FedExCup Fan Guide: Changes in 2008

text size

The PGA TOUR has made revisions to the format of the PGA TOUR Playoffs for the FedExCup. Here is an explainer on some of the reasons why the format is different this year than the one used last year in the inaugural Playoffs:

Related

Expert picks: Who'll win the Cup?
Who'll be the biggest surprise?
Who'll make the biggest move?
FedExCup Playoffs standings
Notes on The Barclays
Video: LIVE@ Barclays

Why the PGA TOUR made minor changes to the point system in the Playoffs:

• To increase volatility, enabling players to move up faster if they play well.

• To create more excitement by having more players with a realistic chance to win the FedExCup going into THE TOUR Championship.

• To maintain the importance of the Regular Season along with the integrity and credibility of the Playoffs.

How it was accomplished

Two relatively small changes to the structure were made that, when combined, meet the TOUR's objectives for the revision:

First, the gap was narrowed between players' point totals at the reset going into the Playoffs.

For example, the gap between first and second was 1,000 points last year; that has been reduced that to 500 points this year. Similar reductions were made all the way down to 144.

Points were added in the first three Playoff events by increasing by 2,000 the points awarded to each place receiving points. For example, a third-place finish was worth 3,400 points in 2007; it is now worth 5,400 points. This means that players who play well will move up more dramatically than in 2007. Points for the TOUR Championship were also adjusted.

Results

Following is a comparison of what actually happened last year to what might have happened if this system was in place:

• More volatility: Instead of just two players "playing their way in" to the next event by moving into the top 120 for Deutsche Bank or 70 for BMW, 11 players would have moved up into the Deutsche Bank field and 17 into BMW. THE TOUR Championship would have had at least eight players moving in instead of three.

• More chance to win the FedExCup going into THE TOUR Championship: Instead of just six players with a mathematical chance of winning, there would have been 12. And instead of just four players with a realistic chance of winning, it would've been six.

• Importance of the Regular Season / integrity & credibility of the Playoffs: The top seeds still had the advantage, and the players in the top 20 who finished the first three events would still have made it into THE TOUR Championship. At the same time, the players who played best in the Playoffs -- Tiger Woods, Steve Stricker and Phil Mickelson -- would still have finished 1-2-3 in the FedExCup.

Examples (Volatility)

Rich Beem, who started as the 134 seed, finished 7th at The Barclays and only moved up to 113th. Under the revised structure, he would have moved up to 68th. Vijay Singh started as the No. 2 seed but missed the cut at The Barclays. He dropped to sixth but would have dropped to 23rd under the revised structure. At 23rd, he would be in danger of missing THE TOUR Championship, especially if he missed another cut.

Camilo Villegas started as the 52nd seed and finished 21st at The Barclays, ninth at Deutsche Bank and seventh at BMW, moving up to 28th going into THE TOUR Championship. Under the new system, he would have been 14th going into THE TOUR Championship.

Examples (Chance to Win)

Only Steve Stricker and Tiger Woods could guarantee a FedExCup crown by winning THE TOUR Championship in 2007. Phil Mickelson needed Tiger to finish no better than third. Rory Sabbatini needed Tiger to finish 14th or worse (and Stricker third or worse). K.J. Choi needed a Tiger finish of 21st or worse, Stricker fourth or worse and Mickelson third or worse. Aaron Baddeley needed even more pieces to fall into place.

Under the revised structure, Stricker, Woods and Mickelson would have won the Cup with a TOUR Championship win, Baddeley and Sabbatini would win the Cup with a victory as long as Steve Stricker didn't finish second, and Adam Scott and K.J. Choi could win if Stricker was outside the top five and Woods was outside the top three. Five others would also have had a mathematical chance at victory.

Questions about the revisions

1. What do "mathematical chance" and "realistic chance" mean?

"Mathematical chance" means "under any possible set of circumstances, no matter how unlikely." For example, if Player A could win the FedExCup only if every player ahead of him in the standings DQ'd, he'd still have a mathematical chance. "Realistic chance" means: If Player A can win the FedExCup by winning THE TOUR Championship while the points leader finishes 11th, Player A has a realistic chance. On the other hand, if Player A can't win even if the points leader finishes 11th or worse, we (somewhat arbitrarily) declare he does not have a realistic chance to win the Cup.

2. The No. 144 seed can move into the points lead with a victory at The Barclays. Will this be credible? (i.e., Will the FedExCup truly represent the "season-long champion?)

