I don't mind Vijay's clarified comment. It's honest. He wouldn't play because he knew she was capable of winning. He was afraid. Okay, so why isn't he afraid of losing to a man? He's got plenty of experience with that. We (perhaps starting with Wie) just need to get them all more used to the idea.

It's something many men fear - the idea of losing to a woman at anything, particularly something physical. I think it's all based on playground mentality and the fear of being called a sissy. Poor Vijay - don't worry, I sincerely doubt the other "boys" on your particular playground will pull down your pants, point and laugh.

Jennifer and Kristen are we talking about the same Vijay Singh? 3 time major winner Vijay Singh, the Vijay Singh with over 50 worldwide career victories, former PGA tour money leader, and player of the year Vijay Singh, the Vijay Singh who is the 2nd ranked golfer in the world. I'm just making sure we are talking about the same guy before I comment on whether or not he is scared to play with women. Vijay looked pretty terrified last year at the Sony Open, while Michelle was missing the cut by 7 strokes, he was trembling his way to a another victory. Women all over the world should, like the rest of us be hailing the achievements of Annika and Michelle, but the thought that Vijay was somehow ducking Annika is criminally insane, as is the thought that he or any of the top male golfers would fear Michelle Wie. Michelle is a great talent, but she will never be on the level of Vijay Singh and to even mention them in the same sentence is unfair to both of them.

Kristen,

To say that Sorenscam was capable of winning when she wasn't even capable of making the cut is idiotic in the extreme.

By the way, I notice that my first post was deleted. Is it that the little feminist doesn't like dissent?

When male pros object to women playing in their events, other female golf fans always miss the point, including Kristen and Jennifer.

Personally, I cannot see Annika ever playing in another PGA Tour event (that's because she's Ladies World No. 1, and she can't stand being the worst player in any golf tournament). We all know Michelle will, but I don't think she'll EVER win a PGA Tour event. I know some would consider that to be a bold claim, but let's face it, men are better than women at every sport.

Returning to my point, the reason male pros, including Singh, object to ladies playing in PGA Tour events is simply because they believe women should play women, and men should play men. Why should women have the right to enter PGA Tour events, when men are not allowed to enter LPGA Tour events (I know what I said above, but still, the moral here is easy to understand)? People like Singh just get sick of females entering PGA Tour events because they're stopping a male pro from playing; and also because even Annika Sorenstam would be the worst player in any PGA Tour event.

After all I've just said, though, I would rather enjoy watching Vijay getting beaten by a 16 year-old girl.

:)

David,
You obviously haven't read many of these blogs. If you had, you would know that I have proved conclusively that the argument of men should play with men, and women should play with women, is a completely flawed one.

The pga tour is for the best players in the world. Period. Just because the women and the seniors have their own tours, doesn't mean that they shouldn't be able to participate also in the best tour.

As regards Annika being the worst player in ANY mens event that she would enter.

If Annika were to enter EVERY pga tournament this season, she would not be the worst player in ANY of those events. Saying she would shows a complete ignorance.

I think Hawaii will welcome Vijay. Unlike Allenby who was pointedly unwilling to wish Michelle Wie well in such a fashion, Vijay has acted like a perfect gentleman. I do predict that Michelle will finish ahead of Vijay, chronologically speaking, but I am quite sure Vijay will have no problem with that. Vijay won't mind still playing a view more holes after Michelle has finished her tournament.

Actually I think Vijay rather likes Michelle--since she has been doing to Annika what Annika did to Vijay. In 2003 Vijay was an afterthought in a tournament where he was the defending champion--now Annika is often an afterthought in tournaments even though she is clearly the number one player on the LPGA. The better Michelle does this week, the less people will care about Annika when Michelle and Annika meet in tournaments later this year.

I'm sure some top male golfers are afraid of doing worse than Michelle, if they should happen to have a particualry bad tournament when Michelle does particularly well. But as more top golfers join the club of pros who have finished lower than Michelle, there will be less embarassment.

I think Michelle Wie may very well reach a level where she will have a fighting chance to win a PGA tournament if everything falls her way.

David,

Of course Wie will never win a PGA Tour event.

Norman,

Try to exercise a little sophistication. LOL -- you haven't "proved conclusively" that the argument that people should compete within their own sex is completely flawed. After all, do you even know why those taking that position are doing so? Perhaps they're coming from a traditionalist's perspective and just believe that it does violence to the natural order to allow such things. And maybe it does; maybe God has deemed that it's so.

What I'm trying to do here, Norman, is expand your thinking a little bit and help you to understand that there may be more aspects to an issue than the obvious ones. You assume this hinges solely on ability -- maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. Perhaps it's more nuanced than you think.

Norman, James and 'Under Par', nice comments. Maybe I went a little far again (can't be bothered to argue further on this one, as there's so many ways to view it and no correct answer :)

Under Par agrees with me that Michelle will never win a PGA Tour event. But why does Michelle hold hopes of winning the U.S. Open (men's)?

David

NO ONE ever watches Vijay. NO ONE ever says, Oh good, Vijay is playing. To heck with Phil and Eldrick. I'm watching the Ouijii from Fiji. In the end, though, all us men-folk look at his muscular six feet four inches of golfing power and say, he's the Sheriff. EVERYONE will be watching Michelle Wie, unless, of course, they are there to see Kevin Hayashi and Henrik Bjornstad. Fortunately, that pair will be with Michelle on daze one and two. Talk about lucky!

Let's also remember, J to the Ma to the Rio, that Vijay's gripe with Annika was not that she was XX, but that she did not deserve the invitation.

