[DMoriarty]

While I am at it, let me mention that I have played Ballyneal and Sand Hills. While the decision was not mine to make, we didn't play Dismal, probably for reasons similar to Jim's.  While it wasn't my decision, I was as fine with the decision then and am now.   I am not able to play everywhere I might like, and so I have to rely on those I trust, and I haven't really heard much which would lead me to believe I really missed out on a great course.   I keep investigating, but most of what I hear about Dismal is hype I cannot quite reduce to anything of substance.  

And, Mr. Johnston, to answer your rhetorical question above, where you manage to get in your digs at Ballyneal and rumors of "slow greens, walking only, the food, or smell of nearby livestock, snakes, rakes, or space aliens in the rough . . . If you or anyone else posted that about Ballyneal (and you just did) I'd keep in mind in all your posts, and discount your opinion accordingly.  As I said, I played Ballyneal, and if anyone came away from there thinking those things, I'd have no respect for their opinion about golf course architecture.  If that is the feeling of those at Dismal (and you have created the impression that it is) then it is another strike against the place as far as I am concerned.  I don't share those tastes.

Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion and tastes differ, and that is terrific.  Understanding the tastes of others helps us all make better informed decisions.  

[Steve Strasheim]

I don't see how any good can come from this thread.

Seems strange to have a member of one Sandhills type course starting a thread about another one. Maybe if it was about something specific that Dismal has done right, but it still seems a little swarmy.

Might be fun for a bunch of us keyboard jockeys to throw around opinions, but it appears more destined to hurt people than help.

[Jim Colton]

Steve,
 
  I'm not currently a member of any club, Sandhills or otherwise. I disagree that nothing good can come out of it. About 40% of the posts have been on target and have advanced the discussion, which is a pretty good average for GCA

  Now, can somebody tell me what's going on with the 6th hole?!!

[Mac Plumart]

I've already had private conversations w/ Mac & CJ, they seem pretty cool with where I'm going here

For the record, I did PM Jim.  I was not "cool" with this thread.  I said I was stunned he would start it.  He, essentially, told me he felt it was his right to post it.  To which I agreed; we can all do what we want in life.  I then wished him well.

Hopefully this is my one and only post on this thread.

[Terry Lavin]

Nobody in his right mind can feel good about what transpired at Ballyneal and I rather doubt that Mr. Colton has any intent to cause any harm to Dismal River.  I sure hope that the addition of the Doak course gives it the necessary attraction to hit the magic number of members to thrive, in any kind of economy.  I decided it was worth the risk, so I'm hoping it pays off.

[Steve Strasheim]

Steve,
 
  I'm not currently a member of any club, Sandhills or otherwise. I disagree that nothing good can come out of it. About 40% of the posts have been on target and have advanced the discussion, which is a pretty good average for GCA

  Now, can somebody tell me what's going on with the 6th hole?!!

Jim,

You already have the manager of Dismal getting slammed here for doing only what any successful person would do on a thread started about his course. If you had a business and I came on to a website that could affect that business and started a critique thread about you, what would you do?

Dismal River: A Case Study is better suited to a feature interview.

[Kalen Braley]

Nobody in his right mind can feel good about what transpired at Ballyneal and I rather doubt that Mr. Colton has any intent to cause any harm to Dismal River.  I sure hope that the addition of the Doak course gives it the necessary attraction to hit the magic number of members to thrive, in any kind of economy.  I decided it was worth the risk, so I'm hoping it pays off.

I'm with Terry on this one.  Any person worth their salt understands the value of a post-mortem/lessons learned analysis and I think Jim C is being absolutely genuine so far with his intent in this thread.

I hope this thread stays and the conversation can remain with the architecture.  I even have one myself.  Looking at aerials, the front 9 appears to be a fairly tight grouping of holes in the same general area, while the back 9 appears to be done in loop fashion.  Was this routing driven by the extremity of the terrain or was there something else in mind?  Link here: http://g.co/maps/6mtca

Thanks,

P.S.  For those in the know...is the new course going in to the west of the clubhouse/lodges area? That seems to match as I understand it from other threads..

[Jim Colton]

Steve,

 I think it's a success story, so I can't imagine that talking about how they got there would be damaging to the club. People have tried to attack CJ's motives in the past, and he and others have defended him pretty well, so I'm sure he can handle it. I'm trying to keep this thread on target. People are obviously interested. And we've have gotten good, thoughtful responses from CJ, Ben Sims and others.

  Jim


Kalen: Doak course is north of the original.

[Michael George]

That is why I think ratings solely of the golf course itself (and not everything else surrounding the golf) are missing the boat.  Golf is nothing more than a social activity.

This isn't the Platinum Club of America, this site is about golf course architecture.  Regardless of whether you play a course in the company of a bunch of dicks or with the greatest guys in the world it doesn't change the golf course itself.

