Linemortensen.com - blog

How can you not love links?

Mon, 29 Aug 2011 09:49:00 +0200

Around the time of The Open, I was asked to write a blog about links courses and how to play them for the best Danish lady player Malene J�rgensen's website � and why not, I adore links golf. It would probably have be easier to write a book on the topic than trying to sum up links in a few words but never mind, it made me revisit my old love and passion for the links � fantastic. Even so, the best way to get to understand what links golf is all about is to try it � reading about it is a meagre substitute but if nothing else perhaps reading about it is the inspiration needed for someone to make the effort to try out a true links course themselves. So here goes! BLOG: Most golfers never experience playing golf on a true links course and might not even care much, but for those who appreciate the origin of the game of golf and its true challenges, links courses are the real deal and any other style of golf course is a copy of the original - the links. With only about 150 pure links courses around it is easy to forget that the game of golf was born on links land. However, thanks to The British Open we annually get a wonderful reminder when this major is played on one of the links courses of Britain. This year the men played Royal St. George�s and soon the women will return to Carnoustie, one of the toughest of The Open courses. After The Open at Royal St. George�s, a somewhat disappointed Rory McIlroy proclaimed that he would not change his game to suit one tournament a year. For a professional golfer who plays almost all his golf on parkland courses this might make a lot of sense from a business perspective but every fan of the links must have felt their heart sink when Rory made that comment - how could such a talented golfer dismiss links golf like that! But yes, links courses are different from parkland courses and so is the technique required of the golfer - perhaps even Rory will one day come to appreciate this. Golf wasn�t born by accident on the links; it was and still is where the conditions for golf are best suited. A true links course is defined by location, soil conditions and design. Books have been written about this but compressed into just a few words, the true links courses are situated on sandy links land close to the sea and have a layout and design which has been dictated by the existing landscape. Very few courses can truly comply with the above template and due to the protection of dune land worldwide the number of links course are unlikely to increase. Playing links golf is therefore set to remain a rare, or never experienced happening for most golfers. In terms of play and technique there are differences between links and parkland golf. The links have firm ground, generally undulating fairways and yes, the wind plays a part too. These conditions create a need for the player to play a much �lower� game, squeezing and punching the ball around the course through/under the wind across the firm and bumpy fairways. A high ball into the green is rarely a good idea; instead a �bump and run� or the odd putt from the fairway or fringe of the green is often the better choice. But more importantly, it�s a fun game if you like a challenge - the variety of shots needed is much greater than that required to get round a modern parkland course. OK, it can rain and rain hard but a true links course (sandy) drains which despite the weather will provide some fair turf conditions. The wind can be truly brutal on the links too, but if you can get over the frustration of the howling wind and avoid the temptation to fight it, swing faster and hit the ball harder, you might just discover that playing in the wind, with the wind, can be not just an interesting technical challenge but fun too. The score might not be as low as you are used to but remember only 4 players were under par at Royal St. George�s this year � everyone �was in the same boat�. The Ladies will this week be playing at Carnoustie, a feared links amongst The Open courses. It�s a course that demands the respect of the player, if not, it will �eat you up�. Besides bringing your best links game, one piece of advice is to STAY OUT OF THE BUNKERS. They are not shallow parkland bunkers ready for a 3-wood recovery shot - no, the bunkers at Carnoustie are as bunkers were intended � deep enough to retain the sand in the wind and true traps. Wind, rain, demanding technique and the smell of the sea - how can you not love the links?

Designing like MacKenzie?

