Should women be allowed to play on the PGA Tour?

[Focker Singh]

Isabelle Beisiegel ranked 79th on the LPGA Tour is entering Qualifying School for 2 PGA events early next season. She's paid her entry fee. What do you think of her move? Is it just a publicity stunt or is she for real? She claims to have the game required to play a PGA event, though her stats on the LPGA tour don't really reflect that. Annika Sorenstan and Michelle Wei are just two examples of this. Question is, should women be allowed to play on PGA events?

[Focker Singh]

In my opinion for this particular case I think she should be allowed to enter Q-school. She is trying out like all the others to win a spot. Good for her if she does, though I don't think she will. As long as women have to qualify and earn their spots on tour, I dont find a problem. Its when you see women play on men's events cause of sponsor exemptions that I find it unfair. It would be unique to see one day for example: Michelle Wei on a Sunday final pairing with Vijay Singh or something.

[Ego Woods]

In my opinion for this particular case I think she should be allowed to enter Q-school. She is trying out like all the others to win a spot. Good for her if she does, though I don't think she will. As long as women have to qualify and earn their spots on tour, I dont find a problem. Its when you see women play on men's events cause of sponsor exemptions that I find it unfair. It would be unique to see one day for example: Michelle Wei on a Sunday final pairing with Vijay Singh or something.
Yes, I believe women s/b able to play on the PGA tour with the men, since the PGA is suppose to represent the best of the best.......if a female has got the game to play with the boys and she goes through qualification like the men, then all the power to them......

while it could be a debated issue, using a sponsor's exemption to let a female play in the tournament is totally ok w/me.....the sponsor wants to attract the biggest audience possible, I mean, they are paying for the tournament, so why the heck not. If you're saying it's not fair and takes away from other players who could be playing, well sponsors always let local club pros, amateurs or Canadians in the recent Bell Canadian Open for example play in their tournament, and they didn't qualify for the tournament either......so what's the diff if it's a female?

[Focker Singh]

If you're saying it's not fair and takes away from other players who could be playing, well sponsors always let local club pros, amateurs or Canadians in the recent Bell Canadian Open for example play in their tournament, and they didn't qualify for the tournament either......so what's the diff if it's a female?

Yes, I am saying that it is not fair to the other men who have qualified for the tournament. The club pro's are technically not in the Thurs-Sun draw. They are allowed to play in the Mon-Wed practice sessions and Pro-Am competition. Amateur's are not allowed to win any prize money. Therefore, even if an amateur wins, its just for glory. Like I said, if they qualify and make it, I welcome them to play.
Lets look at it from the opposite side. If a man is not good enough to earn a PGA card, can he qualify to play in the LPGA. His chances of winning more prize money on the LPGA is probably greater than the PGA.
I'm just playing devil's advocate. I would love to see a Wei vs Tiger final on a Sunday!

[Ego Woods]

I am not quite sure if your argument is about women playing in the PGA or anyone who doesn't go through proper qualifications to play in the PGA tournaments.

The club pro's are technically not in the Thurs-Sun draw. They are allowed to play in the Mon-Wed practice sessions and Pro-Am competition. Amateur's are not allowed to win any prize money. Therefore, even if an amateur wins, its just for glory. Like I said, if they qualify and make it, I welcome them to play.
R u sure about club pro's not being able to play? I am pretty sure that I saw local club pros play in Sunday finals!

How about local pros who get sponsor's exemptions to play? Like I said in my earlier example, inviting Canadians to play in the Bell Canadian. Like David Morland IV! He got a sponsor exemption and didn't go through any qualifications. Would you have a problem with him then?

Lets look at it from the opposite side. If a man is not good enough to earn a PGA card, can he qualify to play in the LPGA. His chances of winning more prize money on the LPGA is probably greater than the PGA.
I'm just playing devil's advocate. I would love to see a Wei vs Tiger final on a Sunday!
PGA is Pro Golfer's Association...it makes no reference to gender. If you're good enough to play, then it don't matter. LPGA is LADIES Pro Golfer's Association.....I guess if there was an MPGA, then women wouldn't be allowed to play, right?

