Golf returned to Rio this summer as an Olympic sport for the first time since 1904. (It was an even longer gap for the women’s golf, which was last in the Olympics in 1900.) The return was surrounded by controversy about whether golf belongs in the Olympics, and the situation wasn’t helped when a large number of top golfers withdrew from play, citing concerns about Zika or, in many cases, just their busy schedules. Men’s and women’s golf will be back in Tokyo in 2020, but its future at the Olympics beyond is uncertain.

Well, it was worth waiting—all 112 years of the wait.

The fears and frustration following big-name defections melted away on the final day of the men’s golf, when Justin Rose of Great Britain birdied the final hole to hold off Sweden’s Henrik Stenson and win a gold medal. The 2013 US Open champion bested the 2016 winner of the Open Championship. Nothing shabby about that.

And Matt Kuchar of the US captured the bronze medal, a nice win for America. After he closed with a brilliant final round 63 and took the bronze medal, Kuchar told Golf Channel, “I’ve never been so excited to finish top-three in my life.”

Full disclosure: I’ve been a supporter of Olympic golf from Day One. I think anything that gives golf greater global exposure is good for the game. Despite what Rory McIlroy said (and now he admits he was “proven wrong”), all who love golf should want to grow the game. And Olympic golf can’t hurt.

The intention was never to suggest that Olympic gold is more prized than a Masters green jacket, the silver claret jug of The Open or the trophy of any other men’s or women’s Major championship. The point was not to devalue the Majors, but rather to enhance the game. Having golf on the largest, most-watched stage in all of sports can only be a good thing.

The Olympic return came at a time when the business of the golf looks somewhat grim. Adidas wants to sell off its golf-club business TaylorMade; Nike is shutting down its golf-club business; the retailer Golfsmith is considering filing for bankruptcy. The governing bodies of golf hoped the Olympic exposure could help the sport, and it very well may have.

The women’s golf was as big a hit as the men’s. Nine countries were represented in the final top 10, with Amy Yang joining Inbee Park for Korea. Also in the top 10 were New Zealand (Lydia Ko), China (Shanshan Feng), Japan (Haru Nomura), US (Stacy Lewis), Canada (Brooke Henderson), Australia (Minjee Lee), Great Britain (Charley Hull) and Norway (Suzann Pettersen).

The days of Americans dominating golf are over, and that’s not a bad thing. In fact, it’s a very good thing, both for competitive excitement and for the financial health of the game. It’s not that the Americans have gotten worse; the rest of the world has gotten better.

Sure, there are some things to second-guess about Olympic golf, in terms of format especially, but there is no reason to second-guess the return of golf. Personally, I’d have rather seen best-ball, match play instead of 72 holes of stroke play. I have two reasons for this. First, we see 72 holes of stroke play virtually every week on a multitude of pro tours around the world. Having something different would have been a good thing. Second, best-ball match play would increase the number of top players in the event and bring the national element into the competition. Instead of 60 players each for the men and women we could have had 64 teams for each—128 players in each competition. That means players like Rolex Women’s World Rankings No. 10 Ha Na Jang of South Korea would not have been left out simply because her country had already reached the maximum four players. Up the maximum per country to eight.

As for the national element, imagine a best-ball match with Bubba Watson and Rickie Fowler, for example, against the Aussie duo of Adam Scott and Jason Day, both of whom chose to sit out this Olympics. Or Lexi Thompson and Stacy Lewis going against Inbee Park (who won the women’s gold in a fantastic, dominant performance) and Sei Young Kim of South Korea.

The men who chose not to go to Rio (nearly 20 of them) have come under a lot of criticism but I’m willing to give them all a pass—except McIlroy. I think these defections were Brazil-specific for safety reasons. If this had been London in 2012 or Tokyo in 2020 all those big names would have been there. It was bad luck: Brazil is a very different country now than it was in 2009, when it was awarded the Olympics. The political and economic collapse happened since then has made dealing with the environmental challenges virtually impossible. As for the Zika virus, no one saw that coming in 2009.

People asked why women did not defect from the Olympics in anywhere near the numbers as the men—especially since Zika is more of a threat to women of child-bearing age. My answer it this: The women’s game does not get the same exposure as the men, and so, honestly, they are not as spoiled by money and attention as the men. This was a chance for them to perform on a global stage, and they knew it, and relished the opportunity.

When Rio 2016 is even further in the rearview, the return of golf to the Olympics will be deemed a smashing success. It already feels that way.

Next year, the International Olympic Committee votes on whether to expand golf beyond 2020. I’m guessing they will.

—

Ron Sirak is a senior writer at Golf Digest and frequent television guest on NBC’s Golf Channel. Follow him on Twitter @ronsirak. Sirak and Yahoo Finance’s Daniel Roberts both participated in a Golf Channel panel in March about Donald Trump’s role in golf.