, MLS coaches were comparing him to Pele (who played in his first World Cup when he was 17.) They were saying that at his age, he was the most talented soccer player ever seen. The difference between him and Wie is that his mother took a different route than Wie's parents and kept him from going worldwide in order to protect him. Wie's didn't. And, yeah, he might not be a starter, but as you so eloquently pointed it in one of those links you posted, "...there is triumph in just having enough game to be invited at that age."
lbb, what's the context of the photo? I assume it's referencing some well known event in running/marathoning, but I don't recognize it from the pic...
(including the Evian Masters, which happened to be the SECOND career LPGA victory for then-EIGHTEEN-year old rookie Paula Creamer, not that anybody noticed...note the ESPN headline). Perhaps you should have read this article instead of just the headline. The article is about Paula Creamer, and only mentions Wie. Get off this girls back, she is going to try to qualify for an OPEN, that means anyone can enter. You keep bitching saying she needs to get better, one way to do that is compete against better players than yourself.
mjkredliner: Adu is OK for a part time starter. I don't see him in the same category of knocking walls down as Michelle Wie is.
Enlighten me: What wall has she knocked down heretofore?
jojomfd1: Perhaps you should have read this article instead of just the headline. The article is about Paula Creamer, and only mentions Wie. No, ESPN mentioned Wie in the headline of an AP story and didn't mention the name of the player who beat her by eight strokes. That's why I wrote "note the ESPN headline" and not "note the ESPN story," Sherlock. You keep bitching saying she needs to get better, one way to do that is compete against better players than yourself. She's not better than Annika Sorenstam, she's not better than Lorena Ochoa, she's not better than Cristie Kerr, she's not better than Paula Creamer, she's not better than Karrie Webb. 'Oh, but she hits it 300 yards!' Whoop-de-do. If long drives were everything, John Daly would be more famous than Tiger Woods. And quit with the "she's only 16" schtuff -- if it doesn't make any diff whether she's XX or XY, it doesn't matter if she's 16 or 61. She ain't there yet. Clearly, Wie isn't far behind the best ladies (as I have said time and time again, only to be ignored by people whose eyes glaze over at a post with more than one paragraph). But rather than concentrate on going up against other LPGA stars she has a chance of victory against, she'd rather try to beat out David Duval halfway down a PGA leaderboard. That's newsworthy?
Actually, Smithee, it is newsworthy. Simply because she is a 16-year-old girl competing against men (and doing better than half the field most of the time). You seem to glaze over on that fact. For her to even be able to get halfway up the leaderboard at her age and being a girl is amazing. How you can't see that is beyond me.
YOUNGEST TO EVER 1.Win The U.S Public Links Championship,male or female, which is an adult, sanctioned USGA event,(and, if you follow amateur golf, you might realize that the best amateurs in the country usually play this event) Fuckin' remarkable. 2. Play a PGA tour event, male or female. (Age 14) (She shot even par in her first round against the men, do you know how many MALE pros don't accomplish that? Very fuckin' remarkable. 3. Qualify for an ADULT sanctioned USGA event, male or female. 2000 Public Links Championship.(age 10 ) Fuckin' remarkable. 4. Qualify for an LPGA event. (Age 12) Again, fuckin' remarkable. 5. Make a cut in a LPGA Major Championship. (Age 13) (She didn't just make the cut, she finished T9th ad was in the hunt for a stretch) Very fuckin' remarkable. 6. Play in the Curtis Cup. Only mildly fuckin' remarkable. 7. Female to make the cut in an Asian PGA Tour sanctioned event, which also made her the youngest female to ever make the cut in a professional male event.(age 16) Very fuckin' remarkable. In addition, she was the FIRST female medalist in a U.S Open Mens qualifying tournament, just recently!(Age 16) Goddamn remarkable. She finished in the top 10 of the LPGA money list last year PLAYING PART TIME! If she was competing against "children of her own age", it would not be that big a deal, but she is playing on the biggest stages available to her, against the best competition she can drum up, and, when she is competing against her gender, she can more than hold her own. Perhaps I downplayed Mr. Adu's talents, but then again, how many links have you seen posted about him? When a certain Mr. Eldrick Woods was her age, his resume`was not near as impressive as Miss Wie's is. Look at her record in womens major championships: 6 top 10's in 9 starts, never missing a cut. If you consider yourself any kind of knowledgable golf fan, if you know anything about the pressure she has played under, then surely you realize how FUCKIN' REMARKABLE her accomplishments are.