Of other note, I also see that it's the second time you mis-spelled Michelle WIE's last name, so thought I should just correct you. :D

HAPPY GOLFING!

[Mok]

i think that a sponsor can give exemption to whoever they want, they are paying big bucks so if the sponsor wants to give the exemption to some board of directors teenage son or daughter they can do whatever they want!

and since PGA does not refer to gender, women can try out anytime they want, if they can get through Q-school, good for them and good luck to them in the tournaments!

[Mok]

i have to add that i think she is wasting her money ... i think i read somewhere it's $4500? well unless she lands a big sponsor because of this stunt then she is losing $4500 heh...i mean if she is looking for tougher competition, she already has some, 78 players are ahead of her in the LPGA and she has missed a few cuts recently on the LPGA tour so I don't know who she thinks she is to try out for Q school...it's a free world she could if she wants though...

[Ems]

If a woman qualifies for a PGA tournament then it sounds like everyone agrees she should be allowed to play.

If a sponsor gives an exemption, and since they are forking out the dough, they should have the right to do that too. However, if they want their tournament to be respected, they should not compromise the integrity of their competition by letting people in who can't qualify just for publicity.

If publicity helps sell their product and that's their main goal, then they wouldn't care about their tournament not being as well respected as one that strictly lets the best of the best play.

[Ego Woods]

i have to add that i think she is wasting her money ... i think i read somewhere it's $4500? well unless she lands a big sponsor because of this stunt then she is losing $4500 heh...i mean if she is looking for tougher competition, she already has some, 78 players are ahead of her in the LPGA and she has missed a few cuts recently on the LPGA tour so I don't know who she thinks she is to try out for Q school...it's a free world she could if she wants though...
She's confident that she can make it past Q-school...a lot of ppl in sports always think they are better than they actually are...sometimes it takes something to make their egos come back to the ground.....:rolleyes: ......I said "sometimes" heh heh

She only made $121K this season on the LPGA, so $4500 is quite a big hit for her.....

[Queen of the Beach]

Isabelle Beisiegel ranked 79th on the LPGA Tour is entering Qualifying School for 2 PGA events early next season. She's paid her entry fee. What do you think of her move? Is it just a publicity stunt or is she for real? She claims to have the game required to play a PGA event, though her stats on the LPGA tour don't really reflect that. Annika Sorenstan and Michelle Wei are just two examples of this. Question is, should women be allowed to play on PGA events?
I am all for equality and I think women should be allowed to try out and win a spot on tour. And I agree that women should have to qualify and earn their spots on tour, I wouldn't want an easy in. However, I just wonder if women can keep up? Annika can probably out drive some male players but she didn't have the same calibre of play. I think it is the lack of stiff competition on the LPGA that makes it harder for the women to switch over to the PGA. I know other sports leagues seperate genders such as NBA and WNBA. Should women be allowed to play on the NBA? And why not? I think we should consider this: Why do women want to play with the men? Is it just for women's bragging rights? Is it for publicity? More money? Is it to improve their level of play? However, if they switch over and fail miserably then won't it just prove that there should be 2 seperate associations?

[Mok]

maybe women sports should be cancelled altogether :eek: and just merge womens and mens athetlics...that way no more complaints and women get equal right! :rolleyes: haha j/k

[Ego Woods]

No PGA tour card for Beisiegel. Not even close. It's kinda stupid to hear her talk of PGA courses being more wide open and more forgiving than LPGA courses. She still shows the same bravado feeling she could have gotten so many more birdies (she only had 2) when she probably had a more realistic chance of getting more bogeys and double bogeys....

Here's the article (www.golfserv.com/gdc/news/article.asp?id=28415).

