« Why should Mike Weir replace Phil Mickelson at the 2006 Grand Slam of Golf?Podcast: Golf tips from Molly Baney, Payne Stewart's advice to Donald Trump and words of wisdom from Percy Boomer »


Comment from: Paul W [Visitor] Email
Nice to see Pressel growing out of making unfair comments about Wie.

Maybe you could learn something from her!
2006-09-26 @ 16:38
Comment from: Brandon Tucker [Visitor] Email
Of course she's developing better and her head is screwed on tighter than Wie, she's from MICHIGAN!
2006-09-26 @ 18:06
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
I think Morgan may have joined with other LPGA players in downplaying
what Michelle did at the SK Telecom--but at the HSBC Matchplay she definitely
refused to rise to the bait tossed out by Gross-Rhode and she no longer
seems to say negative things about Michelle.

My guess is that Morgan Pressel is not assuming that last place finishes for
Michelle Wie at the Omega Masters and 84 Lumber will mean last place
finishes against the ladies of the LPGA when Michelle plays against the ladies.

You mentioned that you thought Morgan Pressel would win soon on the LPGA,
but isn't there a danger that Michelle Wie could win at the Samsung, in which
case the LPGA would be forced to disband from the sheer embarassment of
having a collapsed golfer like Michelle Wie win one of their premier events after
finishing dead last two times in a row in lesser events against the men?
2006-09-26 @ 21:43
Comment from: June [Visitor] Email
So Mogan got her best finish as a pro FINALLY. A THIRD PLACE FINISH.

And now she know what takes win and ready to win one soon.

And yet Michelle is the one clueless at winning on LPGA?

After all those mulitple 2nd and 3rd place finishes of her own?

You guys use very wierd logic for your argument!
2006-09-26 @ 22:33
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email

While I couldn't really care less about Pressel, people may very well view her recent success differently than Bubbles' many similar finishes. Why? Very simply because the relevant criticism of Bubbles here isn't that she lacks the ability or potential to win on the LPGA, but that she doesn't know how to close the deal. The same criticism has not yet been made of Pressel for the very simple reason that she hasn't been in the position to win very often. Diffferent patterns lead to different criticism.
2006-09-26 @ 23:35
Comment from: Kathy [Visitor] Email
Morgan will always be jealous of and obsessed with Michelle. She can't help

But she's matured a little now knowing that whatever she says against
Michelle will come back to bite her so she's more careful now

Michelle has shown that on the LPGA tour at least she is far and away superior
to Morgan
2006-09-26 @ 23:53
kudos to Morgan; regardless of what she says - or not - about Michelle,
she at least sticks to playing the LPGA and is focused on winning there.
Hopefully the LPGA will still be around when Michelle decides to go back to it :)
2006-09-27 @ 00:33
Comment from: Ron [Visitor] Email
Pressel sticks to playing the LPGA because 1) She hasn't been given an
exemption to a PGA tournament, 2) She knows she's not good enough,
3) She wouldn't draw the crowds like Michelle does, and 4) No one would
want to see a cry baby playing a PGA tournament.
2006-09-27 @ 02:50
Comment from: John D [Visitor]
Reply to Comment from: Ron [Visitor]
Pressel sticks to playing the LPGA because 1) She hasn't been given an
exemption to a PGA tournament, 2) She knows she's not good enough,
3) She wouldn't draw the crowds like Michelle does, and 4) No one would
want to see a cry baby playing a PGA tournament.

5) She knows what the "L" in LPGA stands for.
2006-09-27 @ 05:19
Comment from: IB [Visitor] Email
Too bad Pressel never even came close to getting "Rookie of the Year." And all that hype about a Miyazato v. Pressel matchup, too!
2006-09-27 @ 10:29
Comment from: Lori [Visitor] Email
WOW, 3rd place, isn't that amazing. So why don't people rave about the numerous 2nd and 3rd place finishes from Michelle?? And why don't they constantly rag on Pressel for not winning yet? She was so overhyped too. Rookie of the year, oops that went to Seon Hwa Lee. Pressel couldn't even win that, she wasn't even close. So Pressel gets one lousy third place finish and you want to make a big deal about that? HHmmm. I would love to see her play on the PGA, that would be a complete joke!
2006-09-27 @ 10:41
Comment from: Stacy [Visitor] Email
Whether or not Morgan Pressel believes she is capable of competing in a
men's professional event, at least she is attempting to gain an education on the
LPGA tour. She, along with other young rookies, are the future of the tour.

Michelle Wie, on the other hand, believes she is too good for the women's tour.
If she is that good a golfer, why hasn't she won yet?

As it is said, no one remembers who placed second.
2006-09-27 @ 11:09
Comment from: Lori [Visitor] Email
After doing a quick check I see that Michelle Wie has made $726,000.00, 14th on the money list! She only played 8 tournaments on the LPGA. How can you people slam that??? Loud mouth Pressel has made HALF of that this year and is 22nd. She thought she wuld turn pro and win everything. HAHAHA She can't even win Rookie of the Year! Tied for 4th, wow. So Pressel got LUCKY this weekend, big deal. Look at the rest of her year, it really wasn't that impressive. She is good but nothing special. The sponsors know that too.
2006-09-27 @ 11:12
Comment from: Lori [Visitor] Email
No one remembers third either!!!!!!!
2006-09-27 @ 11:14
Comment from: too obvious [Visitor]
Oh come on you guys are a bit too obvious with your flagrant scorn of Michelle despite her excellent finishes in the LPGA. What did you guys do turn to each other say we need some hits/comments we're gonna have to do it, yeah we're gonna have to belittle that young girls achievements while building up a girl's whose accomplished less, it will be so inane and viscious people will HAVE to post.

