If your tire picks up a puncture today, and the culprit is a loose screw, please do Jennifer Mario the favor of returning it. Our beloved redhead has gone over the edge, with a blog on the odds of Wie winning a men’s major, established by a British bookmaking service at 2-1.
The way it is, Michelle Wie will never qualify for a men’s major. The Hawaiian Open is her major. 2-1 is set to sucker people in who might not otherwise bet. Who can resist such odds? What’s that? Low odds make people thinkg “they know something I don’t, so I should bet.” Well, your ten bucks in their pocket is just as good at 2-1 as it is at 100-1. Keep your change, don’t make the bet. Buy a sleeve of ProVs instead.
Wie is great, and has the potential to be the best of all time on the LPGA circuit. She might out-babe the Babe, but only if she continues to develop fan-friendly chatter and charm. Give her some Lee Trevino and Great Gundy, as well as some Mickey and some Tiger, and she will be well on the road to a memorable LPGA career.
| « Bowditch update & other stuff you didn't know mattered | Bowditch: THE Story of the Bob Hope Classic » |
Comment feed for this post
Jason Scott Deegan:
The Accidental Golfer:
Katharine Dyson:
Kiel Christianson:
This is not the first time she has made a blog, and someone else nicked the idea to continue there own blog.
Last cultprit: Mark Nessmith, and his follow up story got 288 comments.
How many will this one get?
Ron Mon, I think she will qualify for a mens major, but not yet. She'll probably try for 2 this season. The US and British Opens.
Although it's a long shot for her to actually qualify this time, the experience should do her good.
Bloggers ALWAYS poach from each other. I'm shocked that you haven't picked up on others besides me and Balls-Out.
I don't think that ANYTHING another female player does, influences Wie's sphere in the least. Her drummer's beat is her own.
But thanks for the "beloved" bit. I think I might be blushing.
I'll take both bets, at $20 apiece. But how do I know you'll be good for the $960 if you lose the 48-1 bet? I know you're not planning to lose but I once had the misfortune to have had someone on the Net renege on a $100 bet. Incidentally, the guy who reneged was a critic of Michelle Wie. I just hope it's not the case that every critic of Wie would never really put his money where his mouth is. :)
While Baldwin is running down Duval in a parking lot, Michelle shows up to a press conference and it is standing room only with press from all over the world. It doesn’t matter that she may have shot a 79 and blown any chance of making a cut, she still shows up and fights back her emotions while responding to questions. That is what a Professional Athlete does; they do not run away from the public that supports their lifestyle.
Now who has the guts to be a Professional Athlete?
Don’t knock your writers meal ticket Ron, just go with the Wie flow.
Wie in LPGA 2005, Age 15 (Tournament Site Date Scores Finish Money)
Weetabix Women's British Open Southport, England July 28-31 75-67-67-69—278 (-11) T3 $142,000*
Evian Masters France July 20-23 75-70-68-68—281 (-7) T2 $212,283
U.S. Women's Open Colorado June 23-26 69-73-72-82—296 (+12) 23rd $30,000*
LPGA Championship Havre de Grace, Md. June 9-12 69-71-71-69—280 (-8) 2nd $164,385
Kraft Nabisco Championship Rancho Mirage, Calif. March 24-27 70-74-73-71—288 (E) T14 $27,571
Safeway International Superstition Mountain, Ariz. March 17-20 73-67-73-71—284 (-4) T12 $23,964
SBS Open Turtle Bay Resort Feb. 24-26 70-70-70—210 (-6) T2 $79,977
Totals (money turned down) $680,180. Good enough for 16th place on the ADT official money list.
2004, Age 14
Samsung World Championship Palm Desert, Calif. Oct. 14-17 74-72-67-70—283 (-5) T13 $15,000*
Wendy's Championship for Children Dublin, Ohio Aug. 19-22 73-69-71-69—282 (-6) T6 $29,975
Evian Masters Evian-les-Bains, France July 21-25 71-71-76-69—287 (-1) T33 $17,500 U.S. Women's Open South Hadley, Mass. July 1-4 71-70-71-73—285 (+1) T13 $60,000 Michelob Ultra Open Kingsmill, Va. May 6-9 72-67-73-72—284 (E) T12 $35,090
Kraft Nabisco Championship Rancho Mirage, Calif. March 25-28 69-72-69-71—281 (-7) 4th $82,000
Safeway International Superstition Mountain, Ariz. March 18-21 72-67-70-77—286 (-2) T19 $14,040
Totals (money turned down) $253,605. Good enough for 47th place on the ADT official money list.