[Mok]

this woman just makes me laugh :rofl: she's a joke. she should really step into reality. it took her 3 tries for the LPGA and she thinks she can get a PGA card...lol...

[Ego Woods]

Again, this has nothing to do with her being female....if I saw Annika and maybe even Grace Park or Michelle Wie at Q-school, I'd think they'd have a much better chance at getting a card than Beisiegel....

[Focker Singh]

She was terrible...not even close...nice try chickie, better luck next year...pure publicity stunt...what sucks more is she's Canadian!!

[Ems]

Any idea where she's from in Canada?

Well, she plays better than me AND she's younger. Must be intimidating to play against all those guys and know that everyone has an opinion on what she's trying to achieve for herself. I kinda admire her for that.

[Focker Singh]

Any idea where she's from in Canada?

Well, she plays better than me AND she's younger. Must be intimidating to play against all those guys and know that everyone has an opinion on what she's trying to achieve for herself. I kinda admire her for that.

If my memory is correct I think she's from BC...somebody look that up for me?
If she didn't sound so confident in the beginning it would be different. She said the PGA has wider fairways and that she can hit the ball just as far as the guys. She should have just lay low in the radar screen and if she did well than good for her. Then again, the media had a lot to do with it too. Kudo's for trying though.

[Ego Woods]

If my memory is correct I think she's from BC...somebody look that up for me?
She's from Montreal.

[Ego Woods]

I certainly don't think we'll see an end to women playing in the PGA tour, or atleast attempting to.......I must admit that they are getting closer and closer......perhaps if Annika entered more tournaments, she could be the first female to make a tournament cut.....she's definitely got the game out of any female out there.......

[malarky]

Yes, women should play on the PGA if they have the game and can compete.

While talking about gender equality in professional golf is one thing, a more important venue for this discussion is in the private clubs. I used to have a membership at a GTA private club along with my wife for a few years in the 90's. We gave it up for a variety of reasons, but one of the more bitter ones was the fact that female members while paying pretty much equivalent fees were restricted in the times they were allowed to play.

Tell me if this is in any way justified in this day and age ... I could play on Saturday morning with a non-member guest, pretty much anyone off the street as long as I paid a guest green fee (a nominal $80), but my wife could not join us even though she was a "full" member.

Sad to say, this was, and to this day still a common practice in the established private clubs in North America.

[Mok]

Yes, women should play on the PGA if they have the game and can compete.

While talking about gender equality in professional golf is one thing, a more important venue for this discussion is in the private clubs. I used to have a membership at a GTA private club along with my wife for a few years in the 90's. We gave it up for a variety of reasons, but one of the more bitter ones was the fact that female members while paying pretty much equivalent fees were restricted in the times they were allowed to play.

Tell me if this is in any way justified in this day and age ... I could play on Saturday morning with a non-member guest, pretty much anyone off the street as long as I paid a guest green fee (a nominal $80), but my wife could not join us even though she was a "full" member.

Sad to say, this was, and to this day still a common practice in the established private clubs in North America.
I think that is pretty ridiculous. Those private clubs are living in the past. I mean it's 2004 now, soon to be 2005. They definitely should be changing their by-laws if they want to be successful business entities with future golfers. There are so many female golfers nowadays, almost comparable to the amount of male golfers.

[malarky]

I think that is pretty ridiculous. Those private clubs are living in the past. I mean it's 2004 now, soon to be 2005. They definitely should be changing their by-laws if they want to be successful business entities with future golfers. There are so many female golfers nowadays, almost comparable to the amount of male golfers.
The newer clubs are changed. Either because they were progressive, or because they were forced to due to declining membership.

The established, and the more exclusive places will be slow to act. No compelling reason. They are doing well.

Now, all the bunk-ness about private clubs is coming back. I remember in order to "equalize" the sexes, my club instituted a "ladies-only" morning. LOL. Too bad it was on a Tuesday morning, when most working people which happen to include men AND women can't play. Sure it works for women retirees, but they would have played at that time anyway!

