News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #25 on: August 31, 2006, 04:03:26 PM »
One of the best, if not the best course built in Scotland in the last fifty years was an old, dreary looking potato field. I cannot guess how much dirt was moved but as far as I am concerned, it matters not. What does matter is that I can get to play Kingsbarns and have the time of my life.

Bob

Jay Flemma

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #26 on: August 31, 2006, 05:47:56 PM »
if DR doesn't encourage the ground game, does that make it "worse' than SH??

just asking....

Lets say it severely reduces options for the weaker player...and therefore offers less interesting strategy.

My issue isn't that "it's not minimalist" my issue is being told to my face that it is, when it's clear it isn't.  I'd rather hear up front - like Bergstrol did at bayonne - that somebody moved 7.5 million.  But does PR for a course come down to trying to mislead the public about the nature of a course and the abilities of the designer?

Here's where it could be a problem.  

People go there because they are told its minimalist and when they get there its a completely different course than what they were expecting.

Also lets say some other Courses want to achieve a similar effect and look.  They hear an architect did that type of work moving little earth...therefore they hope that their course can be done inexpensively.  Then the surprise comes when they actually have to move tons and tons of earth and not get the course or effect they wanted in the first place or at least not at the expected price.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2006, 06:23:56 PM by Jay Flemma »

Jay Flemma

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #27 on: August 31, 2006, 05:59:30 PM »
Jay: I take it from your question that you feel the course looks and plays manufactured as opposed to a more natural feel and I think there is an explanation for that.  Many of the greens were elevated up into the hills, many had false fronts and most were very contoured and undulated.  These features in combination can make the ground game a difficult proposition.  On the other hand, you were not prohibited from running the ball up onto the greens as I don't remember many holes where the front was sealed off from a running shot.  Also, I did not get the sense that features were created by moving dirt any more so than what was necessary based upon the routing.  If you ran the holes on different lines and angles perhaps you wouldn't feel that as much dirt was moved, but I don't know that it would actually be the case.
The problem wasn't that 18 greens were "sealed off" in full, but the combination of severely uphill, crazy cants seemingly anywhich way that shed balls with an alarming lack of containment, so lets say 15 out of 18 there was no ground shot and the other 3 it wasn't "thread the needle" it was arm the laser beam.

At Ballyneal, I SHOCKED everyone on 17 AND 8 by hitting a punch 5-iron, running it up and finishing ten feet form the pin.  What does that say about my game?  WHat does it say about Neil Regan's game...we are creative and resourceful and play the way the land tells us.  I love the ground game and hate it when people bill things as links and I'm floping wedges and 9-irons all day.  And I really really hate it when they tell me "You swear you're in Ireland" and I'm trying to fight 7-irons in 40 MPH.  GHimme a fighting chance...like at Rawls course.  I played that in a 40 mph gale and rarely left the fwy.

Look, I appreciate how hard everyone worked on it and how cool it looks (except 10), but I prefer something much more natural...especially in a place that's supposed to be all about natural...I mean there's a reason we're all up in arms about Trump in Scotland...

...at least Jack gave us a course with no water hazards.  That would've made it impossible...and the green at 5 is incredible.  A total breakout for him.  Plus four and 6 are excellent as well, he did d anice job hiding the safe protions of the fairway...like the hidden shelves on 17 at Crystal Downs.  Remember how you see the landing shelves when you turn around and look back from the green?
« Last Edit: August 31, 2006, 06:26:13 PM by Jay Flemma »

Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #28 on: August 31, 2006, 06:11:22 PM »
Jay,

What's your handicap?  I ask not because it would affect my perception of your opinions, but just because I'm curious.  It occurred to me that I've read several of your course reviews, yet have no idea what type of player you are.

Jay Flemma

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #29 on: August 31, 2006, 06:19:57 PM »
My handicap is too high, but I love the game like a tour player.

Matt_Ward

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #30 on: August 31, 2006, 06:29:32 PM »
John F:

I can't speak with certainty about elevation change but if I had to guess I would say Dismal River likely has the edge.

Jay:

You said, "People go there because they are told its minimalist and when they get there its a completely different course than what they were expecting."

Who is the "they" you are speaking about ?

