Never mind Annika Sorenstam, 13 year old girl Michelle Wie is playing with the men at the Bay Mills Open on the Canadian Tour. She finished with a 2 over on the first round.

Gee, i thought this experiment of putting chics who cant play with the men, was over...

I guess not.. but i'll go out on a limb here and say, she wont make the cut. This will (yet again) prove they should stay on their own little tour and be quiet..

One big difference between Annika Sorenstam and Michelle Wie is that Sorenstam has been the most dominating player on the LPGA, winning numerous tournaments there. Wie has yet to do that.

~Adam

to Phillyfan and to Adam, I say this.

She is only THIRTEEN years old. Giver her time before dismissing her game offhand.

Not to woman bash, but....

they have no business playing with the men.. for the 10 time they have now failed...

Who cares if they play with the men? They are either getting sponsor's exemptions (which would otherwise go unused) or are qualifying as the woman at the GHO did. They aren't taking spots away from men. So they won't make the cut. Well either will half the guys. The LPGA needs the publicity and the PGA, at least when Tiger isn't around, doesn't draw huge ratings.

She probably won't make the cut, but she's a 13 year old girl. But she will probably finish ahead of some of the men in the field. Annika did and so did the woman at the GHO (Whaley was her last name I think). Hell the way David Duval is playing, maybe Wie and Annika are more deserving than some of the guys!

The forst women's golf rankings came out this week and Michelle Wie, with 0 tour wins, is somehow ranked #3. I realize golf wants/needs her to be as good as the hype, but what exactly has she done to earn a #3 ranking?

At least the numbers 1 & 2--Annika Sorenstam and Paula Creamer--have won tournaments and have been consistently solid. What Wie brings to the table is promotion and the attention of the casual (male) fan, sort of like Anna K. in women's tennis.

Another intriguing point about this: The PGA ranks players who have appeared in 40 tournaments; the LPGA bases these rankings on only 15 tournamnets. Michelle Wie has appeared in.....15 tournaments. Coincidence?

~Adam

[ February 22, 2006, 05:52 PM: Message edited by: Adam ]

From the Associated Press:

Michelle Wie fired her caddie Monday, the day after the 16-year-old professional tied for 26th at the British Open. Greg Johnston, who caddied 12 years for Juli Inkster and was on the bag when she won four major titles, was Wie's caddie since she turned pro in October. Johnston succeeded Wie's previous caddie, Jimmy Johnson, who also had been fired.

Johnston found out from Wie's agent that he had been let go while waiting for his flight at the Manchester, England airport, according to Golf-Digest.com.

Wie had her agent fire her caddie?!? Neither she nor her father (her manager) could do this???

~Adam

This guy has caddied golfers to 4 major championships.

As for her father, he used to be her caddie and she "fired" him as well. I wonder if the agent hadled this for her. Sounds like she is going to be quite the diva.

There have been a couple of instances where she violated the rules and been penalized -- this past weekend she was penalized a couple of strokes; she was disqualified in one tourney last year. Does she fully grasp the rules or is this normal for inexperienced players?

That's pretty normal. Most junior golfers inadvertently violate rules all the time, especially when it comes to dropping the ball, but they don't have cameras filming them.

I wish just once somebody would explain to me why Michelle Wie is so determined to play the men's tour? I'm all for women's rights, in all facets of life, and that includes sports; e.g.; equal pay for the female tennis players. But I just don't get Michelle Wie. Why is she doing this time after time? What's she after? What's she trying to prove? I don't understand this need (obsession?) to play with the men; particularly when she hasn't won a single event on the LPGA tour, and, has yet to establish herself as the best female golfer in the world.