Wed, 23 Mar 2011 15:36:24 +0100

Last week I received the result of a survey recently done by Sport Psychology Ltd. The purpose of the study was to investigate the relevance of Alister MacKenzie�s 13 principles of golf course design (1920) to the psychology of golf design in the 21st century. I truly appreciate the work of Alister MacKenzie and considering the development the game of golf has gone through over the last 100 years, this had to be an interesting study. Also, the survey was mainly done amongst golf course architects, which should give the outcome some credibility. The r�sum� of the survey was disappointingly thin but did show that every one of the 13 principles of golf course design, according to the survey, is still relevant to the psychology of golf design in the 21st century. In the survey, each principle was evaluated on a scale ranging from 1 (the principle would be undermining towards the design of a golf course) to 7 (the principle would be of absolute fundamental importance when designing a golf course). The average came out at about 5.5 placed between the principles being of some, to of strong relevance. Alister MacKenzie�s principles aimed towards creating interesting and beautiful courses playable for all golfers. Although we all can agree that this is how it should be, time and evolution have undoubtedly changed our perception of what makes a course interesting, beautiful and playable. There is enough material in this for a book but not today � so just a few points. As much at the survey found Alister MacKenzie�s principles to be of relevance today, they also managed not to convey all his principles in full length. One example which strikes me, is the difference between the survey�s version of the 7th principle and Alister MacKenzie�s original. Survey - �The course should have beautiful surroundings� - left out was �- and all the artificial features should have so natural an appearance that a stranger is unable to distinguish from nature itself�. Leaving out the last bit of the 7th principle must be a mistake since it would surely have affected the 5.5 relevance level of this principle and for more reasons. The equipment available for golf construction today and the often very unsuitable landscapes golf courses are now developed on etc. has clearly pushed modern golf course architecture towards a much more artificial look. The design elements might have a �natural� appearance BUT in a purpose shaped/constructed landscape - not in a �natural� setting. As a result, many golfers and golf course architects now look upon the golf course as a �stadium facility� with expectations of certain dimensions and �look� and no need for a link in appearance between the course and the surrounding landscape. As I understand it, this approach to golf course design clearly goes against the part of the 7th principle, which was left out of the survey and therefore makes this principle a lot less relevant to the psychology of golf design in the 21st century than the 5.5 level of relevance it achieved on the survey scale. Whether by choice or lack of great sites for golf, modern golf course architects are likely to struggle in trying to follow Alister MacKenzie�s 7th principle of golf course design and will probably often fall short of what Alister MacKenzie had in mind when he put his 13 principles of golf design down on paper. So why leave a part of the 7th principle out? Was it simply a mistake, ignorance or a wish for a certain outcome of the survey? No matter what the answer is, who wouldn�t wish to design like Alister MacKenzie, after all, this was the man who designed great courses like Royal Melbourne, Cypress Point and Augusta National just to mention a few of his best known courses. In truth, time might have blurred the relevance of Alister MacKenzie�s 13 principles somewhat, but why don�t you go through MacKenzie�s list and see what you think! The 13 principles were fist published in MacKenzie�s book �Golf Architecture� in 1920: 1. The course, where possible, should be arranged in two loops of nine holes 2. There should be a large proportion of good two-shot holes and at least four one shot holes 3. There should be little walking between the greens and tees, and the course should be arranged so that, in the first instance, there is always a slight walk forwards from the green to the next tee; then the holes are sufficiently elastic to be lengthened in the future if necessary 4. The greens and fairways should be sufficiently undulating, but there should be no hill climbing 5. Every hole should be different in character 6. There should a minimum of blindness for the approach shots 7. The course should have beautiful surroundings, and all the artificial features should have so natural an appearance that a stranger is unable to distinguish from nature itself 8. There should be a sufficient number of heroic carries from the tee, but the course should be arranged so that the weaker player with the loss of a stroke shall always have an alternative route open to him 9. There should be infinite variety in the strokes used to play the various holes � viz., interesting brassie shots, iron shots, pitch and run-up shots 10. There should be a complete absence of the annoyance and irritation caused by the necessity of searching for lost balls (excessive rough) 11. The course should be so interesting that even the plus man is constantly stimulated to improve his game in attempting shots which he has hitherto been unable to play 12. The course should be so arranged that the long handicap player, or even the absolute beginner, should be able to enjoy his round in spite of the fact that he is piling up a big score 13. The course should be equally good during winter and summer, the texture of the greens and fairways should be perfect and the approaches should have the same consistency as the greens

