Tom-
How different are the hills/mounds/dunes at Dismal than Sand Hills? I have played both and can certainly look at the pictures and see differences, but I can't "really" tell. The hills look a little more gentle at DR than SH to me. I realize they are only a few miles apart the way the crow flies so they can't be too different probably, just wondering if you can notice any major differences...
Thanks
Chip
Chip:
They are as different as any two links courses -- say, Sandwich and Deal.
My general impression is that the terrain at Dismal River is bigger and broader than at Sand Hills. There is more vertical change, but less frequency of undulation. That could just be because Coore & Crenshaw routed their course on the gentlest portions of the terrain they had to work with, and Jack Nicklaus went for bigger and bolder things.
Our own site is different than either of the above, because we are leading down to the river. There is twice as much elevation change overall as Sand Hills*, but it doesn't feel like it when walking the course because I cheated and finished lower than I started. Still, I would say the contours on our ground are a bit gentler than on the other course at Dismal, with a few exceptions. Chris' observation that he expected our holes to be laid out in the valleys, and it's really not, is spot on.
* actual elevation changes:
Dismal River II: high point 3444 (6th tee), low point 3260 (16th green) = 184 feet of elevation change
Sand Hills: high point 3335 (3rd tee), low point 3255 (8th fairway) = 80 feet of elevation change
I might be the only person in the world to have the topo maps for both courses. Dick Youngscap gave me the GPS plan of Sand Hills after Bill and Ben had flagged it all out.