It’s hardly news that Michelle Wie missed another cut at a men’s golf tournament. This is how she makes her living. She makes a ton of money missing these cuts, and she has perfected her technique. She misses cuts better than any other female golfer, living or dead.
The latest is the Casio World Open in Japan, in which she finished 17-over-friggin’-par. She shot 80-81 and barely beat an amateur to avoid last place. She didn’t make a single birdie.
She’s already set numerous records missing cuts – she’s one for 12 now – and now she’s taking her missed-cut gospel to other continents.
It’s getting so good, she’s attracting mainstream humiliation: the Spoof has inducted her into its Golf Hall of Fame.
Wie has also perfected her post-missed-cut comments.
“It was pretty tragic,” she said after her latest failure, before continuing her standard repertoire of tired excuses.
Will this finally stop her from trying to play with males? Not at all. And why not, I say? She’s making a great living at it. Defeat and humiliation pay well these days.
| « PGA Tour should follow International Golf Federation policy regarding steroids | Myrtle Beach pols finally helping golf course communities » |
Comment feed for this post
Jason Scott Deegan:
The Accidental Golfer:
Katharine Dyson:
Kiel Christianson:
Tim, golfers judge themselves by how a particular year has gone. Over the course of the year she did extremely well.
The latter part was poor. However, she had already done more than enough for it to be considered a great year regardless.
A few bad events does not badly effect strong golfers. Then again, you wouldn't know anything about that, because you are just a golf writer.
Why does she talk with such arrogance?
Does she not realize that she keeps playing with the men because of exemptions and not through her own merits?
If she really wants to play in the PGA, then, she should go through the regular process that all regular players go through. Let her qualify by showing that she realy got what it takes. If she does, then hurray to her. But until she qualifies to play a PGA tournament through her own merits, she does not really deserve any respect from anyone.
1)Bubbles did not just play well at times, or have some fairly decent tournaments, over the course of the year she played EXTREMELY WELL.
2)Bubbles didn't have a passable or even a fairly decent rookie season, she did MORE than enough for it to be considered a GREAT year.
3)Despite her 2007 season being a GREAT year, the latter part of that year was POOR.
4)Say what?
Norman, keep 'em coming.
What Norman didn't tell you is that he considers the "latter" part of the year to be the period between April 1 and December.
The writings of our Brit friend, Norman, remind me of the malapropisms of another Norman: Norm Crosby. As far as contradiction goes, it doesn't get any better than "she had a GREAT YEAR, but the latter part of it was POOR." A true classic.
I recalled somewhere that you actually mentioned that you attended one of the Bubble's tournaments.
What was your reason?
This might shock all the Wie fans out there, but there are others who play alongside "The Chosen One" at these events. Maybe Alex was there to see someone else--Like the winner who we know from her record was not Michelle.
It is rather arrogant the way she answers when asked about golf rules. And the way she insists that nothing will deter her from playing the PGA when she knows fully well that she is only able to do so through exemptions and not through her actual skills as a golfer.
As your latest post proves, it takes very little courage to post inflamatory remarks from behind the safety of your computer screen.
My thoughts on Michelle Wie are hardly the stuff of rants. I personally admire her for dreaming big, but results speak louder than words and right now her results against the men are screaming, "You are not good enough". I think she has a bright future on the LPGA tour, but will never be the dominant force that she has been hyped to be...IMHO
I personally don't care but, just to clarify, each tournament has a handful of exemptions to give to those not already qualified to play in their tournament. They are typically distributed to those who "bring some value to the event" (read: sell more tickets). So, Wie is not the only one who gets in despite lack of merit.
From now on, an impostor has stolen my identity, falsely identifying himself as Bill on another site. Told him he is welcome to the name, as in reality we are all standing behind a cover of darkness. Told the other "Bill" who does not write truths about MW he is welcome to the name. That I, a humble golf pro with the college golfer getting an education while developing her skills for the LPGA Tour, (while not leaping buildings and fighting all that is wrong in the world) would simply change my pen name and be known now and forever as I am to my friends; Mr. Wonderful. Until further comments are necessary, I bid you a good day (gotta go find my wedge, kevlar and cape).
Mr. Wonderful
If I had to watch Bubbles for her two rounds per tournament, I wouldn't know whether to laugh or cry.
If I am hiding behind the computer, then what are you doing over there?
Thanks for the clarification....
Cheers...
I ask because it's quite obvious that people are judged based on expectations. If your twelve-year-old takes up golf and shoots ninety-five within a year, you don't say, "If you think that's gonna cut it on the PGA Tour, you're delusional, Junior. That stinks," do you? Likewise, if, after complimenting Junior on his score, Tiger Woods shoots an eighty, you don't say, "Hey, great score. Junior couldn't have held a candle to you today," do you?
The point is that Bubbles' performances are found wanting because of expectations, ones that were unrealistically high largely because of the Wies' own doing. Bubbles wasn't billed as merely the next force in women's golf. Nay, she was to be a golfing Amazon, an athlete for the ages who would bring the golf world to its knees as she made sex barriers dematerialize. And a corollary of this is that the LPGA wouldn't even be a challenge.
The teenage Tiger Woods received a lot of hype too, but he never, never sought to increase it through boasting and the making of outrageous claims. He let his clubs do the talking. If Bubbles really did have three-hundred-yard drives as opposed to just a three-hundred-yard mouth, she would never be the object of derision and mocking that she is today. If you want to do the "Ali thing," some people aren't going to like you. And if you can't back it up, you're going to end up with egg on your face. That's life.
