Jun 21

U.S. Open over; U.S. Women's Open on the way

Michael Campbell didn?t just win a giant trophy on Sunday. He also took home $1,125,000, exempt status on the PGA Tour for the next five years, invitations to the next five Masters, British Opens, Players Championships, and PGA Championships, and invitations to the next ten U.S. Opens. That?s just gotta take some of the pressure off.

He also, with this win, almost doubled his career earnings, and won himself a spot in the hearts of many golfing Americans, mine included.
But now the Open is over, and I find myself suffering from a bit of withdrawal.

No worries, there?s another one this weekend. The women are going to tee it up in Cherry Hills Village, Colorado, to see who can take the U.S. Women?s Open title away from Meg Mallon.

Will it be Annika? If so, she?ll bring home $560,000, her third major for the year, and her seventh win out of nine starts. Let?s put that in perspective. Tiger?s had 12 starts this year, and won three events, including one major. Not six events. Three. Annika?s won twice as many events so far, and twice as many majors. Tiger?s 2005 winnings so far total $4,800,290. Annika?s total $1,503,238.

Notice anything? If not, let me spell it out for you. The women earn less than half of what the men make, even when they win twice as often. I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions as to why.

If for no other reason, this is why I?m thrilled when players like Michelle Wie and Suzy Whaley tee it up at men’s events. They deserve their shot at those ginormous purses just as much as the guys do. May the best golfer win, male or female.

And yes, Michelle will indeed be in the field this weekend; last year, she was one of the first amateurs to be offered a special exemption. And her T13 finish (at the ripe old age of 14) was good enough to get her in this time without any help.

Be sure to check out the Golf Grouch?s great blog on Annika and her Grand Slam goals. I just love that guy.

« U.S. Women's Open is underway, and already full of stories

This just in: Chris Baldwin not as dumb as he looks »

11 comments

Comment from: duffer [Visitor]

Another female gripe from someone who doesn't understand the difference between 'relative' and 'absolute'. Being best of the women still doesn't come up to the same level of difficulty as the men - Annika showed where she ranks on that scale (and went back to the women, although I think she should play more with the men because she IS that good.) But Japanese basketball players or midget weightlifters don't get equal rewards to compensate for the fact that they don't measure up to the best. Why should women in any sport? You want equality? Quit using a double standard.

06/22/05 @ 12:14

Comment from: its_simple [Visitor]

If the women golfers want to make as much as the men they have two very simple choices. First, they can play on the PGA Tour (hey, let 'em even play from more forward tees). Second, they can get more people to attend events and watch their tournaments on t.v. Only with ratings and attendance will the money flow from sponsor's and commercial time. Their situation is very similar to the hockey situation (and they are men). People are only going to watch so much sports on t.v. or attend so many sporting events in person. The LPGA must get public interest stirred up or they will continue to be on the Golf Channel with low attendance. I was very happy to see the LPGA Championship on network t.v., but I have to admit it was still somehow a little more boring (if that is possible) than watching the men play.

06/22/05 @ 14:07

Comment from: Golf Grouch [Visitor]

Wie definitely has the ability to do for the LPGA what Tiger did for the PGA. LPGA purses would grow exponentially with a lady Tiger, benefitting all players. Smart LPGA veterans like Laura Davies know this and will fully support Michelle.

However, there are many jealous and shortsighted LPGA players who still want Michelle to "pay her dues." All this will do is further alienate her to the LPGA.

06/22/05 @ 17:31

Comment from: Visitor [Visitor]

"They deserve their shot at those ginormous purses just as much as the guys do."

Uhhh... no they don't. Sports are entertainment and that is all. Playing any sport really well is absolutely meaningless in terms of dollars unless it can be converted into revenue by networks, clothing companies, equipment manufacturers, etc. E.G. I was a hell of a wiffle ball player in my prime, but I never made a dime! Oh the tragedy!

Look don't get me wrong, there are plenty of women out there who could tee off from where I do and wipe up the course with me. But that won't earn them 1 penny unless they can get someone to watch them do it and get people to buy equipment that they used to do it.

