1 In 4 Rule A Good Thing?

Hello. In the past I thought the "1 in 4 rule" (play every tournament at least once in a 4 year span) the LPGA uses was a no-brainer good thing. Why hadn't the PGA implemented it, I wondered?
Well, I've almost done a 180 degree flip on it now, after hearing some discussion on the "Grey Goose 19th Hole" show on The Golf Channel.
Lorena Ochoa missed the Corning Classic 2 weeks ago. She cited having 8 title defenses and the majors as mandatory tournies, plus 2 Mexico events where she's the top draw. That makes 14 mandatory events.
I'm not trying to defend Lorena, but having this rule does make things more difficult for her when considering tournies.
A good point made in the show is the rule only applies to the top players, because no one cares about the others showing up or not.
It lead me to conclude that if some tournies, like the men's Canadian Open, are not better, they don't deserve to have Tiger and Phil and others in the field. And that makes the tournament decide to stay as is, or get better, like the women's Canadian Open. And that's a good thing.

Regards,
Steve