From Parkland to �Links�

Mon, 14 Feb 2011 17:31:00 +0100

Ever since the owner of Loch Lomond Golf Club, Lyle Andersen failed to pay back creditors in 2008, the future venue of the Scottish Open has been uncertain. A few weeks ago it was then announced that Castle Stuart near Inverness would be the host of the 2011 Scottish Open. The Scottish Open has been played at Loch Lomond Golf Club since 1996. The course was designed by Tom Weiskopf and Jay Morrish and opened for play in 1994 - known for its stunning location by Loch Lomond and its highflying membership, the long standing venue for the Scottish Open has, however, always be questionable. Although very beautiful and with no expense spared in getting the course in pristine condition for the Scottish Open, the course at Loch Lomond has never been seen as an appropriate �warm up� location for The Open. With The Open always being played on a links course it was never ideal playing the very Parklandish and often very wet Loch Lomond course the week before. With Loch Lomond Golf Club in financial trouble, the Scottish Open was recently relocated to Castle Stuart, a new links-inspired course near Inverness. Like Loch Lomond, the course at Castle Stuart sits in a very beautiful spot. The course was designed by the American golf course architect Gil Hanse with American Managing Partner Mark Parsinen as co-designer coupled with lots of input from the contractor and ground staff on-site. The design is an absolute chocolate box of different design details but as much as one may find each individual touch striking, the design does leave the taste buds somewhat confused. Compared to Loch Lomond, the course at Castle Stuart is very much a links course, man-made perhaps and not on a natural links site but the overall look is there and as a �warm up� for The Open this course should at least, in playing terms, be closer to the real thing. The pros seem to be welcoming the fact that they will now be playing a �links course� before The Open. However, with a number of them not being too fond of Kingsbarns, another man-made Scottish links, it will be interesting to see if Castle Stuart (links aside) will become a popular venue amongst the best of players. There is a risk of beauty over substance here but if so, does this really matter? A good guess is that about 95% of all golfers evaluate a course on appearance and condition, not layout and strategy, so no matter what, Castle Stuart should in that respect be set up for success. However, spectator-wise the Scottish Open must be expecting the numbers to go down. Loch Lomond is a short drive from Glasgow with a population of about 1.2m - the largest city in Scotland � Castle Stuart on the other hand is located in the very northern part of Scotland just outside Inverness with a population of just around 57.000!!!! Come July, the pros will be at Castle Stuart but what about the rest of us � well, unlike Loch Lomond, Castle Stuart is open for play �for all�, although with a hefty �160 green fee price tag. And Loch Lomond? Well, club members, amongst others The Duke of York, Sir Sean Connery, Sir Jackie Stewart and a handful of well-known golf professionals etc. have just bought back the club. If Loch Lomond Golf Club was ever an exclusive club it is now so exclusive that it looks like the Scottish Open will never be invited back � but let�s see.

The era of copy/paste design

Wed, 08 Dec 2010 11:29:00 +0100

It's winter in Scotland. Usually this just means wrapping up a bit
more before playing golf but the last week or so we have had snow, not just a light covering but real snow. It was -8C when I got up this morning. Never mind, it looks like the snow will be gone come the weekend - but let's see.

December is, as usual, quiet, not much travelling activity which means office work. I don't really mind - the variation is appreciated. With a New Year just around the corner, it is also time for reflection and planning for the New Year.

With the golf industry still struggling, the coming year will be a challenge for everyone in the industry. On a bad day this is a depressing thought, on a good day a chance to make changes and investigate new opportunities. With the sun shining through a -8C sunny sky this is however a good day and I am ready to work through the pile of challenges on my desk.

Reflecting on the past year, it has in all been better than expected at this time last year. After almost every golf project was dropped or put on hold through 2008-9 following the aftermath of the financial collapse, things have started moving again - although very slowly. It is surely a bit too optimistic to hope for the industry to pick up further pace anytime soon - that is unless we all pack up and move to China where the demand for golf facilities seems unstoppable.

I often wonder how we, in golfing terms, will look back at this period in time. Will it be the dark age of golf revisited, with very few new courses being developed for decades and even the best of architects forced out of the business (unless they have already left for China)? It's likely, but these years will probably also be looked upon as the years where golf, despite a dire financial climate throughout most of the world, still managed to spread in Asia.

After so many years having gone without, the Chinese are understandably eager to experience the goods and the life style the western world has enjoyed for so long, including the world of golf.

Apparently, most briefs for new golf development in China are very fixed when it comes to course length, total par and the appearance and maybe this was why I was recently asked to price up a Chinese project in m2 - as if I was selling a carpet. The risk I see in all this is the construction of an endless number of western look-a-like courses - courses where there has been no interest in adapting the design to the local conditions. If this was how golf had developed from the beginning, we would never have seen a heathland or parkland course, only links look-a-like facilities at every location. I therefore wonder if this will become known as the years where golf course design got stuck and a set template for the design of a course was developed; length 7000m+ par 72(73), sleek American-style design including lots of water, mega bunkers and over-manicured surroundings - will this really become the era of copy/paste golf course design?? But honestly, the template is all ready here, in those terms - thank God for the recession - and low budget facilities where these specifications cannot be met. Low budget projects might just be the saviour of the continued evolution of golf course design and help to secure some sort of variation, adaptation and individuality in future golf course design. Who wants every course to play and look the same anyway? Happy New Year and best wishes to you all. 2nd at Gullane No.3

