Jun
07
Rule of 88 highlighted by Wie's Ginn Tribute withdrawal created in 1990
Michelle Wie’s withdrawal from last week’s Ginn Tribute Hosted by Annika at 14 over par through 16 holes drew attention to an obscure LPGA Tour rule that bans non-tour members for a year if they shoot 88 or higher. The origins of the so-called Rule of 88 date back to 1990. At that time, players from the Teaching & Club Pro division competed in tournaments and often struggled. This became a problem for regular tour members, prompting the LPGA to create the Rule of 88.
| « Adam Scott shares lead at Stanford St. Jude Championship; Wie struggles at LPGA Championship | Wie should embrace LPGA Tour; Singh, Choi, Funk commit to Tiger's AT&T National » |
5 comments
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor]
Your history lesson made it clear that players complaining sbout Wie have it all wrong. The purpose of the rule is not to penalize players who perform poorly--but to penalize poorly performing players who do not have the courtesy to withdraw when things become hopeless. Far from being arrogant, by withdrawing for whatever reason, Michelle Wie was acting with respect for the rule and doing what any player with an LPGA exemption is expected to do.
Clearly the rule needs tweaking. Guidelines need to be established for when a player gets a warning, at which time the player may withdraw with no penalty. If no warning is given, no penalty may be applied.
Clearly the rule needs tweaking. Guidelines need to be established for when a player gets a warning, at which time the player may withdraw with no penalty. If no warning is given, no penalty may be applied.
06/07/07 @ 09:24
Comment from: Joltin Joe [Visitor]
"Your history lesson made it clear that players complaining sbout Wie have it all wrong"
Really? So if a rule, or for that matter a law, seems silly to you it shouldn't apply? OK. I get it. All the old rules don't apply to Michelle Wie, and of course all the rules that she disagrees with, and all the rules that aren't specifically applicable to Michelle Wie by name or by intent.
Wow. Could you guys lend that spin machine to some of our politicians?
Really? So if a rule, or for that matter a law, seems silly to you it shouldn't apply? OK. I get it. All the old rules don't apply to Michelle Wie, and of course all the rules that she disagrees with, and all the rules that aren't specifically applicable to Michelle Wie by name or by intent.
Wow. Could you guys lend that spin machine to some of our politicians?
06/07/07 @ 10:24
Comment from: jr [Visitor]
JimC...or you could read it like this. "The rule prevented
players from accepting more exemptions after their fiascos."
players from accepting more exemptions after their fiascos."
06/07/07 @ 12:00
Comment from: JR [Visitor]
All of this fuss over a golfer who is currently ranked
28th.
28th.
06/07/07 @ 12:05
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor]
Jim,
I hope you don't damage your wanting gray matter performing all these mental contortions. So, the "88 rule" is predicated on the idea that players are supposed to withdraw when playing poorly? That's golden, Jim! Hey, you should consider working for the DNC. Jim, pray tell, how did you glean this very unusual piece of information?
I hope you don't damage your wanting gray matter performing all these mental contortions. So, the "88 rule" is predicated on the idea that players are supposed to withdraw when playing poorly? That's golden, Jim! Hey, you should consider working for the DNC. Jim, pray tell, how did you glean this very unusual piece of information?
06/08/07 @ 10:11
Comments are closed for this post.


Recent comments