You know what? We're lucky in the GTA to have an abundance of public courses to play. If all you're interested in is golf, and don't care about the social aspects, status, etc. then screw'em those dinosaurs.:mad:

[Mok]

The newer clubs are changed. Either because they were progressive, or because they were forced to due to declining membership.

The established, and the more exclusive places will be slow to act. No compelling reason. They are doing well.

Now, all the bunk-ness about private clubs is coming back. I remember in order to "equalize" the sexes, my club instituted a "ladies-only" morning. LOL. Too bad it was on a Tuesday morning, when most working people which happen to include men AND women can't play. Sure it works for women retirees, but they would have played at that time anyway!

You know what? We're lucky in the GTA to have an abundance of public courses to play. If all you're interested in is golf, and don't care about the social aspects, status, etc. then screw'em those dinosaurs.:mad:
Seriously, man there are so many golf clubs within very close driving distance that i could care less about a private club. i think if i won the lottery or something and i wouldn't join a private club still, why limit yourself to one course? i know it's a prestiege thing to be have membership at a private club but i think in today's world, especially in toronto, it doesn't mean as much anymore!

[Ego Woods]

The newer clubs are changed. Either because they were progressive, or because they were forced to due to declining membership.

The established, and the more exclusive places will be slow to act. No compelling reason. They are doing well.

Now, all the bunk-ness about private clubs is coming back. I remember in order to "equalize" the sexes, my club instituted a "ladies-only" morning. LOL. Too bad it was on a Tuesday morning, when most working people which happen to include men AND women can't play. Sure it works for women retirees, but they would have played at that time anyway!

You know what? We're lucky in the GTA to have an abundance of public courses to play. If all you're interested in is golf, and don't care about the social aspects, status, etc. then screw'em those dinosaurs.:mad:
I believe it's only a matter of time until private clubs lax their restrictions on women's golf....I've heard that many private clubs are not doing that well financially due to the abundance of courses out there and ones that continually are cropping up....many of the better courses that opened up during 2003 and 2004 were public courses (Taboo, Tangle Creek, the Rock, Eagles Nest, Wildfire)....also many of the new individuals taking up the sport of golf are just middle income or even low income citizens....there's probably small chance that they'd invest their finances on ONE golf club....

to try and exclude or restric such a large population of golfers (ie. women) is one that can only last so long.....a testament to changing face of golf...

[Focker Singh]

I agree that there should not be restrictions to whether or not women can play at a specific golf course. I even more upset to hear that women were not allowed to play at certain times when they are a full paying member.

I've always wondered why Augusta National, home of the Masters and one of the most famous and storied courses in the world can still have rules that forbid women from becoming members. I think its because they have enough CEO's and CFO's as members paying large sums of money to keep the course profitable.

[Mok]

I agree that there should not be restrictions to whether or not women can play at a specific golf course. I even more upset to hear that women were not allowed to play at certain times when they are a full paying member.

I've always wondered why Augusta National, home of the Masters and one of the most famous and storied courses in the world can still have rules that forbid women from becoming members. I think its because they have enough CEO's and CFO's as members paying large sums of money to keep the course profitable.
here's a thought: the PGA Tour boycott Augusta and any other gender bias courses!

[Focker Singh]

here's a thought: the PGA Tour boycott Augusta and any other gender bias courses!

That would never happen. The Masters is the Super Bowl of golf. You know how many millions would be lost? From a business aspect, never in a million years.

[Mok]

That would never happen. The Masters is the Super Bowl of golf. You know how many millions would be lost? From a business aspect, never in a million years.
i wouldn't say it'd never happen.

Who would be the one losing the millions?
Lets say the PGA Tour demands Augusta National to change it's gender policy, and if it doesn't, they find a new home for their Major, PGA Tour would not be losing anything, the only ones losing would be the golf course.

or if the PGA players boycott Augusta, the event would be so tainted that they'd have to figure out another venue to play a major.

