LIV Golf has made a stunning U-turn, abandoning its signature short format in favor of traditional 72-hole tournaments—a move that’s sure to spark debate among fans and players alike. But here’s where it gets controversial: after years of touting its 54-hole, three-day model as a revolutionary approach to golf, the Saudi-backed league is now aligning itself with the very structure it once sought to disrupt. Could this mean a rebrand from LIV (Roman numeral for 54) to LXXII (72) is on the horizon? Only time will tell.
This dramatic shift, reportedly driven by player feedback, marks a significant departure from LIV’s original vision. While the league will retain its unique blend of individual and team competitions, it’s now mirroring the format of established tours like the PGA Tour—the very institutions LIV aimed to challenge. And this is the part most people miss: despite Scott O’Neil, LIV’s CEO, framing this as a step toward innovation, the move essentially reverts to a model that’s been golf’s standard for decades. O’Neil stated, “The most successful leagues globally—IPL, EPL, NBA, MLB, NFL—constantly evolve. As an emerging league, we’re no different. LIV Golf will always prioritize progress for the sport and our league.”
A LIV statement elaborated: “Regular season events will now feature 72 holes of stroke play for individual competition, while the team competition will continue concurrently, with cumulative scores determining team results.” But let’s pause for a moment—isn’t this the very format LIV initially criticized as outdated? The irony isn’t lost on anyone, especially when considering LIV’s early promise to disrupt golf’s status quo by luring top players with lucrative contracts.
Here’s the real kicker: some LIV players reportedly felt underprepared for major championships due to the shorter format, a concern that likely fueled this change. With players like Jon Rahm, a two-time major winner, owning equity in LIV teams, their influence is undeniable. Rahm himself praised the move: “LIV Golf is a player’s league. We crave competition at the highest level, and 72 holes strengthens that. It’s what fans want, and the growing crowds last season prove it.” Dustin Johnson, another major winner, added, “Playing 72 holes feels more like the big tournaments we grew up with.”
But this shift raises questions. If LIV’s original 54-hole format was so innovative, why abandon it? And what does this mean for the league’s identity? Greg Norman, LIV’s former CEO, once explained the name LIV as a nod to 54—both the lowest possible score on a par-72 course and the number of holes in each event. Now, that symbolism is gone. Is LIV losing its uniqueness, or is this a necessary step toward legitimacy, especially with golf’s world rankings still not recognizing LIV events? This change might just be the key to that.
Here’s a thought-provoking question for you: Is LIV Golf’s shift to 72 holes a strategic retreat or a pragmatic step toward sustainability? Does this move dilute its revolutionary identity, or is it a necessary evolution to compete on the global stage? Let us know your thoughts in the comments—this is one debate that’s far from over.
