I do think you really need to work a US Open to truly understand how hard the USGA pushes the playing surfaces. The week before the Open at Pebble the course looked like Augusta. Not only was it in the best condition I've ever seen a golf course, it also played amazingly fast and firm. I set up the course with the USGA the following week and I've never seen turfgrass pushed so hard in my life. I have several pictures but I'm not sure how the poa survived that week. Pebble is lucky to have one of the best superintendents in the business. After those 2 weeks I worked my normal hours at Cypress, where I would drive past Pebble on the way to work. They needled tined basically everything and watered deeply the weeks that followed the tournament. It took several weeks before the course looked right again and that's under perfect growing conditions.
SNaugler.
You were there, so I'll defer to your experience and expertise.
The greens appeared very bumpy and virtually plinkolike on the weekend.(making anything outside 3 feet appeared to be a random event)
With all the preparation that went in, is that needed for a worthy outcome/champion?
and if the greens had been a foot slower, a hair less rock hard, and puttable, would the champion have been less worthy?
Do we need to go back and discredit US Champions of previous decades because some of them finished on greens that were stimping(or would that be "bimping" 
)
at a lower rate?
Seems like someone's justifying their existence , rather than(but under the cover of) determining more worthy champions
Jeff- I couldn't agree with you more! The greens were extremely bumpy but that's mainly because of the countless different bio types of poa surviving at different rates (if that makes sense). What's crazy is the USGA loved it, they couldn't have been happier! I guess they believe that rock hard greens like #14 determine who the best player is that week? I was on that green every morning and evening... Impossible is the only word I can think of. We were rolling the hill side around the green to make it even harder! I remember taking stimp meter readings where I couldn't get the ball to stop. Now I love difficult golf courses but that was a little extreme.
We did have a great finish! So why change? JK! I'm very interested to see how they set up and maintain Shinnecock after what happened in 2004.
Joel- That foot traffic is exactly what I was talking about it my earlier post. I'm sure Josh will get things turned around.
SNaugler,
Regarding Pebble,
I'm actually OK with rock hard greens if they want to go that way. I'd prefer firm but whatever floats their boat.It does put a premium on control
But not at the expense of turf after or especially DURING the event.
My guess is though it'd be a bit easier to get healthy firm at a slightly slower stimp.
As far as the plinko on the greens, I understand completely about the different varieties of poa "surviving" at different rates.(that's exactly how it looked-a little bit the way poa greens look in the spring in the late afternoon when the different varieties "grow" at different rates than the minority bent-just without the smell of death
)
I would be disappointed if your characterization of the USGA being "happy" at Pebble is accurate.
The bastardization of Shinny wasn't just #7-it was the odd setup the whole period of time leading up to the event, particularly growing the weird layer of rough just off the fairways
, then cutting the native bluestem rough back
.
Watching Nick Faldo(no bomber) teeing off with a 3 iron on a windless day on #6 and watching it run 60 yards to where you'd normally bust a driver confirmed that the goofiness was on.
If they played the Open there this June it would be a better event because of, (not in spite of) no preparation