A couple of months ago, when the five finalists for the 2010 Golf Digest U.S. Open Challenge were introduced, I was among the many who applauded the selection. ~ One of the things I liked about these contestants... each of whom played at a very high level... was that they were so different from one another. ~ Whereas one year earlier the finalists had been practically indistinguishable... and represented the narrowest possible slice of the demographic pie... this new group reflected a broad spectrum of the population. They reflected what many of us see as the future of golf.
From there, it was up to the public to select the finalist who'd try, alongside Mark Whalberg, Wayne Gretzky and Drew Brees, to break 100 playing Pebble Beach in U.S. Open championship conditions. And the public chose Peggy... Peggy Ference, the only woman among the finalists. ~ She wasn't my choice. My friend Kenny got my votes... and my Tweets. ~ But Peggy prevailed, and became the first woman to play in the challenge. And of course, there was controversy. Some asked why a woman was even considered since this was a men's tournament, others suggested that the diversity of the finalists was a thinly disguised attempt by Golf Digest to reach a broader demographic... and added that because women are more likely to "vote in contests" the woman candidate won. ~ Then the controversy died down. Until this week.
On Wednesday the 2010 Challenge came to Pebble Beach and the players took to the course in 25 mph winds. The rough was knee-high and the greens were rolling at a 12 on the Stimpmeter... and Peggy, the "average golfer" posted a 118, which sounds to me like
So, once the score cards were signed and the results made public the inevitable debate began: "A popularity contest is no way to choose a competent golfer!"... "Should a woman have even been considered for this challenge?"... "This was just a PR choice by Golf Digest who wants women readers"... "That's truly a pathetic pick to bring a woman to a men's tournament, just look at her results". ~ Those are just a few of the comments that followed the announcement of Peggy's less-than-prodigious round at Pebble. But there were also myriad comments along the lines of: "Thanks, Golf Digest, and thank you, Peggy, for being an inspiration to the rest of us Average American Golfers" and "Peggy Ference did a remarkable job and showed a great deal of character and class", so it seems there were several ways of looking the same outcome.
What's clear is that not everyone was on the same page regarding the purpose of the Challenge. Some seem to feel there's a certain responsibility on the part of Golf Digest to ensure that the person who ultimately plays be the best possible amateur golfer. The way I see it, the contest is more about passion and the search was, in fact, for an amateur golfer with a compelling story and a deep love for the game.
Was there an attempt... in the selection of the 2010 finalists... to reach a particular demographic? I don't think it was that, as much as a desire to reflect the future of the game... or what the future of the game needs to be if we want it to thrive; ie. multi-dimensional: people of different ages, both sexes and various ethnicities who play really well, but more importantly who love the game so much that they're inspired to evangelize it... get out and play it whenever they can and inspire others to do the same. There will inevitably be tweaks to next year's contest... or at least the selection process... and it'll be interesting to see what they are. In the meantime The Challenge will air on NBC on Sunday, June 20, from 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. as a lead-in to the final round of the U.S. Open. ~ I'm not going to reveal what the celebs scored in case there are those who haven't heard, but as a true "average" golfer... one who hovers around 100 on courses far less draconian than Peggy played on... I'm looking forward to watching her round.
I guess the ratings will ultimately be what decides the tweaks for next year. I'm not sure those who voted for Peggy will want to watch her floundering and less so those who thought she was a bad choice from the beginning
ReplyDeleteI wonder how everyone would have reacted if a guy had was chosen and ended up with a 118? I could happen because anyone can have an awful day.
ReplyDeleteThe only things they proved with that selection is that political correctness is now and always has been completely idiotic.
ReplyDeleteGolf Digest has taken a not completely terrible idea based on a quote from Tiger Woods from before Mike Davis took over the US Open course setups. Oakmont was nothing short of brutal - but we haven't seen a setup like that in years.
This was supposed to be four 10 handicappers taking on the US Open track. That lasted about a week before the marketing weasels decided they needed three celebrities to make this a "good idea". The next year, it was one regular Joe in a "hero" career...but all the candidates were Champions Tour age playing a 7500 yard golf course.
Now we have a 51 year old woman - a FOUR HANDICAP 51 year old woman - who plays 5500 yard courses. So naturally, adding 6 shots would make up for the other 1500 yards.
Is the incredible stupidity of this nominee on this course starting to sink in ?
SHE knew she had no chance to break 100. I doubt she broke 120. All she got out of this was a free trip to Pebble Beach to play a course where the whole idea was to find out of a 10 handicapper could break 100.
Political correctness vs the idea of the challenge - and political correctness wins.
Amazing
I'm glad she had a good time - but that wasn't the point of the experiment.
