At his Memorial tournament press conference, Jack Nicklaus let the cat out of the bag:

Q. Given Tiger’s injuries lately, how would you assess now, I know you get asked this all the time, but how would you assess his ability to—

JACK NICKLAUS: I would have no clue. Tiger called me Friday and he was trying to—he said, I tried up until today to see if I’m going to be able to come and play, but I can’t. He said, I’m still hobbling, and he said, I don’t know whether I’m going to make the U.S. Open or not.

Did anyone really think he was going to make his comeback at the world’s toughest tournament? I didn’t.

I don’t think it’s too early to take a look at the betting odds for the 2011 US Open at Congressional Country Club. In spite of what seems to be mounting evidence that their day is done, Tiger (6/1) and Phil (10/1) top the list of favorites. They’re followed by Lee Westwood (16/1) for whom I personally also give little chance. Westwood, I think, is the new Colin Montgomerie: stellar on the ordinary stage, but not quite having the inspiration to take the big ones.

I rather like the next batch more: Rory McIlroy (16/1), Luke Donald and Martin Kaymer (20/1), Dustin Johnson and Nick Watney (25/1), and at 33/1, Charl Schwartzel, Graeme McDowell, Matt Kuchar, Paul Casey and Geoff Ogilvy.

My beef with Charl is the extreme unlikelihood of winning back-to-back majors. In the last thirty years, the only players to have done that are Tom Watson, Tiger Woods and Padraig Harrington. That’s just three back-to-backs in a hundred and twenty majors. On that basis alone, I’d say the odds of him winning are much, much worse.

The others that top the list are all talented, relatively young players who represent the best of the next generation. You may argue with Ogilvy as a new generation player, though. He’s just two years younger than Tiger.

I think the trend is that we’re going to see someone in the middle of the pack win out. Schwartzel was 50/1 for this year’s Masters. Kaymer was 40/1 for the 2011 PGA; Oosthuizen came from out of the field at the 2010 Open Championship; Graeme McDowell was 80/1 at the US Open. Mickelson was 12/1 at last year’s Masters—the last time one of the top players surfaced as a victor.

The complete betting odds for the 2011 US Open at Congressional are below, courtesy of Bodog, the world’s largest betting destination:

It’s not too early to start taking a look at the odds for the year’s next major: The US Open. Played this year at Congressional Country Club, site of Ken Venturi’s heroic 1964 win, and Ernie Els triumph in 1997, Congressional also has hosted a PGA Championship and a US Senior Open.

To what should be no one’s surprise, the bettors again are favoring Tiger Woods, who is in at 6/1. Somewhat surprisingly, I think, Phil Mickelson is just after at 10/1. Phil has never won a US Open, and his early season performance does not inspire me to think this will be the one. But money is headed in his direction nonetheless.

Lee Westwood and Rory McIlroy are in at 16/1. Not good bets, in my mind. Luke Donald and Martin Kaymer are at 20/1. Dustin Johnson and Nick Watney are in at 25/1.

Masters Winner Charl Schwartzel clocks in at 33/1, along with Geoff Ogilvy, Graeme McDowell, Matt Kuchar and Paul Casey.

My money would be on none of the favorites. I think that the talent in golf is so deep and so even right now that any one of a hundred golfers could pull off a victory. In fact, I’d bet on any BUT the leaders. Is there a bet for someone outside the top ten?

The complete odds are below, courtesy of Bodog, the world’s largest betting destination.

In some ways, the history of the US Women’s Open reflects the history of inequity in women’s sports. It’s a young tournament, dating back to only 1946, whereas the equivalent (and generally male) US Open dates to 1895. This is, the USGA, suggests in its official history, due to a decided lack of women professionals until after the Second World War.

Along those lines, it’s also worthy of noting that unlike the US Open, it was not founded by the USGA, but rather by the pioneering, but short-lived Women’s Professional Golfers Association.  The first was a match play event at the Spokane Country Club, with the $19,700 purse contributed by a men’s fraternal organization out of slot machine proceeds.

After three years, the WPGA turned the tournament over to the newly formed LPGA. It wasn’t until 1953 that it was first run by the USGA, which had been running the US Open, US Amateur and US Women’s Amateur since 1895.

Another distinction from the US Open: While the US Women’s Open is the oldest women’s tournament open to professionals and amateurs, it’s not universally considered a major in the golf world. Neither the European Ladies Professional Golf Tour, nor the Japan LPGA sanction the US Women’s Open.

Patty Berg won the first Women’s Open, defeating Betty Jameson 5 and 4 in the 36 hole final. That was the last Women’s Open that used match play. (Note that the PGA Championship used match play until 1957, after which it too abandoned the format).

Betsy Rawls was the winner of the first USGA sponsored championship. In all, Rawls would win four times, a feat matched only by Mickey Wright. The only amateur winner was Catherine Lacoste (daughter of Rene Lacoste), in 1967.

When the USGA assumed control of the championship, there were just 37 entrants. Reflecting the growth in womens’s sports, in 2010, there were 1,296 entries. Growth in women’s sports internationally also is on display as nine of the last 20 champions have been foreign born.

The US Women’s Open is open to any female golfer with a handicap of 4.4 or lower. Qualifying consists of a single sectional state of 36 holes played on a single day. Exemptions come from eleven categories, including winners of the Women’s Open from the past ten years, major winners from the past five, the top 50 from the previous LPGA money list, the fop five from the Japan LPGA, Korea LPGA, and European LPGA money lists, and official winners of LPGA tournaments from the past year.

A list of all past winners is below:

Anybody but Tiger.

I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s not Tiger that I really dislike—although there’s a lot there to dislike—it’s the surrounding media hype. If Tiger wins, that’ll be all anyone in the golf media talks about for months. It’ll ruin the British Open, as no matter who’s in the lead, all the talk will be of Tiger. The sycophants in the golf media will even start the talk of a “Tiger Slam” again.

Ugh.

Dustin Johnson is five shots clear of Tiger Woods. Will that be enough? Tiger’s 31 on the back nine was incredible, but can he repeat? Even bigger charges would have to be made by Ernie Els, who is six back, or Phil Mickelson, who is seven back.

Then there’s Gregory Havret, who also is six back.

The biggest comeback in US Open history has to be Arnold Palmer in 1960, when he charged from seven shots back to win.