David,

Wie entertains hopes of winning the men's US Open because she has been brainwashed by a pinhead professor father and a twisted feminist culture.

I really dont understand where all this hatred for VJ is coming from? He isnt pulling guns on teens or getting busted for drugs or DUIs. He isnt doing steroids. He is the only guy in the Tiger Era to get to number 1. He is a devout family man who donates a ton to charity and doesnt call a news conference to announce that. He works hard and is always up there on sunday.

I am not saying that everyone should jump on his bangwagon ...but there seems to be no reason to hate this guy so much. Where does all this hatred come from? What did he do to deserve this?

Stone: According to the original post, Vijay's the one who said he didn't want her to make the cut because he didn't want a woman to beat him. He knows he can win. If he didn't think she could, why say that? (Take note, Under Par - I don't think Vijay is an extreme idiot.) And if you don't want to call that fear, would you prefer discomfort?

David,
I wouldn't have any problem with male pros objecting to women playing in their events if only they had some events. If they want some events only men can play in, perhaps they should start a Men's Professional Golf Association.

It seems that all the people saying Wie will never win a PGA tour event are really saying a woman can't win, and Wie is just the figurehead. Never say never.

At least Wie isn't trying to do something silly like get equal pay for equal work. That would be absurd. Just ask the sponsors.

Please. I am a Wie fan and I have no particular affinity for Vijay either way. But to think that Vijay or any other PGA champions will be afraid to defend the title against Wie or any other women in a PGA tournament is really silly. The only woman who may develope her game to make a PGA cut is Wie, and while I hope Wie will be a viable PGA competitor in the future, she is still a work in progress and her prospects are uncertain.

I meant Mercedes champion Appleby not Allenby. Oh and just for fun, my predictions. Vijay 1 and Michelle a tie for 47.

What an incredible crew of misogynists! It's somehow radical and feminist to think that the PGA tour should be for the very best golfers, regardless of age, race OR gender! Now, before alan or Under Par or anyone else gets all fidgety, I am not trying to say Wie is clearly one of the best golfers, regardless of gender, and that's why she should play on the PGA tour. She is playing there now because she draws viewers and patrons and generates dollars.

But to say that she doesn't belong on the tour because she is female is such a backwards, nineteenth century idea that I wonder what other interesting "values" you hold to be self evident. Why allow non-white people to play on the PGA tour - shouldn't they go play on some tour of their own? Why allow Europeans to play on the PGA tour, shouldn't they all be playing on the European tour? As for God's natural ordering, now you are becoming legitimately creepy Under Par. I am a very religious person, and I fail to see how you can invoke God in this argument. Doing so indicates you are stretching for rationale beyond logic that can't be countered. Similar invocations have allowed slavery and genocide to be considered appropriate institutions.

Belief that women are inferior, period, or that they should have less access than men simply due to their gender, is an outdated concept. Men are more athletic and better golfers on average, no doubt. But there have been, there are, and there will continue to be exceptional women who excel to a level that allows them to be competitive with men at the highest levels of any endeavour. They are few and far between, though there is definitely reason to believe there will be more in the future than we see today. Ye Gods, man, get with the last millenium's progress as the new millenium commences! You skipped a grade or two along the way.

On the subject of Vijay, he opened himself to the criticism being levelled at him with his misguided remarks about Annika. Just as members of the LPGA shouldn't complain about Wie, who is bringing more money and attention to the tour than any other player in history, Vijay shouldn't have complained about Annika, as she brought more attention to the Colonial that year than it would ever get otherwise.

Finally, this concept of taking another player's (man's) spot in the field is the most ludicrous of all. SPONSOR EXEMPTIONS! They don't go to a starving would be pro very often. They go to locals or other notables that will drive revenue, or to the Sponsor's own hand picked individuals that do something else to help their business.

As for playing in tournaments via qualification, like the Publinx - if you are good enough to qualify, then you are NOT taking another "deserving" player's spot. They only deserve it if they are good enough to beat you. Wie was good enough to play into that tournament, and at only 15 years of age.

Under Par,
You indeed have a "different view".

The kind of pga that I would like to have the ability to qualify for, is one where the best players in the world compete.
It should not discriminate against black people or Australian people, or women, or chemists, or any other particular group of people.
If you are good enough, you should be able to play. Otherwise the pga is devalued.

Annika , creamer or any other women does not have a chance in blue moon to make a cut in a PGA tournament. They would be lucky to avoid finishing last. They don't have the distance, the backspin and various iron shots. 510 yard par 4 in PGA tournaments would be a par 5 in LPGA. Two or three of long par 4 in PGA would automatically add 2-3 to their scores.

Ron Mon said:
re. Vijay :: In the end, though, all us men-folk look at his muscular six feet four inches of golfing power
***********************

Vijay is 6 foot 2 at most.
More golfer's height exagerations.
Tiger is 6 foot by the way.
Ernie Els is 6 foot 3.
End of height lesson.

Norman, i'm agree with you !!!
Kings regards,

Great post Candace! ERA Today! If I had a bra I would go out and burn it. Little lady you sure do have some moxey. Next thing you girls will be wanting to vote, put on yer shoes and get out of the kitchen, hell my wife mentioned gettin a job outside of the house the other day. All kidding aside; You are absolutely right to be offended when people want to keep women off the men's tour simply because they are women. If someone is good enough to play by god let em play, but here's where it gets sticky. I and a number of other poster's on this blog don't think Michelle Wie is good enough. Nothing in her past history suggests that she is good enough to win or even contend in a men's tournament. Sure she has proved that she can almost make a cut, do you have any idea how far that is from contending in a tournament. Hell, she hasn't even proven she can win a women's tournament yet, how can you be so outraged that she is not welcomed with open arms. If you really want equal rights and fairness between the genders than you must honestly look at Michelle Wie and her track record. Would a male professional with one amateur title to his credit, no cuts made and no victories on a far lesser tour be welcomed to the big leagues of course not. You summed it up yourself when you said Michelle is in tournamnts because she is a marketing draw, not because of her skill.

