Rory & the Major Asterisk
Rory & the Major Asterisk
Where do we draw the line on the Asterisk in golf?
Welcome back to the Baller Golf newsletter.
This week has provided us with an interesting discussion surrounding the validity of Major victories if certain personnel are not competing. I wanted to open a discussion and look at how valid an “Asterisk” claim is against Rory compared to other situations.
There is a free version and a paid version of Baller Golf. Both contain words but the paid version has more and goes deeper. I’d appreciate it if you signed up and I’d be over the moon [if] you bought a paid subscription and helped support independent media.
Exploring the Asterisk: Debating the Impact of Absentees in Golf
A debate over legitimacy has sparked discussion this week, with Talor Gooch responding to a question and remarking on a potential asterisk accompanying Rory McIlroy's hypothetical Masters win.
Gooch, a talented golfer himself but currently positioned outside the upper echelons of the World Rankings, raised eyebrows when he suggested that McIlroy's triumph at Augusta would be tainted should it occur amidst the absence of certain players who have opted for the LIV Golf circuit.
Central to this debate is the recent invitation extended to LIV Golf standout Joaquin Niemann to compete at the Masters, a move that has ignited discussions about the tournament's selection criteria and its implications for the sport. Gooch's suggestion that McIlroy's victory would come with an asterisk underscores a fundamental question: should the absence of certain players, irrespective of the reasons, diminish the significance of a major championship win and where do we draw the line for asterisks in golf?
Historically, injuries, personal setbacks, or off-form performances have occasionally taken elite players out of a Sunday showdown during major championships. Should these instances also warrant asterisks, or is there a distinction between voluntary absences and circumstantial ones?
Golf is a sport where players contend with the challenges presented before them, navigating complex courses, conditions, and competitors. While the absence of certain players may alter the competitive landscape, does it fundamentally alter the nature of victory?
If we look at basketball for a moment, taking out the star player often has a big impact on the team's performance because 20% of the A team is missing but it’s less impactful when the star player is missing from a football (soccer) team as that one player only accounts for 9ish% of the favoured starting team. Although an individual sport, I would liken golf closer to football than basketball because removing one or a couple of top-tier golfers is just a small percentage of the competitive field and this winning form has to be sustained over a few days, not just one effort.
Let’s not forget, Brooks Koepka, Dustin Johnson, Cam Smith, Bryson DeChambeau and Phil Mickelson of LIV are eligible for all four major championships in 2024, in addition to the likes of Collin Morikawa, Scottie Scheffler, Jon Rahm, Viktor Hovland, Max Homa, and many more players who will all attract bets from golf punters looking to make some money on a winner.
It’s not like Rory hasn’t got his work cut out and if he beats that field so in my opinion, there would not be an asterisk over a win in Augusta.
Quick Poll
That’s all for this week, don’t forget to reach out to Baller Golf on X/Twitter
Use discount code: BALLERGOLF for 15% off at shotscope.com (including sale items)
Get featured in a rapidly growing golf newsletter 📈
Baller Golf is growing fast (over 25,000 subs) and we have a passionate audience who love the game. We have advertising options for golf brands, courses, and more. Get in touch.
*Disclosure: I only recommend products I would use myself and all opinions expressed here are our own. This post may contain affiliate links that at no additional cost to you, I may earn a small commission.