LIV Golf's Ranking Reality: A Bitter-Sweet Victory, Riddled With Frustration
Share- Nishadil
- February 04, 2026
- 0 Comments
- 4 minutes read
- 4 Views
LIV Golf Finally Gets World Ranking Points, But The Huge Catch Leaves Them Fuming
LIV Golf players can finally earn Official World Golf Ranking points, but a controversial workaround via the MENA Tour and significantly lower point values for their events has sparked widespread frustration.
Well, folks, it’s finally happened, sort of. After what feels like an eternity of back-and-forth, LIV Golf, that controversial upstart league, has at long last secured Official World Golf Ranking (OWGR) points. You’d think this would be cause for celebration, a massive win after months of campaigning and, let’s be honest, quite a bit of drama. And in a way, it is. But here’s the rub, the kind of catch that leaves a truly sour taste in the mouth of just about everyone involved with LIV: these points come with a pretty significant caveat, one that's got them more than a little bit miffed.
See, it’s not exactly a direct embrace from the OWGR. Oh no, that would be far too simple, wouldn’t it? Instead, LIV’s path to points is twisting through what they're calling a 'strategic alliance' with the MENA Tour – that’s the Middle East and North Africa Tour, if you’re wondering. This little-known circuit, which has been part of the OWGR ecosystem since 2016, essentially provides a back door, a clever maneuver that allows LIV events to be ‘sanctioned’ and thus eligible for those all-important ranking points. It's a workaround, plain and simple, a bit like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole with a lot of clever persuasion.
But here’s where the real headache kicks in, the part that's causing so much frustration within the LIV camp. While they’re getting points, the actual amount awarded for their events is going to be substantially, almost shockingly, lower than what players on the PGA Tour or the DP World Tour would typically earn for comparable finishes. We're talking a serious reduction, enough to make a significant difference in how quickly a player can climb – or, indeed, how fast they might fall – in the global standings.
Now, the OWGR system, in fairness, has its own criteria, you know? They weigh things like field strength – how many top-ranked players are actually competing – and whether an event has a cut. LIV events, with their smaller 48-man fields and no cut whatsoever, just don’t fit the traditional mold. So, by their mathematical models, fewer players and guaranteed payouts for everyone mean fewer points on offer. It’s a purely statistical argument, of course, but it really feels like it undervalues the quality of the golf being played out there, at least to those inside LIV.
Just imagine being Cameron Smith, the reigning Open champion, or even Dustin Johnson, a former world No. 1. These guys, world-class talents, have seen their rankings slide, even with some incredible play on the LIV circuit, simply because they weren't earning points. This new system, while a step forward, still presents a massive hurdle. It means that even winning a LIV event, which boasts a pretty stellar field of its own, won't propel a player up the rankings nearly as much as a victory on the PGA Tour would. That, frankly, is a tough pill to swallow when your ultimate goal is to compete in the Majors.
So, yes, it's a victory of sorts for LIV Golf, a technical win in their long battle for legitimacy. But it’s a victory laced with deep disappointment and a sense that they're still being shortchanged. They desperately need these points for their players to remain competitive for Major championship berths, so it’s likely they’ll accept this begrudgingly, for now. But make no mistake, the fight for what they perceive as fair and equitable ranking points is far from over. This is just another chapter in golf’s ongoing, utterly captivating, and sometimes utterly frustrating, saga.
Disclaimer: This article was generated in part using artificial intelligence and may contain errors or omissions. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. We makes no representations or warranties regarding its accuracy, completeness, or reliability. Readers are advised to verify the information independently before relying on