Non-binding Referendum - Form of the New Confidential Guide

[Ted Sturges]

I too have them both.  I would vote for one book, no pictures, but include the lower rated courses as well.  Some of those write ups were priceless!  I also loved your "best lists" from the 2nd book.  Hope you can fit more of that into the book as well.

TS

[Shaun Feidt]

I think the ability to purchase either option C and or option E would meet everyone's needs.  But if I had to choice one, it would be E because of the vast amount of informaiton that could be at your fingertips.

[Andy Stamm]

First Choice: C

Second Choice: D

[rjsimper]

A or C, with a companion E that has ALL courses you've done. Access to E could be included with the purchase of A/C or additional.

I like large books.

Ryan Simper, the Sir Mix-a-Lot of gca?

I can not lie.

[William_G]

I like E, but combined with a book.

Wizard Pubilactions have had the best guidebooks for each of the Islands in Hawaii for a long time, eg Hawaii Revealed

Each book was published, then updated via a new edition. Susequently they had a code put in the books for online updates prior to the new edition, as publishing can be time consuming

Now all the pertinent info is online and constantly updated while the books are stilll available for all the standard info etc..

thanks

[Clyde Johnson]

Tom:

As always, I guess it depends on what you are trying to achieve:

If you are trying to reach beyond the stereotypical golf course aficionados, of which makes up a very small minority of the golfing population, then some version of E. I think the great potential of such a project would be in reaching out to those with only very little interest in architecture, to let the typical golfer know more about what the game and it's courses should be about. Perhaps this includes some of your other writings, drawings and pictures alongside the course reviews? I imagine the practicalities of such an adventure are far from straightforward, and am not sure how much impact something like this would have, but at least you would be offering it out to the mainstream.

[Of course, a limited/luxury/signed hardcopy to accompany an interactive version would be presented to all interns/associates as a requirement! ]

[Michael Dugger]

My vote is option Z

Continue to edit and shrink it down to a size that can be printed in one edition with pictures.  The pictures are essential.

I suggest this option because it is primarily we GCA.com types that are going to be into the book.

And we are far more interested in your discerning, hair splitting reviews of upper tier courses than we are you pointing out that such and such goat track is a Doak 2.

You could cover every course that's a 0-4 in two or three pages.  Say you saw it, forgot it...yup, it's a golf course but nothing worth talking about.

And use your space focusing on the Doak rating 6 - 10's

Something similar in size as the 2nd edition of the CG, and I would be totally fine with a font size smaller, pack in more info.

That's my two bits.  I guess I see this opposite as many others.  This is a book for discerning types, and the gca.com crew doesn't care much for Doak 3s.

[Michael Essig]

I will start by saying I am not going to carry it with me, no matter what size it is; so I think that automatically eliminates the motivation for D.  The reason is that I always do my research and make reservations prior to my trip, so there is no need to carry it with me.

Secondly, I would prefer photos, so B would also be out for me.

A would be nice, but this is a Guide, not a coffee table book, so A would not be my first choice.

That leaves C and E.  I would think, as many have stated, that taking the content that you produce for either C or E would not involve a significant amount of more work to adapt it for the alternative medium.

Lastly, about what to include.  Like wedding invitations, you have to cut it off somewhere.  As a result, sometimes the 2nd cousin doesn't get the invite.

Can't wait to purchase a copy, no matter what form it takes.

[Jud_T]

To be clear,  I think many of us are not saying that we want to see a write-up of every Doak 3.  However reviews of well known, otherwise well regarded courses that aren't up to snuff are essential IMO.  Otherwise if a course isn't rated we won't know if it's because it didn't make the grade or you just haven't gotten around to seeing it recently.  Furthermore, as mentioned above, one can learn as much about GCA and one's own preferences/preconceptions by what went wrong at course X as by what went right at course Y.  Obviously this puts you in a bit more of a delicate position as you're in a significantly different spot in your career and the public's eye than you were when the original came out.  But that's why they give you such massive book advances!  

[Wayne Wiggins, Jr.]

I think (E) would be the best.  With technology today, everyone has anything they want in the palm of their hands.  The book version is nice but who wants to lug around a 30lb book when they go on a golf trip.  How nice would it be on your next golf trip to just bring your laptop or Ipad, and pull up the new Confindental Guide on a bright colorful screen and see some nice pictures to go along with a review.  Like others have said it would probably be more afforadable also.

I agree with this... an app is better than a CD (do they even make them anymore?).  I'm a fan of some of the travel/food shows on TV (e.g. Diners, Drive-Ins, and Dives), and many of them also have an app to supplement the TV show so as you're traveling to these towns you can figure out where to eat based on this show. (e.g. DDD's is called Flavortown)

But also think a nice, 4Color book like the 1996 edition would be great too. 