The Ryder Cup Monster

Fri, 01 Oct 2010 12:34:00 +0200

So it�s the weekend of the Ryder Cup - I am keeping an eye on the screen as I write this. I like the Ryder Cup - head to head golf is great to watch although the circus surrounding the whole event is getting way too over the top for my liking � I actually find all the hype rather off-putting. Earlier this week I went to have a look at the venue for the Ryder Cup action 2010 � Celtic Manor in Wales. Considering the forecast I was rather lucky making it around the course dry and it gave me a chance to have a good look at this stadium of a golf course. Despite what must be rather tricky soil conditions, the course was in good nick � not really a big surprise considering the event but still! The semi was frightening - I was there on the first of the practice days and the length and thickness of the semi was truly brutal � lush ryegrass which was not planned to be cut before play today, Friday! But truthfully, I was not really there to look at the work of the green keepers � as a GCA, I naturally have a greater interest in the layout and design of the facility. So what did I think of it? � well after just having visited the old links of Royal Porthcawl and Westward Ho! the days before, checking out the Ryder Cup venue was a bit of a shocker although not unexpected at all. The difference between the old courses and this monster of a facility is nothing short of crazy. How far is there from the natural old links to this 'purpose constructed' facility - the difference is monstrous, bordering on no comparison at all; it�s like the venues of two different games altogether. I could write a book on this topic but since a blog should be fairly short and sweet, let me just mention a few points here. As a lover of the game of golf and its integrity, and as a 'caretaker' of the landscape, I am truly concerned about the whole stadium design side of GCA. I fully understand the need to make things attractive for spectators, sponsors, players and the media at these events but I am concerned about the effects of transmitting images of such venues to people all over the world. I detect a clear tendency amongst golfers to find such glossy and artificial venues to be 'state of the art' amongst golf courses. I hear commentators on Sky describing some course as natural and well integrated � this might be true, looking through the eyes of a golfer but from a landscape and often environmental perspective most of these over-constructed stadium course are pretty much a disaster - without me mentioning the financial side of things.... I do believe there is a place for stadium-built courses but they should, for so many reasons and even to protect the game of golf itself, NEVER be presented as a prototype for all golf courses. Needless to say, it can be hard to promote golf and spread the game when, what amongst many golfers is considered to be a 'great course', is such an unsustainable monster of a facility. It is hard though - the Ryder Cup is such a big deal and when golf soon will be played at the Olympics, I feel sure we will see another monster of a stadium course promoted as the next wonder of this world. I truly wish that the R&A and all the golf architect organisations would put their foot down but unfortunately I find it very unlikely to happen. Anyway � Enjoy the Ryder Cup � ohh it�s raining, course not coping too well � absolutely silly time of year to play in northern Europe - but then again, Ryder Cup at Gleneagles - 2014 in October!!!

It�s a kind of magic!

Mon, 23 Aug 2010 11:21:00 +0200

Transferring any design from a drawing onto the ground will always involve a variable amount of interpretation � but hardly any more � and I am thrilled. As a non-machine-driving architect, you are absolutely relying on the guy on the machine to do a good job for you. Some architects are privilege enough to benefit from working with experienced �shapers� � guys who can make any architect's work look good. In fact, the architect can sometimes get away with only delivering some very rough sketches leaving it up to the shaper to do the rest of the detailing. However, experienced shapers are expensive guys to have on site and therefore I have never had the chance to work with one of any of my jobs. Added to this is the fact that I mostly work on clay sites and I have over time and out of necessity been pushed towards having to do rather detailed drawings - you know, lots of contour lines, spot heights etc. I don�t mind though - I enjoy working on the details, imagining how it will all work out in a 1:1 scale - in all, I believe that handling the contours has become one of my true technical strengths as an architect. I do use a CAD program - �moving� the contour around on the screen is somewhat easier than with the old pencil and rubber. However, no matter the quality of the drawings you are still relying on the guy on the machine to transfer the design from the drawing onto the ground. This job involves obvious technical skills but also a capability to interpret the design as it was intended by the architect. In my case it has not always been a successful experience. Sometimes I have been lucky enough to get a guy who could actually �read� my drawing and work magic translating this onto the ground but other times the contractor has provide me with an inexperienced driver and my work just could not turn out as it should have. The truth is though, that I do not really want a high-flying shaper on the job - what I need is a great machine driver who can make sure that it is my design and not his that goes on the ground, if not, what�s the point of being the architect on the job! And so it happened � PURE MAGIC. The development I am working on at the moment started construction in April this year and the way the design goes on the ground is nothing but revolutionary in the world of golf course design. For various reasons the project had been delay for a few years so I did the drawings a while back. When we started on site this spring the contractor informed me that they had just installed a GPS system in their machines and that they could now upload my electronic design files directly onto the computer in each digger/dozer on site. However with 250mm contour lines on the drawings the detailing turned out to be too rough to get a good end result - and it showed. The contractor therefore asked me to add 50mm contours to the drawing. ARE YOU MAD I asked! This was insane; I knew my drawings were good so if they were any good at their job they should be able to do the job right using the existing drawings. Anyway, the contractor convinced me to do a test and I added the 50mm contours to one of the green drawings. The new file was uploaded and what followed was pure magic. There was not even a post to show the centre of the green as the machine started working its way across the green site. It was like dragging a magic wand over the surface leaving behind it an exact model of what was on the drawing � I did not have to check it - it was almost scary. Scary because one of my (not so few) concerns had been a small doubt that perhaps I was not as hot at my job as I thought, and if so, it was about to show. Well I am off the hook and can rightfully say that I am in fact GOOD at what I do (not always perfect but most of the time ) Since the test, 50mm contours have been added to all green drawings. The contractor had to pay for this extra work to be done but it paid off � in fact he says that the job can be done twice as fast. Add to this that the result is better than ever, it is almost too good to be true. Discussing the matter with several colleagues, the response varied from sheer horror to great fascination. One of my good friends stated that this would take the last artistic bit out of golf course design but I really disagree - what is happening is just the opposite. Drawing up such detailed drawings does take time but also allows me to be more creative than before and to do much more complex designs - good drawings are no longer wasted since the design is no longer lost in the interpretation of the drawing. The interpretation that takes place when translating the design from the drawings (files) onto the ground has not fully been eradicated but one thing is sure - the architect is back in charge. I have learned so much doing this project both technically and design wise. But yes, using these tools does change the job of the architect; new skills are required and it does add more responsibility too. This method will not work for all architects and might leave some of the traditional shapers unemployed for which I am sorry but this tool allows the architect to be the architect and I can�t help feeling so appreciative and excited about this.

