I disagree with the last paragraph because most putts conceded WERE under 3 feet.

Also, match play tournaments are pretty much obsolete in pro golf. But, this was not a typical match play tournament, because when a player concedes a putt, it affects the entire team, not just the player, as it would in a typical match play tournament. The concept of conceding a putt is based on the premise that only the player conceding the putt is affected. That is why a player cannot concede a putt in a stroke play tournament. Match play tournaments were replaced with stroke play tournaments many years ago.

Exactly. I mistyped and meant ... every putt conceded was under 3', so a non-issue.

If the USA had won, no one would be complained the 100+ years of conceded putts is wrong or the envelope rule should be changed.

I agree with this and arguably the most famous moment/concession in Ryder Cup history, involves this exact subject. Jack Nicklaus conceded a 3' putt to Tony Jacklin in 1969, which ended the Match as a Tie. It's gone down in history as the "greatest act of sportsmanship" in golf (or sports) in history. Most of Nicklaus' teammates were appalled and Sam Snead the Captain was livid at Nicklaus' egotistical assumption he was entitled to make the decision as to who wins the Ryder Cup.

Curiously in retrospect, this 3' conceded putted was (according to sportswriters) one of the defining moments in Nicklaus' career. IMO, I think it was the most egotistical moment in golf history.

The Concession: Great Sportsmanship Or A Crazy Thing To Do? | Golf Monthly

Access Denied

Top 5 Ryder Cup moments of all time - Yahoo Sports

Me thinks, Victor Hoveland drop out, should have been forfeited but they didn’t ask for my opinion

For what's it worth, I think this was the greatest Ryder Cup ever, as it illustrated why the USA has been so ineffective over the last 20 or so years.

The USA has traditionally had Ryder Cup teams, whose individual achievements, far exceed those of the European team. Medal Play Golf has always been an individual sport, team golf is a horse of another color.

The Americans are "tigers". They hunt alone. The Europeans are more like "lions", who hunt in packs. The lions almost always dominate the "pack" play and the tigers dominate single play..

Every time the USA looses the Ryder Cup, all the pundits call for a change in the way the USA team is structured. I think the pundits are right, but missing the point. The USA approach has always been, trying to turn their tigers into lions for 2 weeks. Make the USA team more like the Europeans. Why? As Sam Snead once said, "you have to dance with who you brung".

Instead of trying to emulate the Europeans and trying to create a temporary pack of lions, perhaps the USA should deal with the reality of their players' personalities and allow the tigers to be tigers and the lions be lions? Forget about bringing a "team" and bring 12 gunslingers, who take no prisoners, friend or foe. I think the USA needs more Ray Floyd's and Lanny Wadkin's.

For those who claim that team play and match play are obsolete, I don't think that's true. It's become nearly extinct for professional golf, but only because it's not very practical for TV or in person viewing. Most anyone who's ever attended a Ryder Cup, will admit it's one of the worst events to watch in person. That said, most every round of non-professional golf around the world, is played as match play. Every golf league I know of, plays team golf.

So while team play and match play may be nearly extinct in the professional golf world, it's the kind of golf most of us play every day.

yet, many amateur tournaments, and jr developmental tournaments, have match play.

its an interesting human dichotomy,

In four ball, there is no team or team work, each player plays to win the hole or to minimize the strokes, so "tigers" can still dominate. Its a scoring variation of stroke play.

In alternate shot format, there is a team, but is there really teamwork?
The "team" is in the socialization of the group. However, human chemistry is abstract, difficult to model in math terms. . ie to count. . so its an observation and evaluation . .

Captain Keegan can not be blamed,
The course can not be blamed.
The fans can not be blamed.
The format cannot be blamed.

There is the plan and there is the execution. The plan is difficult to evaluate and whatever the plan was, the execution didn't work. .
However, humans aren't machines, so even if they shot their potential, Europe can still beat them: any team can win on any particular day.

Scotty S is a definite tiger and has stated such in interviews. That is why he struggles every time in that format.

But the Ryder Cup is still and will always be, just an exhibition match for countries to show off the game, the original goal when it was created. Which means its for country and pride and for selling the game of sportsmanship, which should never be remunerated.

I disagree. Everyone plays their own ball, but ... you're always watching and considering your partner's situation and tailoring your shot, to maximize the team's potential. Entirely different mind set.

If your partner flares his Tee Shot into the ****, your Tee shot is going to be a different shot than you'd make, if your partner blasted it down the middle. Team play is typically much more conservative ... or, gets crazy aggressive if both players are on a hot streak.

In professional medal play, no one looks at a scoreboard until the last few holes of the 2nd round (if they're concerned about making the Cut). Then they don't look at the Scoreboard until the end of the 3rd round ... & last 3 or 4 holes of the final round. Of the guys I know out there, none of them are "scoreboard watchers" ... no reason to be.

In a 4 ball, you're constantly forced to watch the "scoreboard". Every shot. Different mentality and different atmosphere.