Unlike other events, the Playoffs and the FedExCup are not about a single event. In order to win the FedExCup, a player will have to play extremely well over the course of four weeks on golf courses representing very different tests of skill. Unless the No. 144 seed wins again or has three more great tournaments, he will not be the FedExCup Champion.

If, on the other hand, he does have four brilliant weeks of play, he has done in the Playoffs what many other underdogs have done in college and professional sports -- overcome enormous odds to achieve a remarkable victory. That victory will be just as credible as North Carolina State winning the 1983 NCAA Basketball Tournament, the New York Giants beating the New England Patriots this year in the Super Bowl and other famous upsets.

3. Does this mean the top players will have to play all four events to win?

No. The structure is slightly revised versus last year, but even with the revisions, Tiger Woods would still have won the FedExCup despite not playing at The Barclays. Certainly, however, skipping an event will have more drastic consequences this year than last, since there are significantly more points available in each event.

4. Do you think with this change that the top players will play all four?

Each player, including the top ones, has to decide what strategy gives him the best chance to win the Cup. One or more of them may decide that they will play better by taking a week off. That is a high "risk-reward" strategy. For example, last year, that strategy worked very well for Tiger, since he went on to finish T2-1-1 to win the FedExCup going away. By the same token, the strategy could backfire if the player has an off-week in one of the events he plays. That will be especially true this year, since there are more points available at each event.

5. What would the top 10 have looked like under the new structure?

Nine of the top 10 would have stayed in the top 10, although K.J. Choi, who finished fifth in 2007, would have dropped to ninth because he withdrew from an event. Similarly, Vijay Singh, who finished 10th in 2007, would have been 15th due to his missed cut.

6. Did the top players (or any player) cause this change? How much input did the players have in this change?

What about Tiger?

Defending FedExCup champion Tiger Woods has the most points (100,000) entering this year's Playoffs, but of course he isn't playing due to season-ending knee injury earlier in June after his U.S. Open win. Even so, Tiger will get FedExCup bonus money based on his final standing; he doesn't have to play any of the events to be eligible. And the best guess as to where Tiger will finish in the final Playoffs standings? Those 100,000 points will probably get put him in the 60-70 range when the Playoffs end with THE TOUR Championship presented by Coca-Cola.

The TOUR solicited and received input from players, fans and the media regarding what worked and what didn't in 2007. Clearly, the overall result was positive, so the TOUR didn't want to make any major changes. But the players and fans were pretty universal in stating that they wanted more volatility and more opportunity for drama and excitement in the final event. The TOUR is confident this change will deliver that.

7. Will the Playoff or Regular Season points structure change in the future?

The TOUR expects these minor changes will create the volatility and the drama and excitement it is looking for, so that further changes to enhance the program won't be needed. The TOUR knew all along that in the first year, a great deal would be learned about how it was going to work. The TOUR was delighted it worked as well as it did, which is why so few changes were made. That said, the FedExCup will be evaluated this year and every year to understand how it could be improved from a fan perspective and a player perspective.

8. There were 50,000 points available in the Playoffs last year, compared to 25,000 in Regular Season events. The Regular Season events still have 25,000. How many points are available in the Playoffs now?

Looking at the total points available in an event isn't really meaningful -- no one can get all those points. What makes more sense is to look at how many points are awarded to various places -- first place, second, third, 10th, and so forth. In every case, there are 2,000 more points awarded in the Playoffs this year to those places than last year. That change, coupled with the narrowed reset margins, provides the best method for creating more volatility in every event, and more drama and excitement in the final event.

9. It looks like there are 190,000 points available in the Playoffs compared to only 25,000 in the Regular Season. With a differential that big, doesn't that take all the meaning out of the Regular Season?

Both the Regular Season and the Playoffs are critical to winning the FedExCup. Using the revised point structure, four of the top five seeds and six of the top 10 would have still had a chance to win the Cup going into THE TOUR Championship. So seeding is vital, which is what the Regular Season is about.

But playing well in the Playoffs is also vital -- the second seed, along with the seventh, eighth and ninth seeds, did not have good Playoff finishes, and all would have dropped out of contention, even with the revised points structure. Bigger moves are possible this year, but there are still huge hurdles to overcome for players not in the top 30.

10. Last year, THE TOUR Championship was worth the same number of points as the other Playoff events. Why is it worth less this year?

Again, looking at the total points available is not really relevant. The important fact is that, in the first three Playoff events, every place receives 2,000 more points this year than last year for that place. That same thing is true for THE TOUR Championship, with the exception of some minor rounding.