Whoever designs a course must surely be defined as a Designer. The very nature of the act
defines the word. However an architect has general overall authority of the project but IS not responsible for more than the design of the shell, pulling together a team responsible for specific planning and services specification. Example in a Hotel the Architect in not responsible for the design of say The Kitchens, air con, ventilation, lifts, etc, etc, but oversees these designs and installations.
So my point is if you are a door to door salesman and design your own course, you are still the designers even if you also built the course, as surely you could not be defined as an Architect.
So every course will have a designer who will not necessary be an architect, although it seem that the big design houses in golf design are now acting as architectural practices and no longer the designer.
This I believe is also backed up by the lack of the names being proposed for the design, just using the name of the design company who acted as Architects.
Yet I firmly believe that the designer be named, his involvement defined and must include being responsible for the routing. But an architect does not make a designer due to the weight of responsibility for the whole complex. WE need to protect the designer, therefore his name should be known – well that’s MHO.
Can’t think why some worry about my English, as I thought I was Scottish
Melvyn
PS Mike why should I be more constructive, I'm a designer not an architect, but is that not what we golfers should actually be saying to you designers or is it architects - you must do better