2003, Age 13
Sports Today CJ Nine Bridges Classic Jeju Island, Korea Oct. 31- Nov. 2 85-78-70—233 (+17) 69th n/a
Safeway Classic Portland, Ore. Sept. 26-28 69-72-73—214 (-2) T28 $10,327
Jamie Farr Kroger Classic Sylvania, Ohio Aug. 14-17 73-72—145 (+3) Missed Cut
U.S. Women's Open North Plains, Ore. July 3-6 73-73-76-76—298 (+14) T39 n/a ShopRite LPGA Classic Galloway Township, N.J. June 27-29 71-72-72—215 (+2) T52 $3,948
Chick-fil-A Charity Championship Stockbridge, Ga. Apr. 25-27 72-70-71—213 (-3) T33 $7,825
Kraft Nabisco Championship Rancho Mirage, Calif. March 27-30 72-74-66-72—288 (E) T9 $35,600
Totals (money turned down) $57,700** Good enough for 108th place on the ADT official money list.
As a thirteen year old she still qualified for an "Exempt" LPGA Tour Card.
No wonder she likes teeing it up with the guys. She needs the competition.
Looking at the improvement each year she jumped 61 positions up the money list from 2003 to 2004 and 31 positions 2004 to 2005.
Just try to imagine where she would have placed if she played a full season of 25 events each of these years.
Look out Annika, Michelle is right on your heels.
I can't wait to see what she does in 2006.
Give me a break. She only played in 20 events over a three year period out of 75 events in the same period for a regular LPGA tour member.
These girls really suck (not rock).
You saw through the smoky curtain of deceipt that I have woven around myself. You are correct. Without Wie, Woe is Me.
In the world of racing, DNQ, DNF and FIN are literally miles appart. In racing as in golf, DNQ-DQ-DNF-CUT implies that it is impossible to finish the race or the tournament.
What is extraordinary is the attention she gets just for trying. I'd put more attention on the matter if she was actually doing.
ML
For Ron my Mon: You are the man. I respect your work.
For jackson: Michelle played in seven regular LPGA events in 2005 and ended up with $680,180 in earnings on the tour. Paula Creamer played in twenty-five LPGA events in 2005 including the end of year money padding events and ended up with $1,531,780 in earnings on the tour.
Now jackson dig out your calculator and figure out the productivity of each player for events played. Paula did have two wins, but her per event earnings were lower than Michelle who had no wins. In five of the eight events they played in the same field Michelle led Paula in the field.
Did you happen to notice the events Michelle entered were the toughest events on the LPGA tour when you take away the SBS in Hawaii?
I think we can safely say she is hot on Annika's heels.
For John ZZZZZZZZZ: I would be the first one to agree that Michelle should forget about playing with the men. Not for your inane arguments that she doesn't have the strength to play in the PGA (A 68 on a PGA setup course at 13 and 15 years of age shows me that dog won’t hunt.), but for the simple fact she could clean up in the LPGA if she applied her focus there. Unfortunately the LPGA will only allow her six exemptions (not including qualifying for the majors) this year and she has no other option but to play in men’s events for experience. The one positive from playing with the men is she gains an A_G boatload of experience when she plays with the best players. If you have experience with coaching John you know playing with somebody that is better than you, brings your game to a new level. You of all people could see this at the Sony when she came back from the worst round of her life, put her emotions in check and carded a 68 the next day, that is a “World Class” athlete in the making.
This gal qualified for a LPGA card at thirteen and every year since. She would already be in the top 135 on the lifetime LPGA career money list as a fifteen year old. The only one on the tour who is consistently a challenge for Michelle to surpass is Annika and she doesn’t play every round with her.