I mean come on you guys couldn't wait until it was at least closer to the samsung before rolling out the Michelle Wie card to get posts, that's so sad. Michelle Wie had nothing to do w/ the compettition Morgan was in come on you guys can do better than that find your pride once more.
2006-09-27 @ 11:27
Comment from: Joe [Visitor] Email
I have seen Morgan play in person many times and also have seen the interviews she has given. I doubt she would even mention Michelle Wie's name if she was not constantly being badgered by the media to make a comment. When you see her comments live they make sense and are not mean spirited at all. Her comments simply reflected her true feelings which I personally found refreshing. When you read what she said somehow it takes on a different tone that was not intended. I think she finally decided to simply give no comment or a short comment to move on to another question.

She has proven by her more tradional path that she can close the deal by her outstanding record as an Amateur. Over time I believe she will achieve greater success than MW simply because she chose a more traditional path. Michelle will be in a category by herself for bettter or worse.

I also do not understand the fascination in seeing MW or any female "make the cut" in a mens tournament. Then what.....does anyone seriously expect her to win a mens tournament. If not expecting to win what is the point other than to simply put on a show for money which everyone will grow tired of this.

2006-09-27 @ 12:14
Comment from: Stacy [Visitor] Email
How come Karrie Webb, Se Ri Pak, Sherri Steinhauer, even Annika Sorenstam
etc. needed to qualify for the upcoming Samsung World Championship but
Michelle Wie got in on yet another sponsor's exemption?
Oh, that's right. She's not a member of the LPGA, nor the
PGA or any other tour. Right, she's only 16. Without her the event wouldn't
get as much coverage, the purses would be smaller etc, etc.

Oh yes, Lori, wasn't the Samsung the event in which Wie was DQ'ed for signing
an incorrect scorecard? She might have placed fourth.

I think some of of our commentors should re-read Judge Smails comments.
2006-09-27 @ 13:36
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email

You are acting like it is only a 5 player tournament. There will be 20 players.
Lorena Ochoa, Cristie Kerr, and Juli Inkster might have complaints if they were
left off, but they won't be. If you were free to run a tournament for the 20
best women players in the world, who would you pick?

I challenge you to either tell us that you would include Wie in your top 20,
or name 20 players you would rate ahead of her.
2006-09-27 @ 18:50
Comment from: Florida Mike [Visitor] Email
What a pathetic blog. Stacy, I believe you are the one who was crowing about your literary education earlier this year in a response to criticism of your writing. Your opinions are not very well thought out and your conclusions are erroneous. Some of us enjoy watching Michelle Wie play golf. I am not sure she should continue to try and play in the Men's tournaments, but that is not for me to decide. She is still one of the biggest draws on the LPGA circuit (if not the biggest) and the comment that Ms Pressel's career will surpass Ms Wie's is at this point ludicrous. Michelle has shown that she is much more talented and consistant than Morgan has. It was nice to see Morgan shoot a good round and to not see her crying again. She will no doubt be a prominent player on the LPGA in the future, but she will not be in Michelle's league.
2006-09-28 @ 08:49
Comment from: Matt [Visitor] Email
I would not include Wie in my top 20 :)
2006-09-28 @ 11:47
Comment from: Ford [Visitor] Email
Florida Mike--Long time no talk. Should I send you my lucky numbers now or do you want to carry our bet out until the bitter end?
2006-09-28 @ 12:52
Comment from: Matt [Visitor] Email
Morgan will always be jealous of and obsessed with Michelle. She can't help herself.. :)
2006-09-28 @ 12:57
Comment from: Stacy [Visitor] Email
All I was saying, Jim C, is that everyone had to qualify except for Wie.

Would I put Michelle Wie on my list of 20 golfers if I was creating my
own tournament? Certainly!
There's no doubt that she's entertaining to watch (she's a great golfer) and
she draws big crowds. Do I believe that she should have qualified just as the
other golfers did? Certainly!

As for Florida Mike, you're just sore because I say what's on my mind. Calling
my blog "pathetic" is just plain rude. I never stated that Morgan Pressel's
career would surpass Michelle Wie's career...please re-read the blog.
I just gave kudos to Morgan Pressel and it was deserving in the final round
of the Longs Drugs Challenge.

Pressel has decided on her course of action, that is to play on the LPGA tour.
Michelle Wie is still undecided as to which route to take. We'll all have to wait
until she makes a commitment to see how she will do as a member of the
LPGA tour.

I hope they both do well. Good competition always stirs the players
and awakens the media.
2006-09-28 @ 13:30
Comment from: Joe [Visitor] Email

"Possessing potential greatness is one thing, being a factor rather than a novelty is another. Sponsors looking for cheap publicity to sell tickets is wearing thin."

For the rest of this article go to


2006-09-28 @ 15:12
Comment from: Paul W [Visitor] Email
What do you mean Wie "should have qualified just as the others did"? She
had more than enough earnings to qualify. It's only because she isn't an LPGA member
that they had to use the exemption.
2006-09-28 @ 17:41
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email

In just 7 LPGA events this year Michelle has earned more than
all but 13 full time LPGA players on the official list. With just 16
events in two years, but a divisor of 35 Wie is number 8 on the
Rolex Rankings. If she were a member of the LPGA, and all her
missed cuts were in additional LPGA events instead of against
the men, she would almost certainly qualify for the Samsung--o
what is the problem?