Norman you are starting to creep me out a little with your obssesion with men's heights.

Candace,

Thank you for demonstrating that you're completely out of touch with reality. I am woman, hear me be stupid.

As I have said, I don't rule out the possibility that Wie might be able to make the cut, owing to the fact that golf is a game where the gap between the sexes is relatively narrow. However, other sports are far different.

Thus, your contention that there are some women who can compete with men at the highest level of any endeavor is preposterous. Where are the women who have done so in running? Show me. In fact, the women's world record for the mile is 4:13 and change -- the BOYS' American High School record is 3:52.

You exhibit great ignorance when you make statements like that.

Norman,

I stood next to the Fijian Telephone Poll in 2003, and he towered over my 5'9" frame by a good half-foot. Unlike high school hoops, where 5'6" kids are listed at 5'9", Vijay works a reverse intimidation, listing himself as shorter than he really is. If he wore Mickelson's spikes, he'd be Manute Bol. Norman, be glad he's only obsessed with height. Candace, you're verbose. Under Par, you are the most entertaining respondent ever. I won't EVER take you on, since you'd kick my colonial arse straight up.

Ron,

You're a good sport.

Yes, Ron, I am too verbose. I don't comment often, but when I do I definitely run on too long. Always been a problem for me.

And it gives offensive pseudo-intellectuals such as Under Par a window to hide their bigotry by parsing my too-long post and picking something to say "See, you don't know what you are talking about!"

Sorry, Mr. Clinton, er, Under Par. I didn't define my terms closely enough. I didn't hail men's advantages over women enough. Meantime, defend your own statements. BJ Wie is a "pinhead professor", we live in a "twisted feminist culture", women competing on the PGA "does violence to the natural order...God has deemed it so."

But I am the one out of touch with reality. To quote you once again "maybe it's more nuanced than you think." I think not. I think there is very little nuance to you or your position. No point in discussing anything with you given such a biased perspective. Sorry you lost your natural home, now that the Taliban has been run out of Afghanistan. It was your kind of society there when they were in power.

Stone,

I agree completely that Wie has not shown she can qualify and play at the PGA level. The exemptions she receives, however, should not be a sore spot for anyone for the reasons I mentioned. She brings dollars to the table for everyone.

Under Par and his patriarchal societal views thinks that even if qualified she shouldn't be allowed to play. Unqualified men get exemptions to PGA tour events via sponsor exemptions all the time. Wie should be eligible for those, and she should be eligible for tour card qualification through her play as well.

Candace,

As G.K. Chesterton once said, "There really are only two kinds of people; those who accept dogma and know it, and those who accept dogma and don't know it."

We all have our biases; the only question is whether we're biased in favor of a lie or the truth. I know my biases, do you know yours?

By the way, you should like Clinton, for he was a true feminist man. And I didn't parse your words, rather, I analyzed a contention you made and refuted it with facts.

Go bake some cookies now.

Wow under...I know you as a very understanding and thoughtful responder/debater, especially when posting to my replies, but that cookies thing? unnecessary...

I've always viewed the PGA Tour as a men's tour. Okay, there is nothing on paper stating that women cannot play, but if it weren't a men's tour, lots of women would be playing on it.

But even the top women players - take the very best, Annika - recognise that they are simply not good enough to compete on the PGA Tour. People here like to harp on about how the PGA Tour is for the world's best players, but what people don't seem to realise is.. Annika Sorenstam is //not// one of the world's best golfers - she's just the best female golfer.

It's the same in every sport I can think of - men outperform women immensely (a very mediocre male pro could beat Annika, in the case of golf). An extremely talented woman sprinter (take the Olympic Women's 100m Champion) wouldn't try and join a men's 100m race, because she'd be left in the starting blocks. In the 10 or so seconds it would take the winner to complete the race, all spectators would see how much more superior men are than women at running. Women can get away with being thrashed in golf because it lasts more than 10 seconds. People often pardon Wie for having 'another good week, with a few costly mistakes,' neglecting the fact that she, without a lot of luck and the wind in the right direction (literally), generally isn't capable of making the cut. Even less actually competing for the title.

David

David makes some very valid points. But in the case of Michelle Wie, she is trying to compete against the best golfers in the world at age 16. Cetainly no teenager of any gender has done what she is doing. That she is female only adds to the interest.

The question is, how much better will she become? And if she does get much better, THEN how will she stack up to the men? We could be watching the female golfing equivalent of Mozart. Or Salieri. Only time will tell.

Patrick,

Unnecessary? Yes, but certainly fun and rhetorically effective. However, not too many things are necessary.

Posting to this golf board certainly isn't necessary -- neither is playing golf, for that matter. Moreover, what is not only unnecessary but also impolite and destructive is to exercise sloppy analyses and make patently untrue comments during debates. As someone once said in an article, "The worst form of impoliteness is insincerity in discourse." First and foremost we owe each other not niceties, but truthfulness.

Patrick, you may not understand this; in fact, you may not even believe me. But modern women like the one in question are used to hen-pecking men, and since most men have been trained to be saps they get away with it. It does NOT work with me.

Feminism has poisoned the modern woman to a point where she perpetually feels compelled to combat a "patriarchy" that she imagines exists. It exists in Arab countries, but that's about it.