For Tom: I tried that argument before and the Jackboots are “stuck on stupid” when it comes to Michelle. How many finished behind her at the John Deere or last years Sony Open Tom? A whole bunch of PGA Professional golfer did.
For Martin Levac: I haven’t read your postings before so I will assume you are a new Michelle Wie Jackboot marching in step with the rest of them. Get a clue man, when you finish on the field of play ahead of someone you beat that individual not the whole field.
JOhn Huston bogied the final hole at the Sony and missed the cut by a single stroke. He was very disappointed, but by A-G's convoluted logic he should have rejoiced since he scored better for two rounds than about 60 golfers. Huston got the same word after his name: CUT.
*************************
John Huston has 7 pga tour victories. Why would he be glad to miss the cut by one stroke. Why would he be glad if he finished in 25th position? The guy is 44 years of age. Comparing him to Michelle is a little strange to say the least. Of course someone who has achieved 7 victories isn't going to be happy with missing the cut, no matter by how many shots.
If John Huston was back at a time when he was 16 years old and missed the cut by 1 shot, he probably would have been very very proud.
no less an authority on golf than Ian Baker-Finch, a former Open champion and now a TV golf announcer has said that Michelle Wie should give up on attempts at the PGA tour.
*******************************
Tiger Woods said the opposite. Quoting one person doesn't really prove alot does it.
Remember Tom, MW didn't FINISH ahead of anybody since she did not FINISH the tournament. When a player doesn't make the cut he doesn't get to FINISH the tournament. She shouldn't quit playing tour events, just not men's events.
*******************************
If Tiger took that attitude after his first 4 failed pga attempts, things would be very different.
In fact if Tiger took that view after his first 7 failed pga attempts, then things would be very different.
She should keep playing mens events as long as she keeps aquiting herself well.
JOhn Huston bogied the final hole at the Sony and missed the cut by a single stroke.
*****************************
Wow.
From the way people comment on these blogs, you would have thought that Michelle was the only one to have ever had a bad finish to a round to miss a cut narrowly.
Many thanks for this find John Zelda, showing that even experienced guys with 7 tour victories, can bogey the last hole to miss by 1.
You are becoming a Wie Warrier John Z. Well done.
I disagree with your assertion about someone with 7 PGA victories being happy about missing the cut by one stroke. Happy is too strong a word--but I suspect there was a point where David Duval might have taken encouragement from coming close to making a cut. He must have found ways to take encouragement from small triumphs to enable him to keep going during his slump.
JOHN Z I don't know who missed the cut by 4 shots at the lasst US Open, but UNDER PAR remembered a boy who qualified for the US Open at Bethpage Black which was bck in 2002. It turned out to be Derek Tolan who missed the cut by 16 shots.
A few years ago a male sportscater lost his job for a comment he made about women not being able to be as good as men at golf because of their breasts, which presumeably get in the way of their swing. If Finch had said that Annika did not belong at the Colonial, he would have lost his job. If Michelle enjoyed PC protection, he would lose his job now--unless the Wies intervened on his behalf. But Michelle does not enjoy PC protection, so Finch's job is quite safe.
In the world of racing, DNQ, DNF and FIN are literally miles appart. In racing as in golf, DNQ-DQ-DNF-CUT implies that it is impossible to finish the race or the tournament.
*********************************
Apparently Martin, you are not very familiar with the sport of Auto Racing. The official order of finish of all races lists the finishing order of all cars which took the green flag at the start of the race. Unlike Golf, cars which do not complete the full number of laps as did the lead car still get paid something--even the ones that blow their engines or crash on the first lap.
Similarly, the final results of a golf tournament list the final order of finish for all players who tee'd off on day one. Those who did not make the cut are so marked with the designation CUT, however their position in the results listing is in order of their finishing position (at the end of the last round before the cut.)
Therefore it is perfectly appropriate to say that a golfer finished "ahead of" or "behind" another golfer even though neither made the cut.
If a race car does not qualify for a race, will the owner automatically stop racing the car--or will the owner want to look at what happened carefully before making a decision? It is not just the order of finish that is important--it is also whether there seems to be a reasonable chance in the future based upon what happened.