David - I agree that the golf course is the majority of the experience, but I just think there should be a category for (lack of a better word) "atmosphere" that encompasses the intangibles that get lost in those ratings.  For instance, Firestone CC in Akron has 3 very good golf courses, but a very corporate feel to the courses and place.  Meanwhile, Sharon GC in Akron has a good golf course, but has a more intimate feel to the course and place.   If you asked me architecturally which courses are better, I would probably say Firestone, but most people that I talk to prefer Sharon.  I think that is part and parcel of playing the course.

[Mike Hendren]

Dismal River is one of the places that shows that long term success hinges on people just as much as having a great golf course.  

I think this is a wise statement.  I assume "success" is defined as sustainability.  That can accrue from either financial benevelence (my favorable line about The Honors Course:  "It goes to show you what happens with 50 guys put in $25,000 and one guy puts in $10,000,000" or something to that effect) or a business model where revenues cover operating expenses and capital reserves for replacement items.  It would seem that the quality of the golf course architecture must clear some de minimus threshhold that might or might not be deemed "great."   However, great architecture alone won't carry the day, as Apache Stronghold, Beechtree and High Pointe attest, and it won't sell itself.   A mouse-trap is still a mouse-trap and a golf course is still a golf course.

I look forward to meeting Chris Johnston in late June.  David Moriarty's criticism has merit, but it's clear to me that Chris has momentum at Dismal River and its proponents are no chumps.  It's equally clear that Ballyneal either lost its momentum or never reached critical mass and one can't help but wonder if that is in partly attributable to the sponsorship, particularly since the architecture is so damned good.  I'll be very surprised if  Dismal River is the architectural equal of Ballyneal, which I hold in high regard.  But I'm headed out there with the expectation and hope of being surprised.  I can't wait.

Bogey

[Chris Johnston]

Mr. Johnston,

I've no affiliation with either Ballyneal or Dismal.  Nor am I likely to ever have any such affiliation in the future.  I've heard you are a great guy, so I'll be straight with you.  I find the endless hyping to be really off-putting, especially when you combine it with the indirect and direct shots at Ballyneal, like in your post immediately above.

You ask, rhetorically, what if you posted "that people (we'll call them "friends") who say 'don't bother' due to slow greens, walking only, the food, or smell of nearby livestock, snakes, rakes, or space aliens in the rough?"  I wouldn't, as my or a few other's starting it would just be...well... odd."  Well you just did post it, for goodness sakes!  And you have done it before in this thread and others.  We are not fools here.  We get your drift when you tell us repeatedly that you don't tell your guests they need to walk, unlike other places.  

Is this really what you mean when you call for respectful discussion?  

I also think it is out-of-line for you and Don (for whom I have tremendous respec) to question Jim Colton's motives, and to belittle his comments and questions as sour grapes in some made up Ballyneal v. Dismal battle. I can assure you that others share his viewpoint on this one whether or not they are affiliated with Ballyneal.

Mr. Moriarty

I'm glad you noticed.  My post was an very clear example of what I dislike here and was done as a point of illustration.  I'm glad you found it unsavory, and hope you do the same when others do the same.  That, my friend, was the purpose and the point.  I'm sorry of they hit too close to home for you.  

I haven't questioned Jim's motives at all. I merely pointed out it is odd that Jim made a post about Dismal River, a place he has never even set foot upon, with a comment or two about why he will never visit.  Jim and I don't know each other well, but I consider him a friend, and he and I have always been able to work out any differences.  This especially so given the fireworks I missed at Max's yesterday.

I won't dignify the rest of your post as I have no stomach for confrontation with people I don't know.

Jim - back to the topic - the only holes changed were 13 and 18, although tees have been added throughout the course.  As mentioned before, several greens were softened to better accommodate bentgrass speed and we expanded the 9th fairway to the right.  The only other major changes were some follow along drainage and adjustment in fertility and irrigation (or non irrigation) of places that became penal.  To me, that says the base routing was actually excellent, extreme but excellent, but needed to be dialed in.  

A good friend just told me that many confuse architectural greatness with fun.  Me?  I'll take fun every time.  

What changed in the case study?  The answer is Dismal is fun.

[Shane Wright]

I don't mind following another Dismal or Ballyneal discussion about the architecture, business model, and/or "tipping" points as Richard mentioned.  I think this information is critical.  I hope the discussion can continue in a constructive way with emotions somewhat under control.  I think there can be a bright future for golf course design/architecture/construction and a lot of the information gained from these discussions will only contribute to that success.  

I've heard people say for the last couple of decades (I'm only 35) that owning and building a golf course is a business death march.  Yes it is extremely difficult, but obviously it can be done.  And it is people willing to share information from inside the trenches that will educate future generations of golf course builders/developers/architects.  

Some on this site will get opportunities in the future (although they may not necessarily be seeking it out now) and gaining as much knowledge here and other places can only help with these limiited opportunities in the future.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Please Chris, Please go point by point the changes at DR Jack that take it from being an average course in a great area to a very good to great corse in a great area. Mountain Lake is a fun course with great architecture. It is the most fun I ever have playing golf to the extent the course itself provides the pleasure. If you or others did things to make it mor efun that is worthy of note too. Please give us the case study.

