Opinion & Analysis
The Presidents Cup, or the old Ryder Cup?

The Presidents Cup is more like the Ryder Cup used to be… a friendly competition where international golfers can showcase their abilities devoid of the “we’re No. 1” mania that has stricken the Ryder Cup. It’s also quite lopsided.
In 1977, Jack Nicklaus suggested that perhaps the continent of Europe should be added to the Great Britain and Ireland side to make the competition more fair. Prior to that, the Americans almost always won, often by lopsided margins. The inclusion of Europe made the Ryder Cup what it is today. This was, as we’ll see, a little bittersweet.
It’s true that the Ryder Cup is a far superior competition, but it has become more than what was intended or what Jack had in mind. It’s all well and good to root for the home team, but when flag waving dominates the contest, it demeans golf. Since the infamous “War at the Shore” in 1991, the Ryder Cup has become far too serious an affair for its own good. Booing opponents and name calling is not what our game is about. And while it used to represent a spirited, yet congenial event, it got lost along the way.
Can you imagine Patrick Reed giving Sergio a 3-footer to halve the entire event on Sunday? Crazy right? Well, that’s just what Jack Nicklaus did in the 1969 Ryder Cup in his match against Tony Jacklin.
“I knew you wouldn’t have missed that, but under the circumstances, I wasn’t going to give you that opportunity,” Nicklaus says he told Jacklin as they shook hands leaving the green.
That would be unthinkable in today’s competition. But, of course, Jack Nicklaus is the rare exception to many things; he’s the greatest winner AND the greatest loser in sports… maybe ever!
The Presidents Cup, on the other hand, has the feeling of the Ryder Cup of long ago. Yes, the teams play hard and it’s a great show, but it’s without the bitterness that seems to pervade the Ryder Cup. That’s said, I don’t think the contest is competitive enough. Not in spirit, but for whatever reason, it has become a one-sided affair, almost a foregone conclusion, like the first 50 years of the Ryder Cup. It raises money for charity and gives us another week to watch some of the best players in the world, but it needs a format or restructuring of teams to make it a world-class event. An event that is effectively closed out on Saturday needs serious consideration.
Personally, I’m less concerned with country and care more about good golf. I want to see grueling matches come down to the wire and have the result decided on the penultimate or final match, regardless of the outcome or nation they represent. I also want to see the players shake hands and go have a beer after they’ve left everything on the course. I’m not getting that from the Presidents Cup.
I love the congeniality… I just don’t see a level playing field here. Do you?
Opinion & Analysis
The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Podcasts
Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Opinion & Analysis
On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
Peter
Oct 7, 2017 at 6:12 am
I was at the 1998 Presidents Cup where the much vaunted USA team was beaten 20 1/2 to 11 1/2 at the next overseas (2019) venue, Royal Melbourne. The teams that year in World golf rankings order were;
Tiger Woods (1). Ernie Els (5)
Mark O’Meara (2). Nick Price (6)
David Duval (3). Vijay Singh (9)
Davis Love (4) Steve Elkington (16)
Phil Michelson (10). Greg Norman (18)
Fred Couples (11). Stuart Appleby (33)
Jim Furyk (12). Carlos Franco (39)
Justin Leonard 15). Shigeki Maruyama (43)
Scott Hoch (20). Craig Parry (53)
Mark Calcavechia (21). Joe Ozaki (55)
Lee Janzen (23). Frank Nobilo (60)
John Huston (29). Greg Turner (62)
The most points won by a player that year was Shigeki Maruyama (5) followed by the Elk with 4. Best of the Americans was Couples with 2 1/2. The International team had a 9 point lead going into the singles!
Why did a team so talented as the USA team get smashed? A tough unfamiliar golf course that they obviously took for granted! A strong ethic with great leadership from both within and outside of the International team (Peter Thomson, Greg Norman, Nick Price) resulted in a team that bonded well. Great local support from an enthusiastic but fair spectator army raised the standard of the Internationals to where the lesser players believed they could compete and win!
If you want to make the Presidents Cup more competitive, play it away from the USA more often! International golf would benefit and the comp would be closer! Standard US PGA tour venues like this year’s are only going to widen the gap between the teams!
BD57
Oct 6, 2017 at 8:45 pm
starting point to restructure the President’s Cup, IMO – shorten the bench, lessen the points.
There’s no “rule” that says it has to be 12 man teams; for the Internationals, going to 12 means they’re going to get hammered by lack of depth.
(Of course, this year they would’ve gotten hammered no matter what).
Cut the teams to 10, or even 8.
