[Scott Szabo]

For those who have played it in its infancy and again more recently - I seem to be sensing a much greater appreciation for DR than in the past.  Can you speak to what's specifically causing the change of heart?

Is it the new ownership group and the direction its headed?

Is it changes to the course?

Something else?

I must admit that all the raving reviews it's now getting has made me want to visit it once again. 

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

From the newly numbered map...I realise that the par three I like so much is 15 not 16 sorry...

[Adam Clayman]

Chris, Are there any arguments that could be made to save the existing 18th green?

Adam - probably not.  I believe the hole, while very good today, will be enhanced by the changes.

While "probably" opens a door, your opinion on the enhancement, shuts it, rather quickly.

 Just for grins, how about I give it a try?

Before I do, I'd like to tell you what I know as premise. That way, if it's flawed, I won't embarrass myself further.

The reason for the change to the 18th green is because of it's blindness. Many of the original members complained about it, and those complaints are going to be heeded and the green will be changed.

Is that correct?

Scott,
 I feel the major difference in my last round versus my first round is based mostly on the fun scale.

The changes to the greens and their surrounds  allow for recovery, where previously it was a chore just to find your ball. These changes also allow for more options on how to play either approach or chip shots. Not in all cases but in general. that's my sense.

Take #10 for instance, With the pin tucked in the back, right behind the center bunker (versus all the way back) I tried to play the right sideboard, higher up on the dune. When my ball stayed up on the hill, getting stuck in the grass, I said to our host how I wish I had tried to thread the needle utilizing the left side, instead. He then tried the shot I just mentioned. Since he birdied the hole both days, I'd say he thought it was fun too.

[Dave McCollum]

What a great thread. Unbelievable phone photos, but it was the passion of the described experience that was most moving. Thanks to Eric, Chris, and others for opening our eyes and minds.

Warning: self indulgent rant follows.  Hit page down key and move on.

I don’t have a clear sense about the physical design changes that have occurred at DR and how these have improved the course.  But I do know from long experience that all golf courses evolve continuously.  Purely from a personal point of view, my opinions about golf and golf courses are also continuously evolving, especially since I started reading a few yards of books, traveling to see other courses, and reading the opinions of others on this site and elsewhere.  For example, renovations I did 10-12 years ago and thought were really cool looking, embarrass my aesthetics today.

Perhaps because I get to leave my armchair and fool around in the dirt (as an owner, not as a designer, clearly I’m guilty of tinkering), I find it impossible to imagine building a golf course and getting everything perfectly right.  I also think it’s impossible to work on such a large canvass, no matter how well everyone else loves the result, without wishing some things had been done differently. Over time, courses, opinions, and people change and experiences accumulate (repeat plays).  So, it seems entirely reasonable to me that the various visceral reactions to DR expressed here (mostly based on one or a couple of plays) would be so widespread.

Given the complexity of building a golf course, I am in awe of anyone who can put together a team of talented folks and create a course that is so beautiful and enjoyable that one is emotionally overwhelmed.  There are a few designers admired here that have done that time and again.  They deserve our admiration for their talent, creativity, expertise, and the pleasure they have given us. They’re our heroes and mentors.  However, it sometimes seems my own opinions (and others on here) are unduly influenced by a sort of conventional “group thinking” that can get skewed by too many design clichés and too much hero worship at the expense of being able to appreciate good work from designers of lesser, or in this case greater, reputations or commercial appeal.       

I don’t read the rating threads here. I’m much more interested in people’s gut reactions about the experience of playing a course, as Eric so eloquently put it near the start of this thread.  When pressed to explain why he felt as he did, those specific things he liked were precisely the same things another questioned.  Fair enough, we all react differently to our own emotions, aesthetics, and our evolving opinions.  Yet, it was refreshing to read this discussion because it remained positive and open minded to other opinions and, to a great extent, didn’t break down into haggling over our individual biases.

Thanks to all of my fellow golf nutcases for making my time here as enjoyable as reading this thread, and please feel free to call me a sentimental, long-winded moron.

[Chris Johnston]

Chris, Are there any arguments that could be made to save the existing 18th green?

Adam - probably not.  I believe the hole, while very good today, will be enhanced by the changes.

While "probably" opens a door, your opinion on the enhancement, shuts it, rather quickly.

 Just for grins, how about I give it a try?

Before I do, I'd like to tell you what I know as premise. That way, if it's flawed, I won't embarrass myself further.

The reason for the change to the 18th green is because of it's blindness. Many of the original members complained about it, and those complaints are going to be heeded and the green will be changed.

Is that correct?

Scott,
 I feel the major difference in my last round versus my first round is based mostly on the fun scale.

