Welcome To ShotTalk - Golf Forum

Joining ShotTalk.com is free and easy, When you register you get added benefits like being able to get help, join conversations, discuss equipment and the tours. It also lets you join in the Contest we have.

  • Join for Free
  • Enter free giveaways and contest
  • Get Help
  • Join in on Conversations and Topics
  • Use the Marketplace for FREE
  • Discuss balls, Golf Clubs and Golf Courses
  • Most importantly make new friends

    SignUp Now!
  • Support Our Sponsor
    Full Metal Markers.com

    Rockford35

    Shark Skin Belt
    Staff member
    Admin
    Joined
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages
    21,786
    Reaction score
    1,080
    Location
    Canada
    With her 5th win in 7 starts, Annika Sorenstam topped 1.2 million US for the year.

    Bart Bryant won today. He finished at 16-under 272 and won $990,000 US. His first win since 1994.

    Thats just brutal.

    I'm not one for saying women should play on the PGA tour(they shouldn't), but they should be paid better.

    Sickening. Really makes me not want to watch golf anymore. :(

    R35
     
    Rockford35 said:
    With her 5th win in 7 starts, Annika Sorenstam topped 1.2 million US for the year.

    Bart Bryant won today. He finished at 16-under 272 and won $990,000 US. His first win since 1994.

    Thats just brutal.

    I'm not one for saying women should play on the PGA tour(they shouldn't), but they should be paid better.

    Sickening. Really makes me not want to watch golf anymore. :(

    R35

    I dunno, Rock...

    If everyone stopped watching women's golf...sponsors and TV would lose interest...prize money would drop further.

    Conversely, if the demand was there to watch womens golf - big crowds, big tv audiences - sponsors would pay more, tv rights would go up, prize money would increase.

    Or is there some crook in the woman's game that is creaming off all the revenue and not dishing it down to the players?
     
    The money does seem intermediate between the Men's tour and the Nationwide tour, and I would say that it would probably parallel the level of interest for the women's tour compared with those two tours. How do the purses compare with the Senior, er, Champions tour?
     
    Chicks suck at everything when compared to men.

    Ballet, cooking, sports, golf, inventions, business acumen, etc...

    Dudes are just better. Not that there is a tiny percentage of women out there that can kick a small percentage of male ass or two, but men are just better.

    As a group, men are better, stronger, and smarter than women.

    Get over it, Rocky. (are you a chick?)
     
    I wouldn't go as far as spankdoggie, but the fact of the matter is that men are simply better at most sports than women. And people don't want to watch something that they perceive as being inferior to something else. It's not that the women on the LPGA are bad golfers, not by any means. As a matter of fact they're tremendous players. However, they just can't stand up to the men. It's not a matter of desire, hard work, and dedication. It's simply a matter of physical limitations. And there's no shame in that.


    I watch the LPGA because I like to watch excellent golfswings in the hopes of gleaning something out of them that I could maybe apply to my swing. But the majority of golfers and golf fans are men, therefore there's going to be more money available from sponsors and therefore larger purses.
     
    If chicks want a better paycheck, Natalie Gulbis and friends need to start playing topless. Otherwise, continue getting pennies on the dollar compared to the gents.
     
    buddha33 said:
    If chicks want a better paycheck, Natalie Gulbis and friends need to start playing topless. Otherwise, continue getting pennies on the dollar compared to the gents.

    I am not sure if seeing Annika playing naked is a good thing or a bad thing. :emot-ange
     
    CKGuY914 said:
    I am not sure if seeing Annika playing naked is a good thing or a bad thing. :emot-ange

    I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'd tag Annika without thinking twice.

    :idhitit:
     
    buddha33 said:
    I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'd tag Annika without thinking twice.

    I'm with you, budd, as long as she keeps that upper lip waxed.... ;)
     
    rockford, the bottom line is they simply don't draw the same crowds or tv ratings and that directly correlates to the size of their paychecks. get more people interested and the checks will get bigger....its pretty simple.
     
    I enjoy women sports. In basketball they are more fundamental and less show boating. In golf it seems the same way.

