Did Captain Love Blow It With His Singles Selections?

Love knew that Europe would send their best players out first to get some blue on the the board. To hopefully inspire and give confidence the guys that followed.

Looking at the match-ups and needing 4½ points, I think Captain Love got it about right: Mickelson, Snedeker, D.Johnson, Furyk, Dufner, Stricker and Woods should have been able to get 4½ points between them.
What do you guys think?


Sunday's singles - 3½-8½

Bubba Watson lost to Luke Donald 2&1
Webb Simpson lost to Ian Poulter 2 up
Keegan Bradley lost to Rory McIlroy 2&1
Phil Mickelson lost to Justin Rose 1 up
Brandt Snedeker lost to Paul Lawrie 5&3
Dustin Johnson beat Nicolas Colsaerts 3&2
Zach Johnson beat Graeme McDowell 2&1
Jim Furyk lost to Sergio Garcia 1 up
Jason Dufner beat Peter Hanson 2 up
Matt Kuchar lost to Lee Westwood 3&2
Steve Stricker lost to Martin Kaymer 1 up
Tiger Woods halved with Francesco Molinari

well hindsight's a wonderful thing, but I do remember when I first saw the line-up that I thought Love had gone slightly top-heavy, when he could afford to be more conservative (knowing Europe had no choice but to front-load massively and hope for the best).

Not massively, but maybe leaving the experienced Mickleson lower down (who was playing well) rather than having the out-of-sorts Woods and Stricker down the bottom would have been a better choice. However, equally you can see what Love was thinking: had the US won say 2 of the top 5 matches it would have been all over bar the shouting, so backing his stronger players to come through wasn't a bad move at all.

Ultimately I'm going to sit on the fence here, and say that there's no right answer.

I can buy the theory that captains can think out the pairings for the other matches, apply a bit of strategy. But really when it comes down to the 12 v 12 on the last day its all a bit pot luck as to who will get your points on the day. I dont think Love can be criticized or indeed Ollie can be lauded for inspirational choices.

Nah. The Euros just played well.

Europe pretty much knew that Bubba was going out first. Thus they sent out Donald as opposed to Poultry (who is more prone to be wound up by players like Bubba). So, knowing that the Europeans expected Bubba first, I had probably sent Phil out first in stead, and then Bubba and Bradley next. Or maybe Love was hoping for a Poulter-Bubba matchup?

Love did say that he expected it to come down to the Dufner match, and that the playing order of the rest didn't really matter. Under all cicumstances I however think he made a mistake in playing Woods last. Woods, had played reasonably and should have been put somewhere in the middle and is, as we know, usually a clutch putter (when needed!).

I thought Woods going out last was odd, but then again Monty sent out GMac, a prime form player, last in 2012. And that worked for him, just didnt work for Love.

erictheblueuk wrote:Love knew that Europe would send their best players out first to get some blue on the the board. To hopefully inspire and give confidence the guys that followed.

Looking at the match-ups and needing 4½ points, I think Captain Love got it about right: Mickelson, Snedeker, D.Johnson, Furyk, Dufner, Stricker and Woods should have been able to get 4½ points between them.
What do you guys think?


Sunday's singles - 3½-8½

Bubba Watson lost to Luke Donald 2&1
Webb Simpson lost to Ian Poulter 2 up
Keegan Bradley lost to Rory McIlroy 2&1
Phil Mickelson lost to Justin Rose 1 up
Brandt Snedeker lost to Paul Lawrie 5&3
Dustin Johnson beat Nicolas Colsaerts 3&2
Zach Johnson beat Graeme McDowell 2&1
Jim Furyk lost to Sergio Garcia 1 up
Jason Dufner beat Peter Hanson 2 up
Matt Kuchar lost to Lee Westwood 3&2
Steve Stricker lost to Martin Kaymer 1 up
Tiger Woods halved with Francesco Molinari

Absolutely NOT, the only weak performers prior to Sunday were Woods and Stricker... but how can anyone look at that US order and say Love blew it with weak selections? Europe had very little luck in the first two days and saved it for Sunday. I actually think Love captained his team extremely well, rotated everyone and was consistant with his pairings. US as a team blew it, don't feel any/much of that is attributed to Love.

