I cant think of one? Besides maybe the Kentucky Derby.
Daytona 500
Masters
Indianapolis 500
Bristol/Charlotte 600, Talledaga all early season and more important than the rest of the races.
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
I cant think of one? Besides maybe the Kentucky Derby.
Right, but we all like that one big title. Different sports are different in this way as far as golf and tennis with the majors, what is a bigger tennis accomplishment points at the end of the year? Olympic gold medal? Majors Grand Slam? or World Tennis Championship Title?
Thinking about the topic and not doing too much research a big difference is that the World Championship is the annual or bi-annual event that crowns a champion in non-Olympic years in many many amateur sports. Not that there is much out there any more that is truly amateur, but as DG is moving into having true pros it kind of opens the door for more big events through the year. This will probably lead to a group of tournaments becoming DG Majors and the worlds championship will get re-named or just be one of the 3 or 4 big events.
You must not pay much attention to sports. Nascar's biggest event is the first race of the year. The race all drivers would give up any other to win. Bristol is early, Charlotte 600 early... The last 10-12 races no one cares about at least up to last year where a win at the last race there won you the championship. It was never like that.
Indy 500 is early too
The Masters is in early spring.
July (usually) is hardly the middle of the year since the season ends the first week of October with the USDGC.
To run the typical (not new Worlds) type event and have all the fun players stuff, you need to run it when the days are the longest. In the not too far past they ran 3 rounds per day!! (we did that in 2011) You can't have Worlds in the traditional sense (not the NWO version) when days are as short as they are in September.
Also, Worlds takes up a ton of time for players. Many of the best are in the 18-24 age range, you need to have it during summer break.
July is one of the dryer months so it makes sense for weather in your biggest event.
If you have a hot year in many sports, the last few events, races, games are meaningless with a giant point lead, so you have your biggest event in the middle when there is still excitement.
Player of the year takes into consideration a full years performance (most of the time).
and so on and so on...
Why did I get trolled by the OP? Why!!
Men can't breastfeed.
Men and women can both play disc golf.
Daytona 500
Masters
Indianapolis 500
Bristol/Charlotte 600, Talledaga all early season and more important than the rest of the races.
To answer the OP:
With the old format, you could make the argument that it's the only one of its kind -- therefore, the timing of crowning the World Champion to me, was not relevant. The format was what made Worlds, well "Worlds". The one tournament that included endurance and skill.
I think that the other divisions, besides MPO/FPO can still say that. I don't see ANY individual sport having a true "end-of the year" champion or "end of the season" champion. So, the counterargument to the OP's original argument is equally true.
My initial thought is that NASCAR does have an end of year champion, but the other individual sports(I'm thinking o golf and tennis) don't have a single event that declares u the overall champion of the season like disc golf does. They have important, landmark events, but no single event that says you are the champion of the season
My initial thought is that NASCAR does have an end of year champion, but the other individual sports(I'm thinking o golf and tennis) don't have a single event that declares u the overall champion of the season like disc golf does. They have important, landmark events, but no single event that says you are the champion of the season
The PGA Tour has the FedEx Cup. It is definitely a more recent invention that, while it gains attention at the end of the season, doesn't quite seem to have the same prestige for winning as the major tournaments do. I mean, I can tell you who won the Masters over the last few years but I couldn't come close to naming any winner of the FedEx Cup.
Most individual sports have season long points and/or ranking systems. We have that too, with awards for the top earners. It just isn't as celebrated as winning our premier events.
I think the thing that should be kept in mind is that forcing one system over another in terms of declaring the biggest events and titles rarely ever works. In practically every sport, especially individual ones, the biggest championships become that organically. Golf doesn't have four majors because someone determined way back when that there would be four super important tournaments. Each individual event became so important/prestigious on their own that eventually everyone else had no choice but to recognize their status. Same with tennis. Same with NASCAR. Etc.
We just don't have the same level of history yet.
Now that it's the season, I equate it to Wimbledon. No question which of the tennis majors is the most prestigious. It's The Championships, Wimbledon. See what JC alludes to above. Notice that Australia has the Australian Open. Similar for the French and U.S. Opens. But Wimbledon's tourney is called simply, "The Championships" -- always has been. And this has occurred organically.
I'm not saying that our Worlds is any harder to win than the Memrial or Vibram or Masters Cup or whatever. Just like Wimbledon isn't any harder to win than other tennis majors. But there is an inherent higher level of prestige to winning that event or even any type of "point series".
I am curious as to why the worlds are in the middle of the season? Secondly why is the winner of worlds declared the "World Champion"? I understand its the name of the tournament but technically someone could win every single event all year and lose that and not be as well thought of as someone who wins one tournament. Or someone could lose every single event and win worlds and be the "world Champion". I think it should be a big finale rather than some tournament at the end of the year, it would carry more weight and be a more legit championship rather than just another tournament.
Umm, no. I came to play. That $50 can go to the next tourney's entry fee.$50 to watch. You're already down there to play, would pay to stay and watch the top 16 pros go at it?
The underlined part speaks volumes. I'm a pretty avid player, but I simply don't feel like watching the game I obviously love on any type of regular basis. I'm fine with the occasonal You Tube clip, etc.The other 10% of my doubt comes from the failure, so far, for anyone to find a way to get people to watch disc golf. We can hardly get disc golfers to watch it. And it's not for lack of trying.
If we got the type of coverage that big time golf tournies do (i.e. multiple camera's following all the players so you don't miss anything interesting), then I'd watch. But I can't see us making the jump from the type of coverage we currently get to that.