Lastly, I have only great women in my life, but this is because I can smell a feminist shrew a mile away and wouldn't give one the right time of day.

Under Par, Just when things started to get good, I got the news that a client of our firm in the beautiful of Tampa is urgently in need of our services, and that I am the chosen one to leave at 4:25 this afternoon. I'll be returning Monday evening. I received a new Dell laptop for Christmas which I'll take along for a test run. First Alan, then June, now the Candy Girl. Man, what a crew! I hope that this doesn't sound like treason, but I am now hoping that Michelle does make the cut at the Sony, and for two basic reasons. The Wie fan(atic)s are thoroughly convinced the she is the greatest discovery since the invention of the wheel. She is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Norman in particular is so impressed with her prowess that he heaos praise upon her, using such glowing adjectives as "thrilling", "outstanding", "great", etc. All this without her ever making a cut in several attempts in men's events, or ever winning a US women's amateur, let alone a LPGA event. Just think of the hyperbole that will spew from the Wie camp if and when she does make a cut. Florence Nightingale, Mother Theresa, and Madame Curie will be stricken from the Wie history books. They'll be demanding a twice-lifesize statue of Michelle at the Golf Hall of Fame in St. Augustine. The Wie bloggers on this board will go absolutely bonkers. On the other hand, if she doesn't make the cut, Norm and the others will just have to return to page one of the excuse book. No fun in that. The other reason is that, in a momentary lapse of good judgment, I put some credence in our resident tout, Asia--Guy, and placed a $50 bet on Michelle to make the cut. I did this questionable thing through an online wagering site based in Costa Rica. I did get what I consider an overlay at 5 to 2 as opposed to 2 to 1 at other sites. For June, Alan, and other residents of Brixton, 5 to 2 extrapolates to 2.5 to 1.

Alex,

I spent a lot of time in Tampa last winter. Now, going soft on Wie . . .

>> Cetainly no teenager of any gender has done what she is doing.

Well, Tiger was as good at 16, but he missed all the cuts as well.

Whether or not Wie can make the cut or win the whole thing is academic mumbo-jumbo. I have no qualms with Wie entering an invitational - she brings in crowds, which is good for golf. But in events that are normally populated by people (note that I didn't say "men") who have earned an spot via Q school or a minor tournament, it is asinine to bump those people to shoehorn in Wie, who has never won any qualifer tourney associated with the PGA.

I'm all for fielding the best golfers of any color, creed or sex, but let's base that field on a set of qualifications that are the same for everyone, and not because it's a novelty to watch Wie nearly make the cut - again. If Wie wants to play with the big boys, why can't she play her way onto the tour like the men - instead of assuming she should get to come just because she happens to be one of the better female golfers?

Sooner Mike,Your post makes nothing but good sense, but therein lies the rub. Although your words may not seem incendiary to a normal person, the Wie fan(atic)s on this board will view you and your post with scorn that is usually reserved for child molesters.

Not at all, Alex. Wie is given sponsor exemptions, and those can be given to anyone. I agree completely with Sooner Mike, as do most of the people you label Wie Fanatics. If she can qualify, she should play on the PGA tour full time. She has not shown the ability to qualify or even compete week in and week out against the men. If she is not good enough to qualify for a tour card, then she won't and shouldn't play on the PGA tour full time. The argument, such as it is, revolves around Under Par and others who claim it's inappropriate for women to play on the PGA tour, period.

Wie gets sponsor exemptions because she drives revenue. But those exemptions give us all a chance to see if her game, still at a formative stage at age 16 obviously, is progressing towards a sufficient level to compete for a tour card. So far, the answer has clearly been that it has not. But Wie's game is not static - no golfer's game is static. Whether she can compete now, or next year, or never, it's interesting to watch and see.

Unless you are Under Par, in which case nature is being violated by Wie's presence on a men's golf course. I'll take my shoes off and go back to the kitchen and my cookies now.

Michelle reckons she's going to play full-time on both the PGA and LPGA Tours when she's older. (You kind of have to snigger at that.) Well, if she, in five years time, is still missing PGA Tour cuts everytime but insists year after year on turning up to PGA Tour events, I'm gonna throw a paddy fit.

Candy,

You say I don't think women should be on a golf course. I don't think they should even be on a golf board.

Under par, the new Dell 6000 inspiron seems to be working fine. As I said on another thread, I never thought I could be so happy while losing a Grant. Michelle Wie, from the penthouse to the outhouse in the opening round. But she's not out of it completely. It's still theoretically possibly for Mchelle to make the cut. All that she has to do tomorrow is break the course record and have everyone else shoot over par. Norman,70-68,really? It is to laugh!

Under Par,As I prepare to disembark, Miss wie is at nine over par and dead last in the field with a few players yet to start.I think I'll hit the first gin mill I can find and celebrate. Remember that Helen Reddy masterpiece of the 70's:"I am woman, hear me roar.?" Let's paraphrae that:"I am male, hear me crow."

Hey come on guys. I'm feeling left out. Certainly I deserve as much ridicule for my prediction as Norman. I just hope all of this is in good fun and nobody is actually happy that Michelle Wie struggled today. Please let us know if it is in good fun or not--I hope you will not consider us paranoid if sometimes we wonder whether it is not. Best wishes to Wie for tomorrow.

He! He! He! +9 +9 +9

Thank Goodness I didn't bet any money on Wie to make the cut. She would be hard pressed to make the score up tomorrow. She really should work on her putting.

Once again, maybe Under Par's wise words are appropriate:

Golf is a sport where your scores vary greatly from say to day. This is attributable to two things: firstly, the great number of variables on a glf course and, secondly and more significantly, the fact that even a couple of rounds of golf do NOT constitute a scientific sample, making what's known as "sample variance" a great factor.