In any case, a a fan of Michelle Wie it is not a big deal to me whether
she is at the Samsung or some other event. I would object more about
the fact that except for the US and British Women's Opens, even if she
does qualify for an event she still needs to use one of her 6 sponsor's
exemptions to actually play.


Michelle Wie has been a factor in all but one her LPGA appearances this
year, with only one finish klower than a T5. It would be nice if you would
be clear on this point when an objection is made to giving her an LPGA

The Greeks got to enter a baseball team in the Athens Olympics on a
sponsor's exemption as the host country--and the field for that
competition was far more important and far more limited than any of the
men's events to which Michelle Wie has been invited. Similar home
nation invitations are given in other events. All these seem more serious
breaches of fairness than a few sponsors exemptions in golf. Do you
object to all sponsors exemptions, or just those given to Michelle?
2006-09-28 @ 18:03
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, There is nothing wrong with a sponsor's exemption when it is earned and granted on merit. Also , such exemptions should be few and far between, and doled out according to PGA guidelines. Bubbles never did a single thing to deserve her numerous exemptions in PGA events, and very little for her LPGA freebies. Her results in men's events speak for themselves. Incidentally, 20 year old Anthony Kim received a sponsor's exemption to last weeks PGA Valero event. To prove that he deserved it, he not only made the cut, he finished tied for second after shooting 12 under par. That's quite a difference from Bubbles' series of flops.
2006-09-28 @ 18:31
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email

Michelle Wie finished tied for 2nd on a sponsors exemption this year at the
Evian, and top 5 five every one of her five LPGA sponsors exemptions this year.
I believe she has done a lot more to prove she deserves LPGA sponsors
exemptions than Anthony Kim has done to prove he deserves PGA exemptions.
Michelle Wie's womens world ranking is 8--What is Kim's non gender specific
2006-09-28 @ 18:56
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, Apples and Oranges. The question is, what did Bubbles ever do to deserve a sponsor's exemption on the PGA tour? Another qestion for you, Jimbo. After Bubbles' monumental flop at the 84 Lumber and her swoon at the John Deere, do you think she should get exemptions to these events in 2007? Not do the sponsors have the right to give her a freebie, does she DESERVE them.
2006-09-28 @ 21:20
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email

You stopped quoting when the article became absolutely absurd.
"Wie is starting to ruin the goodwill Annika Sorenstam and Suzy Whaley
earned three years ago in appearances in PGA Tour events."

The same Suzy Whaley who could only make 2 out 4 LPGA cuts that year,
who isn't good enough to make it on the LPGA, and who qualified
for the GHO by winning a state Open playing from tees that were
10 per cent shorter than those the men played. Tell me about how much
goodwill that generated from the guy who was denied an opportunity to
play a PGA event because Suzy got to play from shorter tees.
And tell me if she generated so much goodwill that they left the rule in
place to allow something similar to happen in the future?
2006-09-28 @ 21:24
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email

You were the one who said Michelle Wie did very little for her LPGA freebies.
That was the point I was addressing. I gave evidence to support the view
that Michelle Wie is very deserving of her LPGA exemptions. Do you wish to
retract your claim that Wie has done little to deserve her LPGA exemptions?
If not, that is the part of your argument that I wish to refute.

2006-09-28 @ 21:34
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, A tale of two golfers. Michelle Wie: Six PGA tour sponsors' exemptions, six missed cuts. One European PGA tour sponsor's exemption, one missed cut. One Nationwide tour sponsor's exemption, one missed cut. Anthony Kim: One PGA tour sponsor's exemption, one made cut, finished tied for second. I rest my case. Jimbo, you have the floor.
2006-09-28 @ 21:36
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
Alex. What will it take for you to acknowledge that Michelle Wie has done
a lot to earn her LPGA exemptions. Don't you think that finishing 2nd
in last years LPGA Championship earned her an exemption into this
years tournament?
2006-09-28 @ 22:20
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, I'll say this for you Wie Warriors, you're loyal to your darling. But, as George says, you'll bend yourselves into pretzels to justify the preferential treatment given her. Sure, a second place finish would justify an exemption, but that second place was won ON AN EXEMPTION. Along those same lines, what did Bubbles do to get an exemption to this year's Samsung? Did her DQ last year make her an automatic qualifier? I notice that you have retreated a lot from your stance that Bubbles will make it through "Q" school, compete successfully on the PGA tour, and possibly win on the big stage. To paraphrase your own words, what will it take for you to acknowledge that Bubbles hasn't done a thing to warrant her numerous exemptions to PGA events, dismal failures, I might add? Do you believe she DESERVES any more sponsors' exemptions to PGA events?
2006-09-29 @ 08:18
Comment from: Mohamed [Visitor] Email
For those people who criticize Wie's sponsor exemption, you can start
boycotting the sponsor's products and write them to inform them of your decision.

Other than that, you can find a lemon and suck on it.

