Ryder Cup: Strategy I don't understand.

lorinda · #1 09-17-2004, 11:47 AM

Why would you put your best two players together when only the best ball counts?

Lori

Toro · #2 09-17-2004, 11:53 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Why would you put your best two players together when only the best ball counts?

Lori

[/ QUOTE ]

Plus they don't even like each other.

Sundevils21 · #3 09-17-2004, 01:34 PM

Hal said it was because that way they absolutly CANT lose. And they would have at least one LOCK. Good thinking moron.
I don't understand either, it makes no sense.

AdamK · #4 09-17-2004, 02:29 PM

When you say best two i'll assume you mean Woods & Mickelson..
Looking at Tiger's Ryder Cup performance, plus his recent results i certainly wouldn't put him in the top 2 of the US team.

emp1346 · #5 09-17-2004, 07:14 PM

look Adam, Tiger's still ranked #2 in the world, and only because Vijay is a little biyatch... (yes I hate Vijay)...

as for the pairing, I think part of it is to send out the best two first not only so you have one lock but also to set a standard for the subsequent American pairings...

also, if they can absolutely tear it up, then it also demoralizes the European team...

EDIT: please don't respond with anything about how the world ranking is based on a 24 month period, and thus try to nullify the ranking... if the 24 month period isn't an adequate and accepted representation of ability, it wouldn't be a 24 month period now would it? it would be six or something...

jwesty5 · #6 09-17-2004, 08:21 PM

The better question is how could Monty and Harrington be +165 against Woods Mickelson.

Or how could Europe be +150 to have the lead after Day 1.

JTrout · #7 09-18-2004, 01:51 AM

There is a general impression that the U.S. team doesn't have as much team unity or spirit as the European team.
(Most likely true.)

There is also an impression that Mickelson and Tiger don't get on very well.

Hal Sutton, the U.S. captain, said it was a great way of sending a message that the U.S. was a "team".

Obviously, it failed miserably.

As for the strategic element of putting your best two together, I would think it is generally a mistake.

Unless, a dominating win out front could boost the confidence build momemtum enough to overcome the fact that your best two players can only win (potentially) 1 point (in the morning).

As for the alternate shot format in the afternoon- Tiger and Phil play a similar game, which is generally thought to be an advantage in that format.

Phil is sitting out the morning matches on day 2, which I think is a good move.

JTrout

AdamK · #8 09-18-2004, 07:30 AM

Listen..
Woods is one of the weakest players on your team.
I'm not saying he isnt a great golfer & am certainly not putting down all his achievements in the sport.
But, having not won a strokeplay event this year, it would be hard to say he is in form.
Moreover, his previous Ryder Cup form is at best mediocre - and that was when he was in form.

As for Mickelson, although in good form, he hasnt shown much since his equipment change.

Neither of the pair are team players, pairing them together and losing only 1pt, was a smart move.

Sundevils21 · #9 09-18-2004, 11:16 AM

fact is Woods and Phil are the two strongest players on your team. Don't put them together in 4ball. Even if you boost your chances of winning the first match by 25%, it's still -EV. Put your two best players on different teams.

[ QUOTE ]
As for Mickelson, although in good form, he hasnt shown much since his equipment change.

[/ QUOTE ]

he just switched. besides it's not THAT big of a deal. People act like if you change a few things suddenly you're completely lost and don't know how to swing a club or roll the ball. Equipment makes up less than 5% of the game.

AdamK · #10 09-18-2004, 11:47 AM

Woods & Phil may well be the two strongest players in the team.
But look at Tigers record in 4balls / 4somes in previous Ryder & President Cups.
It's something like Won 1 - Lost 11.
Anyone else with his record would not be playing in them.

I just don't see these 2 players as being THAT much better than anyone else on the squad.
In Tiger's case, I would not even play him in the 4balls/4somes - it's not his game.
Obviously, this decision would be too controversial for Hal to make.
It's not rocket science, but i dont think he has learnt from the mistakes made last time around.

I think you are right about the equipment, but when their game drops off after changing, id be worried about betting them until i see some sort of comeback. Maybe its not the equipment, but since he changed he's not the same Phil that won the masters.