This article answers a question that circulates in some fan and social-media circles: who are the biggest drinkers on the PGA TOUR? The short, evidence-led reply is that no vetted list exists and that naming individuals without on-record evidence is inappropriate. We will explain the legal and ethical limits on such rankings, distinguish spectator drinking from player conduct, review relevant tournament policies, and show how journalists, fans, and modelers should use reliable sources when alcohol-related topics arise.

There is no authoritative, published ranking of the PGA TOUR's 'biggest drinkers'.

Tournament alcohol policies aim to protect safety and order, and incidents involving fans do not equal evidence about player behavior.

Use on-record disclosures and public-health benchmarks when discussing alcohol and players.

Quick answer: There is no official list of the PGA TOUR's "biggest drinkers"

There is no vetted, published ranking of individual PGA TOUR players by alcohol consumption, and responsible coverage should not attempt to assemble one from rumours or social media snippets. For readers who follow golf closely or consult golf betting sites for information, the basic reality is that player-level consumption data are private and public discussion must be based on on-record disclosures and verified incidents.

Any claim that names a player as a "biggest drinker" without an explicit, on-record statement or documented incident is speculative and risks harm to reputation and privacy. Where available, official tournament communications and public-health definitions offer neutral context for discussing alcohol without naming or ranking individuals.

Explore structured sports prediction challenges and learn about evidence-based approaches

If you want a concise, evidence-backed guide to how to discuss alcohol and safety at golf events, read on and share responsibly.

View FundedPlays Challenges

Why you cannot rank players by drinking: legal, ethical and data limits

Labeling individual athletes as heavy drinkers would require verified, on-record information about their private behavior, which is not published for PGA TOUR players; that absence of data alone makes any ranking unreliable. Public-health measures are designed for populations and surveys, not for singling out named professionals without consent.

There are also clear privacy and reputational risks in asserting a player's consumption level without primary evidence. Journalists and analysts should default to neutral language and avoid definitive claims unless they can cite an on-record statement or a reliable institutional source.

To discuss alcohol responsibly, it helps to use established public-health benchmarks rather than informal labels; for example, definitions from national health authorities explain what terms like binge drinking or heavy episodic drinking mean at a population level, and they are the appropriate frame when talking about levels of consumption without clinical data.

Spectator drinking vs player behavior: tournament policies and crowd management

The PGA TOUR has a Fan Code of Conduct that gives organizers clear authority to remove intoxicated or disruptive spectators from event grounds and emphasizes responsible alcohol consumption among attendees, rather than inviting speculation about players' private lives. Tournament rules are primarily concerned with safety and order in large crowds, and the Tour's policy is a public-facing tool for managing fan behavior PGA TOUR Fan Code of Conduct.

It is important to separate rowdy spectator culture at some events from the professional standards expected of players; crowd misbehavior and operational alcohol limits do not provide evidence about how individual players consume alcohol. Policies that govern fans aim to protect safety, not to police player conduct.

Who are the biggest drinkers on the PGA TOUR?

There is no authoritative list of the PGA TOUR's biggest drinkers; any reliable discussion must rely on on-record disclosures, official tournament policies, and public-health benchmarks rather than rumor or social-media claims.

Event alcohol rules typically describe limits on sales and removal procedures so staff can respond if the crowd becomes unsafe. Those rules are applied to attendees and are an operational matter for organizers, not a basis for labeling athletes.

How event alcohol policies work in practice

Tournament organizers set specific alcohol-service rules and protocols to reduce the risk that crowd impairment will threaten safety or create disorder, and those provisions often include the authority to stop sales or remove patrons. Many fan-code documents frame alcohol restrictions in terms of public safety and respect for competitors and other fans.

When conditions on site make crowd control difficult, organizers may take escalatory steps such as limiting service or closing access to preserve safety and the tournament experience for others. These are practical crowd-management decisions rather than statements about the players themselves.

Case study: what happened at the WM Phoenix Open and why it matters

In February 2024 the WM Phoenix Open temporarily closed its gates and limited alcohol service after an overcrowded, unruly crowd created safety concerns; organizers took these steps to regain control of the site and protect attendees. The episode is an example of how fan culture can force operational changes at a major tournament Party crowd forces Phoenix Open to close gates and limit alcohol. See the tournament's spectator information and related coverage in Golf Digest.

The Phoenix Open example shows that heightened spectator drinking can affect event delivery, but it does not provide evidence about how any player behaves off the course. Tournament-level restrictions and crowd interventions are about immediate safety and logistics rather than player conduct.

Players who have spoken publicly: disclosures, recovery and verified accounts

When discussion of alcohol and golf turns to players, the only responsible sources are on-record disclosures and reliable reporting about individuals who have spoken publicly. For example, Chris Kirk has stated publicly that he has been sober since 2019, a disclosure that properly belongs in any factual account of his personal history Sober since 2019, Chris Kirk wins The Sentry to open 2024 PGA TOUR season.

Funded Plays Challenges

View FundedPlays Challenges

Other high-profile, on-record situations have also shaped public conversations about mental health and substance use in professional golf; the death of Grayson Murray in 2024, and the reporting around his struggles, prompted renewed attention to how the sport supports players facing substance-use and mental-health challenges Grayson Murray’s parents say golfer died by suicide a day after he withdrew from event.