Another advice is: stop reading posts from the Wie-warriors, it will induce stress
and high blood pressure.
2006-09-29 @ 08:37
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email

I believe sponsors should be free to give exemptions as they see fit within
the rules. A player may receive a limited number of exemptions each year.
As long as Michelle Wie's presence means a 30 per cent increase in
attendance she will continue to be offered exemptions. Yes I believe she
desrves more sponsors exemptions on the PGA as long as she continues
to generate interest the way she does now. Stick with amateur golf if
you don't think money should be a consideration.
2006-09-29 @ 09:32
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, Professional sports are always looking for ways to increase revenues. Sometime these ways are in the best interest of the sport, and somtimes they are not. Bill Veeck, the erstwhile owner of several major league baseball teams, was fond of tweaking the noses of the staid officials of the American League and the commissioner of Baseball. He hired Max Patkin, the "clown prince of baseball" to be the first base coach of the Indians.That got under the skin of the big wigs but brought no reprimand. But in 1951, as owner of the St. Louis Browns, he brought in a 3 foot 7 inch midget, one Eddie Gaedel, to bat. He walked on four pitches since no pitcher could find a strike zone that tiny. Veeck said only half jokingly that he wanted Gaedel in the lineup everyday since he was guaranteed to get on base every time. But the commisioner would have no more of it and Gaedel never batted again. Bubbles has become the Eddie Gaedel of golf and it's time for Finchem to make a stand. She has as much chance of making a cut on the PGA tour as Gaedel had of hitting a home run.
2006-09-29 @ 17:43
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
I predict that Michelle Wie will make a PGA cut, and I think it is
outrageous that Eddie Gaedel was banned from baseball for being
too short. I would bet that if there were a Bill Veeck today who did
the same thing the commsioner would do nothing to bail out pitchers
who could not find the player's strike zone.
2006-09-29 @ 19:52
Comment from: Joe Cool [Visitor] Email
Name one LPGA pro that can hit a 3 iron like Michelle.
2006-09-29 @ 21:56
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, I really dislike reminding you of this, but not too long ago you also predicted that Bubbles would not only make the cut at the John Deere, she would also WIN the Evian and the Weetabix. Surely, you haven't forgotten?
2006-09-29 @ 23:01
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Joe Cool, Just one? How about Se Ri Pak? Brittany Lincicome?
2006-09-29 @ 23:12
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Joe Cool,

Let me ask you: what is your handicap?
2006-09-30 @ 02:34
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email

I had a couple of delicious BLTs last night.
2006-09-30 @ 02:37
Comment from: alan m [Visitor] Email
Hey Alex
I was rather interested in your comments about Eddie Gaedel.
I know nothing about Baseball so can you explain the advantage of having him in the team.
I guess at 3'-7" he couldn't run very fast and wouldn't get to 2nd base.
I suppose on the off chance the bases were loaded they would get a run.
Would it have really been an advantage having him play.
Just curious.
2006-09-30 @ 02:57
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
alan m, There was no advantage of having Little Eddie on the team . He was never on the roster until that first and only day. Putting him up to bat was a publicity stunt in an attempt to get more people to pay to get into the games. Similar to having Bubbles in the field at a PGA event. Trying to get more of the curious, non-golf people to pay to watch an over-hyped teenage girl miss cuts by ever-widening margins. In the case of Eddie Gaedel, the commissioner of Baseball and the American League president, in order to maintain the integrity and dignity of the game, proscribed any further such nonsense. Tim Finchem could similarly use the power of his office to conclude the charade being orchestrated by Bubbles' parents, handlers, and sponsors. Sensible folks can only hope that Tim has the intestinal fortitude to do what is right to preserve the integrity of Golf.
2006-09-30 @ 09:29
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
You can all see that Alex is a liar from his comment that he really
dislikes reminding me of my predictions for a made cut and to
wins for Michelle Wie earlier this year. How believable is it that he
dislikes reminding me of that? If he is going to gloat at least he
shouldn't like about the fact that he likes to gloat.
2006-09-30 @ 16:37
Comment from: Alanm [Visitor] Email
How does on earn a sponsor's exemption?
I guess the sponsor's can pick who they like.
If you were a sponsor are you saying you wouldn't pick Wie.
Remember your goal is to sell your product to as many people as you can.
Unless you a running a charity.

Wie gives you a call and says "Hey Alex I need a lawyer"
Is your reply
a. Sorry you will be bad for business
b. Yeh sure thing, but how much do I have to pay you.

2006-09-30 @ 18:35
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, My remarks were a little sarcasm, something you should expect when you make absurd predictions. Don't be so touchy, Jimbo. Bubbles will eventually win something somewhere and you Wie Warriors will be able to lose your collective minds over it. I think it would be good for you Wie-wee's to come to the conclusion that all sensible golf fans have realized for a long time. That Bubbles has the game to be a force in the LPGA or any women's tour, but she will NEVER be competitive on any men's tour. She simply doesn't have the game for it and in that respect she is no different from the rest of female golfers
2006-09-30 @ 19:16
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
alan m, You asked,"How does one earn a sponsor's exemption?" That's a fair question and I'll give you a reasonable answer. Last week at the Valero, 20 year old Anthony Kim, who had been a collegiate star golfer at Oklahoma State, was given his first sponsor's exemption. He responded by not only making the cut but also finishing tied for second. His 72 hole score was 12 under par. Because of his high finish, he automatically qualified for this week's PGA event in Mississippi. He made the cut again yesterday with a shot to spare and shot a 4 under par round today to put himself again into contention. That type of play can be called'"earning" an exemption which he will probably receive at the next opening. Certainly, any sponsor can give an exemption to anyone he so desires. That is not the question. What is the bone of contention is "does giving Bubbles more exemptions despite her poor play in previous attempts in PGA events enhance the image and reputation of the PGA?" Many golf fans, myself included, think that it does not.
2006-09-30 @ 19:43
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
Anthony Kim was probably the most successful PGA sponsor's exemption
in a decade. Giving him as an example of how one earns a sponsor's
exemption is a little like giving Michael Jordan as an example of how one
earns a first round draft piick in the NBA.

