Why The Open Have Got It Right In Limiting Prize Money

Any idea how big the check was Brian Harman paid into the bank after winning The Open last year? What about how much Scottie Scheffler pocketed when he won The Masters?

No? Thought not. And why is that? Because quite frankly nobody knows or cares one bit about how much prize money is dished out in the Majors when it's all about Claret Jugs and Green Jackets.

We're talking about this now as R&A chief executive Martin Slumbers voiced his concern at inflated prize money in men's golf after revealing that the Open Championship prize fund at Royal Troon would be the lowest of the four Majors at $17m.

Although a record first prize of $3.1m will be handed out to the winner, the overall prize pot is lower than the US Open ($21.5m), Masters ($20m) and PGA Championship ($18.5m).

As Slumbers was perhaps referencing, it's also lower than the $20m prize funds on offer at every LIV Golf tournament and the new Signature Events on the PGA Tour - but does he have a point?

There's actually two points to consider here. Should we be concerned about the fast-rising prize money in men's golf overall and in particular should we care about how much they hand out in The Open?

R&A right to limit Open prize fund

We can dissect this further as well but the result, for me, is the same as prize money at the Majors should be irrelevant - even more so when we're talking about the Open.

Being organised by the R&A, which also runs the amateur game and grass roots golf, it has a duty to look after the pennies and not go throwing more and more cash at already wealthy golfers at the expense of those further down the ladder.

Slumbers said the R&A has a "responsibility to strike a balance" between handing out prize money and keeping funds for building the game from the bottom up - and it's absolutely right they don't trying to keep up with the gaudy amounts being splashed about on LIV Golf and the PGA Tour.

There's now more total prize money on offer in a single Signature Event or LIV Golf tournament than there is in the Open Championship, but so what?

When it's all said and done a golfer's career is defined by the Majors, not how much money is in the bank or how many times they've won the Travelers Championship or LIV Golf Nashville.

And that's how it should be surely? We remember players slipping on a Green jacket, kissing the Claret Jug, wearing that gold US Open medal and struggling to hoist that gargantuan Wanamaker Trophy.

It's about etching your name onto these iconic trophies and into golfing folklore, achieving sporting immortality and joining the game's greats in mastering Augusta, surviving the gruelling US Open test, beating the top-qualify PGA field or conquering the elements on the links.

I doubt very much the players lucky enough to win a Major either know or care how much money they've won, and that's just the way it should be - the prestige, the pride, the history, that's their reward.

So much in golf right now is all about the money, we should do as much as possible to keep the Majors out of the cash grabbing squabble - save at least these four golf tournaments for those who play and watch just for the love of the sport.

Rocketing prize funds turning viewers off

Bravo for the R&A keeping their prize money rises at a sensible level - but to the other point Slumbers made about rising cash in golf tarnishing the sport's image. He's probably nailed that one as well.

It's nothing new. The FedEx Cup mega payout has never really taken off - yes there's intrigue in who will finish top of the PGA Tour and DP World Tour at the end of the season but neither has found a suitable culmination of the year that really grabs the imagination.

And just throwing an extra bonus pot of cash at it, while it naturally gets the pros to perk up and try to chase it down, it's not really what the majority of fans want to see on TV.

Iconic courses, historic tournaments, the best players in the world battling it out down the stretch on Sunday, rivalries between players - everything that is the essence of the sport is why most people tune in, just bumping up prize money won't stop them tuning out.

LIV Golf's seemingly bottomless Saudi PIF investment has attracted plenty of big-name players, but it's arguably still not caught on in terms of viewers and general interest. And it's the same for the Signature Events on the PGA Tour.

Billionaires throwing money at millionaires to win a phoney golfing war was always going to hurt the game more than heal it - and that's exactly the way it's turning out even with both sides playing the "growing the game" card which sits as the emptiest of soundbites when much more emphasis is placed on just pumping every last dollar into player prize money.

It's distasteful, regular viewers have no interest in it and it widens the divide between players and fans - fans who after all prop up the game. 

Slumbers is also right when he ponders whether it's sustainable for the game to keep exponentially raising prize money - it's not. But even if the powers that be want to continue their cash war, let's at least keep the majors well and truly out of it.