So, i vote A & E.

[John McCarthy]

A and E.  

With tablets like the iPad the "book" as we know it is going away.  An ebook, update-able periodically seems like the future.  

That said it would be a staggering process to get pictures and video from so many courses.  I don't have to do the work so I guess it is easy for me to say.  

I think the A should be for the gourmet's choice.  A coffee table book.    

[Ian Andrew]

B - if it keeps all content
(A - if content remains - weight not an issue )
Don't need pictures
Won't buy digital format.

[Ulrich Mayring]

Tom,

here are a few questions to ask yourself:

1) Are you willing to put an honest effort into updating it after the initial publication?
2) Are you ready to bring other people in to help?
3) Will you ultimately want to turn the project over to a successor?

The answers to these questions will determine whether option e) makes sense. It clearly is the option with the most potential, but it also requires the most work - initially as well as on-going. It is also the easiest to screw up. But, with modern self-publishing technologies, you can produce any kind of book from it and make everyone happy.

If your time allows for only a half-assed electronic version, then I would prefer a book. Option c) is my choice then.

Ulrich

[Chris Shaida]

E

Either as an app (both ios and android) - quite possible that you'd get a lot of people to pay 4.99 for an app who'd never consider buying a $30 book.

or as an ebook through amazon etc

That would not preclude a lavish coffee table edition later (a la the release of vinyl in addition to digital music -- two different sets of buyers)

[ChipRoyce]

B
While there were some great pics in the Sleeping Bear version, I enjoyed the simplicity of the red bound version.

Regional editions would be too much to deal with and I don't think we need another website / subscription service. I'd expect many courses to protest the message board postings that would develop.

[Anthony Butler]

Tom,

Once you re-publish the book (in whatever form you choose) you can tweet links to new course reviews and drive a lot of traffic to the Renaissance site should you so choose.

Chris Shaida's idea for the app is a good one.. it's easier than you think, btw.... Once you figure out an interface you can put it out onto the mobile cloud for someone to build it for less than $10K. We do this for clients at IBM-large and small

PM if you're interested in pursuing that angle, I can point you in the right direction.

[James Boon]

Tom,

I would imagine that whatever format the project takes, there's one thousand and something people on here who will be interested in a copy no matter what  So its all about what you want it to be!

But in the interest of the the thread, I'd vote B or C. A would miss too much, D would potentially be spread too thin to purchase them all, and as for E, while I fully embrace technology, social media and the like, you can't beat a good book! Hay-on-Wye is a Kindle Free Zone afterall 

Cheers,

James

[Joel_Stewart]

Perhaps an international and North American edition would be a good idea?

[Peter Pallotta]

Tom, Ian -

Ian and I agree on "B", but whereas Ian makes it a condition that all courses be included, I think courses that score less than a 5 shouldn't be, and not just to save space but on principle too. It's interesting: if you don't include them, there may be some who'll conclude that you haven't done so because, unlike the TD of 25 years ago, you now have much more to lose and so aren't as brash or opinionated as you once were.  (I don't believe that's the rationale, because you've already mentioned the reason in your first post). But setting that aside, I think it's a legitimate question to ask: why would I or any other casual/average golfer want to have your assessments of courses we shouldn't play? The 5-10 range is more than wide enough, and includes so many quality and very good and excellent and best of courses, that if anyone is interested (along with your insights and analysis) in such things as rankings, there are already hundreds of examples/courses to choose from and compare. After reading all those, and at this point in the history of gca, it seems to me unnecessary, indulgent and maybe even a little mean to include courses that fail to meet the mark and that just aren't very good. What can that sort of list tell us, in a meaningful sense, i.e. what can any golfer actually learn from a compendium of bad courses? I guess we can learn to avoid them -- but if the book includes as many good courses as I imagine it will, there isn't a golfer alive who'll have any time to avoid the bad courses because he/she can spend a lifetime just playing the good ones. If the book is meant to be in part a a resource and guide and standard reference on golf course architecture (its theory and practice and best examples), how does including courses in the 1-4 range support/bolster its efficacy?

Anyway, just thought it interesting, i.e. I can see why professionals and architects like Ian would want the most complete list possible; but I can't come to the same sense for the average reader and golfer.

Peter

[Matt MacIver]

This thread officially qualifies as the most participated thread in GCA history.  (Almost) all 1500 have chimed in and goodness knows the amount of back channeling. A & C for me pls with a limited edition signed run with color photos for a princely sum - might as well get another collectible out this for all this fuss. Good luck Tom and have fun with it.

[Tom_Doak]

This thread officially qualifies as the most participated thread in GCA history.  (Almost) all 1500 have chimed in and goodness knows the amount of back channeling. A & C for me pls with a limited edition signed run with color photos for a princely sum - might as well get another collectible out this for all this fuss. Good luck Tom and have fun with it.