Instead of asking what is the best any sponsor's exemption has ever done,
it is more reasonable to ask what the median performance is. I am sure
Michelle Wie was above the median at her first SONY and at last year's
John Deere.

Michelle Wie most certainly can be competitive on one of the lesser men's
tours. She made the cut at the Telecom Open eariler this year. It is
certainly reasonable to think she could be competitive on the Asain Tour--and
if not the Asian Tour, what about the Korean Tour?
2006-09-30 @ 21:35
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, There you go again with your verbal contortions, twisting yourself into a pretzel in your devotion to Bubbles. Alan wanted to know how one "earned" an exemption and I gave him an example. Nowhere did anyone ask for the best finish by a sponsor's exemption. Bubbles made the cut at Inchon and finished 34th in a rain-shortened event. She earned a stupendous $3500 in a third tier event. And she needed a sponsor's exemption to do that. Cherry picking her two closest finishes to the cut in PGA events is disingenuous. As you said in a previous post, those are all simply missed cuts, regardless of the number of strokes by which they were missed.
2006-09-30 @ 22:59
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
Missed cuts. Does it matter whether MW misses the cut by just one stroke
or finishes dead last? If the answer is no when she misses by a stroke, it
should also be no when she is dead last. If it is yes when she finishes dead
last, it should also be yes when she misses by one stroke.

If Michelle Wie can earn $3500 in one week at age 16 playing 3rd tier men's
pro golf it certainly seems like she could be competitve on a lesser men's
2006-10-01 @ 14:38
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email

Let's say she could be competitive on a fourth-rate men's tour (remember, the European and Nationwide tours are tougher than those in question). So what? Wasn't it Se Ri Pak who made a cut in a men's tournament in Korea before Bubbles (and Pak finished tenth, I beleive)? The point is that she wouldn't be accomplishing anything that other top women coudn't. And this is significant because you Wiezeals have always billed the Bubbles as a ground-breaker.

The only ground she's breaking involves being the first woman to insist on embarrassing herself completely and selling herself like a $20 hooker.
2006-10-01 @ 16:04
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
Alex claimed that Wie would NEVER be competitive on any men's tour.

If Wie could be competitive on a 4th rate tour, that would refute Alex's claim.

Playing on a 4th rate tour would be more impressive than losing to fifty
something Bobby Riggs like Margaret Court did before Billie Jean King beat
Riggs later that year.
2006-10-01 @ 16:35
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, You're digging sort of deep there, young fellow. It seems as though you've bought into the PC thing lock stock and barrel. You'd better check out your plumbing, slick. Are you sure you're all boy?
2006-10-01 @ 23:01
Comment from: Visitor [Visitor] Email
Jim C said, "Anthony Kim was probably the most successful PGA sponsor's exemption
in a decade."

Better than Jason Gore last year at the 84 Lumber? Do you think before you
write, moron, or is it just that outside of M.W., you don't know a damn thing
about golf?
2006-10-01 @ 23:26
Comment from: Florida Mike [Visitor] Email
Ford, not sure if you will see this, but I will wait for the bitter end. Thanks

Stacey, I was also responding to someone else who had commented on your blog; also rude or not I do not think much of your writing abilities.
2006-10-02 @ 09:38
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
V isitor, In fairness to Jim C, Jason Gore's win at the 2005 84 Lumber came as a result of a "battlefield promotion" from the Nationwide Tour after three wins there in one season. Ryan Moore just two years ago made it to the big show after winning enough in seven sponsors' exemptions to finish in the top 125 on the PGA money list. He received those exemptions because he was the US Amateur champion. Tiger Woods went that same route eleven years ago. The point is that all these guys and everyone else on the PGA tour got there because they earned it. And if their play becomes substandard, they'll have to relinquish their cards and go back to "Q" school or some other route to make it back to the PGA circuit. Incidentally, Anthony Kim not only made his second straight cut, he finished T17 at seven under par. In his last two PGA tour starts, he has shot 19 under par. A little better than Bubbles.
2006-10-02 @ 09:59
Comment from: Mohamed [Visitor] Email
Wie collapsed in two men's tournaments, while Pressel top 3 for the first time in her pro career, now you are concluding that the corner's turned for both players?

Every time Pressel and Wie faced off this year in tournament, Wie clearly out
played Pressel. Are you so desperate to have a young American to represent?
2006-10-03 @ 15:44
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
This blog is a good example of what happens when adults subject teenage girls to such intense scrutiny. Here we have a lot of "Morgan said this about Michelle" and "Michelle has outplayed Morgan every time" and other such nonsense. Like teenyboppers at a pajama party. Neither of these two young ladies has been allowed to mature gracefully as they should have been. Their adolescence and young womanhood have been co-opted by greedy and avaricious parents and in Morgan's case, grandparents. There is a good chance that neither of these girls will reach their potential, and a lot of that can be laid at the feet of overbearing stage parents. And grandparents.
2006-10-04 @ 08:19
Comment from: Stacy [Visitor] Email
Jane, Michelle Wie said that she's too good for the LPGA tour, not me. I mentioned it in a previous article.

I did condemn Morgan Pressel for not going to college, but you probably missed that article too.

I am not "secretly satisfied" if anyone fails, as long as they try.
2006-10-04 @ 11:19
Comment from: Jane [Visitor]
Stacy, Michelle never said any such thing. I checked your archives and found one quote of hers that you took out of context and treated as an insult to the LPGA (which it was not). Now you're acting as if she explicitly said, "I'm too good for the LPGA." She never did. You're putting your own poisonous interpretation in her mouth.