That's definitely one way of looking at it Court. But the thing is, if you look at how the challenge was presented you can clearly see that this year's contest was only loosely based on Tiger's remark.
ReplyDeleteIn presenting the 2010 finalists Golf Digest actually said this, "Tiger's line about a 10-handicapper not breaking 100 at Oakmont in 2007 has helped fuel the Golf Digest U.S. Open Challenge, but this contest was never only about proving him right or wrong. The bigger objective for Golf Digest, the USGA and NBC Sports has always been to show the wonderfully open world of golf. The game sometimes has a stuffy image, but that evaporates when you meet some of the nearly 200,000 golfers who've entered our contest in its three years. We marvel at the number of self-proclaimed average golfers desperate to risk their ego in a count-every-stroke round on the U.S. Open setup. (And the thousands of moms, dads, kids and grandparents who think their loved one should be there.)"
Personally, I think that's a pretty awesome message to send. Particularly as it pertains to the future of the recreational game. But there are definitely many who disagree. That's what this post is about.
Read More http://www.golfdigest.com/magazine/usopencontest/2010/05/gd_usopen_challenge_finalists#ixzz0qaf7VnKW
http://www.golfdigest.com/magazine/usopencontest/2010/05/gd_usopen_challenge_finalists
Once you introduce TV someone has to pay the bills and make some profit. Whether this year's Golf Digest players were representative of anything or fair is a moot point. With network time on the line expect the suits to attempt to find the players that attract the most viewers. If they they think that green-headed alien spawn children are the secret to the demographic grail, be prepared.
ReplyDeleteI'll be interested to know which tees they had her play from (Pebble has women's tees, don't they?) and what the weather was like.
ReplyDeleteActually, I think one of the beauties of golf is that we have this kind of problem to debate. What other sport routinely argues about whether men and women should compete against each other? How many can have a man say a woman shouldn't play and have him legitimately be called a chauvinist? (Really, do you know any women who would seriously argue that an average woman should be allowed to face the Green Bay front line?)
The mere fact that this is an issue at all says a lot about the breadth of golf. Viva la controversy!
Mike - they played the championship tees...which is what the original challenge was supposed to present. Can a 10 handicapper break 100 playing the same course as the pros ?
ReplyDeletePatricia - what you're saying is that it's ok to change the rules of the game after the fact. What NBC and Golf Digest did was ignore the intent of the challenge and turn it into a cutesy, politically correct, made for TV bit of fiction. It was a joke from nomination 1.
That's it... she played from the mens tees, let no one forget that but I sort of agree with Court. Maybe they should do a US Women's Open contest for women. If there aren't any women attempting to qualify for the US Open as players then there shouldn't be a woman contestant.
ReplyDeleteHey, in those conditions at Pebble Beach, I think I would be ok with a 118 as well!
ReplyDeleteI think the format was creative and largely good for golf overall.
I didn't know if Peggy would play from different tees or not. Since the original challenge idea didn't include women...
ReplyDeleteBut I see some real value in letting her play. Like I said before, the whole "men vs women" golf debate isn't going to go away. By doing it this way, Golf Digest gave some perspective to the debate AND did it in a way that I think most women would be ok with. (Pipe in if you think I'm wrong here, Patricia or any of you other women reading this.)
Namely, they brought in a good female amateur, gave her a caddy who is not only an experienced US Open champion but also a relatively short hitter himself to help her navigate the course, and then let her post a score that could be directly compared to the guys' scores. She got no special treatment because she played from the same tees. And they got it on film, so others can see how she did and make their own assessments.
Maybe it's a ratings play; maybe it's an attempt to be PC; maybe some of the editors' wives just threatened severe retribution if they didn't give readers the option to pick a female challenger. But in any case, it sounds to me like they did a pretty good job of providing some legitimate input to the debate. I think it's safe to say that if Peggy had broken 100 instead of Walberg, we'd still be having this discussion.
Maybe I shouldn't lope in with a late comment, especially since I didn't see any of it. I just glanced at the scores. From the scores, nobody did much of anything positive. Or am I mistaken??
ReplyDeleteWaou ! This is a big deal. First I have to say that I'm french and I only heard about that women a few days ago. And I didn't see any problems in her score. It's pretty bad, and ? Bad things happen, even to women. But when I see all those discussions, if it was wrong or not to let her play, I'm guessing she had to play with all this in mind. She was not an average player anymore.In those conditions, 118 is not as bad as I first thought.
ReplyDeleteDon't NBC and Golf Digest have the right to make the contest whatever they want?
ReplyDeleteFolks can then decide whether they want to participate or not. Furthermore, people can decide whether they will watch the event or tune into World Cup coverage. Welcome to the United States of America.
