Ryder Cup: Experience Not the Deciding Factor

With the Ryder Cup approaching this weekend, you may hear some hoopla about the overall lack of experience (10 rookies between the two teams) being showcased, and specifically a perceived disadvantage the U.S. team may have with their six first-timers.

But what are these numbers really telling us? Should we simply group players into veterans and rookies and presume the veterans will be more successful?  

If you look a little deeper, there are other facts that have been hidden by those statistics above.

Let's start by examining the European side.  Three of their "veterans" actually have only one Ryder Cup appearance each.  Robert Karlsson (2006), Ian Poulter (2004), and Henrik Stenson (2006) have a combined won-lost-tied record of 2-3-3. 

This is respectable, but the bottom line is that they combined for 3.5 points of the 37 total for the Europeans in their dominating victories of the Americans in 2004 and 2006.  In Ryder Cups that were basically over by the end of day two, it is doubtful that these players felt any serious pressure that would give them an experience edge over rookies this week. 

So why then, are the Europeans the favorites? 

Their trio of Sergio Garcia, Padraig Harrington, and Lee Westwood are veterans in every sense of the word.  They've all been through a dramatic loss (1999), a close victory (2002), and the aformentioned runaway wins.

Westwood was even there in 1997 when the Europeans won by the slimmest of margins, a single point.  Those three players boast an impressive 35-20-7 record, including Sergio Garcia's team-leading career mark of 14-4-2.

But haven't the Americans accumulated experience as well?

Certainly.  Phil Mickelson is the only player competing this week who played in the last six Ryder Cups.  Jim Furyk is right behind and matches Westwood with appearances in the last five.  Of course, most of that experience has come in defeat.  Mickelson and Furyk were a combined 4-13-1 in the last two Ryder Cups. 

But Mickelson and Furyk were still a part of the huge comeback in 1999 as they both won their singles matches on the final day.  It is this fact that is genuinely important.  Ryder Cup success, rather than experience, is the true edge that a veteran can have.  That ability to recall past triumphs and use them as a guide and confidence boost in pressure situations is what gives a veteran an edge over a rookie. 

This is why you hear U.S. Captain Paul Azinger downplay the need to have experienced players on his team, saying, "The experience that anyone has had to deal with in the past has been bad experiences...when you lose five out of six Ryder Cups that's never very good." 

Essentially, he is saying that a losing experience is not an advantage over no experience.

Unfortunately for the U.S., Justin Leonard is the only player not already mentioned who was on the team in 1999.  He undoubtedly will bring good memories to this Ryder Cup (his clutch putt was the most memorable shot in 1999), but the remainder of the team has never won a Ryder Cup.

With the exception of Paul Casey, none of the players not mentioned previously have any past Ryder Cup success to act as a mental aid this week.

Yet there are other ways to obtain a mental edge.

The cocky, confident Anthony Kim and the happy-go-lucky Boo Weekley could have just the right attitude to deflect pressure away from themselves and toward their opponents.

J.B. Holmes and Kenny Perry, who have never won a Ryder Cup match, will gain support from the crowd in their home state of Kentucky.

Steve Stricker and Hunter Mahan were both members of the winning President's Cup team last year.

It is easy to see that the U.S. cannot be discounted simply because they have less Ryder Cup experience.

Ultimately, there are other intangibles at play that are equally important and could result in a very close finish come Sunday.