Recently, I visited Montreal, Canada. I enjoyed the visit more because my daughter was the reason of my trip, otherwise, on the way back, I was never so happy to see stars & stripes in the horizon.
Don't take me wrong, Canadians were great hosts, especially Gary Lagden, the golf professional at the scenic The Blainvillier Golf Club, where the qualifying round took place; however, I never felt much out of place as in there, part of it was that it was difficult to communicate, and part of it was the obvious desire of the locals to cheer for any Canadian born player to win their national championship, something that has not been done in over 25 years. To some of the spectators, it was more than just a golf championship, it was a matter of national pride.
Driving back across the border, when the immigration official asked us about our trip and gave us a "thumbs up", almost as if somehow Anya had gone to "represent" the United States instead of herself, it reminded me of several international competitions of different nature, those where the name of the country is first, and the name of the athlete is second.
We have several international competitions for which players MUST qualify to have the honor of representing our country (even if some are by "captain's picks"): The Ryder Cup, The Solheim Cup (to be played later this year), The Presiden't Cup (also to be played next month), the Walker Cup and the Curtis Cup. But you also have the The World Cup and The World Amateur among others, however, there is no point system to qualify for these, you are invited by a committee no one knows about; and now, as of 2016, you'll also have "Olympic Golf", and so far, there is no word on how teams will be selected.
To begin with, I believe that golf doesn't belong in the Olympics unless some changes are made to the rules of competition, among the changes I can think of: 1) No caddies allowed (for instance, athletes in the Biathlon don't have someone carrying their competition rifle) and 2) Somehow the rules include a benefit for faster play (wouldn't it be fun if there was a stroke deduction if you finished in les than 3 1/2 hours, and a penalty if you took more than 4 hrs?)
On the other hand, I'd really like to see the very best amateur golfers (professionals do not have a place in the Olympics) represent us with their heart, just as the professionals represent us in the Ryder Cup, President's Cup and Solheim Cup. Maybe have a qualifying tournament, just like they do for other sports. Otherwise, it would be a sad thing for the Olympics to go the same route as the The World Cup has gone in the last 20 years, especially the last 10.
Gone are the days where our very best and highest ranked players represented us in the World Cup. The last three played (2010 was cancelled), we were represented by the following players: John Merrick & Nick Watney (2009); Ben Curtis & Brandt Snedeker (2008) and Heath Slocum & Boo Weekley (2007). Of these, only one major winner (Ben Curtis), which by the way, is the only tournament that he has ever won to date. Now, I don't doubt these players' patriotism or skill at their best, and we should thank them for saying "yes" when tapped to represent the U.S., but clearly, they were not our "best guns" at the time. Clearly Phil & Tiger should have represented us more than they have.
Between 1953 (1st year the World Cup was played) and 1996, the United States won 21 times; an American won the individual title 16 times, and the U.S. Team was runner up 6 times. The best finish in the last 10 years has been second (twice). Before, the U.S. team was chosen from the best finishes in the majors, thus, Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer teamed up to win 4 cups, so did Fred Couples and Davis Love III. Other winners include Johnny Miller, Hale Irwin, Lee Trevino, Ben Hogan, Julius Boros, Billy Casper and other major championship winners.
I have no idea what the thinking is. Maybe there is a brainless and narrow minded idea that "everyone should have a chance" to win (politics seem to be that way the last few years), therefore, since we cannot limit their equipment (as some politicians tend to do with forces that represent our best interests overseeas), we send second or third string players, only with hopes that we win, not with the desire to be best represented. Maybe they want to give other countries a better chance, who knows.
If you were putting your life on the line, wouldn't you rather have a qualified marksman with great equipment that he trusts watching your back than someone who hits the bulls eye only 10% of the time? Sure, sport is different, but we still want to have the best chance to win.
All I can think of is that hopefully, people with this kind of thinking have nothing to do with the makeup of the 2016 Olympic Golf Team.
No comments:
Post a Comment