Why am I doing this?

At some point I am sure someone is going to ask me to detail my motivations for doing this, so I thought I would jump in first. Let me say that I am not involved in the golf business in any way (I am in the IT business) and I play purely for the challenge and enjoyment of the game.

I get to play a lot of golf and experience what it is like to play as a member at one of the countries better estate courses and as a visitor on many others and the one thing that I seldom, if ever, see in any of the golfing publications is a review of a golf course and the experience that surrounds the visit from the perspective of the unknown visitor (and it took a visit to Potchefstroom to finally add enough fuel to the fire). It is my opinion that golf courses treat the golfing press far differently from the paying public and this is evident in the fact that almost always the reviews that you see are glowing and in many cases the courses are not easily within reach of the pocket of the majority of the golf playing public.

I have also have a keen interest in golf course architecture (coupled with the analytical mind of a software and systems architect,at least I like to think so) and the challenge that a golfer faces in negotiating their way round the 18 holes. I believe golf is not a series of difficult tasks to be completed, it is a game that should be interesting and fun and that is the perspective from which I judge a course. I don't necessarily want to be a golf course architect, but I do believe my exposure to the game entitles me to an opinion at the very least.

Whilst playing, I try to judge a course by the following set of criteria:

1. Routing – this is the hardest element to measure, but is best described as the holes seem to all work perfectly one after the other.

2. Architecture/definition – a player should be able to devise a clear strategy for playing a hole without worrying about hidden perils, blind tee shots, etc

3. Setting/aesthetics/conditioning

4. Mixture of hole types and hole lengths/how these are balanced across the 9's

5. Balance of strong and fun holes/playability/degree of difficulty

6. Great par threes

7. A full mixture of par fours from drivable to unmanageable

8. Par fives that are interesting rather than just long

9. A golf course that makes you think – 18 clearly defined holes with one option per shot lacks strategy – the course must invite you to take risk and play smart

10. A course that has continuity – from architectural style through to feel, too many ideas or too many elements ruins a good piece of architecture

This may seem like a lot to keep in mind, but as nearly all of these overlap you do tend to get an overall picture in your mind as you are moving through your round and I find it quite easy to come to a conclusion about a specific course once I have spent some time digesting my round.

[These criteria originally come from Ian Andrews]