Does the fact the ancient Gary Player can still take part in The Masters undermine the competition's worth?

Question

I think it does. He's taking the place of a young up-and-coming golfer. He knows he hasn't got a hope in hell of winning it now, but still he carries on. It's just ridiculous self indulgence.

Answer 1

He only wants to beat Arnold Palmers appearance record. He has no chance of even making the cut, it's an embarrassment to the game. Would they let Rod Laver play at Wimbledon because he won 30 years ago!

Answer 2

The Masters has always been a very closed competition. However, by limiting the number of players, you have noticed that the best players win the Masters more often than the other majors. I think it's also nice to see some of the history of the game once in a while such as the Tom Watsons, Gary Players, Craig Stadlers, and so on. Once you win the tournament, you have an invitation for life. Even players who have talked about it say that is why winning the Masters is so special.

Answer 3

First off, you have to understand he doesn't take the place of anyone.

The Masters is an invitational event. All former champions, aged 65 and below, are automatically eligible to play. If all did (not all still play) it would not affect at all the number of others who are invited to play in the tournament.

There is no limit to the size of the field, other than the rules the club places on it. For the longest time, for instance, it did not automatically invite players who have won a PGA Tour event the preceeding year. That will change next year.

But having player in doesn't mean someone else doesn't get to play. It has no affect on the invitations.

Having said that, having Player in the tournament is tremendous. He's a great golfer, a great man, and he's going out in style. Next year he will probably tee up with Arnold Palmer as honorary starters. It's always wonderful to watch those guys.

I've been honored to meet Mr. Player, and he is a true gentleman.

Answer 4

I don't follow golf - it's too boring for me. Here's some thoughts on your question, though.

If Gary Player can meet the qualifying requirements, he should be in. End of discussion.

If he's in simply because he's one of the great players of the game, then fine, so be it. It's their tournament, their rules. The people that have been following the sport and the tournament for 20, 30, 40 years like to see him there, and (presumedly) patronize the advertisers. Since that's what gets this sort of thing aired on TV, that's what you're gonna see. If there's a young up-and-coming player who's almost good enough to make the cut, tell them to hang in there - all the current people in the tournament did the same thing, so why shouldn't Mr. New Guy do the same thing?

Answer 5

No hes not because he can go any time he wants because hes a past champion..and past champions have invitations for the rest of their life. Its just a part of history that makes the first two rounds of the masters more enjoyable. Even if he didnt play it wouldnt make way for another young up and coming golfer. If they are up and coming then they have to qualify for the Masters like everyone else has done. Its not Gary's fault the up and coming golfers arent in it...its their fault for not playing up to the standards of getting into a Major.

Answer 6

He is not taking the place of some young up-and-coming golfer. He has earned his spot as a former winner. A young up-and-comer earns his spot on the Masters. Do you think Jack Nicklaus stopped Tiger from entering his first Masters? No, he didn't. Tiger earned his spot as a youngster.

Remember in 1986 when Jack Nicklaus hadn't even won a tournament in a couple of years? He won the Masters. There were some before the tournament started who said Nicklaus shouldn't be there so somebody else could take his spot. They were wrong.

You get to play the Masters at Player's age because of the exemption you EARNED by winning. You get to play in the Masters as an up-and-coming golfer by winning. He isn't taking anyone's place but his.

Answer 7

I do not think I could disagree anymore then I do.

The Masters is an event like no other in Golf or sport in general. Having the greats of yesterday play as logn as they see fit, makes it even better.

Whether it is Arnie, or Player, Tiger or Lefty; they all wanted 1 thing more then any other in their career. The Green jackets they don are much like Tom Brady's superbowl rings or Derek Jeter's World Series Rings. Golf is the only sport that an old timer like Gary Player can be paired up with a Great like Vijay Singh without destroying the game.

Answer 8

The Masters is steeped in tradition & honor, more than any other tournament on the tour. There's room for lots of new guys at the Masters, you have no idea what you're talking about!
Let's see you hang through a round of 18 with "ancient Gary Player", I bet he,d smoke your ***!!

Answer 9

You are wrong. The Masters is not a size limited event. All of the people that should get in do. I.e. top so many in the world, winners of last so many majors, last years top so many in winnings etc. In addition to all those players all former winners can play. I think there may be some age cutoff now, but they are not taking spots from anyone that might actually able to compete, unlike Michelle Wie when she plays in PGA events.

Answer 10

Spoken like someone who has no value for the history of the sport. I think it is great that past champions are aloud to return as long as they wish. Remember at one time these champions were also up and comers who had to pay there dues and miss tournaments for reasons such the same. Gary player has done more for the sport than 100 of these younger players could ever imagine doing for it. Just remember that there are always people who have come before to pave the way for us and future generations to have our chance at whatever it is we decide to pursue.