Deserve? Well the money these people make is all about sales. I assure you that if there comes a time when the LPGA has anywhere near the viewership/support the PGA does, the purses will be similar. The competitors and their agents will make sure of that. Don't you worry.

06/23/05 @ 08:05

Comment from: EQUALITY [Visitor]

I am all for equality. So the women should be allowed to qualify for the PGA Tour, off the men's tees of course, and the men should be allowed to qualify for the LPGA Tour.
This is a win win situation - Jennifer Mario, the Burke woman and others like them solud be thrilled at the equal treatment afforded to women, competing with the men on equal terms for the same purse, and there are many PGA journeymen who would make a comfortable living on the LPGA Tour.

06/23/05 @ 08:13

Comment from: Betts Huntley [Visitor]

Whereas: women now go to the military and police academies and make fine officers; women go to seminaries and make fine ministers; women go to medical school and make fine doctors.
Therefore be it resolved: that women be INVITED to play in the PGA. And let the dust fall where it may.

06/23/05 @ 11:11

Comment from: onetour [Visitor]

Why not let the men and women play together on all tour levels and do away with the LPGA? That would certainly bring in the big bucks for the ladies and would likely draw more viewers. I would tune in to watch and see Annika, Michelle, et all step up and battle with the guys every week.

Each course should have a closer set of tees for the women, not too much closer, but definitely something a bit more realistic than some of the men's tee lengths.

Also, each tournament could be fixed to have 3 winners: men's champion, women's champion, and overall champion.

06/23/05 @ 11:17

Comment from: Visitor [Visitor]

Unfortunately, the main way women athletes can bring attention to their sport (and therefore the dollars) is by playing up their looks and sexiness. More people want to watch Natalie Gulbis and Anna Kornikova and the Women's Olympic Beach Volleyball team because they wear skimpy clothes. Not very fair. But since when does what people earn have anything to do with what they deserve? Case in point - CEO's who earn 500 times more than their employees.

06/23/05 @ 11:30

Comment from: Capitalist [Visitor]

You're kidding, right? All you need to do is compare television ratings and attendance figures to realize why the women's Open pays half of the mens. This is not a conspiracy, unfairness, communist plot, or male chauvinism. It is simply supply and demand. Try Econ 101 at any university, and you will have your reasoning.

06/24/05 @ 10:58

Comment from: Candace Polski [Visitor]

I think many are missing the point. It's not that women should "get paid" as much as the men. Rather, it's that women should be competing against the men and seeing if they have enough game to win at that level. No different tees, just add Annika or Wie to the men's field, playing the same game, and let them see where they place. If they are good enough to make the cut and make money, more power to them.

As for men playing on the LPGA, that's a pointless discussion. Why not let Tiger compete in the US Amateur each year? Why not let Paula Cremer play for an NCAA team? Why not let Phil Mickelson and Meg Mallon play in the Junior Golf championship? There will always be restrictions to create lesser golf tours or events. The PGA should be the highest level, where the only criteria is being good enough to play, no matter your age, gender, or nationality.

So the issue is not "the women should get the same as the men". The market will dictate what the LPGA purses will be worth, and the PGA purses. The issue is that the very best among the women should be in the competition on the PGA circuit to see if they stack up or not - and if they do, they will earn some of those larger payouts.

How about the reigning Women's US Open winner getting an exemption into the US Open or the Masters? The US Amateur champion gets that - why not the Women's Open winner? By having a few of the top women's winners exempt into these men's majors, we'll all see how the ladies stack up to the men on a regular basis, just as we get to see how Luke List stacked up against the likes of Tiger and Phil at Pinehurst this year. That would be a very positive change for the USGA to make.

06/26/05 @ 04:55

Comment from: Rob Wood [Visitor]

View the painting of Birdie Kim making her final great shot at 18.
View it on www.thesportsartist.com
and click on NEW PAINTINGS

Regards,

Rob Wood
www.thesportsartist.com
303 972 2944
Denver,CO

07/01/05 @ 23:15

This post has 1 feedback awaiting moderation...

Comment feed for this post