*****************************

It's nice to have somebody who can bring such thought provoking comments to a discussion.

Annika win the Colonial? Michelle make the cut? Stop it, you're killin' me!

The women who sit around thinking men are deathly afraid of losing to women really must have inferiority complexes. If a woman can beat me at something, anything, more power to her. I wouldn't feel any less of myself because she was a woman. A competitor is a competitor, regardless of their sex.

But the point remains, no woman will ever be able to compete with the top men in the world in ANY physical sport. Not baseball, football, basketball, soccer, tennis, GOLF, or anything where strength and endurance are critical. It's not a knock on women, it's simple biology. The best of the best men in the world at these physical sports are so far up in the stratosphere that even an amazing female talent, one who is better than 99% of the males in the world, won't be able to truly compete with that top 1%. Not only that, they won't even come close. Men's Olympic Baseball Team against Women's Olympic Softball Team? Roger Federer against Venus Williams? Top World Cup Soccer Team against the U.S. Women's Soccer Team? Spurs against the Comets? The U.S Women's Olympic Hockey team, arguably a close second best women's team in the world, couldn't beat some random US high school boys team last week.

And why are these considered chauvinistic statements? It may surprise you seriously insecure women to know that comments like I just made are not made out of an insecurity or a fear that a woman will beat me. It's simple physical biology.

I would love to see Wie go to Q School and try to make the PGA Tour. I'd pull for her a lot more than I do now. But I'd still be realistic about her chances. One day she will sneak by and make a cut in lesser tournament in perfect conditions. Yeah!

Arnie said:
But the point remains, no woman will ever be able to compete with the top men in the world in ANY physical sport. Not baseball, football, basketball, soccer, tennis, GOLF, or anything where strength and endurance are critical.
*********************************

Arnie your statement would be completely correct if you just removed the word GOLF.
For golf, strength helps. Endurance is not an issue. Strength helps but it is not critical. In any case, even though Wie has not done well, the parts of her game that have let her down have absolutely nothing to do with strength.

Standing over her 3 foot putts, she didn't need extra strength to bash that ball into the hole.

Anyway, glad to give you the lesson.

Alex,

Travel safely, my e-friend. I see that the Wiemen are willing to show their pusses on the board. Well, as I said on the other board, I suppose they're used to being egregiously wrong.

I made a bet with someone on the AOL boards that Wie would miss the cut. It was only for $25 -- I like the chap and didn't want to see him get hurt too badly.

ARNIE

You have basically given the explanation for why many people are so excited about Michelle Wie. What she is trying to do seems so unprecidented, and today's round notwithstanding, she seems like she very well may be successful.

Michelle Wie is the only one at the moment, who is trying it out against the men, but Paula Creamer is just taking a different approach.

Paula would rather concentrate on being the best woman first before she takes on and beats the men of the pga. Paula Creamer, is able to get the job done.

Ronnie,

You've got to start taking those little pills the nice people in the white outfits give you. You'll never ascend to normalcy if you keep on just pretending to swallow.

By the way, there is another woman who has been trying to compete with the men. Her name is Elizabeth Beisegal -- I think she's about 80th on the money list on the LPGA Tour.

The WIe Warriors are more than happy to welcome comments by Ronnie about Paual Creamer at a time like this.

Norman:

**Standing over her 3 foot putts, she didn't need extra strength to bash that ball into the hole.**
True.. but maybe she needed that strength and endurance to push that drive out the extra 20yds or balst that approach out of the rough onto the green. That last 2 footer isn't the issue, it's all the other yards of turf from tee to green.
While Under Par and Alex might disturb some reader's here with their posts, you can't argue facts. Fact is Wie is a money making side show, albeit a very talented female golfer... but still a sideshow on the PGA, where she just doesn't have all the tools to play to the same level as the world's best.

Wie is working on her strength, but right now she has trouble with deep rough and needs to get the ball in the fairway more than the men do. Windy conditions that make it so much easier to miss the fairway will probably hurt her more than the men. But even now she might be able to do well against the men in good weather,

Jim COULTHARD:

Did you see her swing guru on the golf channel? The esteemed Mr. Leadbetter went on about how she had the all shots that none of the other women have.. she can work the ball left or right, spin it, control her shots etc. Yet here she is on her HOME course, knows the greens, all the trouble spots, what angle of approach to take, heck she probably has played this course from the tips plenty. All this and she shoots 9 over?
What she lacks is not only distance and control off the tee, but distance and control with all her clubs.
She is probably 2 or 3 clubs behind most men in the field. She is trying to hit to a green with a 5 iron, while the pros she is playing alongside are hiting an 8 or 9.
It's been said here oodles of times, by people more eloquent than myself, she just doesn't have the game at the same level as the men do.
She has proven that she can compete well within the confines of the LPGA, but she doesn't have the game to play against the PGA tour players.
Unfortunately for people like Candace, she confuses the idea that anyone who states that, must be sexist. Herbie the Love Bug isn't real..... a nicely painted and well tuned VW Beatle will not be able to compete effectively against anything running the NASCAR circuit.
Ok, that's not to say that females equate to VW bugs, but the analogy is accurate. Then again VW's do have nice headlights, a generously curved rearend and things to hang onto when the ride gets bumpy... but I digress. :-)
Ms. Wie is an extremely talented young lady, but at this point her game isn't up to par agaist the elite male golfers and she is being used as a money-making, publicity vehicle which doesn't end up enhancing the sport.