Secondly, it's not correct to say that if Wie benefitted from the same degree of PC protection that Finch would have been fired. I work in the media, and the fact is that there are more variables than you could shake a stick at. It's not just what you say but also how you say it, who you are, your history and, even more significantly, the kind of uproar that results (who targets you and to what degree you are targeted). Also, making a comment about a specific woman isn't nearly as hazardous as making one that applies to the whole group or a good portion of it.
Of course, the PC thought-police cowards don't cow me a whit -- this is the pen of Braveheart here.
Tom H, no less an authority on golf than Ian Baker-Finch, a former Open champion and now a TV golf announcer has said that Michelle Wie should give up on attempts at the PGA tour.
1991 Open one of two Professional wins on the Tour for Ian spanning a career of two decades.
He should know about missing cuts he became an expert at missing them during his career. He is the Cut Zen Master Grasshopper.
If Michelle had taken the money from the LPGA events she entered last year, her total earnings for 2005 would have outpaced Ian's career earnings by a hundred grand or more.
Yep ZZZZZZZZ, I'm going to lend credence to what this hack says. I'm sure Michelle is taking his advice seriously.
This is your expert John ZZZZZZZZZZ?
Give me a break.
I'll listen to real winners, Ernie Els and tiger Woods.
I disagree with your assertion about someone with 7 PGA victories being happy about missing the cut by one stroke. Happy is too strong a word
*****************************
Actually Jim I said that obviously he WOULD NOT BE HAPPY, with missing a cut, because of his previous success.
ask your pal Norman or any golfer for that matter which they would rather have on their resume, money titles(or your ridiculous money per start title) or victories and get back to me with the answer.
*****************************
Through my experience, most golfers want to win enough money to get financially comfortable. That is number one priority. Then when someone has become financially secure, which is defined differently by different people, the next stage is to be as ambitious as possible in golfing achievements.
Ultimately that is to win the big titles.
It isn't all straight forward though.
At lower levels it is about getting a tour card, and improving your ranking. For those who achieve full exempt tour status, it is about building the world ranking so that they automatically qualify for more events. Obviously top 50 in the world means that someone can pick and choose what they want to play in.
I think I know people in just about each of the categories, so goals are different for everyone.
At Michelle's level, obviously she has achieved the financial goal already. Her next goals should be about tour cards.
She will very likely achieve her lpga tour card next season, if she wants to take it.
But this is such a simple task for her, that obviouly her next lpga goal should be and is to win. She has achieved the next best thing, 2nd in a major, so what is left?
Win number 1 lpga.
Made cut number 1 pga.
Ernie is too much of a gentleman to say anything but compliments about MW.
****************************
Ernie is indeed a gentleman.
However he doesn't just avoid saying bad things about Michelle.
He has gone out of his way to play practice rounds with her and encourage her in her career.
If he was simply being pc, he would just say, "yes she is a great talent" and leave it at that.
Ernie has a deep respect for MW, something many people could learn from.
On a number of occasions you have rightly stated how women cannot compete evenly in physically demanding sports.
Track and Field is the perfect example. Take running for instance. It is all physically related, in that there is no skill level required.
Obviously in sports like this, the top women would be completely outclassed by the top men.
Equally there would be no point in women training with men, when each of the men would just start the race faster, and gradually pull further and further away during the race. What would be the point of them competing together?
Golf is different. Michelle has not finished at the back of field in any mens tournament she has entered.
In athletics, any women would likely finish at the back of any top class mens field, barring disqualifications of course.
You have said Michelle is outclassed in these events.
Was she outclassed at the Sony, by Sean O'Hair, who finished level with her, and is one of the US best prospects for young talent.
Perhaps she was outclassed by Jason Gore, a 3 time nationwide and pga winner, who finished level with her.
Or how about the 2 previous major champions who finished 3 shots, and 5 shots behind her, maybe they outclassed her.
As far as Annika is concerned, Michelle Wie had no wins but 3 seconds and a third on the LPGA as a 15 year old. Does anyone happen to know what Annika's record on the LPGA was when she was 15? I'm certain she had no wins, since Paula has the record as the youngest at 18, but it would be interesting to know how many seconds and thirds Annika had at 15.
