All
Here are some reasons "why", as previously posted here: Buckle up - it is a bit of a read.
The course has matured, it has evolved, it wasn't perfect the day it opened. Like anyone else, we are open to both criticism and praise. We enjoy feedback and participate in discussions.
Irrigation has been calibrated and brought under control, making native rough less penal. During grow-in and with immature turf, the native was a bear (no pun intended) no different from Awarii today or Sand Hills early on. Selective mowing of native similar to Sand Hills.
Continuity of a great staff, mission, and energy. The work has been very hard and all are focussed on one direction.
Focus on fun and away from pretentious. Warm and welcoming. Kind.
Green speeds have been made consistent and they aren't too fast. Nor are they too slow. Goldilocks.
Several controversial greens have been softened and 18 was moved. We haven't been afraid to make improvements - all courses do, and have.
More people have played it, many now more than once, and appreciation grows with familiarity as I believe Brad pointed out.
Great overall club experience - a combination of unique golf, great accomodations, great clubhouse atmosphere, great food.
Other than irrigation and green speeds, since I wasn't here, I often wonder why the course was panned as too hard when it simply isn't. How much did arrogance play in bad reception early on? My guess...plenty.
Why the recent positive vibe at Dismal River? > realization that Dismal River isn't Sand Hills, or Ballyneal and is very good in it own right. Sand Hills green are much faster and Ballyneal's much slower - both work well for and help define them. We love them, don't compete with them, and have our own identity. I wish we could work more closely together. Dismal River and Sand Hills have good relations and really do compliment each other on the "bucket list" visit, as does Ballyneal. All of us accomodate limited outside play. To me, Sand Hills and Ballyneal have a bit better "flow", Sand Hills is unbelievable and its ranking is well deserved. Having probably played both Dismal and Sand Hills more than anyone, the difference between the courses is a lot closer that many think. It's the same in the feedback we receive. Believe it or not, many like Dismal River better.
Wild Horse is highly regarded as well - it is terrific and deserves every accolade it receives. But, seriously, is it really better than Dismal River? Is Shooting Star? To me (and only to me), it isn't even worthy of debate. On the "ten round test", how would YOU split play at Dismal River and Wild Horse? Sand Hills and Dismal River? Dismal River and Muirfield Village? Dismal River and Bandon Dunes? Ballyneal and Dismal River? Dismal River and Shooting Star? Castle Pines and Dismal River? Dismal River and Pronghorn? Lost Dunes and Dismal Rivver? Butler National and Dismal River? Estancia and Dismal River? Dismal River and Pete Dye Golf Club?
To me, and based upon feedback of people who visit the area, nearby Sand Hills, Ballyneal, and Wild Horse are rated well, and I agree 100%. Point isn't that the others aren't good, they are quite good. Its pretty clear and becoming ok to acknowledge... its pretty hard to argue Dismal River isn't clearly underrated. Why? Who cares. It, too, is quite good.
Take DRGC #5 discussed here, a short to medium yard uphill par 3, 150-160 yards, green is +/- 30 yards above the tee. It certainly is a unique and tough hole and, thus, important in a match or round. There is little question it is far less difficult, less severe, and less challenging than Sand Hills #13 which is longer, steeper, and faster. You can find examples like this in several other places when closely comparing the two. If Dismal River had Sand Hills #15 in its routing, I believe Dismal River/Nicklaus would be strongly panned for it - its a great but very tough long uphill par 4 into a very difficult green with a false front. Compare the #2's - once you know each hole well, which is harder and which more fun? Both Sand Hills and Dismal River have challenge and fun - forced carries, false fronts, internal contours, plenty of pitch. Again, Sand Hills very much deserves its accolades - it is well earned, its a spiritual journey, and it is the best of a good bunch.
Brad Klein doesn't much like Dismal #5. Eric Smith loves it and thinks its the best hole at Dismal River. Both have strong views and neither is wrong. Welcome to golf! I like both Brad and Eric, and neither's view of #5 changes that. Like it or hate it, I enjoy seeeing the hole dissected and simply believe that the same "lens" should be applied equally among courses. I'll touch the third rail here, I think #12 at ANGC is the most overrated par 3 in golf - a media creation. Its a 150 yard par 3 over a pond for Pete's sake! Freshening wind? With all due respect, they don't know wind. Feel free to disagree.
Tom's course will be very interesting, fun, and the back holes are unlike anything in the Sand Hills. Will it be easy? Nope. Will it be fun? You bet! That's what Tom does. It won't be boring nor free of deep discussion. This is an exciting project and Tom, his crew, and Dirt and his bunch have done a terrific job. Will everyone like it? Probably not. Will you be able to look closely and find things you don't like. Certainly. All of can do, and do, that anywhere.