Admin, sorry about the tirade.
Redliner, one of the reasons you don't see links to Adu is that soccer has never been fully embraced by the U.S. press or the public at large. Just because you don't see links about Adu doesn't mean he isn't important. And just because Wie is in the news all the time doesn't mean she deserves to be there. She seems like a nice kid...and that's why it's hard to take her seriously. The teddy bear backpacks she wears don't help me believe she's got the eye of the tiger. Or that she wants to destroy her opponents the way Tiger Woods or Vijay Singh want. To her, second place doesn't suck...yet. For now, though, she's a media driven story. I don't know of many newspapers that, if they found out she was in town, wouldn't send out a reporter to write a story about her. But if I were the reporter they sent out, I'd feel like I was writing a fluff piece. Of course, the teddy bear backpack might have something to do with that.
There seems to be a lot of anger directed at Wie that really should be getting directed at the media and the way they chose to cover her career in particlar and increasingly sport in general. Wie is playing a qualifier for the US Open, and that's worth a story - but it's not worth the endless speculation about what it will mean if she qualifies - that story should be getting written tomorrow (or not) dependent on how she does later today. The same thing is going on in England (and has been for... well, 40 years) at the moment - endless stories about how much it would mean if they win the World Cup. The media has elbowed out the reporters and drafted in a bunch of second-rate tipsters. People are trying to write exclusives before the event even happens. What Wie has achieved (in a cold light, away from any PR dressing up or nay-saying dressing down) is impressive. She is now a professional, and as such is entitled to do what every professional should do - that is, to play to the highest standard she can, and to do that, she should play in the best tournaments she can get into the field for. Nobody suggested Tiger should drop down to the Nike Tour when he was struggling for form. Saying Wie should stick to playing with the ladies because she could probably beat them some day is just plain sexist nonsense. Just one more thing for the record - she didn't win the US Public Links Championship, she won the US Women's Public Links Championship. The distinction is only important because had she won the former, she would have received an invite to play in the Masters - and that really would have been worth the column inches.
Yes I realized that to late to correct, JJ, ty for pointing it out, I was in a fizz, so to speak. I am not saying she is the greatest golfer on the planet, I am just tired (and not the only one, apparently,) of some of the ridiiculous statements that always ensue whenever a Wie post is added. And no, I don't believe she has been handled properly, but it is to her credit that she has done as well as she has, under the circumstances. If you get the chance to see her post round interviews, you will see, that she is very much a kid. And she has performed quite well, despite having to perform under pretty tough conditions.
Hal: lbb, what's the context of the photo? I assume it's referencing some well known event in running/marathoning, but I don't recognize it from the pic... The photo is of Katherine Switzer, running in the 1967 Boston Marathon -- or trying to. Knowing that women were not allowed to run in the race, she registered and received a bib as "K. Switzer", and lined up and ran the race. The photo is supposedly of a race official trying to tear off Switzer's number, apparently assisted by two male competitors. She completed the course. She was actually not the first woman who is known to have crashed the gate at Hopkinton -- that was Roberta Gibb, in 1966 -- but Switzer got the famous photo. The relevance to the current discussion is direct and obvious. The justification for not allowing women to compete in Boston or in other marathons was the widely held belief -- nay, the certainty -- that women simply couldn't run that distance. As the Switzer incident clearly demonstrated, when confronted with physical evidence that refutes such a certainty, there is a percentage of the population that would rather ignore the evidence, even (as in the photo) to attempt to change the facts on the ground by any means necessary, in order to get the facts to realign with their beliefs. Not being a golfer or a follower of golf, I'm unequipped to judge what Wie may be able to do. But the history of the Boston Marathon, and countless other restrictions that prevented women and girls from fully participating in sports, should certainly teach us that in discussing women's potential sporting accomplishments, we shouldn't confuse "cannot" with "may not".
FtheRedSox? Wow, that takes me back to junior high school. It's like calling someone an a-hole. As nicks go, it's very nearly as stupid as "redsoxrgay". OK, Grum...you are missing the point! You would look really cute in a skirt at my daughters next Brownie Scout meeting. You'd look really cute with a nick that doesn't make you look like an inbred knuckledragger. Just sayin'.