The changes to the greens and their surrounds  allow for recovery, where previously it was a chore just to find your ball. These changes also allow for more options on how to play either approach or chip shots. Not in all cases but in general. that's my sense.

Take #10 for instance, With the pin tucked in the back, right behind the center bunker (versus all the way back) I tried to play the right sideboard, higher up on the dune. When my ball stayed up on the hill, getting stuck in the grass, I said to our host how I wish I had tried to thread the needle utilizing the left side, instead. He then tried the shot I just mentioned. Since he birdied the hole both days, I'd say he thought it was fun too.

Adam

You are correct.  18, while a great hole, will become "epic" and will fit the rest of the back 9 better.  The blindness was one of the reasons for modification.

[Eric Smith]

What a great thread. Unbelievable phone photos, but it was the passion of the described experience that was most moving. Thanks to Eric, Chris, and others for opening our eyes and minds.

Warning: self indulgent rant follows.  Hit page down key and move on.

I don’t have a clear sense about the physical design changes that have occurred at DR and how these have improved the course.  But I do know from long experience that all golf courses evolve continuously.  Purely from a personal point of view, my opinions about golf and golf courses are also continuously evolving, especially since I started reading a few yards of books, traveling to see other courses, and reading the opinions of others on this site and elsewhere.  For example, renovations I did 10-12 years ago and thought were really cool looking, embarrass my aesthetics today.

Perhaps because I get to leave my armchair and fool around in the dirt (as an owner, not as a designer, clearly I’m guilty of tinkering), I find it impossible to imagine building a golf course and getting everything perfectly right.  I also think it’s impossible to work on such a large canvass, no matter how well everyone else loves the result, without wishing some things had been done differently. Over time, courses, opinions, and people change and experiences accumulate (repeat plays).  So, it seems entirely reasonable to me that the various visceral reactions to DR expressed here (mostly based on one or a couple of plays) would be so widespread.

Given the complexity of building a golf course, I am in awe of anyone who can put together a team of talented folks and create a course that is so beautiful and enjoyable that one is emotionally overwhelmed.  There are a few designers admired here that have done that time and again.  They deserve our admiration for their talent, creativity, expertise, and the pleasure they have given us. They’re our heroes and mentors.  However, it sometimes seems my own opinions (and others on here) are unduly influenced by a sort of conventional “group thinking” that can get skewed by too many design clichés and too much hero worship at the expense of being able to appreciate good work from designers of lesser, or in this case greater, reputations or commercial appeal.       

I don’t read the rating threads here. I’m much more interested in people’s gut reactions about the experience of playing a course, as Eric so eloquently put it near the start of this thread.  When pressed to explain why he felt as he did, those specific things he liked were precisely the same things another questioned.  Fair enough, we all react differently to our own emotions, aesthetics, and our evolving opinions.  Yet, it was refreshing to read this discussion because it remained positive and open minded to other opinions and, to a great extent, didn’t break down into haggling over our individual biases.

Thanks to all of my fellow golf nutcases for making my time here as enjoyable as reading this thread, and please feel free to call me a sentimental, long-winded moron.

Sentimental, long-winded moron living in his own private Idaho.   Thank you for the kind words Dave, I loved your post.  I remembered Idaho because our friends who met you out at Bandon spoke very highly of you after the trip. 

[Anthony Gray]

What a great thread. Unbelievable phone photos, but it was the passion of the described experience that was most moving. Thanks to Eric, Chris, and others for opening our eyes and minds.

Warning: self indulgent rant follows.  Hit page down key and move on.

I don’t have a clear sense about the physical design changes that have occurred at DR and how these have improved the course.  But I do know from long experience that all golf courses evolve continuously.  Purely from a personal point of view, my opinions about golf and golf courses are also continuously evolving, especially since I started reading a few yards of books, traveling to see other courses, and reading the opinions of others on this site and elsewhere.  For example, renovations I did 10-12 years ago and thought were really cool looking, embarrass my aesthetics today.

Perhaps because I get to leave my armchair and fool around in the dirt (as an owner, not as a designer, clearly I’m guilty of tinkering), I find it impossible to imagine building a golf course and getting everything perfectly right.  I also think it’s impossible to work on such a large canvass, no matter how well everyone else loves the result, without wishing some things had been done differently. Over time, courses, opinions, and people change and experiences accumulate (repeat plays).  So, it seems entirely reasonable to me that the various visceral reactions to DR expressed here (mostly based on one or a couple of plays) would be so widespread.