Above 14th green with 50mm contours added (green lines). The contractor gets the data as a CAD file. The contours have x,y,z values which the driver/machine uses to get the levels right. Below a snapshot of the full detail drawing of the 14th green before 50mm contours were added.

Trump and women!

Mon, 09 Aug 2010 14:48:00 +0200

Reading through some articles recently (new and old) I stumbled upon a few headlines which got to me a bit. Trump is building the best golf course in the world in Scotland and Pete Dye is building his first design in Europe for over 20 years - in Israel. Good on him if Trump can manage to build the best golf course in the world, but like so many others I also jumped when he first announced he was going to build the best golf course in the world and that in Scotland. Had Trump finally lost the plot ;-) or was he simply so golf ignorant that he just did no know what he was saying. Of course not, he's smart, properly a genius too. Don�t let the bad haircut and off-putting "in your face" approach fool you. Talking about publicity, a better stunt could not have been pulled � money and lots of attention (of any kind) were the only 2 factors that would ever bring this project to life and allow for a course to be built on this site. And so, construction has started - it is said that over �40 million has been invested in the project so far. Well, since Trump is involved I guess there is still a financial gain expected if not it is one hell of an expensive ego-trip. My colleagues at Hawtree�s are lucky to have landed the job designing the golf bits but the PRESSURE of it � a client who expects �WORLD DOMINATION�. �People will travel from around the world to play the course and experience its beauty,� Trump has said. Only time will tell if they will � they might, but more importantly only time will tell if they will find the course to be the best in the world. I don�t think anyone (but Trump) believes he can create the best golf course in the world. Good, yes, world-class perhaps (the site is super) but the world's best, unlikely. I am, though, perfectly happy for him to prove me and everyone else wrong. The interesting thing is though that it is somewhat irrelevant whether or not this golf course becomes the best in the world - �beauty will always be in eye of the beholder� so Trump will in fact soon own the �best golf course in the world� and so far he has done fantastically well marketing it. So Pete Dye has done his first design in Europe for over 20 years, fine � but in Israel - give me a break. This came from an interview done in January 2008 but the Israel/Europe connection was not all that puzzled me. Both Alice and Pete were quoted, and to the question of, �How would you like your contribution to golf course architecture to be recalled?" Alice replied, �I have worked hard on making forward tees shorter and more manageable for women. They used to be really, really long and then courses started watering fairways! So courses became unmanageable for women. So I think I�ve gone down in history as someone who has championed making courses more manageable and fun for women." Fine if Alice wants this to be her legacy but as one of the very few female golf course architects on this planet, I really had hoped for more. I get this forward-tee-question a lot from people who want to know what the difference is between a male a female GCA � but surely the ability to place forward tees well has to do with the attention to the job and not the sex of the GCA. But yes, I do think I am good at placing forward tees - I pay attention, but more importantly, placing forward tees well is not what I wish to be defined by as a GCA. Surely it is refreshing to have females in the industry and as countless research shows women are (physical strength aside) all in all the superior sex! I will not hold this against my male colleagues though, that would be sexist! Neither would I wish to be remembered as the woman who put the male dominated world of GCA straight :-) No, personally, I would be very happy to be remembered as a GCA who did the job of a GCA more than well - with passion, style, vision and integrity. At least this is how I try to do my job every day.

