Women's rankings and golf technology have bloggers feeling fine

In Sorenstam's interview at this week's Safeway she was asked about the new Rolex world rankings. She stated,

"The world rankings, well, I'm happy that we have some...Hopefully this will be a good measurement to determine the field in different events. I do think it needs to be tweaked a little bit but it's a start. Hopefully in a few months we'll be really accurate."

Does this mean Annika also believes that Michelle Wie shouldn't be in the position that she is currently ranked?

There shouldn't be inaccuracy as a standard of measurement. The powers that be have been working on this system for months. Putting out a system that is flawed initially will make people think twice before ever believing it.

There is nothing wrong with the system. Numbers are numbers. It obviously is based on performance so what's the issue.
Just because people don't think certain individuals shouldn't be ranked where they are doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the system.
Annika's comment may not have been pointed at Wie. She could have been thinking about Yuri Fudoh for example.
it is obvious to anyone who knows anything about golf that Wie is the second best female golfer.

I think Annika was concerned about how easy it might be for a player with a couple of strong wins in a 13 week period to take over #1, at least in the case of somone like Michelle Wie who will have a very small divisor because she has played in so few tournaments. If Annika wins the Kraft and another Major while Michelle Wie wins the other two Majors Annika still should be #1, but I suspect Michelle Wie would take over #1 in the Rolex rankings.

To qoute directly from Ms. Sorenstam:

Q. Do you have any feelings about Michelle being ranked as high as she is?

ANNIKA SORENSTAM: Well, I mean, I was a little surprised. I'm sure she was a little surprised herself, but she has played well. She has played very consistent. I do think we need to count a few more than 15 tournaments in two years. I think we do this for a living and a lot of players play 20, 25 a year. So I think it would be pretty fair if you at least counted 15 per year. I think that would be a little more accurate. Having said that, I am sure Michelle Wie is always going to be up very, very close to the top.


Even Annika acknowledges that MW will always be in contention near the top, Baldies angst aside.
So, whether she is 2nd, 3rd, 4th or whatever, when she starts playing 20 to 30 tournaments a year, She'll probably be either in her present position, or behind Creamer as circumstances dictate. Baldwin is just too touchy about Paula's position.
Having said that, I still think Paula will be 2nd in the money again this year , followed by Gulbis.I'd love to see Paula give Annika a run for her money this year. That is what would make the LPGA very exciting to watch.

The funny thing about the Lashan Clarke blog is that he doesn't have a bunch of Wie fanatics ripping into him.

And the Rolex rankings are, in essence, just a marketing tool for the LPGA. They picked just enough tournaments (and weighted the foreign tours) to put Michelle Wie (the better to attract kids) and Yuri Fudoh (the better to attract fans of the Asian tour) near the top to start just the kinds of arguments we've been having. At least they're not being ignored anymore.

"Lashan also mentions something Chris Baldwin has said all along -- that many critics think Paula Creamer, and not Michelle Wie, will be the one chasing Annika Sorenstam."

It doesn't make them right, though. I believe that they would be the ones chasing Wie in a couple of years.