Given the complexity of building a golf course, I am in awe of anyone who can put together a team of talented folks and create a course that is so beautiful and enjoyable that one is emotionally overwhelmed.  There are a few designers admired here that have done that time and again.  They deserve our admiration for their talent, creativity, expertise, and the pleasure they have given us. They’re our heroes and mentors.  However, it sometimes seems my own opinions (and others on here) are unduly influenced by a sort of conventional “group thinking” that can get skewed by too many design clichés and too much hero worship at the expense of being able to appreciate good work from designers of lesser, or in this case greater, reputations or commercial appeal.       

I don’t read the rating threads here. I’m much more interested in people’s gut reactions about the experience of playing a course, as Eric so eloquently put it near the start of this thread.  When pressed to explain why he felt as he did, those specific things he liked were precisely the same things another questioned.  Fair enough, we all react differently to our own emotions, aesthetics, and our evolving opinions.  Yet, it was refreshing to read this discussion because it remained positive and open minded to other opinions and, to a great extent, didn’t break down into haggling over our individual biases.

Thanks to all of my fellow golf nutcases for making my time here as enjoyable as reading this thread, and please feel free to call me a sentimental, long-winded moron.

  Great post.A sentimental long-winded moron you are not.But a great playing partner you are.Thanks for the wisdom.

  Anthony

[Tony Weiler]

I made the 17 mile drive, yes 17, on the road into DM, and it is all paved.  I'm not sure it's wider than a cart path.  I also drove into The Prairie Club on my very recent trip to Sand Hills.  I can say, after driving into both, that I'd really wish I'd gotten there early to play DM. Of course, I was playing with three great gents at SH who had just played Ballyneal, Wildhorse, and then DM.  They couldn't stop talking about DM, and I think that says a lot!

[Garland Bayley]

I made the 17 mile drive, yes 17, on the road into DM, and it is all paved.  I'm not sure it's wider than a cart path.  I also drove into The Prairie Club on my very recent trip to Sand Hills.  I can say, after driving into both, that I'd really wish I'd gotten there early to play DM. Of course, I was playing with three great gents at SH who had just played Ballyneal, Wildhorse, and then DM.  They couldn't stop talking about DM, and I think that says a lot!

Tony,

Are you sure automobiles were allowed? Maybe it was a cart path!

[Chris Johnston]

But that tee shot is just so awkward looking...you have to banh it down that left side wher it takes the coutour, but you dont know that when you first play the hole...
I agree about the punchbowl green though.
I just felt as though the first few holes were a little weak compared to what is to follow...the back nine I thought was wonderful...that par three 16th is awesome..what a great hole.

Michael

Actually, the drive on #1 is terrific and not awkward at all!  Ultimate beginning risk/reward leaving between 100 yards (reward) and 165 yards (conservative).  The natural terrain is a proper introduction to the course that awaits.

[RJ_Daley]

I'd also like to compliment Mr. long-winded sentimental 'fellow' on his post, and to Mr Johnston for his input.
 
Over the years here on GCA.com, many of the 'purists' and vanguard to the movement to the design of more natural and harmonious golf courses were wishing for more courses like Sand Hills original and then Wild Horse, to come about.  Now, we have BallyNeal, Dismal River, and the courses at Prairie Club.  And, there are a possible few more.  We've seen the same movement towards the same ideal at Bandon, and even a cousin to this movement in places like Rustic Canyon, and certainly more in the same ideal there in Long Island.  We have come a long way in about a dozen years towards a new class of golf course design. 

But, Mr. McCollum makes a point that we really shouldn't overlook in our quest to name the most darling of our golf course designer architects, and which project we favor most, to the critique of others when we find a flaw the inevitablity of change.  All these courses have to have some early flaws.  They tweaked Sand Hills within a few years of its opening.  I don't know if they have done anything at Bally.  Even Wild Horse has done a few tweaks.  But, as for DR, maybe they did have a few miscues.  But, with the sort of commitment and investment that is out there, we should recognise that eventually by user observation and critique, they will EVOLVE!!!  The market forces will keep pushing all of them to tweak and adjust.  But, particularly with DR and the other sand hill courses, they start from amazing ground, and in such a unique place that they will utlimately settle into some sort of adjustments that will please even the purists, IMHO. 

[Adam Clayman]

Chris, I feel that the current 18th green is a great way to end the experience at DR, due to the semi-blindness, in the same way you describe the opener as a proper intro, this green is a proper finale.

It seems like a very expensive fix, for something that seems to fit the entire course so well.

However, since you're describing the change as epic, I will give up any hope in trying to convince you that those that bellyached about that final blindness, just didn't appreciate the bookend effect that green provides. It reminds me very much of Pete Dye's second hole (?) at Firethorn. The one with the big mound directly in front of the green. True to the links courses, I've only seen pictures of, from across the pond.

