1 Oct 2012

The psychology of being a sporting winner

Europe’s stunning comeback to win the Ryder Cup was achieved as much in the head as it was on the practice ground.

While a succession of American players, who had performed so well during the first two days of the competition in Chicago, crumbled at the penultimate hole, Europe’s players, who had enjoyed mixed fortunes earlier, suddenly found the fortitude of character and steadiness of hand to match the greatest ever comeback in the history of the contest.

And key to their amazing success was their ability to cope with the occasion, in the often hostile environment of the Medinah Country Club.

Dr John Mathers, sports psychologist at the University of Stirling, says technique and mental strength are equally important at the highest levels.

“Having technique is one thing. Skill is having technique but being able to cope with the pressure at the same time,” he explained.

“Skill is being able to use that technique by dealing with the pressure that goes with competing, which is what the Europe team managed to do so well last night.”

Yet while sports psychologists are now a common feature of elite sport preparation, Dr Mathers believes it would have been the expertise of a man who is not qualified in the science that would have played possibly the key role in what is being described as the Medinah miracle.

“Most of the major governing bodies and professional sports teams probably have sports psychology input. I don’t believe there was a psychologist accompanying the European Ryder Cup team, but the individuals on that team would have had a coach and at some point worked with a mental-skills person.

“But the psychological support [at Medinah] would have been provided by the captain and vice-captain (Jose Maria Olazabal and Miguel Angel Jimenez).

“The sports psychologist can bring many skills, but in that instance, players would benefit more from listening to the people who had actually been there and done that job before.

“That would have been far more relevant than having some psychologist pitch up.

“Although Olazabal does not have psychology training, he would have been selected because he knows how best to manage players in this situation.”

So what were the key factors that helped Europe fight back from a 10-4 deficit to retain the trophy with a 14½ – 13½ victory?

Self-discipline and self-belief

Dr Mathers singled out two players who demonstrated the characteristics necessary to survive – and ultimately thrive – in the pressured environment of golf’s fiercest competition.

With just two holes to play, Justin Rose was one down against Phil Mickelson. But he sank a sensational 30-foot putt at the 17th to draw level with one hole to play.

Then, knowing a half-point for tying his match would probably not be enough for Europe, he holed another birdie to win on the last.

Dr Mathers said: “You have to make the emotions and muscle tensions stay fairly constant. I know some people like to fist-clench and jump up and down [when they have played a great shot]. That is fine, but you have to get rid of it by the next shot.

“What impressed me about Justin Rose was when he held the [putt at the] 17th, he stayed calm and walked at the same pace and went through the same routine at the 18th.”

Similarly, Martin Kaymer, who holed the five-foot putt that clinched the cup for Europe, betrayed encouraging body language.

“He has been playing poorly for the last 18 months, but this was a chance to get back into the limelight, and he would have been supported by the crowd, his team-mates and the captain.

“He probably remembered the times he had been successful in the past.”

Dr Mathers especially noted his body language after he had sent the first of the two putts he had for victory beyond the hole. “If you look at his expression, it didn’t change. He treated it exactly the same.

“When I saw that I was happy.”

Experienced Jim Furyk was one of several American golfers to buckle under the pressure

Momentum

“In sport momentum is huge,” said Dr Mathers. “Much bigger than anything else.”

Less than an hour before the close of the second day’s play, the US led Europe by ten points to four, needing a total of 14½ points to regain the trophy.

It seemed a near-impossible task. Yet British pairings Luke Donald and Sergio Garcia, and Rory McIlroy and Ian Poulter, managed to win the final two matches of the day to cut the Americans’ lead to four points – still daunting but somehow more reachable.

“That was the starting point [of the comeback]. The last two matches made a huge difference and ignited the huge belief that they were still in the game.”

The following morning, with the captain, Olazabal, putting his most in-form players at the top of the playing order, they all rose to the challenge, winning the first five singles matches and turning the tide in the match.

Team temperament

Europe’s most successful performer over the three days – and at previous recent Ryder Cups – was Ian Poulter, a good quality golfer who has never hit the heights of his profession as an individual.

The flamboyant Englishman appears to thrive in the white-hot atmosphere of team competition.

His birdie on his Ryder Cup debut in 2004 gave Europe the half-point it needed to win the trophy.

But it was at Medinah this weekend that Poulter’s value to the team really became evident, sinking five successive birdies on the final five holes on the Saturday evening on a day when virtually none of his team-mates could hole anything.

Dr Mathers said: “Each person has to prepare in the way that best suits their style and personality.

“While Justin Rose did well to stay calm, it is clear that Ian Poulter thrives in different circumstances. He was getting paired with players who were better ball strikers because the captain didn’t want him outgunned.

“He was able to bring a modest game to the table by performing really well. He seems to enjoy playing for the team.”

Lead too big

While the Europeans tried not to be daunted by the size of their deficit at the end of the second day, there is a possibility that the size of the Americans‘ lead contributed to their downfall.

“The team would have thought that even if they didn’t win their own [final] matches, four-and-a-half (the number of points they still required) would.

“So it is quite possible to remove responsibility from their own games, whereas what they should be doing is taking responsibility for their own performances.”

Ironically, Dr Mathers doubts whether the knowledge that the Americans themselves had overturned an identical scoreline in 1999 in Brookline, Massachusetts, to win the trophy would have had much of a bearing on the Europeans’ belief on the final day.

“Not many of them had taken part in both. I think it was more that they felt it was possible to overcome that deficit, irrespective of what happened at Brookline.”