I don't know, Cranky, is she really not enhancing the sport? How many years have you, or just about any of us, cared who won the Sony Open? That's why she gets the sponsor exemptions.

As for calling anyone stating that Michelle lacks enough game a sexist - I guess I am sexist! I said in one of my replies that she clearly does not have the game to be a regular on the PGA tour. Maybe she will one day, but she doesn't have it now. And that was before today's +9 performance. The sexism comes from the likes of Under Par saying that women shouldn't be allowed to compete with men simply because they are female. I do not support a different level of qualification for women to be given a PGA tour card - I support women being allowed to earn a card the same way men do. No woman has shown the ability to do that yet, but the opportunity should be there for them to try. Fortunately, it is available, as Under Par does not run the PGA or the USGA.

Anyway, clearly this will not be the year Wie makes the cut. Maybe she never will, who knows. Still compelling golf, which is why we are talking about her and not Vijay or Sabbatini, even though she is in dead last place.

Candace;
Is her repeated attempts to qualify enhancing the SPORT??? I think not. It might be enhancing her pocketbook, her sponsors coffer's, the PGA's revenues, but that is entirely a different thing than enhancing the SPORT..... unless golf is all about generating revenue? If thats the criteria to enhance a sport let's get all the male golfers scantily clad girls for caddies and hire chippendales to caddie for the gals on the LPGA.
That kind of thinking, in my eyes, is more damaging than anything you might deem as sexist. So as long as she generates interest and revenue, she should be used to satisfy that potential? That's akin to running a sideshow... let's extract all we can, even if the interest we generate lies more in one of freakish curiosity.
Why not channel all that potential into beating her peers... Annika, Paula, Lorena et al (you can even include Morgan if you want)and once she has matured, give a PGA event a shot? She's tried enough now.
WKW penned a similar blog tonite, perhaps this comment falls more into that vein, but stop with this PGA entry stuff already. She's 16 and wonderfully talented, but let her exhibit,strengthen and hone that talent in a more appropriate venue.
But hey... you say tomato... I say quel tomat!

Cranky--

Michelle Wie is only allowed 8 LPGA events a year since she is not an LPGA tour member, and she has played the 8 tournaments she is allowed.

So she is focusing her talents on beating women, and playing alongside women.

However, if she wants to challenge herself and play alongside men from time to time - more power to her, its a free country and it can only help her game in the long run.

Cheryl:

Ok.. she was allowed entry into only 8 LPGA events as an amateur. How many amateur events did she compete in during 2005?

If she is "focusing her talents on beating women" - errrr I hope you didn't mean to imply she's a woman beater!- I applaud that, in fact you and I agree wholeheartedly.

She's tried 3 times at the Sony now, the John Deere, the PR trip to Japan for the Casio Open and others have chronicled all her exploits here, ad infinitum. Sorry.. she just doesn't have the parts. So while you contend this is to "challenge herself and play alongside men from time to time", I and many others see it as a slick marketing ploy put into action time after time. Perhaps that sponsor's exemption could have been used to invite Tori Taniguchi, the 2005 Casio winner or Kim Jong Duck, who came in second. They and about 70 other golfers finished well ahead of Ms. Wie, but it all comes down to the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
She's a prodigy and a talent, that's NOT my contention, but they are using her most strictly to make $$$$$, plain and simple.
So while you and I agree "it's a free country".... that doesn't diminish the opinion that she is being used, and not neccesarily to the best advantage for her skill and the betterment of golf. I don't agree that "it can only help her game in the long run." Didn't know you had cornerd the market on crsytal balls, oh sooth Cheryl, or I would have asked you what Lotto numbers to pick today.

0cranky1 said:
Norman:
**Standing over her 3 foot putts, she didn't need extra strength to bash that ball into the hole.**
True.. but maybe she needed that strength and endurance to push that drive out the extra 20yds or balst that approach out of the rough onto the green. That last 2 footer isn't the issue, it's all the other yards of turf from tee to green.
***********************************

Your chances of beating me in terms of stats are very small.
There were 144 players in the field.

Her driving accuracy was 14th best in the field. That means she was mostly playing from the fairway, not the deep rough you discussed.

On the other hand, she took 32 putts. Her putting was the 106th best in the field. That is where most of her problem lied.

Also around the greens her touch wasn't great on the short game, which is due to feel as opposed to strength.

Excluding par 3s, on 14 holes Wie made 8 fairways and missed the fairway 6 times. Most players did worse--but missed fairways probably cost Wie a lot more. She made 2 out of 6 sand saves so being in the sand a lot cost her--I do not know how many were related to missed fairways.

Jim, I know one of her shots out of sand went into sand at the other side of the green. Bunker to bunker. It didn't look pretty.

Jim, I was keeping track of Wie on Tourcast, which gives you an overhead view of the course through each shot.

To be honest, on many holes, she outdrove her oppponents and was in the centre of the fairway, with her two playing partners behind her in rough, yet she still seemed to finish the hole worse than them.
Also, for some holes, she hit the rough, and was about 30-40 yards behind her partners, and then she would actually hit a much better 2nd shot into the green than either of them, from their perfect fairway position, and them being much closer to the hole, with much better lie, and able to use a shorter club.

Therefore, to say that that it was the rough that affected her bad score in the first round is inaccurate in my opinion.

I found that she hit several innacurate shots from great fairway positions, that is what really cost her, that and her putting, and don't forget her short game.

Basically everything, except for her play from the rough. LOL.

