Posted on 05/29/2003 12:35:36 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
Annika Sorenstam, who dominates the Ladies Professional Golf Association, became the first female golfer to play in a Professional Golf Association event in 58 years.
She finished her first day one over par, but did not make the 36-hole cut because during the second day she finished with a 74, missing the cut by four shots.
During her press conference, she sounded surprisingly down, and practically conceded that she reached beyond reasonable expectations. Hey, after one try, why not give it another shot before throwing in the towel?
In any case, many fail to realize that the PGA never forbade female competitors. Indeed, Babe Didrikson Zaharias played in a PGA tournament in 1945, making the 36-hole cut, but failing to make the 54-hole cut. By contrast, the LPGA tour, by definition, confines its entrants to females.
How did Sorenstam qualify for Texas' Colonial invitational in the first place? She received a "sponsors' exemption," which allows, by any criteria, a select number of entrants to play. Some men, at first, grumbled that she failed to qualify by playing in a tournament from the women's rather than from the men's tee. She, therefore – according to the critics – entered under less trying circumstances than those required for men.
Golfer Vijay Singh, in particular, said, "I hope she misses the cut. Why? Because she doesn't belong out here." He then quickly backed up and said, "She's the best woman golfer in the world, and I want to emphasize 'woman.' We have our tour for men, and they have their tour. She's taking a spot from someone in the field." Yet, in years past, several men received sponsors' exemptions, including past "champions" no longer competitive. Thus, she did not "take a space" from a male tour golfer.
What's the harm? Last year, the 32-year-old Swede won 13 tournaments, exerting a dominance beyond that of even Tiger Woods. Fellow LPGA player Juli Inkster likens Sorenstam to Woods, "She's the Tiger Woods of our tour. If Tiger had a 'next level' to go to, I bet he would do it. I think she's one who always wants to challenge herself and see how she stacks up against the best. The men are the best."
Sorenstam simply crushes her league. She hits a ball longer than many men. She said she made no statement concerning women – not one of those I-am-woman-hear-me-roar deals, but simply sought to elevate her game by playing with the best.
Does this mean that men can now compete in an LPGA Tournament?
Years ago, a boy in New York tried out for and made the girls' high-school field-hockey team, which state regulations allowed him to do because there was no boys' field-hockey team. New York reporter Melissa Hebert summed it up precisely when she wrote, "With girls going out for boys' teams, the question is, is she good enough? When a boy goes out for a girls' team, the question often is, is he bad enough?"
One female commentator cheered on Sorenstam and called golf a "non-gender sport." If, by that, she means both sexes play the game, sure. If, however, she suggests that most professionals possess equal skills or hit the ball just as far, she fails to properly credit Annika with abilities far beyond those of most professional female golfers.
As mentioned earlier, Annika called the Colonial a one-time event, and that she did not anticipate entering into any other male events. The Colonial, say experienced golfers, while 700 yards longer than the typical LPGA setup, remains one of the shorter men's courses with only two par fives, and thus the Colonial is one where women might likely compete more effectively. Other courses, with higher pars, likely serve more problematic for female golfers, however talented.
Still, Sorenstam beat 11 other men, and displayed poise, class and a sense of humor. Hey, if a female pitcher for the New York Yankees can throw a 95-mile-an-hour fastball, imagine the attendance.
Where is Martha Burk, the woman who banged on the gates to let women into Augusta? Where is the National Organization for Women, one of whose chapter presidents disagreed with charging Scott Peterson for double homicide in the murder of his wife, Laci, and unborn son, Conner?
As a step forward for, call it, female achievement and accomplishment – especially without the supportive agitation of some civil-rights group – this seems far more historically significant. Most male golfers offered support, and, in fact, pulled for her and cheered her on. Television ratings soared, and the event drew 400 reporters, nearly four times the customary number. Meanwhile, Burk's anti-Masters protest drew about 50 attendees, many of them members of the press.