If Sorenstam, with all her experience, guile, and golf acumen, couldn't win a PGA event, what hope is there for Wie? She's even less talented. And even if she does somehow make the cut at a PGA tour event, or for that matter, actually wins a PGA event (and I predict that this will happen one day), what would it prove? That women athletes are as good as men? We already know this; Sorenstam proved it. So a PGA victory by Michelle Wie would do nothing more than substantiate this fact. We know she's long off the tee; we know she can drive the ball farther than most male golfers. So what? Hundreds of male golfers do it, but most don't have a PGA victory on their resume. It takes more than driving length to win a golf tournament. You need a complete game; e.g., like Tiger displayed at this year's British Open.

I hate to say this, but I wonder whether vanity and fame aren't factors. Michelle is starting to look more and more like the LPGA's version of tennis supermodel, Anna Kournikova. A television ratings phenomeon who is very popular, very beautiful, very photogenic, very likeable, very sponsor friendly, very rich, and very winless.

I don't have a problem with women playing on the men's tour if they want, but I doubt she'd be doing any of this if she actually needed to earn money from golf. Because she's already banked millions of dollars from sponsors, she's free to chase fame, glory, and headlines. I supported Annika's valiant effort a few years back, because, in my mind, she had earned the right to be there. Although I was just learning tennis at the time, I also supported Billie Jean King. She brought numerous victories at major events and tons of credibility to that match. Michelle has not won a single LPGA event.

Even though her presence in PGA events isn't robbing other male golfers of a chance to compete, I hope she stops this nonsense. Firing her own father and a caddie because she doesn't know the rules and failed to make the cut? These are not the actions of a humble, dedicated, and grounded professional athlete seeking to promote and elevate women's golf. These are the actions of a spolied, egotistical brat.

[ August 10, 2006, 07:38 PM: Message edited by: Thomas ]

Until men are permitted to play on the LPGA Tour, women should be prohibited from playing on the PGA Tour. Equality goes both ways.

Well, I think Michelle should stop her nonsense, and I understand your sentiment about fair play, but I definitely do not agree that professional male golfers should be allowed to play the LPGA. I don't think the presence of women in a PGA event has much of an effect on the prize money payout, but I think the presence of professional male golfers in LPGA events would reduce the earnings of the female participants. Can you imagine guys like Tiger Woods, Ernie Els, Sergio Garcia, Carmillo Vilagas, Jim Furyk, David Toms, and Chris Dimarco (just to name my favorite golfers) on the LPGA tour? They would win far more events on the LPGA tour than women golfers won win on the PGA tour. So, for this reason, I don't think men should be allowed to play in LPGA events....at all.

MIB, the inclusion of professional male golfers in LPGA events would defeat the whole purpose of the LPGA; to provide a financially rewarding and competitive venue for showcasing female golfers.

But I do respect your opinion on this isue. You have a perfect right to feel that way. For the record, most men I've spoken with about this issue agree with you.

[ August 10, 2006, 07:45 PM: Message edited by: Thomas ]

MIB, that argument is stupid and you know it.

I wish everyone would get off her back. She is sixteen years old and was within a shot or two of winning EVERY MAJOR! She has had an incredible summer and will break through soon enough. And really, if it weren't for the high level of attention paid to tournaments in which she's competing sponsors wouldn't extend their voluntary and totally arbitrary exemptions to her. If some company told me that they were giving me a slot in the next PGA Tour event, you can bet your ass that I'd say yes! Until/unless consistent poor performance in men's tournaments erodes her confidence, she should accept every offer and run with it.

[ August 10, 2006, 03:12 AM: Message edited by: golfer 23 ]

Agreed....she....is....SIXTEEN...years....old!!!

You think Tiger Woods would have done this well against the pros at 16??

Wie has at least another 10 years before she hits her prime...

As far as playing in men's events, I think the PGA events want her there as much as she would like to play in them if not more. Her presence brings out fans($$$), even if said presence is a bit of a sideshow.

Given the option, a tour event would rather use a sponsor's exemption on her rather than the 25437th ranked men's golfer in the world.

There's another reason Wie accepts invitations to play in some men's tournaments: LPGA regulations prevent her (because of her age) from playing in all of their tournaments. The men's tournaments to which she gets sponsors' exemptions allow her a chance to play in a competitive arena.