    Also the courses are easier it seems and you see more hole in ones etc.

    I am always immediatly drawn to Annika's mustache when they do a close-up

    Grace park does it for me though.
     
    The reason why they don't draw the crowds and the dollar amounts is because they have sponsors like Kraft, Safeway and Nabisco.

    How about someone like AT&T or Merril Lynch?

    It's not a matter that women aren't as strong as men. And, it's not that they aren't better golfers. But, they are equal to men. Should they be on par in terms of money? Obviously not with the shitty sponsors they're getting. But the Old Boys Club will never look down their noses and see a woman on the same level in terms of entertainment value. I personally like watching women's golf, sometimes more then men's golf (especially when Miller is on the mic......yuck...).

    The fact that so many here have jumped up and said "women suck" and "we need to see them play topless" is the very reason why women will never, ever be considered the same in terms of social status of a man. We keep pumping this into our kids, and it carries on another generation.

    I'd just like to see people like Annika and others on the LPGA tour, who put their time in and play consistent golf, a little more in terms of what the PGA gets. I would just love for someone like Google or E-bay or Microsoft to jump on board and set up a 2 million dollar winner purse tournament for the women. That would instantaneously get people watching.

    R35
     
    Rockford35 said:
    The reason why they don't draw the crowds and the dollar amounts is because they have sponsors like Kraft, Safeway and Nabisco.

    How about someone like AT&T or Merril Lynch?

    It's not a matter that women aren't as strong as men. And, it's not that they aren't better golfers. But, they are equal to men. Should they be on par in terms of money? Obviously not with the shitty sponsors they're getting. But the Old Boys Club will never look down their noses and see a woman on the same level in terms of entertainment value. I personally like watching women's golf, sometimes more then men's golf (especially when Miller is on the mic......yuck...).

    The fact that so many here have jumped up and said "women suck" and "we need to see them play topless" is the very reason why women will never, ever be considered the same in terms of social status of a man. We keep pumping this into our kids, and it carries on another generation.

    I'd just like to see people like Annika and others on the LPGA tour, who put their time in and play consistent golf, a little more in terms of what the PGA gets. I would just love for someone like Google or E-bay or Microsoft to jump on board and set up a 2 million dollar winner purse tournament for the women. That would instantaneously get people watching.

    R35


    Rock, they will continue to get shitty sponsors as there is no real public interest in watching womens golf.

    Were that to change, so would the sponsors - the big boys would be all over it like a rash.

    Do you really believe that public interest is low because of who sponsors the competition?

    Spectators don't watch golf tournaments because of the sponsors or prize money on offer. They watch to be entertained. The Ryder Cup - no prize money whatsoever, huge audience figures. Would there be the same interest in a female version? Nope.

    I read a report recently about a golf club in the UK that gave women equality. Increased their joining fees and annual dues to the same paid by men, gave them equal access to all golf tee times and facilities, put women on all the committees. Guess what? Female membership fell because "it wasn't fair to charge them the same fees as men". Equality when it suits, it seems.
     
    Kilted Arab said:
    Rock, they will continue to get shitty sponsors as there is no real public interest in watching womens golf.

    Were that to change, so would the sponsors - the big boys would be all over it like a rash.

    Do you really believe that public interest is low because of who sponsors the competition?

    Spectators don't watch golf tournaments because of the sponsors or prize money on offer. They watch to be entertained.


    What Men's tournament is this weekend? The Booze Allen. And what follows that up? The US Open.

    How do I know that? Because it's on the golf channel 24/7. And in Golf magazine. And on MSNBC.com. Cripes, we here on Shot Talk have a calendar that highlights men's tournaments.

    I rest my case. People aren't interested because there is no advertising money, no real sponsors, hence, no real interest.

    If the LPGA came to town to play any tournament, i'd be there before i'd be at any Canadian Tour or Nationwide event, I can tell you that much.

    It's an old man's game, and it always will be. Too bad.

    R35
     

    Members online

    No members online now.

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    38,507
    Messages
    514,806
    Members
    5,079
    Latest member
    MattSC

    Who has been here?

    Back
    Top