Somehow, someway, Sorenstam pulled this off without NOW's Kim Gandy or the National Council of Women's Organizations' Burk. Say it ain't so.
You clearly don't because you seem to have no other interests than defending your opinion that women are the same as men.
Show me one post where I said that women are the same as men.
Show me the post, presidio9.
Wow, cut-and-paste. I'm impressed.
Anyway, here is another quote of mine from BEFORE THE TOURNEY!
It can't be nitpicking when the only point I made prior to the tourney was that this was a legal and good move by B of A.
OK, let's try this. Could you perhaps point out where I said that Sorenstam "belonged out there"? Not that she used a legitimate means to get there, but that she had the tools to do well. How about it?
A little proof, perhaps?
I think your analysis of "The men attack the pin, she attacks the green" is correct. I was referring specifically to actual short game shots that she totally botched. She lost several strokes there, and I'm sure it put additional pressure on her putting.
Quite simple. Sorenstam herself says she did not belong out there. All of your nitpicking can never change that. You will ALWAYS be wrong, because NOBODY is a more qualified judge than she is.
149 posted on 05/30/2003 5:03 PM EDT by presidio9
Nope, just that you never address my point.
Quite simple. Sorenstam herself says she did not belong out there. All of your nitpicking can never change that. You will ALWAYS be wrong, because NOBODY is a more qualified judge than she is.
156 posted on 05/30/2003 5:11 PM EDT by presidio9
Quite simple. Sorenstam herself says she did not belong out there. All of your nitpicking can never change that. You will ALWAYS be wrong, because NOBODY is a more qualified judge than she is.
161 posted on 05/30/2003 5:22 PM EDT by presidio9
Quite simple. Sorenstam herself says she did not belong out there. All of your nitpicking can never change that. You will ALWAYS be wrong, because NOBODY is a more qualified judge than she is.
165 posted on 05/30/2003 5:31 PM EDT by presidio9
Ladies and gentlemen, we have a troll!!!
Truer words... Ever read any Dave Pelz? He gives us hope.
Now that I can't play anymore, I miss the game.
Sorry to hear that. My time is coming one of these days, but I'll sink a putt for you next time I'm out.
Could you PLEASE show me where I EVER said ANYTHING about Sorenstam "belonging"?
WHAT is the main issue?
I know I've been running three wedges for a few years now - a 52 degree Hogan wedge (110 yds), a 56 degree Hogan fairway wedge (90yds) (sweet club - a friend showed me that it was the way to go) and a 60 degree Wilson Staff (65 yds). It is pretty easy to get in between a full swing close in, bringing the inevitable chunky beaver pelt if you haven't been playing in a while.
The great pitch and run golfers, like Lee Trevino, are no longer a part of the game with the distances the young pros are getting.
I've actually started working on the old style pitch and run with the pitching wedge over the last couple of years. Hogan designed his PWs specifically to hit the old-style partial shot (just read that a while ago). I've got a friend who plays partial PWs really well, so I've been watching him.
But I can name a number of men.
Most of my lower handicap friends do too. :-) I'm big enough and hit it long enough, but I'm working on iron control and don't like the percentages with a two-shot par 5.
You sound like you played a bit in your day. You ever play any pressure golf? If so, how do you think she handled the pressure?
I think that ol' presidiQueeg9 has got hold of a "secret post" wherein you & Martha Burk plotted to force the PGA Tour to let Sorenstam play every tournament she wants to from here on out.
And he's got a quote by you that he'll post up later, after he's finished making it up. ;-)
Well, you say it is "Annika not belonging".
And I have asked you to show where I actually said that she did belong.
I'm still waiting.
You have continued to deny that from a marketing standpoint, Bank of America made a great decision and did quite well sponsoring the tournament.
I have posted fact after fact, and the smartest response I get from you is "BZZZT. Wrong." Without any support for your flimsy position.
In other words, if you can't support your contention that there was no benefit to B of A in inviting Sorenstam, then withdraw it and go away.
Put up or shut up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.