Mark,
Unfortunately, all my golf architecture books are in storage, so I haven't had a look at the Confidental Guide in a while. But, one thing that stands out about the book is Tom's writing. Unlike so many writers who try to describe a course by describing every hole, Tom doesn't do this. Instead, Tom excels at summing up what stands out, what is significant about a course. The style is quite refreshing, really.
Truthfully, I was skeptical about the book at first for the reason Tom mentions in his introduction: should an aspiring young architect really write such a book? Is that how he should make his name? I thought not.
But, then, I put that concern aside and just read the book for what it was: a guide to help you sort out good from bad and, most importantly, which courses are worth going out of one's way to see.
Ironically, it was Tom's writing about a course quite near where I grew up that convinced me of the merits of the Guide. For all it's history, I was never thrilled with Winged Foot. But, then the Guide set me straight. WF isn't blessed with a great piece of property. The greatness is all the architecture, the greens, bunkers, etc. the Guide helped me sort that out and appreciate WF better for what it is. So, when I finally made to Melbourne, I may have come away more impressed with Kingston Heath than Royal Melbourne. Well, maybe!
One other obvious point about the Guide: you don't have to read it from start to finish. It is great to just leave sitting nearby and read about a course or two every few days.