Tiger Woods’ Ryder Cup record has long been a puzzling contradiction. One of golf’s all-time greats, who even offered his services to Team USA this year despite turning down the captaincy role, yet on this particular stage, he faltered dramatically.
Across eight appearances, Woods competed in 37 matches, securing victory in just 13 while suffering defeat in 21 and drawing three. His squads posted a dismal 1–7 record throughout his Ryder Cup tenure, leaving him with barely 39% of available points earned.
For many, those disappointing results trace back to a controversial statement Woods, who has never hesitated to give a profanity-laced moniker to Rory McIlroy, delivered in 1999 that continues to shadow Ryder Cup discussions today. This comes as the staggering cost of Trump’s trip to Bethpage Black is revealed
During the PGA Championship at Medinah that summer, Woods faced questions about the tournament’s competitive fire. His response was stark: “I remember players in the past skipping the Ryder Cup because it was an exhibition . . . That’s exactly what it is.”
When questioned whether he grasped why such language might appear dismissive, Woods remained unwavering. “It is an exhibition,” he declared, reports the Mirror US. “Any event where professionals aren’t paid constitutes an exhibition. That’s how it started.”
The moment those comments surfaced proved incendiary. Then-U.S. captain Ben Crenshaw, already energized before the competition, fired back: “It’s not an exhibition. How can they say that?”.
While Crenshaw subsequently expressed regret for his heated response, describing it as an emotional outburst, his stance embodied the conventional belief that national representation should provide sufficient motivation. “All I can tell you is that I come from a different generation,” Crenshaw said.
“Ryder Cup means quite a lot to a lot of us. We want to continue to see that from both sides of the Atlantic.” David Duval, who made similar comments at the time, walked his phrasing back, calling it a “poor choice of words.”
Woods, however, held firm. His stance wasn’t about player wages for their own benefit, he contended, but about authority over Ryder Cup earnings. “The Ryder Cup is a big money maker,” Woods said in 1999. “There’s so much money being made, why can’t we allocate funds to our communities?”
That reasoning has finally reached its conclusion in 2025. For the first time in Ryder Cup history, the U.S. squad is receiving payment: each golfer will get a $200,000 stipend plus an additional $300,000 directed to charities of their choice, a total $500,000 package.
For purists, compensating players erodes the Ryder Cup’s essence – a tournament founded on honor, not hefty checks. But for pragmatists, the decision was inevitable given the income Ryder Cups produce – upwards of $60 million to $70 million in some years.
Woods, Duval, and Mark O’Meara were well ahead of their era in highlighting the disparity. Woods’ Ryder Cup performance still remains a dark spot on his career. It’s uncertain if his attitude damaged his game – or if his setbacks influenced that attitude.