Diggers wrote:I thought Woods going out last was odd, but then again Monty sent out GMac, a prime form player, last in 2012. And that worked for him, just didnt work for Love.

Woods's form has been patchy in this event. If he went out earlier I think he would have lost, just giving the Europeans a big boost. So I think Love was right to play him last to get something if they needed it. If you think about it he got a half and if a couple other guys had also got a half they would have won.

erictheblueuk wrote:

Diggers wrote:I thought Woods going out last was odd, but then again Monty sent out GMac, a prime form player, last in 2012. And that worked for him, just didnt work for Love.

Woods's form has been patchy in this event. If he went out earlier I think he would have lost, just giving the Europeans a big boost. So I think Love was right to play him last to get something if they needed it. If you think about it he got a half and if a couple other guys had also got a half they would have won.

Woods form has been patchy in most of his RC's and it hasnt made a jot of difference to his singles record which is about as good as anyone who has played the event as many times as him.
But you are right, really who cares what positions the points are gained from, they have to come from somewhere...or not as happened to the Yanks.

I would say DLIII's thinking was sound.

Almost everyone on the US team seemed to be playing very well on Fri and Sat. Shouldn't have come down to the last 2, but if it did, then 2 veterans would be able to handle the pressure better than anyone else (and situation may have inspired them).

I would've sent out my fodder at the top to take on the Europe big guns then have my form players against their out of form.

The "weak" links of the US team are much stronger than those of European 1999 squad, but some of this feels like in the lap of the gods.

Mark James, sent two stronger players out (Clarke/Westwood) and then tried to have his weaker players there, before the rest of the team tried to make it to 14. It failed. Clarke and Westwood lost, and then so did the next 4, and it was 12-10 USA. No game got to the 17th. He was vilified because the game got to a point where his perceived stronger players had no calling on the game. But what if he had put Monty/Olazabal out first, would it have made any difference?

Davis Love, puts his two pointless players at 11 and 12, almost the exact opposite of what James does, and puts out what seems like a strong head. Knowing that Ollie must really go top heavy, he puts out what appears a very balanced set, with some form players in the top 6, so that the US will never lose that advantage, we won't have a situation where Europe build up a head of steam. Unfortunately Europe do win the first 5 and it's soon 11-11.

You can go on and on about what people should have done, but as I said before the tournament, ultimately the singles comes down to luck. 24 very good players. Some wil go hot, some will be cold, and they're not always the ones you think it will be.

No. Not at all.

Donald set the tone. I think sometimes whipping the crowd up into a frenzy isn't the best idea. I think what Bubba did on the first tee was misguided. Donald found the fairway and Watson found the trees. That I think set the tone for the day's play.

Poulter was unplayable all weekend. The only European who's putter was working in the first 2 days. Mickelson I thought played well and and lost to some outstanding putting on the 16th, 17th and 18th and Lawrie produced a masterclass in golf.

Furyk I think blew his match. The putt on the 18th was a bit of a choke.

End of the day you have to take your hats off to the European team. That was some comeback and it is going to be one which is talked about in generations to come.

GSC wrote:I would've sent out my fodder at the top to take on the Europe big guns then have my form players against their out of form.

Wouldn't this have sent out a message to the world that they were scared and pile even more pressure on the guys going out later?

I think the lesson learned after Brookline is that you must always top load your team. Always. No matter if you're leading or trailing. It all comes down to momentum. If US had won a copuple of the first matches it would all have been over. Now Europe won them, and confidence propagated to the other matches. So always, ALWAYS top load the team! It's all about applying pressure to the opponent.

(Btw. the same goes for penalty shootouts in football. No idea saving your best players for 4th or 5th, as it might all be over by then.)