[oldalum]

From the rulebook:

"The Division I Men's and Women's Golf Committees will determine lineups for the match play portion of the championships using the same method employed at the President's Cup matches. The higher seeded team (as determined through the 72-hole stroke-play portion) "Team 1" will have the first choice of putting a player on the board for Match #1. The opposing team "Team 2" will then name its player for Match #1. Team 2 will then name its player for Match #2, and Team 1 will name its player for Match #2. The process will continue in an "S" curve until the players for all five matches are named. However, Team 1 may defer in the selection process and permit Team 2 to begin the overall selection process."

So Walker had the option of putting her player on the board for #1 first or deferring; anyone know which she chose?

I can see an argument for Walker deferring: if she knows she wants to end with Stackhouse/Kim, she should probably defer so that SC gets to determine those final two match ups with limited choices, and we don't really care who our last two are up against. So SC only gets to determine one consequential matchup, the #2 slot. I suspect that's what happened, and SC put up their #1 player first, and Walker used the opportunity to put our #5 (freshman, no experience in NCAA match play) to "waste" their #1.

[oldalum]

From the rulebook:

"The Division I Men's and Women's Golf Committees will determine lineups for the match play portion of the championships using the same method employed at the President's Cup matches. The higher seeded team (as determined through the 72-hole stroke-play portion) "Team 1" will have the first choice of putting a player on the board for Match #1. The opposing team "Team 2" will then name its player for Match #1. Team 2 will then name its player for Match #2, and Team 1 will name its player for Match #2. The process will continue in an "S" curve until the players for all five matches are named. However, Team 1 may defer in the selection process and permit Team 2 to begin the overall selection process."

So Walker had the option of putting her player on the board for #1 first or deferring; anyone know which she chose?

I can see an argument for Walker deferring: if she knows she wants to end with Stackhouse/Kim, she should probably defer so that SC gets to determine those final two match ups with limited choices, and we don't really care who our last two are up against. So SC only gets to determine one consequential matchup, the #2 slot. I suspect that's what happened, and SC put up their #1 player first, and Walker used the opportunity to put our #5 (freshman, no experience in NCAA match play) to "waste" their #1.