I don't have a problem with Wie so much as with the media obsession over her. But that's the nature of sports media.

~Adam

Stupid to require equality? Stop being such a hypocrite. I don't care WHAT age a professional sports participant is; that's irrelevant. I am simply stating that if a female can participate in the PGA Tour, then a male must be allowed to participate in the LPGA Tour. It works both ways. If men are prohibited from playing on the LPGA Tour, then women should be prohibited from playing on the PGA Tour. Period.

MIB, you are hilarious.

OK, guys. Just one more question. Let's say that Michelle Wie is successful in her effort. And let's assume that up and coming young female golfers emulate Michelle and follow her lead. What does this do to the state of women's golf in this country? For example, if the LPGA's "superstars" are now playing more PGA than LPGA events? What happens to the future of the LPGA? Wouldn't such superstar defections from the LPGA hurt its popularity, sponsorship, and purses? And what happens to the hundreds of female golfers who lack sufficient talent to earn a living on the PGA tour?

Michelle has the right to do whatever she wants; to chase her dreams. But I can see two winners in all this: the PGA and Michelle Wie. It is not unreasonable to assume that the more successful Michelle becomes on the PGA tour, the less time she spends in LPGA events. How can this not adversely affect the popularity, survival, and continued good health of the LPGA?

I don't think it's that far-fetched to at least consider the possibility that Michelle's present action could potentially cause more harm than good to less talented and less famous female golfers relegated to competing in LPGA events exclusively.

I don't agree with MIB on this issue, but I can definitely see cause for concern. And I do not think Michelle, her handlers, or her sponsors, have given this issue the careful thought it requires.

[ August 10, 2006, 08:18 PM: Message edited by: Thomas ]

Most don't agree with my brilliant logic, so I ask a simple question: why shouldn't men be allowed to participate on the LPGA if Wie is allowed on the PGA? Note: Your answer cannot contain anything physiological.

I am bot trying to be argumentative or a pain in the arse here, but MIB has a valid question. If Ms. Wie is given exemptions to play in selected PGA events and compete for the prize money, why can't the men play in LPGA events? Yes, I can see the point that the men will often win and dilute the prize money for the women, but I dont see that as a valid excuse becuase it does not ring of fairness.

Sorry for the mis-spell. It should be "I am NOT trying to be argumentative..."

In theory, perhaps, there should be nothing to bar a man from taking part in LPGA events. However, any man who would seriously want to do so would have to either be desperate for the money or just a plain old jackass. So, if some man ever did force his way into a women's tournament, he should be forced to wear women's clothing and makeup...and if necessary to embarass him further, I'd have the LPGA adopt a dress code so that every participant would have to wear a dress.

....or maybe a guy who wishes to play an LPGA event simply wants to wear shorts which they are not permitted to do on the PGA tour.

I registered just to add my 2 cents...

It's called the PGA tour, not the MPGA tour. I see it as the top-notch tour for all professional golfers. If women want to play on it, there should be no restrictions against it. Similarly, if seniors want to play on it, there should be no restrictions against it. I'm guessing that is the case, but there is still a Senior PGA tour. Does anyone think that young men (or women?) should be allowed to play on the Senior PGA tour if Wie is allowed into PGA events?

The other tours are for special groups of people that probably would not be able to compete with the best people in the world, who are generally all younger men. If these other tours can support themselves with restrictions, then let them have restrictions.

I would love to see more women competing directly with men.

Now this from Michele, who is quickly becoming very tiresome in my book. She defends her right to play with the men and is even eyeing a spot on the Ryder Cup team. Shouldn't/couldn't she focus on trying to win against her peers or make a cut against the guys before thinking she should qualify for an event that takes the top 10 men's golfers in the US?

This is my favorite part of the article:

So if the PGA changed the name to the MPGA, Michele would back off? Me thinks not!

What Wie Wants

Yes....part of me is thinking she's a immature 16 year old who isn't grasping fully what she's doing.