That kind of makes the point doesn't it, Jim? You claim she bested the field in missed fairways - "Most players did worse--but missed fairways probably cost Wie a lot more.", yet her score ballooned. That tends to support what I said earlier.
NORMAN claims it was all those nasty putts she made or missed as the case my be, and yes her average was 2 per GIR. He also says "Your chances of beating me in terms of stats are very small.", so I ask him if she possessed all this excellent shot making skill as claimed by David Leadb, and you promote from the stats you quote, why the +9? Look at her other stat Normie-boy... she was 45' from the pin on average. Of course she's gonna 2 putt her way around the course, she was never able to stick it on and close, for a chance at birdie like she did on #3 where she left herself an easy 3 footer. You can't take one stat and try to base your whole argument on it. She is not the best putter, so for her to succeed she has to not only putt well, but be in position on the green to get that putt to drop. Pretty hard for a so-so putter who is often coming into the green with a longer club in her hands and can't get the ball to stay. That's one reason why I feel she competes very well against the ladies... the shortened course gives her the chance to get more approaches to stay in a makeable range... a neccessity for a so-so putter to score well. Yeah she had sand trouble too, but part of that could be because she was unable to control her longer irons coming into greens. She ranked in the bottom tier of the field for Putts per round, putts per GIR, Driving distance and Greens in Reg. Only 2 putting stats there, but boy if you can't drive far enough to have a good chance to hold a green with your approach shot, or be able to get there in regulation, it stands to reason you might be 45 ' from the pins and 2 putting everything.
It's ok though Normie-boy... she does do well when playing the gals what with the shorter courses, shorter rough, more generous fairways and easier pin placements. Hopefully she takes her game there and we get to see how well she can do on a level playing filed... not one stacked against her.

Norman:
My earlier post said "What she lacks is not only distance and control off the tee, but distance and control with all her clubs", so it is more than the one dimensional strength issue. See the word CONTROL and you'll see why as you said "she outdrove her oppponents and was in the centre of the fairway, with her two playing partners behind her in rough, yet she still seemed to finish the hole worse than them."
So from a prefferable lie she couldn't stick it beside the pins, yet those guys she was playing with ended up with fewer putts and were closer to the pin on average, all from a poorer playing position. Yer logic is gettin kinda fuzzy there.... hmmmmm

Norman seems to be positing the thesis that it's advantageous to play from the rough. Well, then things bode well for my golf game.

0cranky1,
It is a pity that you weren't able to understand, but I will try to explain in simpler terms.

During Michelle's round she:
- from advantageous positions in fairways, where she was able to hit with a shorter club, she hit bad shots and missed greens.
- from the rough, and with much further distance, playing from a more difficult lie, with more club needed, she played alot of good shots to about 14-20 feet from the hole.

What is the point?
- The point is. You were saying that she was severely disadvantaged from the rough and because she had longer approach shots. She was not. She was able physically for those shots.

So why did she play poorly when given better chances from the fairway and with shorter clubs?
- Because she was playing poorly. She had bad form, the reasons why that would happen are plenty. The point though is, that she had the physical ability to do well, whether in the rough, and even when her driving was shorter.

- The fact is though, that she did not perform well on the day. The other fact is that, that was not caused by a lack of physical strength. It was caused by poor play, plain and simple, easy to understand. Hopefully you get it.

Boy oh boy Normie... Never did I say "severely disadvantaged", but that seems to be the way you fashion your arguments. OK... so now the wunderkind does not have the skill to compete since you clearly said "Because she was playing poorly. She had bad form etc".
Wow bad form, can't putt, rates in the bottom of the field of 144 players in Driving Distance (122), GIR (T107), Putts /Rnd(T125), Putts /GIR(T108).
My comments have clearly stated that her strength and control both have to improve to compete effectively. Whether that shot is from the rough, bunker or fairway, she is at a disadvantage if she can't place the ball in an effective spot on the green.
Using the shot from the rough, or her approach shots played with a longer club as an example of the disadvantage she faces, is just that... an example to support some of the ideas posted by myself and others here.
I believe her "bad form" as you called it is a wonderful example of her "lack of control" as I have mentioned... it's just that I have further clarified and justified my positions with examples, not just rhetoric.
Look back at how she faired at say the Evian Masters... as I recall her putting stats were tremendously better.... 12 birdies in the last 2 rounds and many of them short putts. Could that have anything to do with her improved GIR and proximity to the pin? It wasn't because she was draining these monster 45 footers. Good putting stats are tremendously influenced by great control on approach shots, GIR etc.
The permutations are fairly complex, so you might have a hard time fathoming some of the concepts there Norman, but the strength and control issues will always be a factor when she competes against the best male golfers on the planet, let alone a weaker field in say .. Japan.
Oh no.. that wasn't putting, or shot making, or control or strength, or mental endurance, it was the wind, the speed of the greens, the wait coming up to play the last few holes. Sounds somewhat familiar?

Norman, you're a goof. I agree that throwing golf in my list is a stretch, but that's not because strength isn't important, it's because I was talking about sports, and let's face it, golf is not a sport. It's a game. A great game.

Now back to your ignorant post. Strength isn't required to win on the PGA tour? So the fact that all the top players are bombers these days and distance beats accuracy, doesn't matter? And hitting out of heavy rough or sand doesn't take strength and coordination? Norm, do you actually play golf?

And it's not just raw strength, it's fine coordination coupled with that strength, and, yes Norm, it's also endurance. Not cycling endurance, but endurance just the same.

This is all a ridiculous discussion. Michelle Wie will never compete in any meaningful men's tournament. With all the amazingly talented young women coming up the ranks to the LPGA, I wonder if she'll even win a lot over there.

What I am sure she'll be is very, very wealthy. Because she and her Dad have played the money angle very deftly.

0cranky1,
The example I listed were to show that she did perform great shots when strength was needed.

