For anyone interested in purchasing a copy, please see Ian Andrew's blog entry for this past Wednesday.

On a related note:

Anyone have any updates on the Sebonack book?

On a semi-related note:

Any update on when we might (if we might) see Ran do a Sebonack course profile?  

I have a SB copy that I bought when it first came out and have used it many times over the years.  

The thing about "The Guide" is that it is a snapshot in time and has become dated.  It reflects Tom's assessments when he was traveling like mad, seeing everything in the 1980s.  The courses reviewed are now 20 years old or older.  You can get good information from The Guide on courses pre 1980s.  But with all that has been built over the past two decades a "next edition" is needed.  Tom's wonderful and often quirky lists in the back would now need a complete overhaul.

Tom will never be able to update CG because he just doesn't see lots of courses like he once did.  The job is left for someone else.  Might make an interesting project for the right person - maybe collaborating with Doak?

JC  

Tom will never be able to update CG because he just doesn't see lots of courses like he once did.  The job is left for someone else.  Might make an interesting project for the right person - maybe collaborating with Doak?

It would probably work better as a web site today, where the opinion of the choosen expert is presented together with fresh reviews of the featured courses from the users of the site.  

Andrew,
   Check back in a week when Tom Huckaby gets back from his swim workout, I mean golf trip to Bandon. Tom has it stored for when these questions arise. It is a useful frame of reference.

Okay Dokay Tom,

Take Golf Mag, Gold Digest and Golfweek's combined top 100 lists.  (Probably 300-350 courses??) How many of those are not profiled in CG?  100?  150?  200?  Of those, how many have you seen and if inclined could write updates on?  Most?  Half?  A quarter?

But it's not the "important" courses that matter so, it's the little gems, especially in Ireland and Scotland that you exposed 20 years ago.  Those 5s 6s and 7s in CD (Portsalon, Cruden, Machrihanish, Nairn, Louth) more piqued my interest because back then, I had never heard of them.

JC

Peter:

I think that's a great idea, which is why I did it in The Confidential Guide ... every Doak scale rating is followed by the month and year I last saw the course.

Jonathan:

I don't know how many of the combined top 100 list courses I haven't seen, but I'd guess that there are less than 100 I haven't seen.  Unfortunately I don't have any of the lists handy this weekend to fact check myself.

I did go back and look at the index to my top secret update, and found that I have seen 220 courses since the book was published ... including 14 by Nicklaus, 14 by Fazio, 10 by Ross, 9 by Coore and Crenshaw, 8 by MacKenzie, and 5 by Mike Strantz.  The most surprising number was 20 by yours truly; I had forgotten just how far back even the last edition of the book dates.  However, I am sure that there are many architects who would feel slighted that I haven't seen more of their best work, and probably some others who would be glad that I hadn't seen theirs.  

Paul:

The updated version won't get published until I'm dead, and hopefully that's later instead of sooner.

If you guys are searching for the book simply to thumb through it, I would suggest checking large libraries.  While I was out in DC last year, I went and read through a copy at the Library of Congress.  From what I remember, they have two copies of the book, the first edition that was recalled, and the second printing.

Now if your not near DC, I would simply check out a large college library or the likes, you'd be suprised at the types of books you'll find.

I think people forget that this book had a strong backlash, and that a new release of the book would open up some old wounds. Ask yourself - why would Tom go through that NOW? - it strikes me as counterproductive for him.

Tom:
Did you have to read Adrienne Rich in university too?

As you can deduce, I don't have a copy of the Guide. I think it remains a good idea to date the reviews, and that it would work even better in a new printing of the last edition, i.e. it would say both "this is what I thought, in 1983" and "this is what the course was like, in 1983" - thus helping golfers who are seeing a course that's been altered better judge the changes.

Peter  

Perhaps someone can explain how the Doak scale works for the uninitiated.

"0-A course so contrived and unnatural that it may poison your mind, which I cannot recommend under any circumstances. Reserved for courses that wasted ridiculous sums of money in their construction, and probably shouldn’t have been built in the first place.

1-A very basic golf course, with clear architectural malpractice and/or poor maintenance. Avoid even if you're desperate for a game.

2-A mediocre golf course with little or no architectural interest, but nothing really horrible. As my friend Dave Richards summed one up: “Play it in a scramble, and drink a lot of beer”.

3-About the level of the average golf course in the world. (Since I don’t go out of my way to see average courses, my scale is deliberately skewed to split hairs among the good, the better, and the best).

4-A modestly interesting course, with a couple of distinctive holes among the 18, or at least some scenic interest and decent golf. Also reserved for some very good courses that are much too short and narrow to provide sufficient challenge for accomplished players.

5-Well above the average golf course, but the middle of my scale. A good course to choose if you’re in the vicinity and looking for a game, but don’t spend another day away from home just to see it, unless your home is Alaska.

6-A very good course, definitely worth a game if you’re in town, but not necessarily worth a special trip to see. It shouldn’t disappoint you.

7-An excellent course, worth checking out if you get anywhere within 100 miles. You can expect to find soundly designed, interesting holes, good course conditioning, and a pretty setting, if not necessarily anything unique to the world of golf.

8-One of the very best courses in its region (although there are more 8’s in some places, and none in others), and worth a special trip to see. Could have some drawbacks, but these will clearly be spelled out, and it will make up for them with something really special in addition to the generally excellent layout.

9-An outstanding course – certainly one of the best in the world – with no weaknesses in regard to condition, length, or poor holes. You should see this course sometime in your life.

10-Nearly perfect; if you skipped even one hole, you would miss something worth seeing. If you haven’t seen all the courses in this category, you don’t know how good golf architecture can get. Drop the book and call your travel agent – immediately."

                                                                    Tom Doak

Interestingly enough, a quick search of two big city library catalogs for books authored by Mr. Doak showed one copy of Anatomy of a Golf Course in Chicago and a copy of the Alister MacKenzie book in Boston.

I'm in Boston at school, you gentlemen think it's worth a trip down to Copley Square to read the MacKenzie book? I've never read or seen it, and you are not allowed to check it out.

Pat