PGA Championship Week Recap (etc.) Part I: How Did LIV Golfers Fare?

 In the Norse tradition, Valhalla is the place where heroes go when they die in combat. But there is another, IRL Valhalla in Louisville, Kentucky, and it's just hosted its fourth PGA Championship.

No, we didn't see Rory McIlroy end his major drought dating to the 2015 Masters. No, Jordan Spieth didn't complete the career grand slam. And no, Scottie Scheffler wasn't able to keep alive his Scottie Season Slam hopes. He did, however, get clapped into jail for not cooperating with the cops at a traffic stop after a poor fan had been killed in a car crash. This led to a third day of split tees, which you normally don't see at majors.

We also saw yet another dramatic finish on the premises. In 1996, Mark Brooks nipped local boy Kenny Perry in a one-hole, sudden-death playoff. In 2000, Tiger Woods caught Bob May and effectively beat him with his birdie on the first hole of what was now a mandatory three-hole aggregate playoff. In 2014, Rory McIlroy won the PGA Championship as fast fell the eventide by one stroke over Phil Mickelson. And just today, 19 May 2024, we saw Xander Schauffele launch the first-ever season Golden Slam bid (and add to his career one) by responding to LIV founding member Bryson DeChambeau's closing birdie with one of his own from just outside 6' to set a new scoring record for men's majors against par (-21/263).

I mentioned LIV Golf. What you see here is a grid of what I call "expectations versus reality." Since the majors are the only events at which LIV golfers compete against PGA Tour loyalists these days, I decided to compare the proportional performances of the various LIV contingents at the majors since the start of last year to assess their "real" performances when the size of the field and its nature (club pros and amateurs excluded who are not otherwise exempt to the majors) are taken into account. In other words, I'm sort of making like Phil Steele, except for professional tour golf.

The "LIV" column is simply the number of members of LIV Golf at each major. The "aField" column is the total field size minus any amateurs (Masters, U.S. Open, Open Championship) or not-otherwise-exempt club pros (PGA Championship). I say "not otherwise exempt" because of the case of such guys like Michael Block, who placed in the top fifteen and ties at last year's PGA Championship, so he didn't need to play the PGA Professional Championship to get in (he did anyway but finished outside the top twenty). The "tField" column is simply the total number of golfers--tour pros, club pros and amateurs--who are competing in that major.

"aProp" refers to the proportion of LIV golfers among those covered in the "aField." "tProp" is the overall proportion of LIV golfers in the field. As you can tell, there has been a slight decline in the proportions due to the lack of OWGR points for LIV golfers. In general, the largest percentages of LIV membership at each major have been correlated with the Masters Tournament and the PGA Championship. This may be because the first category for exemption to each of those majors is simply having won the event in the past, no questions asked. This year's contingent at Valhalla may also have benefited numerically from further defections to LIV among the OWGR top 100 (Jon Rahm, Tyrrell Hatton, Adrian Meronk), a good performance among last year's contingent (especially winner Brooks Koepka) and special invitations extended to members outside the top 100 (Talor Gooch comes to mind). While the jury is still out on the last two majors of this year, last year's "open" majors had much lower percentages of LIV members. This may stem, in part, from restrictions on past champions (such as the USGA's ten-year limit and the R&A's age-sixty, soon to be age-55, limit).

The three columns with the letters "NY" revolve around the number of golfers invited to the following edition of that particular major by virtue of a top finish. For the open majors, one must finish in the top ten and ties to be automatically invited next year if not otherwise exempt. For the Masters Tournament, it's top twelve and ties. For the PGA Championship, it's fifteen and ties. The column "xNY" multiplies the original "NY" column by "tProp" to ascertain the number of expected LIV golfers among the top finishers. This year, seventeen overall players finished among the top fifteen and ties. Of these, two--DeChambeau and South Africa's Dean Burmester--are affiliated with LIV Golf. The latter number is noted under "lNY," which indicates the actual LIV membership among the top finishers.