Part of me thinks others around her with their own best interests are pulling her towards the men(why am I thinking this leads to more money for her, despite the fact that she won't make a cut there?)

Concentrate on the women's tournament's....build a record of success there...you're only 16, you have plenty of time and opportunity down the road to compete against the men.....

Wee Michele missed the cut yet again and finished 15 over par. But she is still goping to play with the men again next week. Ugh! Go away already!

And she is running dead last (and will miss the cut) at this week's event as well. Whoever is advising this girl needs to find a new job.

In tournaments on the LPGA this year, Wie has done better than ever but on the men's tour, she has done worse than last year. It would be wise of her to skip the men's tournaments for a while and petition the LPGA to allow her to compete in all of their tournaments next year--instead of limiting her to a select few due to her age. Of course, the publicity some of these men's events gets (all 'SportsCenter' showed of the 84 Lumber Classic was Michelle Wie; didn't even bother to tell us who was leading) depends on Wie--and she makes some nice change in appearance fees--so I'm sure she'll continue to get sponsor exemptions.

I wonder if the poor showing in recent weeks will affect her mental game and bring about some degree of burnout?

~Adam

I read that her tee shots this week (Lumber Classic) averaged somewhere around 260 yards, shorter than anyone else's. The article (sorry, i can't remember where I read this) cited this as one of the problems that led to her failure to make the cut. She often had to execute 200-240 yrd approach shots to the greens, so was forced to use 3-woods while others who drove it longer had the advantge of hitting iron shots into the greens. Even when she managed to find the green, she couldn't make any putts (her putting average was higher than anyone else). I don't see how this helps her game at all. She doesn't have the physical strength to compete against the men on 250 yrd par 3's, 500 yrd par 4's, or 600 yrd par 5's, no matter how talented she is.

But am I going to tell her to stop? Hell, NO. When there's big bucks to be made, you have to get it while the getting's good, as we say down here. So, I don't blame her for taking the money.

This will sound chavanistic and perverse, but I don't really care so much about that. I think the LPGA's marketability could benefit from Michelle's likeability, good looks, and feminine charm. The two most popular women sports in America are Ladies Figure Skating and Tennis. Does anybody think these sports contain better athletes than the WNBA or LPGA? I don't. I think the answer is that Figure Skating and Tennis are more feminine, so is more marketable to both men and women. I don't know why women prefer these two sports, but I know that many men will watch a female sporting event, not only because of the good competition, but because they like and enjoy looking at the ladies; especially the pretty ones, sexy ones, and/or those showing some skin. Many female athletes see this as a diminution and/or objectification of the sport. I don't. I suspect WNBA players would argue that they should be respected for what they do on the court; for their talent and athletic ability. And in an ideal world, they would be correct. But realistically and commercially, this arguement fails because we do not live in an ideal world. The reality is that men and women make the decision to watch whichever sporting event they want, and, for whatever reasons they choose.

The WNBA, the little I've seen of it, is competitive; a good sports watch. But that won't be enough to attract male basketball fans. I think the marketability of the WNBA and LPGA would increase if their players wore shorter pants, shorter shirts, and showed more skin, and/or adopted a more feminine image. Look what sex kitten Anna Kournikova's did for women's tennis. Her legacy is still visible. Female tennis players are showing more skin than ever before and looking hotter than ever. In fact, several of them are famous and very recognizable sex symbols. I think this is a good thing for tennis because it increases the sport's popularity and marketability.

On the flip side of this issue, a number of male and female fans are physically attracted to male athletes in the NBA, NFL, MLB, ATP, and PGA. These guys don't have a problem with being objectified as sex symbols (of course, most men never have). Most male athletes recognize and accept it for what it is; they know it doesn't represent who and what they really are. They understand that physical attraction and personal appearance are factors that add to the popularity and marketability of their sport.

