The fact of the matter is, these threads, when so many of us have a personal connection to not only the people who run them, but the places themselves, can become toxic. The Dismal/Ballyneal thread a while back is a good example of this.
This is a site about golf course architecture, and we should be willingly able, and respectful, debating the architectural merits, also understanding that they do not encompass the entire golfing experience (something which I touched on at this years 5th Major one of the nights by the fire).
So, my feeling is that while Dismal Doak is a wonderfully good golf course, and a club that I would love to be a member at in the future, the most minute details put it just a step below Sand Hills. The Doak course is filled with terrific golf holes, and I think there are world class holes to be found at the 4th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 13th, 16th, and 18th holes. But the 15th and 17th feel slightly awkward to me (although still fun to play) and the 18th finishing away from the 1st, a minute problem that I don't necessarily think should have been handled differently, is a slight disadvantage.
But then there are the things that Sand Hills does which makes it extroardinary. The way it mixes the sizes of its various greens, providing great variety while still feeling like you're on the same golf course, is remarkable. The land is a bit less dramatic, which means it lacks some of the backdrops which Dismal excels at, but makes it more suitable for golf. It's bunkers are wonderfully mixed, ranging from the deceptive to the dominant, often scaring you to death, sometimes scratching your head as to how you could fear a bunker which leaves so much room. It's not necessarily that Dismal doesn't accomplish these feats, but more that Sand Hills does it so often. Everything fits into the land so magically that I still struggle to figure out which holes were the finest and which were the weakest.
And I'll be very blunt about my potential prejudices: I played the best round of my life at Sand Hills, and ever since I got into architecture, it has always been a mythical place that I had only dreamed of playing. Getting the chance to walk out on the first tee last week is something I'll never forget, and for these reasons, I may struggle to reasonably evaluate the golf course. But I've spent much of this previous week trying to separate my emotional attachments from the architectural merits of each course. What I will add and say is that the last week, both the 5th Major and my rounds after leaving Dismal River, have been some of the most fun rounds of golf in my life, and I've been so lucky to share them with incredible people, some who post here and some who have tagged along. We're fooling ourselves if we think one is significantly better than the other, as golf architecture is much better off because both exist, I'd care little about which of the two courses I'd be playing if it guaranteed I got to play them with all of the terrific people I hung out with last weekend.