There are always questions waiting to be answered heading into major championships, but this week's U.S. Open seems to have an inordinate number of them.
So, what kind of test will Chambers Bay be for the world's best male golfers? And of that top talent, who might head home early?
Our panel of experts go in depth on these topics and more in the latest edition of Four-Ball.
1. On a scale of 1-10, how will pros react to Chambers Bay as a first-time major venue?
SportsCenter anchor Matt Barrie: I'm assuming 1 is hate. And 10 is love. And I'm going with a 3. The course layout has not been welcomed by current and former players. And I expect the USGA will be a punching bag this week because of it. Expect players to be critical in regular and social media.
SportsCenter anchor Jonathan Coachman: From everything I am reading, there won't be too many happy golfers. And they have no one to blame but themselves. Phil [Mickelson] said it: You can't spend the next three days getting to know the course. It's too late then. I will say that the venue will get a 3 because there will be so much frustration.
ESPN.com senior golf analyst Michael Collins: Five. Half of the players will be cool with the setup, and half will hate it. Quite honestly, I think the USGA would be ecstatic with that, too. It wants guys to be psyched out by it before the tournament even starts. Take out the top-five finishers on both ends (making and missing the cut) and this year's reaction will be similar to Pinehurst No. 2 last year with its "natural areas."
ESPN.com senior golf writer Bob Harig: The number here is 5, for in the middle, because the reaction is likely to be all over Washington State. Chambers Bay is unique, but not all are going to like it. The course is a lot to learn.
ESPN.com senior golf writer Jason Sobel: If you ask most fans (especially those watching at home) to rank it come Sunday evening, the number will be close to 9. But the pros will rank it closer to a 5. Pros hate when a course is "unfair," which too often gets misinterpreted as "really difficult." They're going to see plenty of similar shots end up in different places this week. That'll get 'em grousing about the fairness.
2. More likely, Tiger Woods misses the cut or Lefty finishes inside the top 10?
Barrie: Lefty in the top 10. He fired a final-round 65 at St. Jude and has some pep in his step making the trip to Washington. In Tiger's most recent competitive round, he played by himself because he was so bad the round before. This might be Phil's last stand at a U.S. Open. He'll come to play. Tiger won't sniff the weekend.
Coachman: This one is easy, with all due respect to Tiger. Phil played well this week and sounded confident after his round Sunday. He said his game plan is in place for this week. To me, for Tiger, his game is not in the kind of shape to tackle a U.S. Open venue. I hope I am wrong, but I am going to go with Phil.
Collins: Tiger is much more likely to miss the cut. Woods has shown little in his game that would give anyone a reason to believe everything has come together. If anything, the opposite is true. Phil's scouting mission here and his finish last week should give a least a glimmer of hope that his game is trending in the right direction.
Harig: Lefty inside the top 10. As tough as it has been for Tiger of late, he will find a way to make it to the weekend, but Phil could just be primed enough to make a run for the title.
Sobel: Can I say yes to both? I like Mickelson as much as I don't like Woods this week, but I'll fade Tiger for the sake of this question. I'm bullish on his game long term -- well, more bullish than most people -- but nobody turns things around at a U.S. Open.
3. Pick a top player who will struggle.
Barrie: I think Dustin Johnson will have some struggle in him. He WD'd with an illness this week in Memphis. So it's anyone's guess how he'll feel. DJ's game is long, which is perfect for this course. But his ball flight is low and, on greens expected to roll Open-fast, he could struggle holding an approach.
Coachman: I think Bubba Watson is going to struggle. He hasn't had a great year so far, and he is not the most patient golfer out there. Creative? Yes. Patient? No. And if he struggles, he will tell you why, which is what I love about him.
Collins: Henrik Stenson will struggle. Watching him on the range for a little while late Sunday afternoon made me believe his swing is not where it needs to be coming into this week and this venue.
Harig: Jason Day could win the U.S. Open, but he's also been off lately. He missed the cut at the Memorial. And he didn't have the Masters everyone envisioned. It's tough to go against him, but if you have to pick one, he is the guy.
Sobel: Bubba Watson has the talent to win anytime, anyplace. And based on his insane practice-round putt that went viral, he has gained an understanding of Chambers Bay. But this is a course that will require plenty of patience -- and Bubba is a player who has shown a short fuse in the past.
4. What do you make of the USGA switching up holes as par-4s and par-5s during the tournament?
Barrie: This is laughable. And typical USGA. Instead of making it about the quality of play, the USGA is making it about the USGA. Why change scoring during the tournament? Who benefits? Enjoy a plus-7 winner and a ticked-off locker room.
Coachman: I love the creativity of the opportunity to do this. I don't know too many other courses where this would be possible. Each day, the players are going to really be focused on that day's round. This is supposed to be the toughest test in golf. Why not make "toughest" mean "most creative," as well? I can't wait for Thursday.
Collins: Listening to some caddies talk about it, players would like to know when they will flip them. I like the idea and concept of the USGA doing it, but I, too, would like to know which days they'll do it. I think not telling players before they get here makes it more gimmick than substance, making the USGA look unsure of its decision instead of confident.
Harig: In the end, it's only a number, so it doesn't really matter. You still try to make the lowest score possible. But it seems quirky. You can still establish a four-round par for each hole, leave it there, vary the tees and have widely different scores.
Sobel: I love it. Par means nothing. It's just a way of keeping track of in-round scoring, so we're not trying to figure out whether one player's 51 through 13 holes is beating another guy's 24 through six holes. Any world-class player who gets psyched out playing a hole differently as a par-4 or par-5 needs a serious attitude adjustment. They're just golf holes. Play 'em in as few strokes as possible.