When I stated, the comment about her bad form, I meant just that.

Do you know that Retief Goosen hit a round of 81 in last years US Open.

What do you think we would find if we analysed the stats from that round?
We would find that most of hit stats were pretty poor.

Going by your logic, we would then say, oh oops, Retief Goosen isn't good enough for the pga.

Do you know just how stupid your argument sounds.
You take the worst round that someone has played in a pga event, and then start spouting off about how this means they aren't good enough.

How about we took her round of 68 at a previous Sony, or how about we took her rounds of 71 and 70 at the John Deere and analysed those stats.

Obviously those stats would look much better, and you could come to the conclusion, oh she does belong.

Basing stuff on one round of golf shows complete ignorance.

Hi Candace, I sure missed you. A man and wife were playing in their club's annual "Guys and Dolls" tournament. The man was not happy about having to play, but his wife had insisted. On the 12th tee, his patience had reached its limit. While his wife wasted time on the ladies tee, he decided to go ahead and hit his drive from the mens. Unfortunately, he misjudged his shot and his ball hit his wife in the back of the head, killing her instantly. At the hospital the doctor came to talk to the husband. "Mr. Davies, we found a golf ball lodged 3 inches into your wife's brain, which was the the cause of death. But, we have found something else that really puzzles us." "What is it?" asked Mr. Davies. "Well," said the doctor, "we also found a golf ball lodged 6 inches into her anal cavity." The husband dismissed the doctor with a wave of his hand "Oh, that was just my Mulligan!"

Norman, tsk,tsk,tsk
****Going by your logic, we would then say, oh oops, Retief Goosen isn't good enough for the pga.

Do you know just how stupid your argument sounds.
You take the worst round that someone has played in a pga event, and then start spouting off about how this means they aren't good enough.***
Obviously, you can't read Normie, can someone please call in some remedial help for this poor soul. I NEVER based my points solely on this one round you twit, so you can eat your own words "Do you know just how stupid your argument sounds"
I have cited examples of how her limitations affect her play and ability to score against the men both generally, based on all those attempts she has made QUOTE-She's tried 3 times at the Sony now, the John Deere, the PR trip to Japan for the Casio Open and others have chronicled all her exploits here, ad infinitum. Sorry.. she just doesn't have the parts-END QUOTE and where her strengths would apply ie: Evain Open, yesterdays hole#3.

NEVER once did I say because she failed in this one instance she shouldn't be allowed to compete, but what I ACTUALLY have said is that after all her repeated attempts, it's obvious she isn't ready to take this step, but I highly doubt she will ever be. Your Retief Goosen arguement is pure crapola. I never postulated anything to that effect.
QUOTE- Fact is Wie is a money making side show, albeit a very talented female golfer... but still a sideshow on the PGA, where she just doesn't have all the tools to play to the same level as the world's best.- END QUOTE.
I think that sample variance line you tossed out every other post must have seeped in and caused you to suffer cerebral variance.
You aren't accurate in how you ascribe arguements, positions or facts versus anyone here who holds a different opinion tahn yourself. That pretty sad when honest discourse is eschewed in favour of your rabid indulgence in your Wie World. Under Par had it right.. your a wiemen to the core.

So yesterday she stunk up the course with a terrible odor. Only one player had a higher score. Her driving average was a pathetic 278 yards.

Today her driving average was 300.0, only 11 players had a lower score and she looked like one of the better players on the course...

Maybe she is who she is and will do what she wants to and to heck with what any of us say :-)

"Maybe she is who she is and will do what she wants to and to heck with what any of us say :-)"

Yes, John, I'm sure that it was willful when she shot that 79, and that she was just being herself.

By the way, I watched the round and it's my perception that the winds died down considerably as the afternoon wore on. I could be wrong, but it did seem that way.

Ah, who is looking for excuses now, Under Par? I made no wind-excuses when she droppped a 79. She simply stunk up the joint. But when she hits a 68, you come up with "Well, looks like the wind dropped." I know you hate to see it, but a 68 was a damn fine score on day two, in the morning or the afternoon.

So she shoots a 68, nearly a top ten round for the day, right after posting a 79, one of the very worst rounds of the previous day. Does this mean she can't compete at the PGA level? Or that she can?

I think it says just what it seems to - she has the ability to score well and shoot low on a men's tournament course, but she doesn't have the game (especially the consistency) to do it for a full tournament yet. I say yet - perhaps she never will, but given that she is 16 years old, I would think there is a fair chance her best golfing days are ahead of her. In which case, it's likely that she will be more than a sideshow eventually Cranky.

But that is conjecture. For now, she did herself proud on day two - both by shooting a great score and because she bounced back from disaster yesterday instead of folding her tent. Unfortunately, she still has to sound the rallying cry of the also-ran: "Wait until next year!"

One thing her 68 certainly did do - prove Baldwin wrong (again). That score will keep the interest in Wie quite strong, both for the rest of this year and right up to next year's Sony Open, when she tries again.

Interest will remain because they'll do anything to hype "No-wins Wie."

At least she was color co-ordinated....BLACK! Perfect for the occasion. Maybe she'll go away, now. You know she should have learned...3rd times a CHARM. Looks like the CHARM of loosing will stay with her!

0cranky1
Fact is Wie is a money making side show, albeit a very talented female golfer... but still a sideshow on the PGA, where she just doesn't have all the tools to play to the same level as the world's best.- END
************************

If she can shoot the 12th best score of the day, that shows that she has the tools. She played a bad round. She played a great round.
By her 2nd round she showed that she has the tools to succeed, all that she needs to make a cut comfortably is to use those tools on a consistant basis.