If you view her desire to compete with the men as damaging or insulting to the LPGA, that is one thing, but it is NOT the same thing as Michelle saying she's too good for the LPGA.

Why not look up her quotes after the Evian, in which she said what an honor it was to play with Karrie Webb and Laura Davies? That's at complete odds with what you've suggested here. And back to my original point, how can Michelle be acting like she's "too good" for the LPGA when a) she's playing the maximum number of exemptions and b) she's not eligible for membership in the first place?
2006-10-04 @ 18:02
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jane, If Bubbles never said those exact words, "I'm too good for the LPGA," those feelings have been pointedly implied numerous times by Michelle and her parents, agents, and handlers. Several posters on this site have said the same. I don't want to get into this juvenile feminine cat fight, but truth is truth.
2006-10-05 @ 07:59
Comment from: Jane [Visitor]
Your interpretation is your interpretation, not the truth. Let's leave it at that.
2006-10-05 @ 08:15
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email
Alex has shown himself to be two-faced again.

Reading through the blog, he professed how Michelle had not earned her sponsors exemption at the lpga championship for 2005, because a sponsor invited her.

Read carefully, Alex says that she did not earn her 2005 lpga championship exemption.

Then later Alex goes on in some detail to explain how a 20 year old male player earned his sponsors exemption on the pga tour.

How did he earn it?
Alex explains that through his great performance as the sponsors exemption of using it to get a 2nd place, that he showed he deserved it.

So back to Michelle then.
At the 2005 lpga championship, Michelle got her sponsors exemption and had a 2nd place there.

Alex, are you getting the picture?
Alex thinks that the guy through his 2nd place finish justified his sponsors exemption, yet he thinks that Michelle's 2nd place didn’t justify her exemption.
2006-10-05 @ 10:29
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email

Just a couple of points because alot of people just don't understand why sponsors exemptions are given out.

Recently I played in Switzerland, there was about 20 Swiss players in the field.
Another example in Holland, there were about 25 Dutch player in the field.

No sponsors exemption is earned by anyone. They are just given out to whoever the sponsor wants, whatever that players skill level.

If Alex or anyone else wants to complain about sponsors exemptions not going to deserving players, then let them complain about any tournament, because in every tournament where there are sponsors exemptions, there are plenty of players who would be more deserving of the place than those sponsors exemptions.

Just look at the alternate players list. The top of that list will contain players more deserving than the sponsors exemptions.

So if anyone wants to complain, complain about all sponsors exemptions and do not nit pick about certain ones, okay.
2006-10-05 @ 10:46
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email
On the Samsung Event

Certain people were complaining of Wie getting a sponsors exemption.

She got a special invitation given by a tournament committee. The sponsor Samsung has nothing to do with it.

Why should she get the Invitation?
Because she earned enough lpga money, that she would have been invited if she were an lpga member.
Incidentally Morgan Pressel didn't earn enough money to qualify and so won't play at the Samsung event.
2006-10-05 @ 10:50
Comment from: Stacy [Visitor] Email
Right that Morgan didn't earn enough money to play next week
but Morgan had to qualify, Michelle did not.
2006-10-05 @ 13:35
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Norman, What did Bubbles do to earn an exemption to ANY PGA event? That's PGA, without an "L". If your answer is along the lines of "she is a great attraction" or "the revenue increases when she is in the field", do me a favor a spare me your Wie Warrior sophistry.
2006-10-05 @ 14:35
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email
Morgan didn't earn enough money to qualify.
Michelle did earn enough enough to qualify, but was stopped from qualifying due to not being an lpga member.
By the way, Michelle earned enough money in just 7 events, whereas Morgan didn't earn enough in over 20 events.

If you want to try to put down Michelle by comparing her to players, you should compare her to a great player like Karrie Webb. Morgan Pressel is a few leagues below either of them.

People can argue all they want about whether Wie is good enough to compete on the pga tour, but it is clear that her performances in lpga events prove that she is good enough to compete in any lpga event.

I think it is just petty for anyone to suggest otherwise.
2006-10-05 @ 15:00
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email
To answer your question.
Wie has not done anything to earn a pga sponsors exemption.

However she is still entitled to many more if the sponsors want to invite her.
Sponsors exemptions are given, not earned.
2006-10-05 @ 15:06
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Norman, There is no argument as to whether Bubbles is good enough to compete on the PGA tour. Her recent play in such events along with her award-winning swoon at the John Deere are conclusive proof that she is not good ehough for the PGA tour. And barring a miracle she will never be good enough for the PGA. She can be and in fact is competitive on the LPGA tour, but the question still is, is she good enough to win on that circuit.
2006-10-05 @ 22:00
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email
Good enough to compete on the pga tour?
In 5 attempts, she has got within 3 shots of the cut 3 times. She is doing very well for a young golfer. Her game is still very immature. Even at the same physical stature, she could knock alot of strokes off her scores, if she improved on a few things.
So, you are very premature in writing her off as regards the pga tour.

On the lpga tour, she is good enough to win, she has already posted a clubhouse lead with a the leaders nearly done. If a leader was to have bogeyed the last hole, she could already have won.
She had a little chip off the side of the green to win outright at the Nabisco and she could have got lucky there, it was very close to going in.

That doesn't change the fact that she didn't win, that is not in dispute, but she has shown that she is good enough to win.