I've looked into my crystal ball: Dateline May 27, 2011...21-year old Michelle Wie failed yet again in her quest to qualify for the Men's US Open. One curious note is that Miss Wie, a former child prodigy, has also failed to win one tournament in her career on the LPGA
As long as her tee off time is after 2pm, since she's a female.
And of course FtheRedSux, using CAPS to emphisize your inane position is the way to go. I imagine while in a foriegn country you yell louder to make english easier to understand.
Ah - you people are dinosaurs. Always putting limits on what people should and should not attempt. Sporting limits and boundaries are, and have always been, the ones that the greats break down. Wie is an exceptional talent. A rare talent. If you can't see that, than I have to suggest that you're not paying attention. Her accomplishments speak for themselves. Smithee - why does she have to win on the LPGA before she should be granted your approval to play on the PGA? What's the relationship? And why do you care? There are no rules suggesting this has to be the way. (Appropo - Gretzky didn't win a WHA scoring title before he won and NHL one.) And as per your last comment directed to me - you suggest she has "acquitted herself well" which is an interesting way to describe a 16-year old finishing in the top five in two LPGA Majors. Frankly, it's a loaded understatement. It's not telling the whole story. Purposefully. You're dimishing her accomplishments to make your position seem more tenable. You do this a lot. Perhaps I have been reading your comments wrong. Perhaps your's has been an exercise in calling out the media for over-hyping the girl. This is true - she has been over-hyped. But so what? That means she's not worthy of the coverage, not necessarily means she's not worthy of attempting to qualify for the Open. So then - what's your point? My point is clear - Wie has shown the talent and game to qualify and play against the men. Her track record, though it contains no LPGS wins, is exceptional when considered against history and her game is one which best translates to the PGA tour. Given her age and talent level - she is entitled to give it a shot without so many thinly-veiled mysogonists telling her that she hasn't 'earned' it yet. Last question: Smithee - should women be allowed to play on the PGA? I want to know where you really stand.
joecab: Ihope you got the extended warranty on that crystal ball. Five years is a long time to wait to discover you have a defective product.
Cabbie, I know the crystal ball gag was supposed to be humorous, but a hundred years ago, a lot of people believed in crystal balls. Of course, it was a load of crap...just like you last post. People said the same kind of bilge about Woods. They were full of it and, though only time will tell for sure, I have a feeling that you are , too.
I enjoy the LPGA. Therefore, my concern isn't that Wie can't make it on the PGA tour, but that she can. I worry that she could set a new trend. If Lorena, Annika, Paula, Natalie (especially Natalie) etc defect to the PGA, the LPGA would most likely fold - or at least lose enough tv ratings that I'd never get to watch it. There is a precident for my worries. It didn't take long after Jackie Robinson joined the majors, and was followed by the best of the Negro League players, that the Negro League folded. Robinson made his major league debut in 1947, and the Negro League disbanded after the 1949 season. I am torn between believing that the best golfers (of any sex or race) should be allowed to play in the PGA, and the possibility that the LPGA might follow in the footsteps of the Negro Leagues.
As I type this, Michelle Wie is 1 under par through 12 holes of the qualifier. I don't have the info on the rest of the field, but I am pleased to see that she's doing well.
OK, Grum...you are missing the point! You would look really cute in a skirt at my daughters next Brownie Scout meeting. I really wish I'd seen this comment before it got (rightly) deleted. And for the record, I have VERY skinny legs and knobby knees, so skirts are the antithesis of flattering on me. And it saddens me that you have this sort of attitude and are trying to raise a daughter. I wonder how you'll react when she gets told she can't do something because she's a woman... How long until, in this politically correct world we live in, will it be until they allow her and/or other women to play in men's tournaments but hit from shorter distances? I don't know. Do they currently let the players in the Champions Tour (seniors) hit from different tees when they compete in the U.S. Open or the Masters?
Scores here. If she picks up one shot on the back nine, she has a slim chance of making a playoff. Two shots and she almost certainly would get in a playoff. Three shots and she'd get in outright. I reckon.