Matt:  I agree, and thanks to everyone for chiming in.

I'm still thinking about it, but I am leaning toward going with option C or maybe D -- a series of three or perhaps even five books to cover the world.  It is too big for just one book -- even if there were no pictures -- and if split up appropriately there will be plenty of room for anything I want to put in there.  Also, by spacing out the release, it will enable me to start publication sooner, while giving me more time to travel and explore the regions where I haven't seen as much [Europe and Asia] before including them in later editions.

It also allows people to buy what they want.  Lots of people will be interested in a book on the courses of Britain and Ireland, because most of them are accessible, so that should sell everywhere.  People in Britain may be less interested in reading my views of courses in the USA and Asia and Australia ... unless they find that they enjoy the topic based on the book about their home area.  Certainly some people will want the full set.

I will probably eventually figure out a way to do an electronic version, too, but that might take some time, as I'm far from expert on how it can be done -- although I've had a couple of offers for help already, which I appreciate.  My main concern is that I barely even find time to update my web site, so I think it will be hard to keep updating the Confidential Guide for someone who's expecting a lot of new material.  I just don't play as much golf anymore as some of you imagine!  On the other hand, there will still be loads of interesting courses that I have yet to see, and if I'm smart about it I bet I can figure out a way to incorporate recommendations of further courses from friends and trusted sources, so that it really is the best place to find out where you should try and play, anywhere you're going in the world.

[Tim_Weiman]

Tom,

 As others have said, don't assume you would have to frequently update an electronic version.

[Bill Shotzbarger]

c

[Bart Bradley]

This thread officially qualifies as the most participated thread in GCA history.  (Almost) all 1500 have chimed in and goodness knows the amount of back channeling. A & C for me pls with a limited edition signed run with color photos for a princely sum - might as well get another collectible out this for all this fuss. Good luck Tom and have fun with it.

Matt:  I agree, and thanks to everyone for chiming in.

I'm still thinking about it, but I am leaning toward going with option C or maybe D -- a series of three or perhaps even five books to cover the world.  It is too big for just one book -- even if there were no pictures -- and if split up appropriately there will be plenty of room for anything I want to put in there.  Also, by spacing out the release, it will enable me to start publication sooner, while giving me more time to travel and explore the regions where I haven't seen as much [Europe and Asia] before including them in later editions.

It also allows people to buy what they want.  Lots of people will be interested in a book on the courses of Britain and Ireland, because most of them are accessible, so that should sell everywhere.  People in Britain may be less interested in reading my views of courses in the USA and Asia and Australia ... unless they find that they enjoy the topic based on the book about their home area.  Certainly some people will want the full set.

I will probably eventually figure out a way to do an electronic version, too, but that might take some time, as I'm far from expert on how it can be done -- although I've had a couple of offers for help already, which I appreciate.  My main concern is that I barely even find time to update my web site, so I think it will be hard to keep updating the Confidential Guide for someone who's expecting a lot of new material.  I just don't play as much golf anymore as some of you imagine!  On the other hand, there will still be loads of interesting courses that I have yet to see, and if I'm smart about it I bet I can figure out a way to incorporate recommendations of further courses from friends and trusted sources, so that it really is the best place to find out where you should try and play, anywhere you're going in the world.

Tom:

That is great.  And the truth is that the volume(s) for the US courses probably won't need any updating anytime soon .  If you do it in volumes, you could more easily update the Asia/rest of the world type volume in the future because that's where most of the new courses will be.

Bart

[Ally Mcintosh]

Tom, Ian -

Ian and I agree on "B", but whereas Ian makes it a condition that all courses be included, I think courses that score less than a 5 shouldn't be, and not just to save space but on principle too. It's interesting: if you don't include them, there may be some who'll conclude that you haven't done so because, unlike the TD of 25 years ago, you now have much more to lose and so aren't as brash or opinionated as you once were.  (I don't believe that's the rationale, because you've already mentioned the reason in your first post). But setting that aside, I think it's a legitimate question to ask: why would I or any other casual/average golfer want to have your assessments of courses we shouldn't play? The 5-10 range is more than wide enough, and includes so many quality and very good and excellent and best of courses, that if anyone is interested (along with your insights and analysis) in such things as rankings, there are already hundreds of examples/courses to choose from and compare.

Peter, it's rare that I find myself disagreeing with you but you need to know what Tom rates between 0 & 4 exactly because many / most other people in the golf industry hold many of these courses up as examples of excellence.

Now, if Tom had played and rated every single course in the world, you could conclude that anything not listed fell in to the 0-4 category. But because he hasn't, one will never know when looking for course advice for that invite they receive next week whether Doak rates it a dud or whether he just hasn't seen it.

Very, very few people play ALL their golf on Doak 5-10's.