That didn't come from me -- might it be possible you are the guy who is inserting the term and then being so coy as to refute it just as quickly ?

If there's another source who said DR is minimalistic please feel free and knock yourself out with the name publicly on this site. I'd like to know and so would others.

Second point.

You further added, " ... so lets say 15 out of 18 there was no ground shot and the other 3 it wasn't "thread the needle" it was arm the laser beam."

Jay - allow me to enlighten you on what holes I played that featured what you said (ground option) that doesn't exist.

1st
2nd
3rd
7th
9th
14th
16th
17th
*18th -- can be used if you are quite gutsy.

That's just quickly off the top of my head and doesn't include any of the par-3 holes -- although at #15 you can play it as close to the ground as you choose and allow the contours of the land to take your ball onto the surface. Ditto the 3rd hole if you choose to play the low and allow the target to take your ball to the hole if played correctly.



Jay Flemma

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #31 on: August 31, 2006, 06:35:52 PM »
Look, there is no escaping the fact that I negotiated the 6600 yards of Ballyneal with far many for options and far more ground game shots and reasonable putts...even on the extreme holes...than I negotiated the 6600 yards of aerial attack of Dismal River...and so did the others who played with me.

As for who told me, I dont remember.  Why do you care.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2006, 06:38:22 PM by Jay Flemma »

Matt_Ward

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #32 on: August 31, 2006, 06:38:32 PM »
Jay:

I love the Gene Kelly / Fred Astaire tap dance non-answer shoes you use. I've outlined a couple of questions and answers from my previous post and would love for you to answer them -- especially the name of the mysterious "they" who said DR was minimalistic.

Thanks partner ...

Adam Clayman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #33 on: August 31, 2006, 06:43:55 PM »
Jacks marketing says he didnt build them, he found them.
  Thats leads to minimalists expectations/

IMO, They needed to do more of a meltdown,.
"It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing your whole life." - Mickey Mantle

Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #34 on: August 31, 2006, 06:44:06 PM »
Matt,

The articles I've read about Dismal make a big deal about the minimal amount of earth moved, which to me implies a minimalist style.  I don't know whether this is coming from Nicklaus, his people and/or the club.  
« Last Edit: August 31, 2006, 06:44:40 PM by Tim Pitner »

Jay Flemma

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #35 on: August 31, 2006, 06:49:33 PM »
Matt, my time is my most precious asset.  I'm not wasting it playing games with you.  I know you love the course.  That's great.  There are some cool holes there, but it was too much for me.  And quite frankly, I have a really tolerant and diverse palate.  I can tolerate alot of expirimentation.  I felt it was too much.  You didn't.  End of discussion.  Nobody is "wrong" simply because they disagree with Matt Ward just like nobody is "right" just because they agree with matt ward.  You did a nice job breaking down the course.  Here is a different perspective.  Thats golf.  We still are a democracy aren't we?

This isn't Russia is it Danny? No, this isn't Russia.

Voytek Wilczak

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #36 on: August 31, 2006, 07:07:00 PM »
One of the best, if not the best course built in Scotland in the last fifty years was an old, dreary looking potato field. I cannot guess how much dirt was moved but as far as I am concerned, it matters not. What does matter is that I can get to play Kingsbarns and have the time of my life.

Bob

One of the best, if not the best course built in the US in the last 100 years was an old, dreary looking potato field. I cannot guess how much dirt was moved but as far as I am concerned, it matters not. What does matter is that some can get to play NGLA and have the time of their life.

 ;) ;) ;)

PS - I am not sure whether NGLA was build on an actual potato field, but the phrase is fitting because there are so many potato fields on LI (they are being turned into vineyards now..).

The point remains that NGLA was totally built from the ground up, yet it is worshipped here.

If folks have a problem with Dismal River because of its lack of ground options, fine. It can be debated and easily resolved.

If folks have a problem because DR is not "minimalist" (ie too much dirt was moved) - PUHLEEEZE!

Matt_Ward

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #37 on: August 31, 2006, 07:08:52 PM »
Tim:

I love it when people say they read something that said "X" is what is happening at a particular course.

OK.

