Is anyone surprise they are playing this a par-73? I thought the USGA would want a par-71 maybe with reduction of two of the par-5s. It doesn't bother me; low score wins. Should Mike Davis be lauded for leaving it as is?
Tony, the problem with trying to convert the 5s to 4s is that they don't lend themselves to it.
#1 (Open #10) used to be a par 4 (I'm told) with the green short of the lake. Now that the green is not there it wouldn't work as a 2-shotter.
#4 (#13) would require a tee up from the corner of the property and leave an usual blind tee shot - I suppose you could do this.
#9 (#18) doesn't have enough room left of the lake to be called a 4 even if the tee is up.
#11 (#2) was played as a 4 in the 1993 Walker Cup and the members played it as a 4 for a while. The landing area doesn't fit unless they remove the trees. Not only that, I made 2 here once and it isn't right to turn my double-eagle hole into a par 4.
#12 (#3) elevated green, too long, wouldn't work.
Par 72 if you move up on #11. More likely for the men. I don't see getting a 71 out of it.
I've said it many times. This is a PERFECT venue for the ladies.