It didn't take long after Jackie Robinson joined the majors, and was followed by the best of the Negro League players, that the Negro League folded. The problem with that comparison is that a large majority of the players in the Negro League could compete at an equal level with MLB players, but were denied the opportunity. When they were allowed to play, it made the need for a Negro League irrelevant. I'm not sure (at this time) we can say more than a handful of the goflers on the LPGA could compete on the PGA tour. Therefore, there will probably be a need for an LPGA (unless it collapses from lack of fan/TV interest).
I'm slightly confused by the format - are they taking 9 from each course (North and South)? Or just the top 18 regardless of where you play?
Scores here. Wow. I didn't realize Mark O'Meara had fallen so far off the tour that he had to qualify for the US Open. He's currently 3 strokes back of Wie. It was only in 1998 that he won 2 majors (Masters/British).
I think I'm being dense - it's 36 holes, isn't it?
Can we please just lynch her and get this over with?
** Bulletin: She's in the clubhouse with a 2 under par 68. Last info ESPN has is that the leader is at 4 under. She might make it.
Re: "Now that we understand what sport we're talking about, name one other player who almost won an LPGA major tournament at the age of 14." Key emphasis: "almost won." I suppose I should have more imagination, but my mind doesn't boggle for "almost." And that is why I find this ongoing over-hyped story a snoozer. All I can say is bring on the World Cup and let's see some amazing athletes in a sport that matters get their 15 seconds in the American media.
** Bulletin: She's in the clubhouse with a 2 under par 68. Last info ESPN has is that the leader is at 4 under. I don't follow golf that closely, does she have to win to get in?
Not necessarily. She just has to finish in the top 18 to get a qualifier's spot. Right now, she's tied for 11th. (ESPNews is reporting that; that site is only updating hourly.) I think she's halfway there; there's one more round this afternoon, but as of now, she's right in the mix. All I can say is bring on the World Cup and let's see some amazing athletes in a sport that matters Dude, don't go there.
Are we talking about soccer now? I'm so confused!
grum: And it saddens me that you have this sort of attitude and are trying to raise a daughter. I wonder how you'll react when she gets told she can't do something because she's a woman... "F you, Dad! Just...just...f you!" That's my guess, anyway.
Her putter failed her I read, but man, this is a tough event to qualify for. Every year there are a ton of journeymen pros and those on the outer fringe of qualifying that are forced to go this route, and most receive a free pass through the first round of local qualifying. I myself wonder why she tried to qualify in N.J., when there was a Hawaiian sectional event (probably because only one person advanced from there, would be my guess.) At least she gave it a shot and went down fighting. And, she was more than competent, naysayers.
She faded in the end and her putter didn't show up, but even so, she's still gonna finish ahead of Billy Andrade and Mark O'Meara. Not to mention about 80% of the rest of the field.
She faded in the end and her putter didn't show up, but even so, she's still gonna finish ahead of Billy Andrade and Mark O'Meara. Actually, they are both currently ahead of her.
I just read her final scores and well, it was closer than I thought it would be. More power to her. I hope she wins the LPGA major that's coming up, so all of the Wie haters out there can just shut it.
JJ, looks like everyone played both courses (18 on the North, 18 on the South). I think that's what you were asking. As for what happened to Wie today there's no discounting two things. First, with 18 spots available the NJ location is the second most difficult (Columbus OH had 21 spots available...size and quality of field determine), so she played in a quality field and was in a great position through 27 holes. Second, they shut the gates down because too many people showed up to watch. This is a USGA qualifying event, go find out how many people went to the other locations today.
Even if Wie was to win the LPGA major, the Wie haters wouldn't shut up. It would just make them more rabid in their arguments that she should stick to a place where she can win.
I don't know that they are Wie haters, but their opinions are boorish. I've said it before: When this kid learns to win, ( I think her playing against such stiff competition since such a young age has not helped in this regard) she may be capable of great things.
That is a good point mjkredliner....at some point in sports competing against better competition isn't good enough. One needs to learn how to win, how to make clutch shots down the stretch, how to focus on that 7-footer at the 18th, etc. That is a different type of pressure than having a media throng watch your every move (I would think).
Good point about the level of competition she's facing, MJK. Remember, when she first started raising eyebrows, there were those in the LPGA who grumbled that she should be worrying about helping her high school team win championships, not about playing pro events. Just because she oftens chooses to play against those who are presently better players doesn't change the fact that her abilities are awe inspiring for a girl of 16!