How about you outline which articles you are talking about and if there's a link I'd like to read them. If there's no link simply add the specifics on this site and I'll be glad to get copies.

Jay:

I'm so happy your time is precious -- so's mine. I just lvoe the justification to cut and run. Sure you can have an opinion -- just tell me about the ground game you mysteriously avoided. It's there -- you missed it.

Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #38 on: August 31, 2006, 07:24:07 PM »
Matt,

I wasn't aware I'd need to provide you with citations--if you've read anything about Dismal River in golf publications (Links Magazine, for example), you'd agree with me.

How about this from Dismal's website--Nicklaus: "Most courses you create.  This one, you find."  Sounds like minimalist aspirations to me.  

http://www.dismalriver.com/Golf.aspx

Matt_Ward

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #39 on: August 31, 2006, 07:31:13 PM »
Tim:

Will all due respect ...

Don't go pissing in your shorts now.

When people raise the famous "I read this somewhere" argument I think it's fair game to ask the specifics if they can be provided. Otherwsie, how does anyone know if such statements are accurate. I like to learn things from knowledgeable people.

Yes, I have read the article you mentioned along with others. I usually like to hold off until I have played a course to provide my own 2 cents worth.

What's really funny about all this jibberish about "minimalism" is that it's so silly -- the finished product is what counts and I have already outlined where the ground game can be accomodated with specific hole citations. What's amazing on this site -- not directed at you Tim -- is that people can spin something and then people respond to spin when it's not true.


Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #40 on: August 31, 2006, 07:37:16 PM »
Matt,

My very limited point is that people, including Nicklaus, are indeed stating or implying that Dismal River is minimalistic.  I haven't played it--I don't know whether it is or isn't.  And, I agree, whether it's minimalistic doesn't determine how good it is.  But, you asked who is saying that Dismal River is minimalistic and I think it's fair to answer, Jack Nicklaus, that's who.  

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #41 on: August 31, 2006, 07:42:17 PM »
I'm surprised by Jay's original premise here.  If anything, I thought the argument would be reversed; that the course was too minimalistic, and more sand needed to be moved to make the holes more playable.

Matt_Ward

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #42 on: August 31, 2006, 07:44:38 PM »
Tim:

Here is the press release from Jack Nicklaus golf design on the opening of Dismal River ...

*****

With Opening of His 250th Design, Jack Nicklaus
Puts Golden Touch on the Nebraska Sandhills

Celebrated Dismal River is the Golden Bear's
first design work in Nebraska

MULLEN, Neb. (Aug. 4, 2006) - Even when reaching a career milestone, Jack Nicklaus finds a way to break new ground--literally and figuratively.

The Golden Bear, who is widely regarded among the world's most successful and prolific course designers, will officially put his imprint on the Nebraska Sandhills with the grand opening Saturday of his new creation Dismal River. In doing so, Nicklaus will also celebrate the opening of the 250th golf course design in which he has been involved.

In a design career that is closing in on 40 years and has become as storied as his legendary playing career, Dismal River represents what has made Nicklaus one of the era's preeminent designers. Playing across the rolling, grass-covered dunes of the Sandhills, Dismal River is as unique as it is traditional, as minimalistic as it is cutting edge. With his pick of any of the property's 2,900 acres, Jack chose the 400 best acres as the site for his first course in the state of Nebraska.

"The experience of arriving at the Dismal River site was like stepping back in time and seeing what the dunes of Northeast Scotland must have looked like a hundred years ago," the Golden Bear said. "In every direction I looked, I saw great golf holes."

Nebraska is the 38th state in which Nicklaus Design is represented, and Dismal River becomes Jack's 208th solo design to go along with 30 co-designs and 12 re-designs. "We are extremely proud that Dismal River represents my 250th design," Nicklaus added. "And I say 'we' because every design I have been involved in, even as a solo designer, was a collaborative effort between dedicated owners and a talented group of design associates and support personnel we have assembled at Nicklaus Design. We are also very proud of Dismal River. In this case the team consisted of Nicklaus Design, a passionate group of owners, and a lot of Mother Nature."

