Jonathan:

You need to see other TF courses -- for starters -- try Glenwild in Park City, UT and Karsten Creek in OK. Both are superb golf courses and the sites are indeed unique.

First, I don't believe we have anything near concensus on what constitutes the ideal site.  Second, Fazio couldn't get a gimme if he was 6" below the hole from many on this site.

I would argue that large elevations changes are detrimental to a site.  Ditto for soils other than sandy loam, or just plain sand (which can pose other problems).  The presence of rock, wetlands, and specimen trees further compound the problem.  Add strong winds and heavy rainfall to the list.

The Preserve has a bit of all these "problems" to various degrees, and I commend the design team of Sandy Tatum, Mike Poellot, and Fazio for coming up with a challenging, yet playable, and walkable golf course.  The site and surrounds are indeed visually breathtaking, no doubt adding substantially to what one experiences while playing golf.

As to the best natural site made available to Fazio, The Vaquero Club just west of DFW Airport comes to mind.  It was the top ranked course in Texas by the Dallas Morning News, a bit higher than my own estimation.  Gently rolling with some nice, but unabrupt elevation changes, the site is beautiful in its own way, and Fazio did not have to force any part of the course onto the ground.  It is also appears to be the new club of choice by the many touring professionals based in the Dallas area.

I believe that Dallas National is the best course in Texas by at least one full notch.  I am not convinced that Vaquero is #2.  Golfweek's ranking of DNGC last two years in the Modern top 20 is in line with my estimation.

As to a non-compete clause, Fazio worked on DNGC largely on the come for a couple of years until the project came into fruition.  The developer was not ultra-rich and in a position to make many demands from Fazio.  

Besides, Fazio also has a resort course at Stonebriar just north of Dallas, and is building another very high-end private club in Marble Falls.  Like sometimes building gas stations on all four corners, both properties (Vaquero and DN) have been very successful and likely benefit from the competition.  Also, they are two different courses serving alternative markets.

Jim:

Glenwild is set on rolling pasture land -- albeit at a high elevation in the Park City, UT area. It is far from the "built-in" advantages that TF usually gets with a prospective layout for golf.

At Glenwild, Fazio used the land with a very unique routing that maxes out all the elements that were there. There is very little of the eye-candy aspects that many people quite correctly label as being non-essential strategic considerations.

Frankly, when I hear people compliment Shadow Creek I have to shake my head because that site was completely workable by man to be anything you could conceive. Clearly, money had to be used but sites like Glenwild have plenty of obstacles -- incorporating a solid routing at high elevation is no small feat. Put the course somewhere else where the attention is greater and Glenwild would easily make the top 100 courses in the USA.

I'm also a fan of Karsten Creek -- for many of the same reasons. The site on first observation is nothing to sing praises about. However, TF and his crew fashioned a no-nonsense layout that never suffers fools or becomes the least bit predictable and boring -- often tell tale signs with many of TF designs.

No doubt the overall batting average for TF is nowhere near as high as others that are favored here on GCA by a number of people. The two courses I just mentioned -- have unique locations -- but are taken to the next level by a tour de force combination of holes and the pacing is well done to always keep the player off-balance.

Both are clearly "must play" layouts when in UT and OK IMHO.

Mike:

You raise a valid point of concern. I played the course before the housing development intensified. Let me point out that many of the trees you reference -- are really far away from the existing corridors of the holes. In some cases they are considerably off to the side and have no real intrusion into the day's play. Whether there are "thousands" as you suggest is really stretching the point.

The issue with Glenwild is that many people think that mountain golf cannot be great golf because of the advantages of elevation. That's far from the case here and I have played my share of high altitude golf. The final five holes at Glenwild are right at the top of any TF course I have ever played. You need to be completely aware of ball placement and the greens are integrated well with the approaches you play. This is far from the cookie-cutter approach one often finds with TF layouts. Depth -- not beauty is the hallmark at Glenwild.

Mike -- with all due respect -- it's really being UNFAIR to the max to throw into the pot a deep left field snide comment about the course being akin to a 2nd year muni.

You need to play the course because too many people here on GCA are quick to "spin" what they "believe" pictures show.
Then courses are "tagged" and it becomes a major battle to remove the "tag" that's been applied.

Glenwild is one of the 2-3 best TF courses I have played -- it far surpasses the 14 other layouts that Digest rated among the top 100.

Unfortunately, the development of UT golf is only beginning to make headway because people still believe there is a major gap from the time you leave Denver and arrive in the Bay Area.

Ignorance is clearly there because I have seen a nmber of instances that disproves it. Glenwild is a winner in my book.

TMac,

The site at Vaquero cannot compare to that at Bandon or Sand Hills.  I haven't had the opportunity to visit Friar's Head.

The Vaquero site and the club is indeed very pleasant, and way above averge.  Special?  I guess that it all depends on what you are used to.  It is more in the mode of The Golf Club as Dallas National is to Muirfield Village.  And I do prefer both MV and DN to TGC and Vaquero.

Also, I believe that both DN and MV were more difficult (and expensive) to design, engineer, and construct than the other two.  Drama via large elevation changes, specimen trees, oceans and natural water features are important, valuable site attributes, but without $$$$$, it is difficult to route and build a great course on such a site.

Matt,

Thanks for your thoughts.

If Glenwild is as good as Galloway, I'm sure I'd enjoy it.  I'd just hate to see them ruin the spacious, scenic "high desert" million-mile views with plantings of evergreens all over the place.  Those things get tall quick!

I always liked playing golf in Utah anyway and hope to get out there to see for myself.

Flame suit on . . .

Pine Hill is about 2 miles from Pine Valley . . .

If we are talking purely about "sites", I would think that Pine Hill has to be mentioned.

I can tell you all about some of the course's shortcomings . . .
but the site certainly is not one of them.

-Ted

Mike:

One of the issues I have with "armchair QB's" is the rush to "tag" either a golf course or architect or portion of the USA. Once the "tag" is applied it then goes from that point on. It's no different than former presidents, governors, etc, etc. The "tag" stays in place.

The only way to get a clean and true "picture" (no pun intended) is to actually go to the site in question and play it.

One of the "virtues" of electonic communication is the speed. But, that can be a major drawback because of so-called "instant analysis."

Glenwild is a superb course designed by TF IMHO. Unfortunately, for some people the mere mention of the name TF means certain conclusions on his work. Unfortunately, I don't "tag" architects because each course is a completely new and a different project.

Mike -- the rush to judgement about Glenwild being some kind of "parkland course" is really getting ahead of ourselves and at worst nothing more than bleacher seat commentary. I"ve already said that from what was told to me the bulk of the trees will be nothing more than hole separations far from the actual playing dynamics originally envisioned. You will not see "bowling alley" type holes with tree density comparable to what one sees at such places like Sahalee in the Pacific Northwest. The playing angles provided are there and the course's original intent should continue.

When I return to the course I can ask again and see what has happened since my first visit.

Mike -- I don't know what I am "misinterpreting" -- you looked at a picture of Glenwild and opined about trees and their impact on the course. I think it might be wise to trust the judgement of those who have played the course(s) in question. Pictures serve a purpose -- but they cause reactions that are at best speculative and at worst "tagging" that precludes a clearer assessment that can come only from playing a layout and returning some time thereafter and seeing if any real significicant changes -- pro or con -- have occurred.

Does that work ?