If you wanted to play three four-balls and three foursomes the first two days, and then 8 singles the last day, you could, although the public would probably like to see everyone play every match.
Gorden
Oct 5, 2017 at 10:08 am
Ryder Cup good, Presidents Cup seems way to one sided. Want to really get some pressure on America add the Asian Women to the Solhiem Cup.
RMF
Oct 5, 2017 at 9:11 am
Ryder Cup Flag waving is something the Americans brought to the event, I think it was when they spent the best part of the last 3 decades getting spanked by Europe. They didn’t like it one bit
Competition with an edge is good for the game, how many people on here don’t joke around on the course, before and after… 0% that’s what I thought.
bellisaurius
Oct 5, 2017 at 6:23 am
It’s a lot easier to be friendly and congenial when you’re up a couple points. The closer the competition, the harder the two sides are going to go at it.
Chris B
Oct 4, 2017 at 12:48 pm
Generally the Ryder Cup is played in good spirits but it clearly has boiled over. Kiawah was the worst that I have seen with balls being kicked out on to the fairway, Seve’s cough and the ball swapping disagreement. Brookline was really bad at the end, and I really didn’t like the bowing last time round from a couple of our guys.
But, this event seems to take some guys to another level and the standard of the golf is usually beyond what you see during the regular season. maybe it needs that edge to it.
Rano
Oct 4, 2017 at 4:52 am
Other than when certain immature fans stoop unnecessarily low in their goading of opposition players, I don’t see the problem in the fact that the Ryder Cup has a bit of edge to it. It’s what makes the contest a sepectacle, and the reason why it attracts viewers who would ordinarily not sit and watch golf for hours.
The President’s Cup on the other hand, is a damp squib and flawed from the start. The International Team is not a team. It’s a group of random players, from different countries, cultures, languages and tours thrown together for a few days. It’s not all bad though, it has at least generated quite a lot of money for charity.
NG
Oct 4, 2017 at 1:23 am
Clearly we don’t need the President’s Cup any more. All that time and money should be spent on helping disaster areas and not wasted on golf by the President
michael
Oct 4, 2017 at 8:27 am
wut
Greg V
Oct 3, 2017 at 1:42 pm
Good comment about the Ryder Cup. It all starts with the pregame pageantry, which is way over the top. Too much party, too much production. Really, military jets flying overhead?
At some point the Rest of the World will have excellent golfers who may dominate US players – it could happen.
I would like to see the Presidents Cup retired, and have a Ryder Cup continue with 3 teams – US, Europe, Rest of. If your team wins, you play the next year against the other team. YEs, a superior team could play every year for 5 or 6 years, but isn’t that what the US does currently?
Of course, that will never happen because these things are made for TV. There would be little interest (ie, no sponsorship interest) in the US in the years that the Rest of played Europe.
boomroasted
Oct 3, 2017 at 11:48 am
You can’t really ask for chemistry on the international side. They don’t all speak English well, they probably don’t spend as much time together on tour, and it’s probably more motivating to play for YOUR country like the U.S, or at least Europe where there is a cultural root, rather than just being all grouped together from god knows where. I think they’re just less fired up than Europeans in general, but it’s not really their fault. They don’t even get home-field advantage in a true sense, it’s a foreign country for the majority of the internationals. Plus for now, the U.S. has way more talented golfers to choose from and gets to play and build chemistry every year so the internationals are at a disadvantage from the start.
Hard to become a good golfer anywhere other than the U.S, parts of Europe and Australia, unless you’re rich or gifted or both, so the talent pool is going to be narrow to begin with for the internationals. Maybe in 10-20 years when Golf grows in Asia and beyond, we might see more competitive teams.
Chris Maddison
Oct 3, 2017 at 11:41 am
“That would be unthinkable in today’s competition.” — umm, what about Tiger giving Molinari the putt to win the RC outright 5 years ago?
The RC is played with great sportsmanship over the last twenty years. Only the incidents at Brookline and Kiwah were over-the-top.
It is what makes the RC so appealing, they play hard but they play fair. The perfect example of this was Rory and Paddy on the 8th green. This fist bump as they walked off was everything the RC is about.
99.9% of the fans in 2015 were perfectly behaved. They got excited, they cheered and they booed which added to the atmosphere. The ‘bitterness’ you refer to is such a small minority it isn’t even worth talking about.
peeny
Oct 3, 2017 at 2:16 pm
Disagree – the bitterness is very much there and far more than a minority (at least when it is being played on US soil). I don’t understand the need for screaming with excitement when the opposition make a bad shot. A win at all costs mentality with spectatorship being flung out the window.