What does all this mean in relationship to Michelle Wie? Just give me a minute here. Does this mean that WNBA and/or LPGA members should wear shorter pants and tighter shirts? That players should wear more bling and make-up? No, but it sure as hell wouldn't hurt. Every sport benefits from its superstars, and those superstars don't always have to be the best athletes. Of course, the ideal superstar would be someone who possessed immense talent, sex appeal, and likeability, but those are few. In the absence of this, sex symbols may be utilized to increase popularity and marketability. Frankly, I'm surprised that the WNBA and LPGA hasn't hired image consultants and marketng gurus to increase television ratings and revenues.

This is where Michelle Wie becomes so valuable to the LPGA. At sixteen, she is a lovely and likeable young girl, but in a few years, she will become a very beautiful young woman who owns an enormous male and female following. I can't think of a single other female golfer with the potential to revolutionize the LPGA than Michelle Wie. Just as Tiger Woods inspired a return to physical fitness on the PGA tour, Michelle Wie will inspire young female golfers to look and act like her; e.g.; to adopt a more fashionable and feminine look and style of play. Her presence on the LPGA tour is not only beneficial because of her enormous talent, but also because of her marketing potential. It is marketability that drives television ratings, and it is television ratings that drives money and larger purses for the LPGA events. Michelle Wie is money, and, I think the LPGA would be wise to recognize this, and do whatever it takes to keep her happy, instead of forcing her into male-dominated tournaments where her presence serves only to increase attendance, television ratings, and revenues for the PGA.

[ September 18, 2006, 01:29 AM: Message edited by: Thomas ]

Well she's at it again! Wie is trying to make the cut at the Sony Open in Honolulu. She shot a 78 in the first round and is 8 over par. She finished ahead of one man. Please make it stop already! She's yet to win a single LPGA event. Not one. And she and her advisors continue to enter these men's events.

Okay so yesterday Michele Wie was +14 after 16 holes during the first round of an LPGA event (that's a score of 86 BTW) and she withdraws with a sore wrist. So far so good, right? Well not so fast. Turns out that if she had shot an 88 she would have been banned from the LPGA tour for the rest of the year as per LPGA rules.

I smell a rat. She and her entourage could have cooked this up. LPGA officials also could have had a hand in this given that Wie, despite still not having won squat, is probably their biggest draw. Either way, I'm not buying that after struggling through 16 holes she suddenly determines that her wrist is too injured to continue.

She denies the 88 rule is why she stopped...



It seems plausible that either she, her family/advisers, or the LPGA didn't want her banned for the year.

I'm sure it wasn't a coincidence that she stopped when she did. But why does the LPGA have the 88 rule? I mean, anybody can have a bad round. But to be banned for the whole season?

It's only for non-tour members. So maybe they don't want players who aren't really qualified taking up space in events.

It's for players who aren't full time LPGA tour members and since Wie doesn't play a full schedule, she would have been banned for the rest of the year.

Meanwhile, Annika Sorenstam is pretty pissed off at Wie. I'm sure many folks will interpret this as the other women being jealous but Wie has a reputation of doing things that just aren't considered kosher on the course.

http://www.golf.com/golf/tours_news/articl...1629707,00.html

Sorenstam's got nothing to be jealous of. She's accomplished way too much, so she's got a right to speak out.

Wie shot 82 today in the first round of the US Open. Either she is still injured or she is imploding mentally. It's probably a little bit of both.

Wrist injuries are not something to be taken lightly in golf. Jim Furyk took off a full five months after he hurt his wrist -- granted he had surgery, but he missed the Players and the Masters while it was healing. He also didn't have any top 5 finishes the rest of that year and missed the cut in 5 out of 13 tournaments. (For comparison, he's only missed 7 cuts in the last two and a half full years - 64 events.)


I'm going to give her the benefit of the doubt and just write off this year. God knows that with her talent she can do anything, but if she doesn't come back focused and ready to succeed in 2008, it's probably safe to assume that her chances of playing elite golf in the long term are slim to none.

Wie-sy gets her first LPGA Tour victory at the Lorena Ochoa Invitational.