Wow first Normie is a golf-guru, now he is an athletics expert. NO SKILL LEVEL REQUIRED????... Normie I think you should attend a track meet and say that to a sprinter or hurdlers face. You might indeed find out what skill is involved.
So if you race somone who is skilled at coming out of the blocks, but you are both equally as strong, then by your argument you should at least tie, or you might even win since you claim NO SKILL is involved.
That statement of your is so moronic....
What a choker!
Since Annika took up golf at age 12, it only took her 5 years to make her National Amateur Women's team. So at 15, she was in her 3rd year of learning a sport and in the fifth year of playing that sport she made it onto a National Am Team.
Her bio doesn't indicate what amateur events she had entered and how she placed, but doing the above alone seems to be a testament to her natural talent!
Asia-Guy, Do you think the fact that Michelle and Tiger are both endorsers of Nike might have something to do with his benign comments? Ernie is too much of a gentleman to say anything but compliments about MW. Also he might be on the lookout for the PC police. Look at how Vijay was villified for his remarks about Annika in the Colonial three years ago.
Ernie is the guy Michelle called and asked for advice about turning pro or not and encourages her to keep trying to make it on the PGA tour. He has played a few practice rounds with her and showed her some shots that Michelle added to her tool bag. The first practice round she played with Ernie was at the 2003 Sony Open.
Ernie is also the one who introduced her to David Ledbetter after he played the practice round with her in 03. I think the comment Ernie made after the first practice round was, “I don’t remember much of my practice round, we were too dumbfounded watching this 13 year old girl hit the ball.”
Ledbetter coached Michelle "Pro Bono" starting in 2003 after seeing the talent she had in person at an LPGA event. He offered her a full scholarship to his Junior Golf Academy, but Michelle and her parents did not want to relocate to Orlando.
You’re right about one thing John, Ernie is a gentleman and he would not provide false hope to a young girl unless he spotted some real talent in her.
Since Annika took up golf at age 12, it only took her 5 years to make her National Amateur Women's team. So at 15, she was in her 3rd year of learning a sport and in the fifth year of playing that sport she made it onto a National Am Team.
*****************************
I don't know much about the state of women's amateur golf in Swedan, when Annika started out playing amateur events.
I would hazard a guess that it might be a little easier to get into a National Am Team in Swedan than the US, but that's just a guess. Perhaps you know better.
OBVIOUSLY when I quoted the running example, it was meant for running events only, hurdles is not just running.
I'm not sure if your post was just joking or if you are really that thick. It's difficult to tell sometimes.
Even in hurdles, if you take a woman with the highest possible achieveable skill level of going over the hurdles in the perfect fashion, she still wouldn't beat the men. That is the reality. Perhaps you disagree, but you're entitled to your opinion.
My post was answer to JIM COULTHARD's question, and only based on facts. I wasn't the one using the "what was so and so doing at 15" to support any argument.
So what about the "No Skill" point you made. I see Norman likes to say things and not back em up!
Michelle Wie's age is also irrelevant since she is a PROFESSIONAL. When a person is a pro in any trade or career, excuses like "she's only 16", "she was affected more by the wind", "she's just learning", "she needs more experience", etc. ad nauseum just don't cut it.
****************************
Ryan Moore is just 23 years of age. He is a professional, but it is his rookie year on the pga tour.
He should not be judged in the same way as Vijay or Ernie.
He is learning his trade and has done well so far.
This season, he has only played one event so far and missed the cut.
At the end of the season when he is judged, it should be taken into account that he is a rookie, and it should be taken into account that he is young.
Would you agree, or do you think he should be judged by the same yardstick as Vijay Singh for instance.
Obviously Annika's path to stardom was and is more successful than Michelle's.
***************************
Oops John, I think you have sorted it all out there.
Michelle, at 16 years old, is less successful, than the greatest female golfer of all time, has been up to 35 years old.
Let's not forget, age doesn't matter here, they are both professionals. Don't worry about Michelle's next 19 years of golf, because the important thing is, she hasn't achieved as much as Annika now.