Yellow, yes please

Mon, 26 Jul 2010 10:45:00 +0200

Yellow, yes please. I have only missed one Open since moving to the UK in 2001 and that was at Muirfield before I move to Scotland. I know Muirfield now and can therefore safely say that St. Andrews is probably the worst of the Open courses to visit as a spectator. Never mind, it is always great to be at St. A. and at the Open you might not see much golf but the atmosphere is something else. The course looked beautiful and the wind helped to protect the Old Lady from being thrown apart. I know lots of golfers are somewhat disappointed after playing The Old Course for the first time and fair enough, if you are only familiar with modern parkland designs I can see how you might find this course a bit odd. There are blind holes and many deep and sometimes blind bunkers too. The gorse is brutal and add to that the linksy playing conditions. I love The Old Course and would not compare this course to any other � it is a piece of history and deserves to be seen in that light. Why the 17th tee had to be moved back to the range I really don�t get � I was told it was to �force� the players to hit a driver � silly. Unlike some years, the course was all green with not a single yellow straw of grass in sight � a shame, had the competition been 2 week earlier it would have been a whole different matter � June was dry and at least the Gullane courses were as yellow as a haystack � absolutely fantastic. The balls were bouncing all over the place and only the crispiest of short games would give you some sort of chance of putting together a decent score. A few years back I was stunned to find the son of a very well know golf course architect giving some rather strange opinions on the presentation of one of The Open courses. The previous Open had been at Royal Liverpool and yes it had been dry and yes the course was yellow and yes Tiger was hitting irons off the tee to keep the ball under control � GREAT. While taking part in a panel discussion the following spring which I was attending (in the US) this son of the famous golf course architect went on and on about how un-presentable the course had been � it had looked all dead and why had the R&A allowed this to happen � my jaw hit the floor! I was in shock, anyone who really appreciates links golf would prefer it this way � so I told him, politely. I don�t really care about his opinions but I was shocked at the level of obvious ignorance and more frighteningly, people listen to semi-celebrities like this thinking that they must know what they are talking about � scary. Well it's all gone now � July has been wet so the links are green again. Below - The Open at Royal Liverpool 2006

A bright side to this story

Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:05:00 +0200

Last week I went to watch at bit of the British Amateur at Muirfield. The course looked great but was �playing nice� it had its gentle face on, hardly any wind and sunshine. I spoke to a few of the players who found the course tricky but not as difficult as expected � no wonder. In these parts of the world it is not just the course itself you have to battle - most days you find yourself struggling with the wind and very likely the rain too. I would therefore always be careful evaluating the difficulty of a course based on only one round of golf, although you might be �lucky� and get all 4 seasons in one day. Jin Jeong South Korea won on Saturday � great play, so much in control, so professional and such fantastic great putting. To those who say golf is not a sport, take a look at just how athletic the upcoming golfers are. I am not convinced some of them are not getting too bulky for the job but one thing is sure � there aren�t many flabby lads left in top golf, professionals or amateurs. This week I visited one of my �old� projects. A meeting had been cancelled and I suddenly had the time to go back for a visit, something I rarely find time to do but wish I could do more. It was with mixed feelings I revisited. Like so many other private projects the development went belly-up last year when the recession hit the hardest - the houses didn�t sell! I was therefore anxious to see the state of the course which until a buyer can be found is run by the 400+ club members and a staff of only 4 green keepers (18 holes plus pitch & putt practice facilities and range). To date, this project represents some of my best work � it is not �the best new course of the decade� but it is a class example of a "value for money� golf course with identity, of which I am still very proud. The course looked better that expected but then again I had had some rather scary visions before arriving. The 4 green keepers were clearly doing their best and working hard to keep the course in as good a condition as possible. Although I was pleasantly surprised it was still clear for me to see that the course was already suffering. All the �small� jobs that follow the construction of a new course were not attended to and the rough areas were clearly running out of control. I also saw a few things that I thought needed tweaking now that the course is in play but with the original client out of the picture there is nowhere for me to direct my suggestions and concerns. The truth is that I am truly sad about what has happened to this project. I am absolutely gutted for the client and try not to think too much about just how he must feel about all this (without much success). On a more selfish note I am desperate that a project I cherish so much is slipping away form me. Self-pity � absolutely, but it really does hurt and more than that if nothing is done soon I will find it difficult to use this project as a future reference which on a professional level is a problem. At this stage though I guess I should be pleased that the course is still there, other courses in this situation have been returned to farmland an absolutely frightening thought. Luckily there is a bright side to this story � the club is thriving. 50 of the 400 something members are actively doing their bit to run the place; they take care of the club, the beverages and help out on the course too - all on a voluntary basis. It is hard work undoubtedly but I see their passion and how they are pulling together to make things work, and so far it is working. No matter the difficulties this club faces or what the future might bring it is wonderful to watch the kind of spirit that is emerging here. For everybody�s sake I do hope there will be a happy ending for both the club and the course.

