Long and short of it? Merion will be tough

One in a series of articles getting you ready for the U.S. Open at Merion Golf Club, June 13-16.

IN 1995, John Daly won the British Open in a four-hole playoff with Costantino Rocco after they had finished at 6-under-par 282, the highest winning score at St. Andrews since Jack Nicklaus (283) a quarter-century before.

Since then, the oldest major has gone back to the Old Course three times. And the champions have shot 269 (Tiger Woods, 2000), 274 (Woods again, '05) and 272 (Louis Oosthuizen in '10). Yet you don't hear anyone suggesting that St. Andrews shouldn't get to host an Open any more. Because nobody over there gets too caught up in what the best players in the galaxy might do there. It's only about who lifts the claret jug. So St. Andrews will again be the venue in 2015, and most likely every 5 years after that for eternity. Just because.

Their attitude seems to be: Here's the course, and the weather, have a go at it.

What a concept.

The green jackets who rule the Masters have taken steps to "Tiger-proof" Augusta National. And Zach Johnson's 1-over 289 in 2007 did equal the highest winning total in that tuna-mint's history, matching records that were set in the 1950s. Yet from 2009-12 the champs all finished between 10- and 16-under. This April Adam Scott and Angel Cabrera got to play extra holes after tying at 9-under.

Again, it's often largely dictated by the conditions. And everyone's pretty much OK with that.

The PGA Championship has been more of the same. The last dozen have produced everything from 18-under (Woods in 2006 at Medinah) to 3-under (Padraig Harrington 2 years later at Oakland Hills). So you really just don't know.

But when it comes to the U.S. Open - which is returning to the famed East Course at Merion for the first time in 32 years - you kind of do.

Remember Arnold Palmer's line in 1960, when he trailed by seven after three rounds at Cherry Hills? He told some sports writer friends that if he could get to 280 (which that year was 4-under), that's usually what won. And he did, thanks to a closing 65, to finish two in front of everyone else.

Over five decades later, not much has changed. There's a reason why this championship is billed as the game's toughest test. More often than not it's downright torturous.

Yes there are going to be years like 2000, when Woods shot 12-under at Pebble Beach, which that week was playing to a par 71 instead of 72. Of course nobody else ended up in red numbers. And Rory McIlroy shot 16-under 268 2 years ago at Congressional, which also had been made into a 71 from a 72. But Webb Simpson won last June at Olympic at 1-over. In 2010 Graeme McDowell took the trophy at Pebble at even. In 2008, Woods and Rocco Mediate got into a playoff at Torrey Pines at 1-under. In 2006 and 2007, at Winged Foot and Oakmont, 5-over was sufficient. Even got it done in 2005 at Pinehurst No. 2. And so it's mostly gone.

It doesn't seem to matter much. The Open is the Open. The rough will be tall, the fairways narrow and the greens slick. Because for the USGA, par counts. And there's nothing wrong with that. I just wish one of these times the powers that be would simply say that, instead of imposing the word "fair" during Wednesday's pre-tourney state of the organization news conference. The only thing that's fair is all 156 players face the same obstacles.

When you take a golf course to the edge, sometimes stuff happens. See Shinnecock Hills in 2004. And that's hardly the lone example. It happens at other majors, too. Just not nearly as often. Like the 1999 British Open at Carnoustie, where the rough was jungle-like and 6-over was enough to get into a playoff thanks to Jean van de Velde's epic 72nd-hole meltdown. But when they went back in 2007, Harrington and Sergio Garcia tied at 7-under. The penal quotient doesn't seem as pervasive along the rest of the grand-slam trail. And perhaps that's how it's supposed to be.

But if a number's indeed just a number, then why the need to lower the par of a course that was worthy enough to make it through the selection process? So you can turn par 5s into par 4s? Isn't a 4 still a 4 on the scorecard, whether it goes down as a birdie or a par? You think the Royal & Ancient would change St. Andrews from a 72? What would be the point?

I like Mike Davis, the USGA's executive director and the man responsible for setting up the course. It's hard not to. He's done some interesting things in recent years, like adding graduated rough, chipping areas and drivable par 4s. Nonetheless . . .

"The whole mindset is we want it to be the most complete test in golf," he said on media day in late April. "We really try to set it up as fairly as we can, and then it's really up to Mother Nature.

"People think the USGA is more fixated than we are about the winning score. We're not. What we're fixated about is trying to get the golf course to play properly."

We'll see. I mean, they were going to move the fairway on the par-5 second hole all the way to Ardmore Avenue on the right. But they didn't, because they weren't sure they could get the grass to grow there. I get it. These players are good. So you have to throw something at them. As long as it doesn't go over the line. And we know that line can be tenuous.

Merion obviously presents a unique dilemma. One of the reasons it hasn't hosted a national open since 1981 is its relative shortness. Even though they've added some 500 yards in the interim, it's still just under 7,000. And the last time that happened at an Open was 2004 at Shinnecock Hills (6,996), where Retief Goosen won by shooting 4-under 276. So there's a justified curiosity about how this one's going to play out.

Merion is the sixth-ranked course in America. It should host an Open every 15 or 20 years. And it shouldn't matter what happens when it does. In 1950, Ben Hogan won a playoff after shooting 287. In 1971, Lee Trevino and Jack Nicklaus tied at 280. A decade later, David Graham closed with a 67 for 273 to win by three. But only four others broke par. And two of those were 1-under. The logical progression would suggest that the next champ will probably finish somewhere around 270. Merion people are hoping for more like 275, which might be wishful thinking unless the place is really playing firm. And if not, there's always the chance that low could be closer to 265. Does that mean that Merion would no longer be No. 6 on the U.S. hit parade? I think not. But perceptions are what they are.

There's a lot of pride on the line. But folks have to get past that. Davis has predicted that there should be an inordinate amount of birdies at Merion. Five par 4s are under 400. Yet there'll also be disasters, because it's an Open. The long holes are long. And the closing stretch is as good as it gets.

Besides, isn't much of the attraction at Augusta knowing that guys can make eagles on the back nine, on holes that they could just as easily double-bogey?

"I'm sure there's some 65s or 64s out there," said ESPN's Lanny Wadkins, a World Golf Hall of Famer who tied for 13th at Merion in 1971 in his first U.S. Open and tied for 14th in '81. "But it'll bite back. It'll make them have to play golf. You don't disgrace a place like Merion. It'll show who the most imaginative player is, because they're going to have to hit all kinds of right shots at the right times."

And 10 years from now . . .

"The winning score isn't nearly as important as who won," said Graham, who will be back at Merion to co-host Tuesday night's champions dinner, the first one that's been held since 2000. "That's what people remember.

"In the big picture, the score's totally irrelevant. I don't see why the golf course has to be the winner. It's the legacy of the championship that's being perpetuated. This isn't the same Merion as it was in 1981. But if the conditions are soft, it'll be a kettle of fish for these guys. That's just the way it is, in any era.

"I think it's ridiculous for anyone to say, 'No one's going to beat our course.' It's kind of like going to the Daytona 500 and rooting for a wreck. I don't understand the mentality of that. If they shoot 20-under they're still going to have another U.S. Open next year. And everyone will forget about it."

Well, maybe.