"He who exalts himself will be humbled."
Didn't they take God out of the golf course a few years back?
Seriously, I agree with you. I wonder when the LPGA and the PGA are going to step in and stop the circus before golf starts being related to professional wrestling.
Nice of you to comment a few times to my comments.
Since you didn't understand the last time, it might be nice to make it a little bit easier for you to understand.
A golfer looks back on a year and says what did I achieve. The likes of Jim Furyk says, hmm moved to number 2 in the rankings, won X event and Y event. Good stuff.
He doesn't particularly worry about his lowest placing or even his lowest few placings.
He simply checks out what he has achieved and bases success on those facts.
So what has Wie achieved?
- made cut on the Asian Tour.
- very successful lpga season, with 6 top 5s in 8 starts, and with 3 top 5s in 4 majors. Also the lowest combinded score for the majors.
- won her US Open Local Qualifier, and did well at the Sectional Qualifier.
- shot her best round on the pga tour in the 2nd round of the Sony Open.
To put it in a basic way, that maybe even Alex can understand, she has made alot of progress in many areas.
I have a question: what is the universal standard with which we are to judge golfers? Norman says that Bubbles' career has been immensely successful thus far, but what, Norman, is your yardstick for making that determination?
*********************
That's an easier answer.
It can be judged on the yardstick that she has achieved things that no other golfer has before her such as:
- she was the youngest ever winner male or female of an adult usga event.
- she was the youngest player to ever qualify for an lpga tour event.
- she has the record in each of the 4 womens majors for the lowest 4 round total score shot by any amateur player. That's in each of the 4 majors, although she was the only amateur to play the lpga championship, so leave it at the other 3 majors.
- she is the only female to qualify for an adult male usga adult male event, the publinx where she got through to match play.
- she is the only female to get through local qualifying for the US Open.
Judge the list goes on.
That all sounds nice, but it still pales in comparison to the hype. Perhaps you didn't read my post in its entirety.
In her stated goal of competing with the men, she has been an abject failure.
If God has been taken off the golf course, it would explain the greed of the sponsors and the Bubbles clan.
Tim, Great is not the correct word to describe anything about Bubbles. Decent or possibly even good would be more apropos. Lorena won six times and had a slew of top tens. THAT is a great year. Bubbles had what I would consider a passable year against women. Against men she couldn't have done worse."
Alex since you brought up Lorena Ochoa you might recall her first full year on tour (2003) where she appeared in 21 LPGA events. Lorena put together a great Rookie season with five top five finishes (one in a major) and Lorena only missed the cut once during her first season.
Lorena's performance was good enough for her to run away with the 2003 Rolex Rookie of the year honors.
Lorena had taken all the steps to learn how to win and had a NCAA Hall of Fame career in college, yet did not win a professional event until her second full season on tour.
Playing infrequently on Sponsor's exemptions was the route Lorena took for a couple of years while she was in college and she didn't win until she had entered her second full LPGA season.
Michelle had a "Rookie of the Year" season appearing in only eight events.
Seon Hwa Lee the LPGA "Rookie of the Year" appeared in fifteen events with three top five finishes none of them coming in a LPGA Major (T-19th Kraft, T-16th McDonalds and a T-49th in the US Women's Open).
Miss Lee finished at #12 on ADT Official Money List ($915,590) after playing in 15 events.
Michelle (if a member) would have finished in fifteenth place on the ADT money list appearing in only eight events with over $700,000 in earnings.
Alex you should be willing to wait until Michelle's official LPGA Rookie season before you pass judgement on how she compares with Lorena or anyone else who are fulltime LPGA tour players.
As a freelance golfer in her first professional LPGA season she has set the bar pretty damn high with her performance. Maybe Michelle will run away with Rookie of the Year honors like Lorena did back in 2003 when it is her turn?
Just as I predicted, the Wie-wee's have licked their wounds, dreamed up some even more outrageous excuses for Bubbles' poor play, and are now on the offensive.
Just witness One-Putt's recent post about his darling Bubbles. Convoluted is not a strong enough word for such nonsense.
One thing I'll have to give Bubbles credit for is that she is sure getting the most from the least effort.
She only plays two rounds in her forays against the men and still gets sponsors' exemptions and occasionally appearance money. I guess it pays for her to have an aggessive agent like Ross Berlin even if she doesn't have the game to make it to the weekend..
Ms. Wie...it gives me great heartburn to award you $870,000 for missing the cut at 17 over par.
Hmmm...dumb as a fox.
for failing to break 75? I mean, I'm not
asking for Wie bucks for failing to break
80, like she is. I'll shoot for five strokes better for my paycheck. Any help?
The "gals?" of the LPGA can hardly wait for the 2007 season to begin so they can trash MW...uh, wait, MW trashes herself.
It seems that BJ wants Michelle to become wealthy and an expert at handling her finances, (6 years at Stanford.) I can see MW sitting at her computer managing her $100,000,000 portfolio. Get a life BJ and come back to reality.
80, like she is. I'll shoot for five strokes better for my paycheck. Any help?: End quote.
Booger, you can start by picking up range balls. And when hell freezes over, then you can move up to porta-potties duty.
I'd play Wie for a million dollar Nassau
right now with the Korean mafia waiting to
kill me if I fail to win.
She can't beat me, Ron Mon, or Baldwin.
The whole thing is a psychotic, sick joke.