Re: Just play the game.

["Dan Forant" <dforant1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Every now and then there's a good post. This one's interesting because
someone's trying to break new ground. Well fairly new ground anyway. It's
been done before.

Annika Sorenstam won't make the cut because.........................men are
far superior putters and bunker players compared to the LPGA Pro's. This
particular course will be friendly toward her because of the doglegs and the
shorter length compared to the average course men play. Putting will make
the difference. I can now see some PGA sucker on the low end of the totem
pole challenging the LPGA for a spot. Now that would be interesting. Maybe
Annika overdid the hormones.

As far as WNBA gals trying the NBA, it would be a joke.

Fore,
DanF


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Snoopy the Celtics Beagle" <snoopy@celticsbeagle.net>
To: <celtics@igtc.com>
Cc: <celticsstuffgroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 1:13 PM
Subject: Just play the game.


> This post is long, and will veer off the Celtics--and basketball in
> general--a bit, before getting back to the point, so please be patient.
>
> Some months back a golf player named Annika Sorenstam received an
> invitation to play in the Colonial golf tournament, which will be the
first
> time in nearly six decades that a woman has played in such a game,
> heretofore a place for men only.  This elicited a number of comments from
> the golf players who normally show up for this event, few of them
> supportive.  Most recently, Vijay Singh said she "shouldn't be allowed" to
> play, and if he wound up on her team, he would refuse to play.  Then, he
> suddenly announced he wouldn't be playing in this event at all,
withdrawing
> with a week left before it started.
>
> The gist of comments from Singh and others was that she wasn't good enough
> to play their game.  So I decided to investigate.  This wasn't easy as all
> I know about golf is that Tiger guy normally wins like he was Larry bird
at
> the three point competition, and Golf is supposed to be a civilized game
> with lots of rules dating back to when the ruined castles in Europe were
in
> one piece and occupied.
>
> Apparently, there are two ways your performance is measured overall for
the
> men.   One is your overall performance--how well you played, with
> breakdowns hole by hole no less--over the last two years.  The other way
is
> by how much money you made playing this year.  The men and women have two
> separate groups, and there is no official cross-gender ranking.
>
> First, Annika Sorenstam's listing from the women's list.  After playing 5
> games, she is second on the women's money earned list, with
> $554,501.  (first place is held by Se Ri Pak who played 8 games, and has
> won $562,900).  She has finished in the top ten in every game she played
> this year.  Financially, as of the official list today, that would make
her
> #55 on the men's list, just behind Brenden Pappas, who has made $556,832
> playing in 14 games with two finishes in the top ten.
>
> It is interesting to note, that the official PGA site, which also houses
> the LPGA site, only gives extended stats on the men, and not the women.
So
> there is no other way to break down her professional game in comparison to
> the men.
>
> Let's make an assumption that she is a consistent player, which her record
> would seem to indicate.  With a handful of exceptions,the men have played
> twice as many games as the women at this point.  Presuming she continues
on
> her course, she will double her earnings after ten games, giving her just
> over $1,100,000.  That would put her in 20th place on the men's list, just
> after Scott Hoch, who has won $1,118,923 in 9 games.  Top 20 is pretty
> darned good in ANY league that lists over 200 players at any given time.
>
> But she's "not good enough" to play with the men.
>
> Does anyone expect her to win against the best the men have to
> offer?  Probably not.  But those who decry her as "not good enough" need
to
> take a look at the few hundred guys on their list that by the same
> statistical measurement, aren't good enough either.  Sooner or later, the
> women will be playing alongside the men.  Golf is not a contact sport.
Nor
> is it a matter of competing against each other, the experts tell us, it's
> the golf player against the course.
>
> So what's the big deal in letting women play?  The answer, supposedly is
> that the men are "out there earning a living", according to Mr.
> Singh.  Like it's no more than a hobby for the women.  If he's worried
> about some man that might get beat out because she "makes the cut", then
> tell the other guy to do better next time.  She's not asking for special
> treatment, so far as I know.  She's playing in the same golf park by the
> same rules.  There's no defense in golf, it's not like she can poke check
> the guy with her golf stick.
>
> So, you're probably wondering what the basketball point is in all
> this.  Sooner or later, it will happen in the NBA.  There will be a WNBA
> player who is better than the rest of the women, who wants a challenge
> worthy of her talent, and will want to play in the NBA.  I recall recently
> the contract negotiation with the WNBA, where they were David Stern did
not
> discriminate when he screwed their union as much as the NBA was.
>
> We should watch, listen, and learn.  When that day comes--and I don't
> believe it's as far off as many people think--we'll have the hard lessons
> learned in how to be receptive to the idea.  By then, perhaps, Mr. Singh
> will have realized how foolish his behavior was at this time, and will be
> looking forward to an opportunity to play with ALL of his fellow golf
players.