When is the construction scheduled and will the hole be closed during the fix?

Dick, At our inaugural dinner, that was the one question I asked Mr. Doak. 'How did he see tweaking the design over the years" His response was "not at all." His reasoning was that his entire team had spent so much time on site, and, go over every detail, that all tweaks were made prior to grassing.  Bally has had a few bunkers added. I'm not a fan of them, but they are there and there's not much you can do about it now. I just hope and prey when Hep gets asked again, to do similar work, he will graciously decline. I assume it's Dave Hensley who has made a few adjustments to the look of some of the native areas too. By scratching out the native, he's made the sand more visible, in spots. I don't consider them design changes, but, they do have an affect on the look of some of the holes. Who knows? Maybe they will evolve into blowouts, in their own right.

[Eric Smith]

Chris, I feel that the current 18th green is a great way to end the experience at DR, due to the semi-blindness, in the same way you describe the opener as a proper intro, this green is a proper finale.

It seems like a very expensive fix, for something that seems to fit the entire course so well.

However, since you're describing the change as epic, I will give up any hope in trying to convince you that those that bellyached about that final blindness, just didn't appreciate the bookend effect that green provides. It reminds me very much of Pete Dye's second hole (?) at Firethorn. The one with the big mound directly in front of the green. True to the links courses, I've only seen pictures of, from across the pond.

Adam,

A couple of hours around the firepit with you arguing the merits of keeping the existing green, perhaps then they'd decide to leave well enough alone.  I kid...just a fan of the 18th as it is, is all.

Chris,

Will the big tall bunker short/right be altered or removed as well?

[RJ_Daley]

Adam, wouldn't we all expect most architects to take a similar line of comment at an inaugrual dinner of their new and acclaimed course?  TD and Co, do indeed pay attention to their details, as their track record would prove.  Although, even they haven't been 100% untweakable, have they?  

Of course that is a great marketting tool to be able to say, "we get it right from the git-go", and don't expect to have to come back for tweaks.  But, there is a real world out there that is beyond their control, as the example you pointed out of the boss wanting something more or changed.  The customers over time may also want something else.  What to do then, if you loose market or customers for well thought out rationale or just trendy desires?  I think you have to tweak to protect your investment.  Apparently that is what DR did.  

I guess there is all sorts of 'evolving' processes.  There are the market driven design evolving due to demand for a change of some feature that just doesn't gain support, and there are the natural processes like scratching out vegie in places like sand hills/chop hills where the wind just is going to do it's thing and probably create one hellacious bunker blow-out.  Speaking of which, I wonder what the scratched out mess on the fragile prairieland at the defunct Applegate Prairie course project looks like these days?

But, I guess I don't want to pooh pooh the potential for evolution.... or I'd probably look even more regressed...

[Dave McCollum]

You probably don’t remember Anthony Gray’s assessment of me at Bandon that my “heart was as big as my liver.”  How embarrassing, but guilty as charged.  I sat down there in that basement pub at Bandon and listened to Tom D., Gib, and Geo Bahto late into the night.  And in a moment of transcendence, kept drinking stuff that I never touch.  Geeze, can I apply again for membership in the treehouse?

Good discussion.  Keep it going.

[RJ_Daley]

BTW, what better ground and terrain to have to make tweaks in than sand hills?  One can easily strip away sand, pile it out somewhere where it might look like a natural hummock, and re=establish turf pretty rapidly.  I'll bet the costs of moving around sand in those areas is a heck of a lot cheaper than mucking around in clayey loam with enviro agents dogging your every move back in these regions.  I can just hear the county land planner (if they have one up in Hooker)...

'... oh, you want to melt down some hummocks on your golf course?  Well, don't melt them down more than 200 feet or you might run out of sand or create a big runoff compromise with the other billion acres of sand..."   

[Chris Johnston]

Chris, I feel that the current 18th green is a great way to end the experience at DR, due to the semi-blindness, in the same way you describe the opener as a proper intro, this green is a proper finale.

It seems like a very expensive fix, for something that seems to fit the entire course so well.

However, since you're describing the change as epic, I will give up any hope in trying to convince you that those that bellyached about that final blindness, just didn't appreciate the bookend effect that green provides. It reminds me very much of Pete Dye's second hole (?) at Firethorn. The one with the big mound directly in front of the green. True to the links courses, I've only seen pictures of, from across the pond.

Adam,

A couple of hours around the firepit with you arguing the merits of keeping the existing green, perhaps then they'd decide to leave well enough alone.  I kid...just a fan of the 18th as it is, is all.