The last three columns are marked "T4." These refer to the number of top-four finishers at a given major. The original column is, again, multiplied by "tProp" to derive "xT4." As with "xNY," "xT4" is the expected total of golfers in that range. I track this because the three majors other than the Masters send their top-four finishers to next year's Masters, no matter what. This year's PGA "lT4" came up with one LIV member, Bryson DeChambeau. Not as though he needs the exemption because he won the 2020 U.S. Open, which gives him Masters access through next year. After that, though, it'll matter.

This year's majors have been a mixed bag for LIV so far. Given the data above, I would argue that the LIV contingent was generally successful in living up to expectations at Valhalla. But this is a step down from the Masters, where they exceeded expectations in terms of top-twelve finishes. So, how will they do at Pinehurst next month, home of the U.S. Open? Or at Royal Troon, home of the Open Championship the month after? Feel free to offer your predictions, either on the YouTube short I posted or in the comment form below.

Concerning Jon Rahm's Hypocritical Selling Out to LIV Golf (A Rant)

C.W.: Some language 

The news of Jon Rahm defecting from the PGA Tour to the Saudi-backed LIV Golf had been rumoured for weeks. Rahm had gone incognito (seemingly) since the Ryder Cup, where he had helped Europe win back the trophy 16.5-11.5. He hadn't bothered to play the Hero World Challenge, though he would have definitely been eligible as one of the top five in the OWGR. And earlier this week, despite being the holder of the title at the American Express, he wasn't listed as a participating player for next month's renewal of that event. None of that matters now that Rahm has signed for at least $300 million--possibly $500 million--with LIV, for rumours have become reality. And though it seemed increasingly likely, I stepped out of the office at my workplace to let out a primal scream of rage.

In my opinion, Rahmbo's prior defence of proper tour golf seemed especially eloquent, more so than Rory McIlroy (whose own native tongue is English, for crying out loud). Rahm invoked legends of Spanish golf, both living (like Jose Maria Olazabal) and deceased, in so doing. He never said anything about blood money, wisely focusing on the format--only 54 holes, no cut and parallel team and individual components. Needless to say, when Rahm signed with LIV yesterday, something within me died. It was arguably because Rahm was a terrible hypocrite to defect.

Traitor.

In contrast, for all his demons, Rahm's fellow-alumnus of Arizona State University, Phil Mickelson--also a multiple-major-winning golfer on his career who's defected to LIV--was at least upfront about his desire to alter the nature of tour golf. His interview with golf journalist Alan Shipnuck showed his honest feelings about the dual nature of collaborating with the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF). Though the Saudi government was willing to help Mickelson's endeavour, he knew their penchant for killing LGBTQ+ people and their involvement in the murder of Washington Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi, calling them "scary motherfuckers" to deal with. But he at least showed no qualms about his priority of redesigning tour golf, especially the PGA Tour, in justifying his eventual break with the established ecosystem to join the Saudi-funded one. Furthermore, Mickelson was approaching the end of his career as a mainstream golfer when he left for LIV. Rahm is only 29.

On a personal note, I am part of the generation that saw Tiger Woods rise to glory and fall from it, then come back for a while late last decade and win a few more big-time events. Growing up, then, I had believed in tour golf because of its meritocracy. The idea that you need to do well enough out of the gate at each tournament to earn official prize money, which only comes by making the cut. The idea that, if you win an event, you should get more job security than those who don't win events. The idea that, without a tournament win, you need to do well consistently to keep from being demoted or terminated. Even the events without a cut, such as the Tournament of Champions (now the Sentry), have come with strings attached, such as a win since the last edition or a high standing in the world or in the tour's order of merit. I mentioned Rahm invoking Spanish golf tradition. I swear the moment Rahm signed that contract with LIV, Seve Ballesteros turned his grave vault into an electric power turbine.

Earlier this fall, I gave up on college sports because money is driving out tradition and the sound institutions that made it great in the first place. I just hope that Rahm's departure for LIV will not cause me to lose my appetite for golf sooner or later. The whole conundrum of his treason against proper tour golf breaks my heart more than any result in any sport.

Edward the Scop