Ever since golf was added back into the Olympics in 2016, questions have been raised over its format, whether it should be doubles, mixed or even contested by amateurs.
The amateur question was raised after a number of top pros withdrew from Rio 2016, with some believing that elite professional golf already has enough meaningful and historic titles to play for.
One pro with that belief is former World No.1 and 2013 Masters champion Adam Scott, who has withdrawn from consideration from all three Olympics that golf has featured.
“People watch us play 45 weeks a year,” Scott once said. “If you really wanted to grow the game you’d have the Olympics for amateurs.”
The amateurs could use the Olympics to springboard their careers into the professional game or to top US colleges - but it appears that there is now no going back and golf in the Games is reserved for the sports' elite in the paid ranks.
So is that the right format for golf in the Olympics? The Golf Monthly team discuss...
Without question, Olympic golf should be a professional event. The Olympics is all about the pinnacle of sport and having the likes of Rory McIlroy, Scottie Scheffler and Jon Rahm compete is a must for both the Olympics and golf.
Coming once every four years, it shouldn't be seen as a springboard to future success. Instead, a gold medal should be something every golfer aspires to winning, no matter how many Green Jackets or Claret Jugs they own.
Perhaps it isn't quite at that level yet but let's not forget that golf only returned to the Olympics in 2016. There's a place for it at the pinnacle of the professional game.
In my mind, Olympic golf should be professional only. I understand the arguments for amateur inclusion, but if your goal is to grow the game and increase participation, you need to put your best assets from and centre.
Some professional golfers will be recognisable to those who tune in, even if they're not golf fans, and the pros have the potential to hit heights that amateurs cannot reach.
I think the format seriously needs looking at – there's a clear opportunity to do something different and more engaging – but I'm not an advocate of having amateurs in the field.
I was always in two minds about whether golf should feature amateurs or professionals, but for women’s golf in particular, when we are continually trying to generate greater female interest in the sport, this is another opportunity to showcase the leading female tour players on a global stage.
You could argue that elite amateur golfers would be more relatable to any young women tuning in, but in my opinion it’s always good to aspire to be the best in your chosen sport!
The reason the authorities were so keen to have golf return to the Olympics after a 100+ year absence was to grow the game and take it to a new audience. Therefore to show it off in its most favourable light it seems clear to me that the best professional players in the world need to be involved.
While I don’t agree with the current format and think that the Olympics is perfect for a mixed competition, I do believe the cream of the crop need to be competing to showcase the sport and bring new people in.
The old amateur ideals of the games are long gone and it would have been a mistake for golf not to bring its biggest stars to the party.
Originally I did think that it should have been amateurs. Boxing has a good system where the Olympics is one of the peak amateur achievements so you get a real sense of who the brightest prospects will be when they turn pro. That would have worked in golf, with the Olympics carrying similar weight to the US and British Amateur Championships, perhaps?
However, now we're three Olympics in for professional golf, I think it works. The players are buying into it more and more, and I think the move to introduce mixed doubles in the Olympics golf event for 2028 will be a great thing.
Had players continued to skip it like we saw in both Rio and Tokyo, it would have lost credibility. But the fact that both men's and women's World No.1s are playing as well as the likes of Xander Schauffele and Rory McIlroy, it's going to continue to grow.
I can certainly understand some points in favor of the opposite, but my view is that the Olympics should remain as a professional event for golf. If an amateur qualifies via their world ranking, they should - of course - be allowed to compete, but it makes more sense from an entertainment and commercial sense to watch the very best players on the planet in a unique setting.
Plus, with the Olympic ideals being about excellence - alongside respect and friendship - even the World No.378 pro could challenge the World No.1 if the stars align while the chances of that happening in the amateur game is likely to be even smaller.
I can see arguments for both. When you look at the likes of amateur boxing, the peak of it is a gold medal at the Olympics.
However, the whole point of golf being included is to grow the game and if it didn't have the biggest names in the world present, then, let's be honest, people are less likely to tune in.
If sports like darts and snooker were put into the Olympics, and you didn't have Michael Van Gerwen or Ronnie O'Sullivan appearing, would as many people watch? I don't think so.
The last Olympics showed that anything is possible, even when it's only the pros that are involved.
Rory Sabbatini and C.T Pan were ranked well outside the world's top 100 yet still secured medals, which sort of sums up the Olympics... the underdogs performing for their country.
The Olympics should definitely be professional golfers. If you want to enthuse and capture non-golf fans through the olympics, as many sports do, you have to expose them to some of the best in the game.
While the sentiment around amateurs qualifying for the olympics is a nice thought, I don't see how that helps the longevity of participation and interest in the sport.
