Presidents Cup 2007

From The Toronto Star
Sep. 22, 2006. 06:36 AM
DAVE PERKINS

STRAFFAN, Ireland—The Ryder Cup, which began this morning and not a moment too soon — weather permitting, of course — may well live up to its hype as the greatest event in golf. It often, even usually, does. But it still could learn a few things from the Presidents Cup.

Most athletic competitions, the better team wins. Or at least that’s the way to bet. But the Ryder Cup doesn’t always work out that way; in effect, the format favours the weaker team. By letting each captain sit out four players at a time, a smart man at the helm — and so far this week that’s clearly Tom Lehman — can sidestep an opposition’s superior depth.

That’s why the Europeans, in four of the past five RCs, have upset (if that’s the word) the more heavily star-loaded U.S. teams and it’s why, this time, a deeper European team could well lose as the favourite, although that’s a shrinking role, with the betting line moving more toward the U.S. in the past 36 hours.

Letting them all play is one of three reasons the PC has a superior format to the Ryder. None of this business of a guy striving for two years to make a team and then getting told to go sit out once the games begin. Go tell Luke Donald and Paul McGinley and Chad Campbell, among those on the bench this morning, that this is the best format.

At the PC, all 12 men go into action the first two days. Nobody is short-changed. Nobody can hide. Team depth comes entirely into play, the way it should.

That extra day’s play, too, is better. Ryder Cup takes three crammed days and the PC stretches out over four. Easier on the players and there’s none of this sitting around on Thursday, dressed in jacket and tie watching the blazer parade go by and listening to speeches.

Those two reasons, while compelling, still aren’t the main one the PC has a better framework. It’s this: The captains hand-match the games, sitting across from the table and actually making and altering strategy and player matchups, like the coaches in every other sport.

None of this business of tossing names out in a certain order and seeing how they match up, although, granted, only a dolt could not have seen the U.S. starting today with Tiger Woods and Jim Furyk and Ian Woosnam countering with Colin Montgomerie and Padraig Harrington.

Better to match them all by design. What else could we have wanted in South Africa except Woods against home-ground hero Ernie Els? That’s exactly what we got. This time, with Sergio Garcia talking trash about playing against Woods, who wouldn’t want the captains to make that happen in Sunday’s singles? But they don’t have the choice; it’s a matter of a 1-in-12 chance.

It’s better when a player says “Get me so-and-so” and the captain can certainly try. Mike Weir comes to mind, telling Peter Thomson in 2000 in Virginia that he wanted a crack at Mickelson. Thomson waited and when Mickelson was put forward, he countered with Weir, who would beat him easily for one of the few non-U.S. highlights of that Cup.

Imagine, on the other hand, that somebody talked trash and then his coach ducked the big match by naming the yakker against someone else. That would be a revealing moment.

Because the two events are owned, in part, by rival operations, the PGA Tour and the PGA of America, no one expects to see the older RC learn from the younger PC and alter its format. But it will happen some day because golfers and fans will start asking why they don’t do it the better way.

Sporting landscapes change; the Ryder Cup has changed formats over the years, adding matches and altering schedule. It has a couple more sensible changes to make to stay great.