Tom; in response to your question, I was quite familiar with the history and I couldn't stomach the consistent inaccuracies intended to enhance a story that needed no enhancement. If the author had suggested that he was trying to understand Ouimet's motivations or given some other basis for his inventions I might have been able to overcome some of my objections. But he didn't. Moreover I wasn't all that impressed with the writing and before I put it down, I thought the dramatic license was pretty obvious and didn't add to the story. In short I thought the book was inaccurate, the writing pedestrian, and the plot devices less compelling than the reality that was ignored. Beyond that, I liked it a lot.