As regards the John Deere, why would you even bring that up. That was just a WD, and they are several of them in most events. At the Lumber there were 10 withdrawals from the event, 2 just before and 8 in the middle of the first or second rounds.
WD's are just part of golf, so for you to say that a WD proved anything is not rational at all.
2006-10-06 @ 12:40
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
It is a fact that Michelle Wie has yet to win on th LPGA. It is also a fact
that in 5 common stroke play tournaments this year, Michelle Wie finished
ahead of Annika 4 times. She was top 5 in 6 out of 7 tournaments this year.

Suppose a 17 year old boy was top 5 in 6 out of 7 PGA events this year,
and finished ahead of Tiger in 4 out of 5 common stroke play events.
Would anyone be asking whether this boy was good enough to win
on the PGA? He could still be winless on the PGA, but no one would be
suggesting that he somehow was just not good enough to win on the PGA.

2006-10-06 @ 12:48
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Norman and Jim C, You guys have a litany of "if's" when it comes to Bubbles. If she had pitched in from off the green, she would have won. If she had made a few more putts, she would have made the cut. If, if, if. If Queen Victoria had a pair, she would have been King. If the dog hadn't stopped to defecate, he'd have caught the rabbit. If, if, if. And Jim C, no 17 year old has ever come within a million miles of what you projected. Again, apples and oranges. And you know it. I never suggested that Bubbles can't win on the LPGA tour. She just hasn't done it. Pay attention slick, you might learn something.
2006-10-06 @ 15:37
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Norman, How many of those withdrawals were taken from the course in an ambulance?. Theatrics at its heighth. Or is it depth. Bubbles was the ONLY person so evacuated on that day including all the spectators, golfers, marshals, volunteers, police, and other security personnel. She's an actress, but not in the class of Katherine Hepburn or Sarah Bernhard.
2006-10-06 @ 16:09
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email
Alex said:
Norman, How many of those withdrawals were taken from the course in an ambulance?.

She would not have been taken away in an ambulance, but for the fact that it was law in that state that anyone with that condition had to be brought to the hospital.

Do you know anything about the law?
2006-10-08 @ 17:32
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email
Alex said:
I never suggested that Bubbles can't win on the LPGA tour. She just hasn't done it.

Ealier Alex said:
She can be and in fact is competitive on the LPGA tour, but the question still is, is she good enough to win on that circuit.

You said the question is, is she good enough.
As Jim pointed out, she has proved that she is good enough.
2006-10-08 @ 17:35
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Norman, What condition was she in? What I glean from your convoluted reasoning or lack thereof, is this: Your opinion is that it is not necessary for Bubbles to win any event on any tour to prove her ability. Some high finishes are just as good. I, and any sane person, would respectfully disagree. If and when Bubbles finally has a "w" after her name, or better still a series of them, she can then be considered a winner. Until such time, she will be an also-ran.
2006-10-08 @ 20:26
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
My dictionary defines an also-ran as a horse that fails to win, place or
show in a race. Since Michelle Wie has frequently finished second or
third in LPGA events she is not simply an also-ran.
2006-10-09 @ 00:11
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, She isn't a winner, either. You're correct about your definition of an also-ran. That would make Bubbles an also-ran by a country mile in every men's event she has ever competed in.
2006-10-09 @ 08:13
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email
Nice way to dodge the issue there Alex. Fact is Michelle has shown that she is good enough to win. Luck can play a big part on when a win occurs, but she is certainly goo d enough to win.

Also who said 2nd's were as good as wins?
It doesn't change the fact though that she was good enough to win.
2006-10-09 @ 10:43
Comment from: Stacy [Visitor] Email
Wie is going to need all of her strength and top form to get past Ochoa and
Sorenstam at the Samsung this week.
2006-10-09 @ 11:36
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
Wie will need to be in top form to win the Samsung--but she is not
going to need all her strength unless she plans to put herself in a lot
of deep rough and fairway sand traps.
2006-10-09 @ 12:34
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Bubbles will not finish in the top ten at the Samsung. And it's only a 25 player field. Her game has taken a decided downward dip in her last several events. That should be obvious to anyone but a Wie Warrior. But you Wie-wee's needn't worry. She'll have plenty of excuses, although being only 16 years old won't be one of them. She'll probably use the old standby, "I've been so busy with school, I haven't had time to hone my game." And ,of course, you jokers will buy it
2006-10-09 @ 15:29
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
And I predict Michelle Wie will finish in the top ten at the Samsung.
Hopefully that will prove to her critics that she has turned her game
around, and that we can expect improved performances from her as a
17 year old against both the women and the men.
2006-10-09 @ 19:39
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, How bold of you to predict that your darling Bubbles, the greatest thing since sliced bread, the single-handed savior of golf, a prodigy who has PROVEN that she is good enough to win, who is ranked somehow about number seven among females in the world, will finish in the top ten in a 25 player tournament! WOW! And you think that will be proof that she has turned her game around against women AND men! Jim C, it's admirable to be optimistic, but PLEASE, try not to be ridiculous.
2006-10-09 @ 21:50
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Well, if Bubbles pursues her Ph.D as she has said she will, she'll have the homework excuse to fall back on for a long time to come. I can hear it now: "I couldn't prepare adequately because I was working on my dissertation on the effects of pressure on athletes in competitive situations."
2006-10-10 @ 00:53
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
Michelle Wie is ranked number 10 in the world in the latest rankings
and I am predicting she will justify her ranking by finishing in the
top 10. Certainly that should be enough to silence her critics. It is
not clear to me that her last two outings against the men have any
bearing on what she will be expected to do against the women--but Alex
seems to think her game has taken a decided downturn in part because of
those two outings--which is what suggested to me the idea that a top 10
finish at the Samsung, in spite of Alex's prediction to the contrary, would
indicate a turn around in her game that would apply to both the women's
and the men's game.
2006-10-10 @ 12:10
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Michelle "Bubbles" Wie, DQ, WD, PhD. Jim C, And if Bubbles doesn't finish in the top 10 of 25 at the Samsung, what is your prediction then? Be careful you don't twist yourself into a pretzel with your Wie- loving contortions.
2006-10-10 @ 16:04
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
I will absolutely guarantee that Michelle Wie will not finish outside of
the top 10 of 25 at the Samsung.
2006-10-10 @ 21:16
Comment from: Jim C [Visitor] Email
OK I will come clean. I could make that guarantee because I knew
the size of the Samsung field is 20 not 25.