Peggy (who was my choice) has a ton of guts to participate in this event. I honestly think this whole thing is a little silly. She won the thing fair and square according to the current rules. She trained and trained and gave it her best shot. Good for her!
I think Mike makes a valid point: This is a debate that isn't going away, but it's pretty cool (IMHO) that golf allows for this discussion at all.
I'll be curious to hear what Peggy found most difficult... what she feel affected her game most. I hope she gets a chance to go into that.
ReplyDeleteGolf Digest gets to have whatever kind of contest with whatever participants it wants: they own the show. I'm not sure this particular choice was good for women's golf, and that's always the problem when a spirit of inclusiveness lets women play in arenas typically set aside for men.
ReplyDeleteWe don't let men play in arenas set aside for women; it would mean women never get to play much of anything, so it's not much of an argument to pretend we need some sort of universal inclusion policy to avoid discriminating. But letting a woman compete in this contest risks simply showing the wide gap that exists between the front and back tees, and I'm not sure that helps women.
Ms Ference turned in a score 43 strokes above her Index playing from the championship tees. (The others were 12, 19 and 28 strokes above their Index) This reflects the enormous difference in slope between a regular course from the front tees and the US Open from the back tees.
I want more women playing golf and bringing them into the game is nothing but great for golf. Golf has a unique system to equalize those differences and even let us compete fairly. In this particular situation, it neither showcases women's golf abilities nor does much of anything positive; it's just going to give the male jerks on the course that much more fodder because it completely distorts the nature of golf's equalizing system.
And it's going to make for either boring or painful TV if you are interested in a challenge reflecting Tiger's original comment.
.
ReplyDeletemy two cents
playing well on a very dificult course is no small feat, and under the circumstances, the television coverage which magnifies every error, catches every wiff and records every foozle, i think this woman did very well shooting what she did, however, i do NOT see how this helps the "average" woman see this as NOT what it is like, or SHOULD be like, on a typical casual round of golf with friends
if a MAN thinking about taking up golf watches this and sees highly competitive, physically fit, professionally trained and properly coached athletes having such great difficulty on the course, well, that would only serve to give me second thoughts
as for the challenge a tournament course provides for the "average" player - one could play bethpage or pebble or torry pines or st andrew's or TPC sawgrass within the weeks AFTER the actual competitive tournament is completed under roughly the same conditions as the pros - no need to win in this raffle. i once tried it myself, here in miami at doral, and spent the better part of an entire afternoon looking for my ball in the uncut rough and ended the day by going one iron one iron to even reach the eighteenth - the only thing i "accomplished" that day was counting to infinity
a friend of mine, who is a regular at bethpage carrying a 14 handicap, could not break 100 when bethpage was set-up for the open, hitting from the regular mens tees he usually plays from, NOT the championship tees (obviously requiring greater carries)
i guess what i'm saying is i don't know that this causes more harm than good for anyone already timid about playing golf
anyway keep the change
frankD
ft lauderdale
.
ReplyDeleteas the good doctor above indicates the math of handicapping for a follow up game, i would say the lowest two mens scores get no strokes, the next man gets one stroke each hole and the woman gets 2 plus rounded to three strokes per hole under the circumstances however playing from the appropriate tees is the basis for handicaps and you can see how this gets all screwed up otherwise
which is another reason i don't quite understand what this proved
let these egomaniac have been threatened losing a hole to a girl on handicap and well you may have seen a different result - LOL
so four non-touring pros got beat up by an open set-up
you may see some open qualifying pros get beat up by that same course next week
again i don't know what it really means for golf
as for TV well as long as i don't have to listen to jim nance i'll watch
anyway be well
frankD
ft liquordale FLA
As for a person, male or female, being timid about taking up golf, this whole Open "experience" is so far from what a novice or even an average golfer should be doing is ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteI mean it might be fun to try a couple holes and laugh and be done with it. I mean if a person (assuming reasonably young) wanted to race cars, I think a couple trips to a go kart track would be a good place to start. You don't go to Indy and say "fire up one of these bad boys for me."
As far as long off the tee goes, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall seeing any long drive champions in contention for anything other than longest drives.
As Gene Sarazen supposedly once said as he walked past a Joe Kirkwood Sr. trick shot exhibition, "how many tournaments has he won?"
duck64
ReplyDeletekirkwood said he became a trick shot artist because one "trick" he could NOT do was hit the ball STRAIGHT - LOL
anyway be well
frankD
Ft Lauderdale
ashgolf, if a guy with an Index of 4.6 ended up with 118, the reaction would have been that he choked on a tough course under pressure, or else that his Index was bogus. 43 strokes over your index is too wide a gap to just blame on a tough course.
ReplyDelete