Chris,

Will the big tall bunker short/right be altered or removed as well?

Eric

The right side bunker will remain as will the pitch just behind it.  I can assure everyone, we spent more than 3 months simply studying this before reaching a decision. 

Dave is is very easy to work with the sand but the restoration isn't - the land out here is very fragile.

I do like the firepit discussion idea!

[Tom_Doak]

Nobody should expect to be perfect the first time out; there is always room for improvement over time.  But this fetish that some of you guys have for tweaking courses is just beyond me.

RJ, how can you say "maybe they did have a few miscues.  But, with the sort of commitment and investment that is out there, we should recognise that eventually by user observation and critique, they will EVOLVE!!! "  I think that comment refers to a course that's on its THIRD owner.  I'm not picking on that course in particular; I'm picking on the idea that a developer or his new members enjoy having their course torn up every couple of years, or enjoy paying for it.  [And in fact, I would rather go on to build another new course than come back and tinker with all the ones I've done to date, but it is the nature of the world economy that many architects are looking to get paid to fix their own errors because no one is eager to pay them to make new ones.]

I've got one owner who loves to tinker ... Mr. Pascucci ... and that experience is enough that I hope I don't have any more.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Chris,
We will just have to agree to disagree on that one, I personally dont think the player is aware of the risk reward until after the tee shot has been hit and you drive down to see what you were hitting to...that been said...that is what practice rounds would be for!

[Adam Clayman]

Dick, Tom wasn't marketing to me. He was sincere and honest in their applications.

As for getting it right out of the box, I assume that they did because they were given more freedom than is usual. I'm unaware of any rebuilding of bunkers due to heavy rains (and we've had heavy rains). There might have been some softening of some slopes, but that could've been natural settle or, before grow in.

I admit I don't know everything about BN. For all I know they could be doing night work, like they do at Pebble Beach. One night they rebuilt the entire front bunkers on the 7th.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

i am with Adam...love the 18th green...

[Derek_Duncan]

Glad to see Dismal getting some respect at last. I've always liked it a great deal more than I feel the general consensus here has.

I like the idea of shifting the tee on 6 down into the valley--I've always felt that was an awkward hole because the tee shot lacked any real strategy (in relation to the punchbowl green) other than just get it over the dune. I can't quite envision what it will play like from the lower left but hopefully a greater degree of reward can be created.

Eager to see to the new 13th.

Count me in with the crowd that doesn't see the need to change the green location at 18. The "Taco" green was a fun and appropriate end to the round.

[Garland Bayley]

Adam, wouldn't we all expect most architects to take a similar line of comment at an inaugrual dinner of their new and acclaimed course?  ...

Dick,

That is the same posture that TD takes here! It has nothing to do with an inaugural dinner for a particular course.

[Chris Johnston]

Chris,
We will just have to agree to disagree on that one, I personally dont think the player is aware of the risk reward until after the tee shot has been hit and you drive down to see what you were hitting to...that been said...that is what practice rounds would be for!

Michael

I agree with you.  Remember, most who play Dismal River are with a Member or a caddie so there is local knowledge on the first tee.  The tee shot is one of the members favorites here but I agree local knowledge is important.  Once you know the hole, most really find it great.

[Chris Johnston]

Nobody should expect to be perfect the first time out; there is always room for improvement over time.  But this fetish that some of you guys have for tweaking courses is just beyond me.

RJ, how can you say "maybe they did have a few miscues.  But, with the sort of commitment and investment that is out there, we should recognise that eventually by user observation and critique, they will EVOLVE!!! "  I think that comment refers to a course that's on its THIRD owner.  I'm not picking on that course in particular; I'm picking on the idea that a developer or his new members enjoy having their course torn up every couple of years, or enjoy paying for it.  [And in fact, I would rather go on to build another new course than come back and tinker with all the ones I've done to date, but it is the nature of the world economy that many architects are looking to get paid to fix their own errors because no one is eager to pay them to make new ones.]

I've got one owner who loves to tinker ... Mr. Pascucci ... and that experience is enough that I hope I don't have any more.

Tom (and all)

The 18th hole at Dismal River is terrific.  As mentioned earlier, we have literally taken months contemplating as one should when working with a masterpiece.  Among the key factors were maintenance, drainage, condition, traffic, and pace of play.  In the end, we chose to modify 18 and it will make a great hole even better and we like that opportunity!

As the best golfer in history, and arguably the best course designer in the modern age, Jack has been a real pleasure to work with.  Both Jack and Chris have been very generous, engaged, and focussed - true pros. 

This week we have found time to focus on the walking paths/trails.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()