Not saying you, more companies that work with PGA and their sponsors and the OWGR.
Obviously the tour being totally reliant on Saudi cash makes it hard to rely on into the future imo
Right, but my point is just that you see negative press from outlets and assume it’s because of “PGA bullying”. I’m saying that a lot of people, like us, disliked LIV from the beginning for various reasons, and that is just their opinion. Like Eamon Lynch: nobody has bullied that guy, he just really hates LIV!
1 Like
I think the entire environment was very hard to give it a fair shake in. Even now, with all the positive PGA changes spurred directly by LIV and all of the cool moments we’ve seen on LIV essentially nobody gives it credit
When you offer every top player in the sport absurd sums of money to go play in a new series of events that have no meaning, the existing ecosystem of that sport isn’t going to be happy about it. Fans especially. Are you also puzzled why people don’t view the Saudi soccer league that Ronaldo plays in favourably?
The PGA and its sponsors also offer players absurd amounts of money to play on their tour on events that have no meaning. Doesn’t bother me there
Insane stuff on the blog about rahm. The entire statistical insight of the website is strikes gained, now you have added “points” as a way to sort of throw in just subjective stuff. The stats show Rahm is same guy but LIV hatred leads to a kind of wild rant against him bashing him for low “points” and lost standing in the game when you made up the points (could easily tie it to strokes gained) and it’s just your opinion his standing has dropped.
Sometimes it seems like PGA press releases get mixed in amongst the amazing insight
It probably isn’t tied to SG because when was the last time, when reflecting upon someone’s career, has anybody said: ‘they gained 2.5 true SG in x year, so impressive.’ It is about wins and more specifically wins against top competition. Rahm has won once in 18 months and at the end of the year when asked where this win was 98% of golf fans won’t have a clue.
He’s no2 in DG rankings. There’s the praise of his skill level. The last 18 months have meant nothing for his legacy, Ryder Cup aside (and he might be throwing that away in '27).
2 Likes
I think DG Points is the best thing we’ve added to the site in recent years. It’s as objective as we could make it, go read the methodology. It’s derived from our adjusted SG.
edit: Also, would just like to point out, you are the only who complains about this. I don’t get any other messages saying that we are horribly biased against LIV players, and we have a pretty broad mix of users.
1 Like
“Legacy” talk and all that matters is winning is what this site has done so well to get away from. I feel like the points and this kind of talk is drifting back towards Big Randy from NLU type content and away from how good is his golf
Deciding that finish place is rewarded over strokes gained is subjective in first place.
Takes it away from player control to other factors (field strength etc)
Finish position vs actual score can be quite misleading. A 2nd place finish when it’s
-21
-20
-7
Vs
-21
-8
-7
Isn’t even close to same level of performance. Unless I missed something you switched from strokes to finish position ?
Deciding that SG is rewarded over finish position is also subjective. What’s your point?
We offer on both on the site because they are objective measures of performance (SG) and quality of accomplishments (DG Points).
Golfers can’t control the rest of field. If you go shoot -13 at a us open the rest of the field goes over par, except for tiger shooting -15. You deserve major credit , but you would get the same DG Points as shooting even
Okay, so that’s why you think DG Points is similar to Big Randy talking about legacy on NLU? Give me a break.
SG values a 20-footer to win the Masters the same as a 20-footer to miss the cut by 6 at the Valspar. Not ideal for certain uses, to say the least.
Nobody cares if you win a major by 6 or by 1. Results (accounting for field quality) are how careers are measured in golf and all sports. DG Points measure that as best as we can, I don’t see why you have such a problem with that (well I do… it’s because you can’t handle LIV players being criticized).
The LIV part is separate. You use DG points to criticize Rahm because you decided playing well on LIV shouldn’t count for as much as playing on the PGA.
But this site has been amazing at determining golfer quality, anyone can look at the wins already. It’s not that telling. It’s the equivalent of deciding QB wins need to be valued more than performance imo. I liked looking at who played well without winning etc but think the turn toward results based judging to be more of a turn toward mainstream “talking head” stuff and less focus on the actual golf performance
It’s not just wins, DG Points tells us how to value any finish against any other finish. Allows us to do lots of interesting things. SG simply isn’t a satisfactory way to evaluate careers. Look at Brooks.
SG would tell us that Howell’s win at LIV Mayakoba is better than Tiger’s 2019 Masters. That’s not acceptable (or correct… Mayakoba just had a ton of separation, partly because of how the course plays).
Re: the QB wins thing… what are you talking about? Golfers control their result completely, QBs don’t. In football it would be the equivalent of saying it’s stupid to look at anything beyond a team’s total point differential (instead of wins and losses, adjusted for opponent strength).
Golfers do not control their result. The other golfers are essentially totally independent
Another good-faith argument, brought to you by hogtrough. Ignores any point that pokes holes in his argument, latches on to anything else.
Just enjoy the Masters, I need to stop taking the bait.
3 Likes
At what point do we start to believe this is a Greg Norman burner account? 
4 Likes
Sorry, I took a break from watching Bryson on 11 on loop to check this thread out.
1 Like