[Howard Riefs]

I need to get more cynical.  I can’t see Jim’s intent starting this thread as being anything but genuine interest in learning more about DR’s transformation.  I welcome the continued dialogue as we proceed toward that stated goal.

[Jim Colton]

Howard,

  To summarize, I think we have:

- Shift in focus from extreme and tough to extreme but fun
- Maintenance issues resolved and dialed in
- Softening of extremes on many greens, made suitable for target green speeds
- Major changes to 13 & 18 - both new greens. Widening of effective playing areas - 9 and others (?)
- New tee boxes in many places (?)
- CJ and others focusing on fun experience


Back to more questions:

- I think I read that 36 holes or more were staked out before final routing was decided on. Is there a constellation map similar to SH showing different options or some earlier iterations of the routing? I'd love to know more about how they got to the final routing (maybe that's just me).

[Jud_T]

I can't really see the upside in any BN vs. DR grudgematch, and I like gossip and a good fight as well or better than the next guy.  Seems to me that 1+1=3 in this instance;  i.e. nothing could be better to make the Sand Hills region a more attractive destination than to have great clubs at Sand Hills, DR, BN, the Prarie Club, Wild Horse and a few others to be named later.  On the margin, this is where incremental member and guest play will come from IMO.  Since it's not a hop, skip and a jump for most of us to get there, the more good to great clubs/courses there are the more folks who are likely to make the pilgrimage and spread the word.  The folks at Kingsley aren't bummed that Crystal Downs is nearby.  It makes Kingsley a more attractive trip.  

[Emile Bonfiglio]

A good friend just told me that many confuse architectural greatness with fun.  Me?  I'll take fun every time.  

What changed in the case study?  The answer is Dismal is fun.

Under Jim's Avatar it reads ""Spread the word. Golf is meant to be fun." I'd like to know how DR made a shift of thinking to focus on the fun aspect of golf. I'm all for defining your brand and sticking with it but I love to see monumental shifts as well (JC Penny transformation into JCP). I think that courses not built on superior land (no reference to DR) can apply the "fun" model to make their course more attractive in certain situations.

[Brandon Urban]

I have followed this website for more than seven years (just recently joined) and my view about DR has completely changed.

Early on in I felt the same way Jim did... heard  many negative reviews and probably wouldn't have spent one of my few hall passes to make the trip there.
But my viewpoint has slowly changed. I saw more pictures, heard more stories and member testimonies. I heard the course was more playable, more "fun".
I looked at pictures of changed holes and became more and more interested. Then I saw a picture of the fifth hole for the first time and was hooked... what the hell was I thinking not wanting to visit this beautiful place?
I will be making the trek this summer for the 5th Major and can't think of a better way to experience DR for the first time.
Looking back I guess my views have been affected by other's opinions, marketing and the golf course itself all equally. With all that said, I have gone from not wanting to even drive by to being pretty damn excited to see the place.

[Terry Lavin]

Brandon,

Nice to see you posting.  As your attorney, I advise you to change your last name to "Dunes" and you'll be our new hero!

[Tim Martin]

Brandon,

Nice to see you posting.  As your attorney, I advise you to change your last name to "Dunes" and you'll be our new hero!

Stay hot Judge

[Scott Warren]

If this thread has achieved nothing else, it appears to be identifying those who actually want to discuss golf architecture and those who merely want to embrace and discuss the superficial (and, bizarrely, those who like to make cancer and abortion jokes...).

Given the tone of his posts in this thread, I can't understand those getting narky about Jim raising this topic. Chris's replies have been illuminating and educational.

I did post a couple of questions on the first page that I'd love to hear the answers to at some stage.

[John Kavanaugh]

You guys don't get it. The architecture was always great. The critics were wrong.  Proving them so has been one of the great joys in my life.

[JC Jones]

I was wrong.

[David Kelly]

You guys don't get it. The architecture was always great. The critics were wrong. 

And the rebuilding of more than 10 greens, the completely new greensites and the renovations of a number of holes by the owners is somehow proof of this?

[Mark Saltzman]

  Now, can somebody tell me what's going on with the 6th hole?!!

Jim,

It is my understanding (could be wrong) that the 6th originally played longer than it does now.  There is a way back tee that I think has been eliminated.  All other tees have been moved up a tee box or two.  

Original intent was to have the lower fairway (now unused) as the option for those that did not want to take on the long carry to reach the upper fairway.  Upper fairway leaves an interesting, but not so difficult pitch to a bowl green surrounded by dunes.

The approach from the lower fairway would have been blind, very uphill and extremely difficult.

Into the wind, I would think few could make the carry to the upper fairway and the forced lay-up/difficult blind approach combo would be hated by most.

Good example of a positive change.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()