These examples show the correct evidentiary basis for reporting on player health: use direct statements from the athlete, family, or team, and rely on reputable reporting when the subject has been publicly documented. Even then, such accounts should be treated with care and context.

Public-health framing: using NIAAA benchmarks instead of labels

Public-health definitions help readers understand terms like 'binge drinking' without turning those labels into accusations aimed at named individuals. National health authorities describe binge or heavy episodic drinking in population terms that are useful for context but not for diagnosing a single person without clinical assessment Binge Drinking (NIAAA).

Applying these benchmarks requires caution: population-level thresholds are meant to guide public conversation and prevention work, but they cannot substitute for verified clinical or self-reported data when discussing a named athlete. Use benchmarks to explain risk in general, not to assert specifics about players.

How journalists and analysts should report on alcohol and players

Writers covering alcohol-related topics in sport should follow clear sourcing rules: rely on on-record statements, official tournament communications, or contemporaneous, verifiable reporting. If a claim cannot be sourced to a primary or reputable secondary account, it should not be published as fact.

Beyond sourcing, balance public interest with privacy by avoiding sensational labels and by placing disclosures in context. Cite tournament policies and public-health benchmarks when they help explain the scope of an issue.

Verification checklist for reporting on alcohol and players

Confirm primary source
Confirm date
Confirm quote
Check official statement
Check tournament policy
Identify support resources

Use this checklist before publishing

Practical verification means asking whether a statement comes from the player, an official release, or a vetted news report, and whether any claim about behavior rests on a single social media clip or on corroborated evidence. That discipline protects subjects and readers alike.

Common mistakes and myth-busting: what to avoid when discussing golf and alcohol

A frequent error is to equate spectator antics with player behavior; a viral clip of fans partying at a gallery does not demonstrate how touring professionals conduct themselves off the course. Conflating the two misleads readers and damages trust in reporting.

Another common mistake is elevating anonymous social-media claims into headlines. Rumour-driven threads and isolated clips lack the corroboration needed to support naming or ranking a player for substance use. Verify dates, sources, and context before sharing or publishing.

Practical examples: how to write responsibly about a player who has discussed alcohol

Good headline example: "Player X discusses sobriety and return to form after treatment". Bad headline example: "Player X is the PGA TOUR's biggest drinker". The first headline focuses on verifiable disclosure and context, while the second asserts an unverified label.

Model paragraph that would be irresponsible: "Fans say Player X drinks heavily, making him a top drinker on tour." Model paragraph that is evidence-based: "In a press conference on [date], Player X said they had sought help for alcohol use; the player described steps taken to address that issue and credited support resources for their recovery." Use direct quotes and cite the original statement when available.

What fans should know and how to behave at tournaments

Fans should read and follow the Fan Code of Conduct at each event, which typically includes rules about alcohol service and the removal of intoxicated or disruptive attendees. Compliance helps keep events safe and enjoyable for everyone PGA TOUR Fan Code of Conduct. For event-specific guidance see the PGA TOUR Know Before You Go page Know Before You Go.

Minimalist 2D vector showing a support pamphlet with a lifebuoy and speech bubble on a dark background representing player mental health resources for golf betting sites

Practical tips for attendees include pacing consumption, respecting staff and security decisions, and reporting unsafe behavior to event personnel. Organizers may limit alcohol service or close gates when crowd behavior threatens safety, so plan accordingly and prioritize personal and public safety.

Why this matters for people who follow betting markets and sports predictions

Confusing spectator spectacle with verified player behavior can mislead modelers and bettors who rely on accurate inputs. For those who use golf betting sites or build forecasting models, including services such as Funded Plays, the key is to base adjustments on documented player news, injuries, or official statements rather than on crowd behavior or gossip.

Forecasting and handicapping depend on consistent, evidence-based inputs. When a player's status or condition is material to a model, look for direct confirmations from the player, their team, or official Tour communications before making parameter changes. See how Funded Plays evaluations work for one example of evaluation methodology.

Supporting players and where to find help: mental-health resources and respectful language

When coverage touches on substance use, use nonjudgmental language and avoid assigning motive or causation without clear evidence. Sensitive reporting can still be informative while respecting the dignity of the person involved.

If a story raises concern for a reader, direct them to reputable mental-health and substance-use resources. High-profile incidents have reminded the golf community of the stakes involved when athletes face mental-health and substance-use challenges Grayson Murray’s parents say golfer died by suicide a day after he withdrew from event.

Conclusion: stick to evidence, respect privacy, and focus on safety

There is no authoritative list of "biggest drinkers" on the PGA TOUR, and attempting to create one from rumours would be irresponsible. Rely instead on on-record disclosures, official tournament policies, and public-health benchmarks when discussing alcohol in golf.

Readers and writers alike should separate fan culture from professional conduct, prioritize safety at events, and use verified information in reporting and forecasting. That approach protects players, supports accurate discourse, and keeps the focus where it belongs: on the sport and on safety.