MJK, After a second look at my last post, it sounded like I was disagreeing with you. I wasn't. She does need to learn to win, but I think right now she's just working on her skills. She's not consistent enough in any phase of her game to win regularly at any pro level, but if she uses some PGA events as part of that development, it seems like it will only benefit her. If she gets to the point where she's comfortable with how her game stacks up with the top men in front of huge crowds, suddenly a playoff against Sorenstam or Webb isn't so confidence shaking.
Dudes, from my perspective, it has nothing to do with "Wie haters." That is a lame cop-out. I have no problem with Wie. I do, however, have a low tolerance for hype that gets repeatedly shoved under my nose. It is not "hatred" to point out the obvious. Wie hasn't won anything. Her skill-set and age are, as another poster said earlier, "remarkable. " But it is over-gilding the lily to define her "almost won" accomplishments as "mind-boggling." Ernest Shackleton "almost making the South Pole" and then turning back and rescuing his entire crew after months of dangerous travail and isolation -- that's mind-boggling. Michelle Wie missing a cut in a mens event -- again -- that's not mind-boggling. Wie should be entitled to enter "Open" events. I'm all in favour of that. But I'll save the "mind-boggling" descriptives and appelations for when she wins the thing, not when she "almost" qualifies. It seems to me that Wie has great agents and publicists. They are making the girl and her family a great deal of money. But her age -- again -- seems a total non-story to me. She's a female athlete who excells in her teens. Is that really a big deal? Steffi Graf, Monica Seles, Martina Hingis, Maria Sharapova all won MAJOR titles in their teens in their respective sport. Wie still hasn't won a title in any LPGA event, let alone a major. Yeah, the girl's got game. But she's got more hype than game. And that's what the so-called "haters" -- like me -- are tired and bored by, the hype. Let the girl play her game. But the spoils should go to victors, not millionaire endorsement billboards that haven't won anything yet. Jeebuz, on American sports radio stations last night, they were playing Wie's failure to *qualify* for the U.S. Open bigger than the first game of the Stanley Cup. That's a pathetic joke.
I believe there is a pretty easy deal to take care of that, it's called "changing the channel". But yeah, I have to agree that she is overhyped, but I don't think that is her fault.
Steffi Graf, Monica Seles, Martina Hingis, Maria Sharapova all won MAJOR titles in their teens in their respective sport. I take your larger point, but tennis != golf. As your example shows, tennis has plenty of teen champs. Golf does not (that I know of).
I do, however, have a low tolerance for hype that gets repeatedly shoved under my nose. So what you're saying is that the the media world should revolve around you and your desires? It shouldn't matter that other people care about Michelle Wie, or are curious to see how good she may or may not do on a specific day, because "red Terror doesn't want to hear it? Get over your self buddy. You don't have any right to dictate to me or anyone else what we should care about, read about, or talk about. If you don't care, don't comment. I don't show up in every hockey thread talking about how its a silly sport, just because I'm not interested in it. Maybe try this: read the FPPs to try and get an idea of what they are about; if you aren't interested don't click on the button. this way no Michelle Wie info will be shoved under your nose, and we won't have to listen to your chauvinist ditribes anymore.
Part of the problem is the game of golf. It's not like a lot of other sports where you spend a higher percentage of your time training than competing. In golf, it's almost exclusively competition (plus warm up, warm down and the occasional panic on the range with your coach if something is going wrong). As a result, narrowly failing to win isn't as big a disaster as it would be for (say) an Olympic athlete. As the latter, you have four years to wait before you can try to win again - as a golfer, the longest you would have to wait to have another go at any title would be two years for a Ryder or Solheim Cup - but really, you're back on the horse the very next week. The other problem with the game is that a reasonably talented amateur having the best day of his or her life could beat Tiger Woods on his worst day - that doesn't really exist in other sports. I suppose what I'm driving at is that while it may feel to someone watching that Wie is banging her head off a brick wall playing with the men, there's obviously enough going on out there for her that she feels justified in continuing to try. From what I've read, she missed quite a few putts yesterday - if they had all gone in, we would have woken up to different headlines. For what it's worth, I think she is right to always play in the best quality tournament she can get an invite for - but maybe only because when I was growing up, I lost count of the number of times I was told that you can only get better by playing against people w