I will predict another top 5 finish for Michelle, which is considerably higher
than her Rolex ranking. If she finishes lower than that, I will agree that
she is in a slump, but I would still be optomistic that she will turn things
around and become THE dominant golfer among the ladies and do better
than any other woman has done against the men.
2006-10-10 @ 21:31
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Jim C, What's the matter there, slick? Not so confident anymore? Just a few months ago you predicted quite assuredly that Bubbles would not only make the cut with ease at the Deere, she would also WIN the Evian and the Weetabix. Are you lowering your expectations, kiddo?
2006-10-10 @ 21:59
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Incidentally, Big Jim, there are TWENTY-FIVE young ladies in the final field of the Samsung, not twenty. So your bold prediction is for Bubbles to finish in the top 40%. Whoopee-doo!
2006-10-10 @ 22:06
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
25 women were in the final field of the Samsung. On Tuesday evening the tournament director relegated five to the roles of alternates. Those five were Julietta Granada, Jee Young Lee, Al Miyazato, Brittany Lang, and Morgan Pressel. Bubbles remains in the field, probably on the strength of her sparking finish at the Weetabix and her marvelous performances at the Omega and the 84 Lumber.
2006-10-11 @ 08:06
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
The point that you Wiezeals seem to miss is that most of us who criticize Bubbles only do so because of brash, unrealistic predictions concerning her success against men made by Bubbles and her acolytes and the fact that a red carpet has been rolled out for her on the PGA Tour.

However, it now seems as if you Wiemen have come down to Earth with your expectations, as the most you can muster presently is a claim that she'll finish in the top five in a girly event. This is a more appropriate perspective, and I certainly hope it indicates that the Wiezeals have undergone some significant internal change and maybe even that they've experienced an epiphany.
2006-10-11 @ 12:16
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email
The field for the Samsung has not changed. It was 20 players in 2004, 20 players in 2005, and was billed again as 20 player in 2006, so not sure where you were getting your info but it was very inaccurate obviously.

As regards the tournament, it is nice that Alex made the prediction that she would be outside the top 10. It should be nice to ridicule Alex after the event.

By the way, I would be happy with a top 5 for Wie.
The reasons are because it has all the top players.
The 20 players in the field are the 20 best women players.

Annika is a massive favourite, it is her home course and she has won it
for 4 of the last 5 years, and often by large margins so she will probably be
difficult to beat.

Lorena and Karrie are on great form also, but I think Wie will contend for
the title.

Alex was mentioning her Lumber performance alot.
A slight difference is that the Samsung will probably play about 1,500 yards
shorter, so don't get too cocky Alex about it.

Wie has a decent chance of winning, a great chance if Annika doesn't just
dominate the event like in previous years, and either way has a very good
chance of a top 5, which would be a good performance against the best,
and would further enhance her terrific debut year as a professional golfer.
2006-10-11 @ 19:06
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email
Judge said:
However, it now seems as if you Wiemen have come down to Earth with your expectations, as the most you can muster presently is a claim that she'll finish in the top five in a girly event.

The event is held in practically Annika's back garden.
It is difficult for the other players to win.

A top 5 in the middle of a school term would be a good result for Wie.
She may win, and is likely to win in 2007 in any case.
2006-10-11 @ 19:09
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Judge Smails, Just when I thought Norman would disappoint, what does he say in defense and alibi for Bubbles? He plays the "school term" card! You've got to hand it to old Normie. He's got a million of them. Which of the Wie-wee's will be the first to say "she just turned seventeen a few days ago?" "Her game hasn't matured yet." These canards will come after they have already said she has a good chance to win. When she doesn't win, it will be "Annika is too tough on that course" and "Bubbles was bothered by the plane flight, the wind, the heat, the cold," take your pick.
2006-10-11 @ 19:29
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Yes, Alex, being a Wiezeal means never having to say a Bubbles performance has been sorry.
2006-10-11 @ 21:54
Comment from: Alex [Visitor]
Norman, My information as to the field at the Samsung came from the LPGA itself. The final field was published about a week before the event, It included the names of 25 golfers in no particular order. On Tuesday evening the committee listed the 20 that were to play as well as the five alternates. That is where I got my information and it was quite accurate.
2006-10-12 @ 08:08
Comment from: Norman [Visitor] Email
How can you call it accurate?

The official tournament site stated not only that it would be 20 players, but also how they would be selected.
2006-10-12 @ 11:43
Comment from: new [Visitor] Email
Assista filmes, programas jornalísticos de entretenimento, culturais, documentários, canais de video clipes, programação adulta tudo ao vivo em seu computador pessoal ou notebook, em qualquer lugar do mundo em que você esteja
2010-08-02 @ 13:26

Comments are closed for this post.