A busy but great week!

Mon, 10 May 2010 11:47:00 +0200

Last week was a very busy but a great week. After spending most of the week working in Denmark I yesterday went to a Jamie Cullum concert in Edinburgh � IT WAS FANTASTIC. This guy is not just good he is great � I truly admire anybody with that kind of talent and passion � to be there was absolutely inspiring on so many levels. Last year Danish Cancer Research asked if I would like to donate a prize to the golf club that would raise the most money in their support during 2009. I was honoured to be asked and offered to donate �myself� for a day to the �winning� club. As it turned out the club that �won me� was a pretty remote one (in Danish terms), - flying into Copenhagen we are talking about a 5-6 hours drive. I did not know the club beforehand but after some research I soon started to look forward to the visit despite the long drive. I have never seen any other Danish course on such a great site - forest covered dune land. Well, in golfing terms one could do without the trees but these trees were planted long ago to protect the sand from blowing away. Laying out courses on sites like this is no longer possible � they are protected (this site included) and therefore out of reach - even so, I have decided to keep hoping :-) It was a good spirited bunch of members who joined me at 9 o�clock last Sunday morning. The club chairman, a few green committee members and the superintendent were there and tagging along for the day was also a journalist from a Danish golf magazine. I had suggested that we would start the day in the clubhouse so I could get to know a bit about the club and their future vision for the facilities before walking onto the course. When doing this kind of consultancy work I am usually contacted by clubs who have design issues that need solving or clubs who are eager to upgrade their facilities altogether. This time was different though - this club had not called me but �won� me and when talking about future visions I was told that the course was ranked well and that the club was content with the number of members and green fee guests too! What a challenge! Luckily there is rarely a course which does not have room for improvement. A brainstorm on the facilities (what is there, what works/what doesn�t and what can be done about it) is therefore never wasted and the club knew this. The course was fine and as expected it would have been hard for any kind of golf course architect to do �a bad job� on a site like this. However the alignment and placement of tees always needs checking out - especially the ladies� tees, not that they are tricky to place, but the architect must take the time to do it well (they rarely do). Looking at the aesthetics of the course is also a must � club members and green staff �go blind� over time when it comes to the presentation of the course. The main thing to check though, when visiting an existing course is the course strategy - how each hole plays or can be played - does the player have a choice off the tee or not etc. No choice this time though - with every hole heavily tree lined �straight down the middle� was the only way to go off each tee - there simply wasn�t room for any strategy at all. I could mention many more details that we looked at this day but the main conclusion was not surprisingly for the committee to think about where trees could perhaps be cleared to give more choice off the tee and then to STOP planting trees � trust me they had enough. I had a great day visiting the club and I do hope they did find it worth their while to spend a Sunday with me. What the journalist got out of the day is still to be revealed! I did a few interviews this week and was also contacted by the American magazine �LINKS Magazine� - Tom Cunneff was writing a piece on female Golf Course Architects and as he said when contacting me, �of course he had to include me�. He had found only 18 female architects including long gone architects like Marion Hollins and Molly Gourlay. I am not surprised by the number though - to be a golf course architect you have got to love golf, appreciate being on site during the construction and not unimportantly put up with �all the crap� that goes with being a female in a male dominated business. No wonder there are so few of us around. Although Tom�s piece was more like a list and not an in-depth article I was glad to be mentioned linksmagazine.com/best_of_golf/features/female_golf_course_architects/index.aspx Quite a few names on the list were former players � most likely signature designers and not golf course architects as such but I was there on my own merits as a golf course architect and as one of very few women running their own business. Although I never intended to work alone I am altogether proud to have made it in this tough industry woman or not.

Under the circumstances...

