It was that great American sportsman Ted Lasso who opined that “If God wanted games to end in ties, she wouldn’t have invented numbers.”
Coach Lasso is on to something.
Ties, like all things cauliflower, can be wholly unsatisfying.
Yet the Ryder Cup offers the potential for a tie, something that fortunately has happened only twice in the 43 times the biennial event has been contested.
Just last week, the Solheim Cup ended in a tie because, like the Ryder Cup, it has no playoff option.
Because they had won the previous Solheim Cup, the European women retained the cup and celebrated as if they had won something, which technically they had not, prompting captain Suzann Pettersen to say of her team, “These girls are legends.”
Because they didn’t lose?
That’s the way it works.
It’s possible that Sunday evening at Marco Simone Golf Club, the Americans could be celebrating keeping the cup that they won at Whistling Straits but still be winless in Europe since 1993.
Is that a good thing?
The purpose of keeping score, it seems, is to determine who wins and who doesn’t.
What if the Super Bowl ended in a tie?
What if the Wimbledon final went five sets and they stopped playing at 6-6 in the final set?
There’s a reason why playoffs – even the interminable NBA playoffs – have an odd number of games. It assures a winner.
But not the Ryder Cup. Not the Solheim Cup. Not the Presidents Cup.
The 2003 Presidents Cup might have changed all of this. That’s when the two sides found themselves tied in South Africa, resulting in a sudden-death playoff between Ernie Els and Tiger Woods.
It became a sudden-darkness playoff because with daylight fading and the Woods-Els playoff having gone three nervous holes, the captains – Jack Nicklaus and Gary Player – decided to call it a draw.
No one seemed particularly happy except the fans with non-refundable airline tickets home the next day.
Since then, the Presidents Cup has restructured its format and a 15-15 tie results in both teams sharing the cup. That’s slightly different from the other two cups, in which a tie allows the team that won the previous time to keep the cup.
The Ryder Cup format regarding a tie isn’t likely to change, though if a tie were to happen, it would spark plenty of discussion.
“I think retaining it means something and there’s certainly a historical and traditional element to it.” –Rory McIlroy
“I was watching the Solheim Cup last week, and obviously there were huge celebrations when Europe got to 14 [points] and retained the cup. And I thought to myself, Geez, they are celebrating a lot for a draw, and then I go back to Medinah in 2012, and we went ballistic when we got to 14 as well,” Rory McIlroy said, realizing the Europeans ultimately won that Ryder Cup, 14½-13½, thanks largely to his singles win over Keegan Bradley despite nearly missing his tee time.
“I think retaining it means something,” McIlroy said, “and there’s certainly a historical and traditional element to it.”
Leave it to American Max Homa to offer a different perspective.
“I’ve never liked ties,” he said. “They don’t make sense to me. The whole point of any competition is to see who wins. So, I do not like ties. I do not like the retaining thing. I understand it. I understand why they do it, but I’m not a fan of it.”
Let’s flash back to 2003 when Woods, the ultimate bloodthirsty competitor, had this to say about the Presidents Cup tie.
“I think it’s the perfect decision,” he said. “The way the week has gone, it’s the right decision for the game of golf. There is no decision because of the way the matches were played this week, the sportsmanship and the quality of play…
“To have two guys decide the fate of the whole team in extra holes like that, I don’t think any of the sides felt comfortable with that to begin with. It’s just part of the captains’ agreement and part of the rules of the competition.
“But we didn’t like it. It’s a team event, not an individual event.”
Woods called the playoff “one of the most nerve-racking moments I’ve ever had in golf,” and finding a proper format to decide a winner, though intriguing, it’s almost problematic.
Would it work to send two-player teams to play sudden-death in a four-ball format?
“I think it would be quite interesting if there was a way of putting in like a playoff, if that was to happen,” Europe’s Tyrrell Hatton said. “I think it would be pretty exciting for fans, and it would certainly create a pretty epic atmosphere.”
Is there a good playoff option?
After 28 matches, sending out two players to go extra holes wouldn’t properly reflect the competition. It’s too much to put on a single player. Bernhard Langer still gets reminded of the putt he missed on the final hole of the 1991 Ryder Cup at Kiawah Island that would have secured a 14-14 result and allowed Europe to keep the cup.
Would it work to send two-player teams to play sudden-death in a four-ball format?
If it’s a team event, what about sending all 12 out to play a par-3 and the lowest total score wins?
That’s not a good idea.
Maybe it’s best to leave things as they are. Everyone knows the rules going in.
“I do like traditions of the game, and this competition has been around since 1927, and that’s the way they have always done it,” McIlroy said.
“Does that mean that’s the way they always have to do it? Probably not. But it’s nice to keep some of the tradition around the event.”
PAIRINGS / LIVE SCORING / RESULTS