Dismal River boasts an 18-hole links style golf course that measures 7,600 yards from the Championship Tees and 6,700 yards from the Member Tees. Current amenities include an 18,000-square-foot clubhouse, complete with a "saloon" lounge, four bowling lanes, hunting and golf simulators, card room, pool tables, and a wine room. Fishing will be available during all summer months in either the Dismal River or one of the club's four stocked ponds on property. Upland hunting is available after the golf season.

Lodging is available on-site in early settler-style cabins overlooking the beautiful Dismal River. Over 90 percent of the planned lots, which over look freshwater ponds and enjoy endless vistas of the Sandhills, are already sold. To enhance Dismal River's secluded feel and pure golf experience, players will notice that all vertical structures, including the clubhouse, cabins, and houses are hidden from the course.

When all amenities are complete, Dismal River will include a second 18-hole course, 9-hole short course, Italian restaurant, world-class spa and wellness center, and general store. On-site lodging will include 160 beds broken up into single, 2-bed, 4-bed, and 8-bed cabins.

"I think our current and future members will be impressed with the amenities we have assembled at Dismal River, and it all begins with and revolves around our Jack Nicklaus Signature Golf Course," said Managing Partner Bill Martin, one of the six Denver-based owners. "We are excited and proud to see what is coming to reality at Dismal River. To look back at what our dream and vision was a few years ago, and to see that dream taking shape, is a special and gratifying feeling to the partners and everyone involved."

The Sandhills of Nebraska provide the ideal landscape for golfers who appreciate and respect the natural environment. The region consists of 20,000 square miles of grass-covered sand dunes, the largest such formation in the Western Hemisphere. The natural, undulating hills rise sometimes more than 450 feet higher than their sloping valleys. Those unique dunes provide a home to six different ecosystems in the area. Below the Sandhills is the Ogallala Aquifer, the world's largest underground water supply.

Dismal River's grand opening weekend will kick off with a press conference on Saturday morning, involving Jack and the Dismal River ownership group. Following the press conference, everyone will make their way to the practice range, where Jack will entertain hundreds of members and guests with a clinic. The highlight of the day will be the christening of the newest Jack Nicklaus Signature Golf Course, where the Golden Bear will play all 18 holes and explain to guests the vision and design strategy behind each carefully created hole at Dismal River. A reception for members and invited guests will follow the completion of his round.

Nicklaus Design, the global firm founded by golf legend Jack Nicklaus and owned by the Nicklaus family, is widely regarded as the world's leading design firm with 304 courses open for play in 28 countries. Of those, Jack Nicklaus has been involved in 250 courses. At least 47 Nicklaus Design courses have been ranked in various national or international Top-100 lists, and by the end of 2006, at least 79 Nicklaus courses will have hosted a combined total of more than 500 professional tournaments worldwide or significant national amateur championships.

*****

Tim -- I don't see the precise words from Nicklaus saying the course was "minimalistic" -- would love for someone to post such a statement because I'd like to read it firsthand.

JWL

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #43 on: August 31, 2006, 07:47:27 PM »
Jay

I didn't work on DR, but I did walk the course with Chris Cochran, the Nicklaus Design associate most responsible and knowledgable of what happened at DR.   So, I feel, without a doubt, that when CC told me that the total amount of soil moved on the job was right around 10,000 cubic yards, I believe that answers the question.   That should qualify as minimalist by anyone's standards.  
Hopefully, this puts to rest your concerns about any misleading information being propagated.

Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #44 on: August 31, 2006, 07:54:01 PM »
Matt,

Nicklaus: "Most courses you create.  This one, you find."  

Add Jim Lipe to the list of people saying it's minimalistic.  Again, I'm not saying it is or it isn't, or that it matters one way or another.  But, don't pretend that those behind the course aren't pitching it as minimalistic.  

Dave Bourgeois

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #45 on: August 31, 2006, 07:57:34 PM »
What's the soil moving limit (sml) to have the magic minimalist word tied to a course.  10K or less, 20K or less?  

Is Minimalist the "signature" course of today?


George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #46 on: August 31, 2006, 07:57:46 PM »
Tim -- I don't see the precise words from Nicklaus saying the course was "minimalistic" -- would love for someone to post such a statement because I'd like to read it firsthand.

