Dunno if there is any truth to what some of the announcers said: "Europeans tend to play a lot more matchplay than Americans"
I'd say at least 75% of the rounds I play are in some kind of match format. Either team or individual.
Any difference there?
__________________
When James Durham recorded 94 at the Old Course at St Andrews in 1767, he set a course record that lasted 86 years. Golf: A curious sport whose object is to put a very small ball in a very small hole with implements ill desiged for the purpose - Sir Winston Churchill
All of the above deserve to be efforted to some degree. However, I chose to afford the captain greater latitude in determining the composition of the team. There is a tremendous hole in this logic, but I will get to that.
My thoughts are that the current quantitative qualification is unreliable beyond the first 5 or 6 players. It does not take into account the momentum of the player, consistency, durability, persistency, or tenacity. Leave us not forget the value of experience, either. If they tracked this statistical process for 5 cycles (heaven help us), I am willing to wager it would show it has no validity in predicting the success of an individual in the Ryder Cup. Of greater importance, it denies the necessary long term "breeding" or perspective of the Ryder Cup institution, which needs to be taken beyond our quarterly earnings per share mentality.
Foremost, it should be explained to the PGA selection committee that denial is not a river in Egypt. Their assumption that stats will devine their Dream Team, obviates the reality that some players thrive beyond anticipated capabilities in the Ryder Cup formats. And quite often it is purely a result of teaming the proper players. A smart captain picks by twos, or picks a wild card who melds with a member of the core. A smart captain also pulls Tiger aside and tells him to make one pick. He tells him to make it good, because that is with whom he is going to be partnered. And he, as the best player in the world, will be held accountable for the outcome.
A smart captain. That's the hole in my selection. Four bad player selections is twice as bad as two. Which nicely scurries me to what I see as the true reason the US teams' effectiveness has smelled like my golf shoes after residing in my car trunk all summer.
As a part of undeniable realities, justice has a way of insisting upon itself. The US will be fighting a karmic uphill battle until Larry Nelson is made captain. Call it bad karma. Call it the Larry Nelson Curse. A pox which that fine man would graciously never wish upon the appropriate PGA demagogues. However, being basically intemperant and lacking Nelson's distinguished character, I most effortlessly wish upon them just desserts for denying the imperative choice. This is until this wrong has been righted, and justice and Nelson have been properly honored.
I hope that's not over the top. The Ryder Cup deserves consideration without politics, and abandonment of the cold statistics which replace thoughtful judgement.
These were two of the LBG poll choices. For what its worth, the 'Captain's picks' option garnered 18 percent of the vote. The change in the points system received no votes.
How can the top strok players be competitive in match play?
__________________ Yani Tseng, Go! Go! Go! Yani Tseng Did It Again! YOU load and sustain the "LAG", during which the "LAW" releases it, ideally beyond impact.
"Sustain (Yang/陽) the lag (Yin/陰)" is "the unification of Ying and Yang" (陰陽合一).
The "LAW" creates the "effect", which is the "motion" or "feel", with the "cause", which is the "intent" or "command".
"Lag" is the secret of golf, passion is the secret of life.
Think as a golfer, execute like a robot.
Rotate, twist, spin, turn. Bend the shaft.
Makes me even more eager to see your book on GOLF hit the shelfs.
__________________
When James Durham recorded 94 at the Old Course at St Andrews in 1767, he set a course record that lasted 86 years. Golf: A curious sport whose object is to put a very small ball in a very small hole with implements ill desiged for the purpose - Sir Winston Churchill
Went to the K club on the Wednesday. After the weather susided the players emerged to rapturous applause (both teams). The Europeans all took their time wading through the crowds smiling signing autographs. They then split up into groups and played golf stopping after each green to smile, chat and have a laugh with the crowds. They played the holes properly hitting a few balls here an there and trying putts from different spots. They took their time going back to the clubhouse. The US team all gathered with glum faces and played as one big mob. Hitting shots into the greens as if they were on the range. They didnt bother putting at all on any of the holes I saw (they didnt want to practise putting on wet greens or they didnt want any contact with the admiring crowds?). They zipped around and then disappeared back into the clubhouse never to be seen again.
At the end of the day it was putting that let them down.
Im not sure what the problem is. It certainly isnt golfing ability.
Could be:
The US guys dont like to travel overseas?
The courses on the PGA Tour are too uniform especially the greens?
There is no socialising between players on the US Tour?
There is too much pressure on them to perform instead of seeing it as an exhibition where they give something back to the fans and actually have a laugh? Its an end of season party with a bit of a match (which is what they are meant to love).
Mr Verplank certainly looked like he had a few things to say but managed to bite his tongue in the interview I saw.
How about getting a non US captain next time? It works in football (soccer).
The main thing is the matches were played in good spirit and we didn't have any Kiawah or Brookline nonsense.
Hybrid Mode
