Should amateurs earn prize money when they make the cut in a pro event?
Money is flying around everywhere in golf … unless you’re an amateur teeing off in a professional event. And with amateurs Jackson Koivun and Lottie Woad playing their tails off on the course for pride but no paycheck, the dreaded debate is back yet again.
As always, our Golf Digest panel had many a take, with quite a few disagreements from person to person. Some went long. Some kept it brief. And we’re sure this dispute will be back before you know it. There’s usually an amateur shocking the golf world, and then the golf world has to argue whether or not they deserve to be paid for it. Some things never change.
Daria Delfino, Equipment Coordinator (and 2025 New Jersey Women’s Mid-Amateur champion): You can call me old-fashioned, but I don’t think amateurs should take home a check after making the cut in a professional tournament. There are very few rules in golf that have remained untouched since their inception, and I think this one is fundamental to preserving the tradition of the game.
My reasoning? Francis Ouimet didn’t get a check after winning the 1913 U.S. Open as an amateur. He borrowed a $50 loan from his father with the condition that if he failed to qualify, he would have to give up the game of golf for good. He ended up winning by five (talk about clutch) and remained an amateur for the rest of his golf career. He played for the love of the game, not a paycheck, and so should every amateur playing in a pro tournament.
Alex Myers, Senior Writer: On Jackson Koivun not getting paid: For all that great golf, this young man received exactly ZERO dollars based on his amateur status. As I’ve argued before, there’s no way to know if he would have had the same results had he been playing for money. HOWEVAH, there’s also no reason—especially in this NIL Era—that this guy shouldn’t be able to keep the paycheck he earned. Heck, this is his summer job! Just instead of working for minimum wage at a kids' camp, he’s beating grown men at golf.
Jay Coffin, Contributing Editor: This is something that my 18-year-old son, who is about to play college golf, and I have discussed quite often over the past few months. He just can’t understand why they’re not allowed to accept the cash. I understand the NIL world that we live in, but I don’t care about that when it comes to this issue. If you enter the event as an amateur, you can’t collect the cash. It really is that simple. You want the cash, turn pro first. There is no other alternative that makes sense. In the case of Koivun, he has the ability to turn pro and has opted not to. It’s hard to feel sorry for him. Now, I’m sure the rules will be bastardized at some point over the next decade, but for now, it’s not. And I love it just the way it is.
Ryan Herrington, Managing Editor: It made no sense that outside entities—colleges, equipment manufacturers, golf governing bodies, etc.—could profit off an amateur golfer’s name, image and likeness while the individual could not. That’s why when the USGA and R&A revised their rules in 2022 to allow amateur athletes to sign endorsements and accept money while not losing their amateur status, it was a welcome and fair change. But there remains a line, in my mind, regarding accepting prize money in golf tournaments that should be maintained. Yes, it’s impressive that Auburn sensation Jackson Koivun has three top-10 finishes in recent PGA Tour starts and that (now former) Florida State star Lottie Woad won an LET event as an amateur last month. And it’s a fun story to look at the money they missed out on earning. But there are a variety of reasons why getting that money crosses the line.
For starters, amateur golfers know that at the outset of competing in a pro event, they won’t earn a payday for their finish. In other words, it’s not like this is a surprise come the final round. Secondly, the circumstances of playing well in a tournament as an amateur versus as a professional differ; the pressure and stakes are such that the way a player competes knowing there’s money on the line might impact his or her performance. Lastly, accepting prize money essentially erases the distinction of being an amateur altogether. What’s the point of remaining an amateur? Is it so that a player wouldn’t lose his/her college eligibility? If that’s the case, are we OK with the notion that Cooper Flagg can go play for the Dallas Mavericks, get paid for playing in the NBA, but say he’s an amateur so he could also still play for Duke? That doesn’t make sense.
If elite amateurs could make money playing in pro events, why bother playing in amateur events anymore? That was the fear three years ago among USGA and R&A officials as they considered the downstream impact to amateur golf on a macro level and decided against allowing amateurs to take prize money. If a player wants to get paid for playing in golf tournaments, there’s a simple way to do that. Turn pro.
Auburn's Jackson Koivun is staying in school for his junior season in 2025-25 despite having already locked up a PGA Tour card through the PGA Tour Accelerated Program.
Jared C. Tilton
Greg Gottfried, Web Producer: I see this both ways. I get that amateurs are “amateurs” for a reason, and yet, are any young athletes amateurs at all nowadays? There’s NIL money being thrown around all over the place now, and for good reason. You want to get on these golfers’ good side before they make it big. Getting these amateurs into your event is nothing but helpful, especially when it comes to making connections early, and it seems silly for these people to earn money and then keep it away, essentially dangling it on a string. High schoolers are getting recruited for various brand deals. At this point, it’s all over for the amateur vs. professional argument. And it should be. Make your money. And for any pros complaining, just beat these amateurs and you won’t have to worry about it.
Drew Powell, Associate Editor: In a time when the line between being an amateur and a professional is as blurred as ever, there needs to be a clear distinction in earnings in a professional event. A reasonable solution is to give amateurs who make the cut a travel reimbursement that covers their travel, food, hotels for the week, but nothing more. Enough to break even but not enough to profit. Anything beyond that and, well, what does being an amateur even mean?
Keely Levins, Contributing Writer: In the age of NIL, I don’t think it’s ridiculous to allow amateurs making the cut to take home some money. Playing in tour events is not cheap. And if amateurs can’t earn anything while playing in these events, they’re unable to recoup the costs associated with entering, getting to, and playing in a tour event. Amateurs do score points towards PGA Tour U Accelerated and the LPGA Elite Amateur Pathway when they make a cut, so they’re getting something very valuable. But I think if we want amateurs to occasionally get in the field, which we do, because the stories are so fun to root for, then it makes sense for them to be able to cover their costs a bit. I don’t think they should be handed whatever check they’d have earned if they were a professional. If you want that money, then you should turn pro. But Ben Griffin shared that he spends at least $6,000 a week to play in tour events. So I think something like a $6,000 check for any amateur who makes the cut isn’t out of bounds. Obviously, this is a lot more than the USGA currently allows amateurs to make in a tournament (the limit is currently $1,000), but the rules around amateurs being able to make money have changed so much in recent years that a $6,000 check for making a cut doesn’t feel out of bounds.
Luke Kerr-Dineen, Senior Editor: Truly, what is the point of amateurism if the answer to this question is yes? I guess in the spirit of compromise, I could see some solution where the amateur has to defer the money until they turn pro, then they get to cash those checks as back pay. But that seems messy, and again, not really the point of all this. The ongoing blurring of the lines between amateurs and professionals is something I don't quite understand or frankly, like. It seems both parties want all the benefits of both without any of the tradeoffs. You see it a lot right around the line between non-elite pros and elite amateurs: Amateurs want the prestige and opportunity of remaining an amateur, while cashing checks like a pro. Pros want to spend years cashing checks, but then flip a switch and return to their amateur status with almost no repercussions. Neither sits right with me, but those are conversations for a different day.
E. Michael Johnson, Equipment Editor:No, you idiot. That makes you a professional, not an amateur. That is all.