I mean, it's not a new thing that athletes boycott sporting events in support of a cause. Look at the olympics! Athletes that train endlessly turned down a chance for glory (and potential money) and at times these athletes never get a second chance. For PGA golfers to boycott an event, it wouldn't be a big financial hit on their wallet or for the sport of golf. I'm pretty sure there would be enormous support for this.

[Ems]

I'm just starting to learn more about golf but am so shocked :eek: to hear that full paying female members to established private clubs are restricted in the time that they can play!??!

Hopefully with more and more major corporations moving towards equalizing women in the work force, it would influence the types of affiliations that executives would choose to associate with. I know my company is trying to make huge strives in helping to make women advancement more equal to men, and for me it would be disappointing to know that any of the partners at my company are members of a club that discriminate against their female members. I know this might sound like a whole different topic, but I think they're related in some ways... I think as society progresses, these dinosaurs will have to change with the times to be successful and respected.

[Ego Woods]

I agree that there should not be restrictions to whether or not women can play at a specific golf course. I even more upset to hear that women were not allowed to play at certain times when they are a full paying member.

I've always wondered why Augusta National, home of the Masters and one of the most famous and storied courses in the world can still have rules that forbid women from becoming members. I think its because they have enough CEO's and CFO's as members paying large sums of money to keep the course profitable.
If Augusta promoted themselves as a men's only club, I find nothing wrong with forbidding women from playing their course. That is their choice and their right. However since the Masters is one of golf's majors, and the tournament can be played by any gender...I find this to be very oxymoronic..

[Mok]

If Augusta promoted themselves as a men's only club, I find nothing wrong with forbidding women from playing their course. That is their choice and their right. However since the Masters is one of golf's majors, and the tournament can be played by any gender...I find this to be very oxymoronic..
http://www.torontogolfnuts.com/showthread.php?t=15

haha this is a joke btw!

[Queen of the Beach]

The newer clubs are changed. Either because they were progressive, or because they were forced to due to declining membership.

The established, and the more exclusive places will be slow to act. No compelling reason. They are doing well.

Now, all the bunk-ness about private clubs is coming back. I remember in order to "equalize" the sexes, my club instituted a "ladies-only" morning. LOL. Too bad it was on a Tuesday morning, when most working people which happen to include men AND women can't play. Sure it works for women retirees, but they would have played at that time anyway!

You know what? We're lucky in the GTA to have an abundance of public courses to play. If all you're interested in is golf, and don't care about the social aspects, status, etc. then screw'em those dinosaurs.:mad:
As a beginner golfer I am currently only interested in playing at Golf courses that feel inviting and welcome inexperienced golfers (male or female). And my goal will not be to one day play at a snobby private club. I would rather play at a world famous public course.
Not a dinosaur type course. :)
I know that we have abundant public courses in Toronto that welcome women. Are the public courses in other parts of North America or say Europe as progressive in their treatment of women? How about Asia?

[Queen of the Beach]

If Augusta promoted themselves as a men's only club, I find nothing wrong with forbidding women from playing their course. That is their choice and their right. However since the Masters is one of golf's majors, and the tournament can be played by any gender...I find this to be very oxymoronic..
I agree that private clubs have a right to put restrictions on the types of members that they have as long as it is constitutional. They can restrict membership to only those that can afford it if they want. However, I don't think they should place restrictions on gender. Playing Golf does give you status recognition because not everyone can afford to play the sport.
If you look at some public courses they have their restrictions too. We just accept it. Some make it so expensive that they price their green fees at a level close to extortion. I think that automatically restricts the type of clientele that plays at those expensive courses. But as long as you can pay the fee then you can play.
But the face of Golf is changing and golfers no longer fit into old stereotypes. Golf is no longer a male only sport. Young players, women and minorities are increasingly interested in the sport and changing the way the game is played. And I believe if they have the skill then they should be allowed to play at any course they want. Private or Public.