Let's put it this way, Pressel hasn't achieved what Sorenstam has. We could substitute the name of any current lpga player in that.
*********************************
"Take running for instance. It is all physically related, in that there is no skill level required."
********************************
Norm won't be posting here for a few days. He's going down to his local athletics club, find someone that has the same leg strength as him and race that person, because since he asserts NO SKILL is involved, it should be a cakewalk. Unless of course he says that to their face, then I think the beating he'll take is quite different.
She has much the same appeal that Annie Oakley had 100 years ago--and that was certainly not due to political correctness.
Michelle Wie may not achieve what Annika has, she may achieve much more, or she may achieve something different. Annika's statements on her competition with the men have no bearing on Michelle Wie--who unlike Annika has trained extensively for competition on the PGA.
Right now Michelle is actually more of a semi-pro than a pro, since she also has a full time "job" outside of her sport, namely school. She is also a new pro or semi-pro and there is no reason to assume she has peaked.
And there is no reason to assume she has not peaked.
***********************
Her age is a reason. If she was playing tennis, you could argue that she may have possibly peaked, although it would be unlikely, since most top women tennis pros at the moment are 23 and upwards. Maria Sharapova being an obvious exception.
For golf, peaking usually happens later again, so there is certainly many reasons to assert that it is highly unlikely that she has peaked.
Just for my edification, how does a 16-year-old girl train extensively for PGA tour competition?
***************************
In the last year Wie has added 8 pounds of muscle according to David Leadbetter.
Perhaps her 7 drives over 300 yards are partly due to this.
She recently got a personal fitness and strength trainer, Paul Gagne who usually works with hockey players.
Norm won't be posting here for a few days. He's going down to his local athletics club, find someone that has the same leg strength as him and race that person, because since he asserts NO SKILL is involved, it should be a cakewalk. Unless of course he says that to their face, then I think the beating he'll take is quite different.
*******************************
I said physically related. Why are you just mentioning leg strength? Obviously physically related includes strength and stamina and endurance.
People who dedicate themselves to that sort of training would obviously beat me in a race, and I'm pretty sure I could take care of them in a round of golf.
Although I was quite a good junior runner with a very good turn of pace, but had no interest in pursuing it further. Golf was my sport.
I think it is about time you gave up your petty little arguments. Getting some common sense would be a pretty good idea.
I do have common sense old top! Common sense enough to not say something blantantly dumb as you did. According to you, the four names I mentioned above had no skill, because they were runners.
They happened to win gold for the UK at the last Olympics, but according to your post, their victory was hollow due to your assertion that "It is all physically related, in that there is no skill level required."
You obviously know very little about athletics.
Perhaps our friend John Z, will answer, how much skill is involved in the running part of track and field. That is for running events which do not include hurdles, which are obviously a highly technical event.
It's not as easy for a girl to gain that much muscle weight in that time-frame as you may think. Heck, it's not all that easy for a guy. Of course, she may be filling out simutaneously (I say "may"), which is a factor that could make the claim more realistic.
I'm not saying anything definitive either way; my only point is that people make these claims ALL the time (I gained four pounds of muscle this month!), and very rarely are they valid. You should also remember that girls will tend to gain some body fat as they mature, although, as I've said, she's already as physically mature as a much older gal. So it is a confusing picture.
Lose the orignal ALL and NO from his claim and it is much more accurate.
It's very common to see some very vast and erroneous generalizations posted in some of these blogs. Normie might say I'm splitting hairs, but using absolute terms as he did earlier, don't form an accurate basis for his point.
Funnily enough I also agree concur with most of your synopsis.
Ocrancky seemed to be pressing the issue of sprinters for skill so it is interesting, that you say that the longer the distances the more skill required.
I wouldn't have actually thought that but I'll take your word for it.
On the heredity issue, that makes sense. At school, when I was young, I had very little physical actrivity, yet I was still the fastest sprinter there. There is also plenty of speed throughout my family.
So what exactly is the comparison between athletics and golf?
Still though, it doesn't change the fact that Track and Field is very different to golf.