Wed, 28 Apr 2010 15:49:00 +0200

Well well, just as I managed to get this blog up and running I suddenly got busy. Work is picking up and the visitors I had staying could not get back home due to the Icelandic ash cloud!!!!! But really I am not complaining - the golf industry has taken a battering over the last 1� years so it does make a nice change to have to run faster again � I like it! Yesterday I had an enquiry from another youngster trying to get into the industry - it was the second this week. I would love to help but next to the recession in the 1930�s this is probably the worse timing if your goal in life is to become a golf course architect. I used to tell the students I was teaching to prepare themselves - hard work and talent doesn�t cut it in this industry - you need luck too - sometimes this even seems more important than talent, OOPS did I really say that? They will keep trying though, as a youngster I did, no one could have put me off the idea of becoming a golf course architect. I often think about how tough I was when evaluating other architect�s work back when I started out. Little did I know just how many things that would have to come together to make a success of a project and that the golf course architect would only have a limited influence on the quality of the final product. What I quickly discovered was that a golf project truly is about teamwork. I find the teamwork part fascinating but the fact that I can only contribute so much really bothers me immensely. But honestly what can you expect, when what you need to succeed is: a good site (size, topography, soils, planning etc.) - a sensible client too with a realistic budget and intention to match. Then you hope to get to work with good consultants, to get a good and fair contractor (which rarely is the cheapest, so that�s a tricky one) and finally you pray for good weather during the construction and that the archaeologists do not find a Viking grave on your site. Did I forget something? � Lots! The frustrating thing is - the result will �never� be perfect. I therefore often find myself saying, �under the circumstances it�s a super result�. Unfortunately only the people involved in the project know this - everybody else can only evaluate on what is in front of them, never mind the low budget, the shitty soils or the planning restrictions etc. So for a project to end up good it has to start out great. The worse things though, are the projects where the circumstances change during the project. Often this has to do with the budget or time running out or the client changing his/her mind etc. - the result suffers and suddenly you are truly trapped. These days when I look at other peoples work and see something I don�t like or agree with I therefore do not necessarily think less of the architect right there and then. Instead I wonder what went wrong or which obstacles there might have been for the result to end up like that � I guess we all get wiser with time � at this rate I expect to turn into Yoda before my time is up.

GOLF � I love it, hate it,..

Fri, 09 Apr 2010 09:49:00 +0200

Love it... It has always been like this for me ever since my father put the first golf club in my hands. It was a 2- wood (yes wood) � broken by one of the older junior boys in anger over a bad shot (I guess). The club was tiny and so was I. I do wish I still had that club but surely it was passed on to another young kid whose golfing career was also to start with a �broken� golf club. My parents have long lost their passion for golf but before they did they managed to pass on the torch to me � little did they know that golf would become such a big part of my life. I really do have a love/hate relationship with golf. Like so many other things in life one is passionate about I can�t seem to live with it but more importantly I can�t live without it. Golf is almost like an extra limb, an extension of who I am. I am much more than golf though but take golf away from me and I�d be left without my soul mate. Spring has come to Gullane (at last) � the other day I was walking by the local bowling green and was suddenly hit by the smell of newly cut grass. It brought me right back to my childhood. I inhaled deeply just to find the smell much too strong to be enjoyed. Do you know the smell of a golf course? I do, freshly cut grass, pine trees and the smell of dry yellow grass and dirt baked by the sun. Anyway that�s what it is for me, and it is so heart-warming, like the memory of the smell in my grandmother�s kitchen. I was watching the Masters this weekend � well I tried to, golf and Tour De France has the power to send me to sleep in seconds despite the fact that I am actually interested in what�s going on � and oh yes cricket does the same to me although fair enough, I do not have much interest in the game (no offence I think it�s a cultural thing me being Danish and all). But well done Phil and very nice try Lee. Like so many others I enjoy watching the Masters � it is a fairytale world, carpets of green grass, sharply edged blue ponds and a rough of nicely draped pine needles, even blue skies this time around - but thank God the azaleas and rhododendrons weren�t out in force this year. As pretty as they are, I dread the thought of every green committee member worldwide rushing to the local plant nursery to buy a few for their local club. Trust me 98% of times they will not fit in, landscape nor budget-wise (the maintenance considered) - oh go ahead then - have a few by the clubhouse if you must. Ironically enough this spotless �garden of a golf course� is one of the giants amongst golf courses � it is picture pretty and a fearsome golfing test � but man does this make the life of a golf course architect difficult. After the Masters everyone wants the course manicured to perfection and the course long as hell (well perhaps not that long this time). But nothing could be further from what it now takes to get planning permission for at new golf course � at least in the western world. A golf course must be a part of the �natural� landscape and make room for wildlife etc. - and rightly so. Augusta is therefore a loved but also totally off-putting course in my book � the love/hate relationship continues! Welcome to my world of golf � hope to be back on the blog soon � perhaps next week.