Tim:

Here is the press release from Jack Nicklaus golf design on the opening of Dismal River ...

*****

With Opening of His 250th Design, Jack Nicklaus
Puts Golden Touch on the Nebraska Sandhills

Celebrated Dismal River is the Golden Bear's
first design work in Nebraska

MULLEN, Neb. (Aug. 4, 2006) - Even when reaching a career milestone, Jack Nicklaus finds a way to break new ground--literally and figuratively.

...

Playing across the rolling, grass-covered dunes of the Sandhills, Dismal River is as unique as it is traditional, as minimalistic as it is cutting edge.

(emphasis added)

Personally, I don't care whether it's minimalistic or not, but doesn't the press release as least imply if not actually state it, as snipped out above?
« Last Edit: August 31, 2006, 08:00:44 PM by George Pazin »
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

JWL

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #47 on: August 31, 2006, 08:10:17 PM »
Tim

I don't know if it was your intention to include me in the people that you said were behind the course and "pitching" the course in a certain way.  I am not "pitching" anything.  I just passed on information that I know to be fact and that should have answered the question.
I couldn't care less.   The course is what it is.

Matt Kardash

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #48 on: August 31, 2006, 08:27:45 PM »
This is seriously the dumbest agrument EVER. People, get over yourselves with this minimalist bullshit. It's all labels, it all means nothing! It's just a golf course. Play it if you like it, don't play it if you don't like it. End of story. End of thread. Let's close down this discussion board  :)
the interviewer asked beck how he felt "being the bob dylan of the 90's" and beck quitely responded "i actually feel more like the bon jovi of the 60's"

Jay Flemma

Re:How many cubic yards of earth were REALLY moved at Dismal River?
« Reply #49 on: August 31, 2006, 11:05:43 PM »
Dear Jim:

Thanks for taking the time to talk me through your ideas about the course and share with us your discussions with Chris, who no matter what - everybody agrees is a good guy.

Please take this in the intellectual and educational spirit in which it is meant.  I was watching really, really closely at DR, trying to observe what was going on in the earth.  I saw lots of good horizontal and vertical movement in the earth and I saw some excellent advanced design features on 4-6 and the last three holes are great too,  but some of the work is as severe or more severe than Yale GC.

Now your loyalty to Chris and jack commands respect.  But looking closely for four days at what the natural land looks like,  I saw how two other courses that looked really natural were presented - wild horse and ballyneal.  I also got a look at major portions of Sand Hills as well.  While the land on which these course sit looked the same as dismal...three courses look natural and flow and are presented similarly and one is all aerial, totally unwalkable, goes up and down towering dunes nothing like the other courses and has contours more severe in the greens than any other course I have played anywhere...about 350 courses total.

With great respect, I cannot just simply take your word for it or Chris' unless he and I stand there on the course and we actually point out where he says the land was moved and, conversely, I want to see what he says when I point out features and especially greens and opine my belief earth was moved...those green contours are nothing like the surrounds.  To create 10 alone there had to be alot of earth moved.

Lets assume for the sake of argument that Jack only cut the lower parts lower and added height to the higher parts to give the illusion of little earth.  Strantz had to move over 150,000 at Royal New Kent to do that and your land was milder than that with which he started and your finished product make his look like a petting zoo.  Similarly, SIlva moved 150,000 to build shaker hills and that is nowhere near as zany as the contours of DR.

I do not believe you moved only 15,000.  I'll be glad to come out there again, this time with you and chris and see for myself, if you want to defend the point and try to convince me.  I'll even promise to hear you out and keep an open mind.  BUt if I am observant enough to see the reverse angle landing areas on 6 and the lions mouth aspect of 5 and the riviera no 6 coutour attempts at 10, I am also observant enough to see what fits the land reasonably and what looks like it dropped in form another planet.  How about a topo map...do you have access to what the land loked like before construction? That would go quite a ways to enlightening everyone...if DR really is that good a feat of prestidigitation, the world should know how it's done...

and again matt L. you miss the issue...I'm not mad its not minimalist...I'm dont like somebody telling me something is red when I look at it and it sure looks blue instead...that's the thrust of this thread.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2006, 11:11:25 PM by Jay Flemma »