Why Tiger Woods And Other Past Open Champions Shouldn't Be Allowed To Play Until They're 60

The start of Open Championship week at Royal Troon has already sparked into life, but not for the reason you might have expected.

A sharp exchange of opinions between former World No.2 Colin Montgomerie and 15-time Major Champion Tiger Woods kicked off what is sure to be a blockbuster week, but the debate got me thinking about the value of allowing past champions to retain their spots in the field beyond the point of realistic contention.

With so much exciting and emerging  talent coming through in the game of golf, I asked myself, should past Open Champions keep playing until they are 60? Quite simply, the answer is no... and the data backs it up!

What Did Colin Montgomerie And Tiger Woods Say Earlier This Week?

Former World No.2 Colin Montgomerie raised a few eyebrows with his comments about Tiger Woods, suggesting that the 15-time Major Winner "didn't seem to enjoy a single shot" at the US Open last month.

The Scotsman added "What the hell is he doing?’ He’s coming to Troon and he won’t enjoy it there, either. Aren’t we there? [retirement] I’d have thought we were past there.

"There is a time for all sportsmen to say goodbye, but it’s very difficult to tell Tiger it’s time to go. Obviously, he still feels he can win. We are more realistic."

In what appeared to be a firm retort, Tiger Woods responded by saying "As a past champion, I'm exempt until I'm 60. Colin's not. He's not a past champion, so he's not exempt. So he doesn't get the opportunity to make that decision. I do,"

"So when I get to his age, I get to still make that decision, where he doesn't. I'll play as long as I can play and feel like I can still win the event,"

Colin Montgomerie later explained that his comments had been taken "out of context", but in my opinion, it did pose a very fair question that many of us feel strongly about.

It's Time For Change... And The Answer Seems Obvious

It's important to note that from this year (at Royal Troon) winners will only be exempt until they are 55, but my argument would be the five year exemption cut which has been implemented for future champions is still not going far enough. After looking back through the data of recent Open Championships, it became clear that it's time for change... and more drastic measures may be needed.

Since the year 2000, the average age of an Open Championship winner is 33, while the oldest player to lift the Claret Jug in that time was Phil Mickelson, at 43 years old.

It's actually not abnormal for a player in their early 40's to win this illustrious event, as this has happened on four of the last 12 editions, but only one player has ever won the Open Championship past their 45th Birthday – and you have to go back to 1867 to find that one in the records (Old Tom Morris, 46 years old).

In the field this week there are eleven past champions aged 48 or older, including the likes of of Tiger Woods, Henrik Stenson, Phil Mickelson and Padraig Harrington. The nostalgic part of any golf fan might hope that any of these top names could once again deliver a fairytale story, but the trends suggest that is very unlikely.

Jon Daly and former winner at Royal Troon, Todd Hamilton, are the oldest players in the field this week, aged 58, and I can't help but feel those spots could have distributed to players with a more realistic chance of lifting the Claret Jug.

Last week's LIV Golf Andalucia runner-up Anirban Lahiri just missed out in a play-off at Final Open Qualifying, while Branden Grace, who holds the record for the joint-lowest single round score in Major Championship history, is another player who missed out via the qualification route.

Scottish hopeful Connor Syme also came agonisingly close at the Genesis Scottish Open last week, missing out on a qualification spot by one shot and ultimately limiting the number of Scotsmen in the field to just four.

There is also an argument that some of the top talent on LIV Golf, where world ranking points are not currently awarded, deserve a place in this field based on their playing abilities. In what will likely be a very unpopular position to take, I would like to see some of the spots currently reserved for previous winners allocated to the top-5 or top-10 in the LIV Golf Order of Merit.

After all, if I was given the choice to either watch Jon Daly, Justin Leonard and Todd Hamilton, or Sergio Garcia, Talor Gooch and Carlos Ortiz... There really is only one winner.

The currently policy weakens the field, in my opinion, and a reform to lower the age that former Open Champions automatically qualify to 50 feels like a much more fair system. No player has ever won a Major Championship above this age, and while it's nice to reminisce about the glory days of old, perhaps we should save that for highlight reels.

Don't get me wrong, I completely believe that we should reward the tremendous achievement of those select few who have won at the Open Championship, but not at the detriment of the fundamental competitive values we hold dear in this sport.