I know some golfers like to see the courses made so difficult that the pros look more like us at times. I personally don't. I don't mind a course being difficult. But it needs to be fair. It needs to punish the miss-hit shot, and reward the well-hit one. Traditional U.S. Open layouts, in my opinion, often cross the line. When a guy has to hit a drive 270 yards -- IN THE AIR -- the USGA has already eliminated many in the field from being able to compete.
The forecast is for rain, rain and more rain. Which makes it even MORE difficult for the guy who can't hit driver 300 in the air. So the conditions are made even more likely for Tiger to defend his title. I'm pulling for him, but I wouldn't mind seeing Phil (what a story THAT would be), Steve Stricker, Kenny Perry or Paul Casey win (all long hitters).
I would like to play a U.S. Open course when it is set up with Open conditions, just to see what I would score. Two years ago at Oakmont, Tiger said a 10 handicapper couldn't break 100. I would just be interested to see what it would be like.
President Obama swats a fly, and PETA gets offended! Don't these radical movements realize they look buffoonish when they are so extreme? They lose all credibility.