Michelle Wie - I don't like what I'm seeing here
Jul 15, 2006 at 11:10 PM Post #46 of 109
OK...let's lower the temperature in here please. I don't want to have to lock my own thread.
 
Jul 15, 2006 at 11:12 PM Post #47 of 109
Well it's a simple fact of life, a strong man will always be stronger or faster than a strong woman. In sprinting, men are almost a whole second faster than women, in Javelin it's nearly 30 meters differece. Strength has a lot to do with it, even in golf. That initial whack makes a big difference. The different tee off points should be evidence enough that a level playing field would not give the top women a great chance against the top men.

Not everything is about being sexist, much of it is simply physical limitations of size, speed and strength.

However, If women wish to play in the PGA with they guys I really don't care though I'm sure many on both sides would.
 
Jul 15, 2006 at 11:24 PM Post #48 of 109
Quote:

Originally Posted by elrod-tom
..... Until then, this strikes me as a publicity stunt designed to line everyone's pockets.

Your thoughts??



Is not lining everyone's pocket's the point of professional sport in general?
 
Jul 15, 2006 at 11:24 PM Post #49 of 109
Quote:

Originally Posted by smeggy
Well it's a simple fact of life, a strong man will always be stronger or faster than a strong woman. In sprinting, men are almost a whole second faster than women, in Javelin it's nearly 30 meters differece. Strength has a lot to do with it, even in golf. That initial whack makes a big difference. The different tee off points should be evidence enough that a level playing field would not give the top women a great chance against the top men.

Not everything is about being sexist, much of it is simply physical limitations of size, speed and strength.

However, If women wish to play in the PGA with they guys I really don't care though I'm sure many on both sides would.


Ok, then go out and prove it. I just don't think that arguments were ALL X is < or > ALL Y really float. Men and women are built differently, each giving them strengths and weaknesses, but ALL is never greater or less than ALL.

Welcome back to the early 20th century. I feel that our understanding has been enlightened since then, and that time has evolved. But yet, to ask these tough questions gets the response to simmer down. It's really sad.
frown.gif
 
Jul 15, 2006 at 11:31 PM Post #50 of 109
Geez Plainsong, grow up.

This isn't a male/femal pissing contest so try to refrain from making it one. There is a vast body of evidence to support my statements, look them up. It wasn't implying men are better than women, more that men are better suited to some things than women. Athletics being one of them as the sheer size and strength of men gives them an advantage over women.
rolleyes.gif


In sports where men and women compete in the same way be it running, triathlon, decathlon, discus, shot putting, weight lifting, hurdles, cycling, speed skating. Men generally hold the records. In more skill oriented sports women fare much better like in equestrian sports. You want me to prove it? look in the record books.
 
Jul 15, 2006 at 11:58 PM Post #51 of 109
There has been some good discussion here, but the thread is starting to degenerate. Please keep comments on topic and avoid this thread being closed.
 
Jul 16, 2006 at 12:06 AM Post #52 of 109
Quote:

Originally Posted by smeggy
Geez Plainsong, grow up.

This isn't a male/femal pissing contest so try to refrain from making it one. There is a vast body of evidence to support my statements, look them up. It wasn't implying men are better than women, more that men are better suited to some things than women. Athletics being one of them as the sheer size and strength of men gives them an advantage over women.
rolleyes.gif


In sports where men and women compete in the same way be it running, triathlon, decathlon, discus, shot putting, weight lifting, hurdles, cycling, speed skating. Men generally hold the records. In more skill oriented sports women fare much better like in equestrian sports. You want me to prove it? look in the record books.


Well that was uncalled for. This wasn't a gender war thread. I agree 100% with the OP there. What I'm questioning is this burning need of some men (not every poster, obviously), to take it there. Re-read the thread if you don't believe me.

No one as of yet has answered the question as to why is there a burning need to make it about male dominance, but the snippy words tend to give me that "Welcome to the 50's" feeling.

This was supposed to be about the negative influences in golf. All I've been doing is questioning the need for the chest thumping.
 
Jul 16, 2006 at 12:52 AM Post #54 of 109
Quote:

Originally Posted by JahJahBinks
I don't think a male player will be allowed to enter LPGA just because he can't make enough money playing in the PGA.


males are not allowed in the LPGA, just as non-Seniors are not allowed in the Senior PGA. however, the PGA technically is open to anyone who can play their way in, or get an exemption (including sponsor exemptions) and whose skill takes them to the final cut. that's why you see seniors in some of the events, and both Michelle and Annika weren't excluded from play.
 
Jul 16, 2006 at 1:40 AM Post #56 of 109
She gets to drive from ALL the Womens tees too, don't forget! Gosh Dang It!
 
Jul 16, 2006 at 2:19 AM Post #57 of 109
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-Finthen
She gets to drive from ALL the Womens tees too, don't forget! Gosh Dang It!


I don't believe that this is true on the PGA.

I also don't agree with the advice she is getting. I agree with others that she is better suited to compete in juniors, then the LPGA then maybe the PGA. She's only 16 for christ-sakes.

She'll make her money in due time.
 
Jul 16, 2006 at 4:37 AM Post #58 of 109
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-Finthen
She gets to drive from ALL the Womens tees too, don't forget! Gosh Dang It!


what you smokin' man? she tees off from the same set of tees as all the other men.

i'm a big michelle wie supporter, but after this latest futile attempt at the John Deere classic i would rather see her play more LPGA tournaments. besides annika, i think michelle has the most talent on the LPGA tour and i would like to see her start winning on that tour. the problem is that she can only accept 7 sponsor's exemptions per year since she is not an LPGA member. she officially cannot become an LPGA member until she turns 18, although she can petition for early membership. after this year is over, i hope she sits down with her family, manager, and leadbetter and decides to petition early (she will be 17) and play a fuller LPGA schedule next year. i have no problems with her playing the sony open in hawaii and maybe a japan/korea tournament, but i hope she spends more time on the LPGA.
 
Jul 16, 2006 at 4:40 AM Post #59 of 109
Quote:

Originally Posted by utep10
I don't believe that this is true on the PGA.

I also don't agree with the advice she is getting. I agree with others that she is better suited to compete in juniors, then the LPGA then maybe the PGA. She's only 16 for christ-sakes.

She'll make her money in due time.


i say she would be wasting her time playing junior tournaments. she's obviously good enough to win on the LPGA tour...why should she or would she want to play against other teenage girls on 5600 yard courses? that won't make her better.
 
Jul 16, 2006 at 5:07 AM Post #60 of 109
So then, what of the male who's constantly attempting to qualify for the PGA tour and failing? Simply because he refuses to compromise and wants to play with the absolute best players in the world is a cause for concern? I would that we had more kids with her ambition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top