Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
i havent read that book or even seen it, but the exact pharse "illusion of action" was coined by dave when writing our book that hasnt made it to print. i find it very troubling that he uses it simlarly to our use and was privy to the part of the manuscript that few have seen.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
hasn't made it to print yet

[/ QUOTE ] .. Does this mean there is still a chance it might be published?

RZ

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
i havent read that book or even seen it, but the exact pharse "illusion of action" was coined by dave when writing our book that hasnt made it to print. i find it very troubling that he uses it simlarly to our use and was privy to the part of the manuscript that few have seen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ray,

I can assure you--from personal experience--that Barry has been using the phrase "Illusion of Action" with his students for years.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Apparently Ray had the illusion of intellectual property theft.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
i havent read that book or even seen it, but the exact pharse "illusion of action" was coined by dave when writing our book that hasnt made it to print.

[/ QUOTE ]

In that case, expect a quick change of mind by Mason. His book review will now reverse to saying that Illusion of Action is correct, but it is a 2+2 Publishing idea.

Remember, there are only 2 types of ideas that are published in non-2+2 books.

1) Those that have not appeared in 2+2 books, and are therefore incorrect
2) Those that are correct, and therefore must be plagiarized from 2+2

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i havent read that book or even seen it, but the exact pharse "illusion of action" was coined by dave when writing our book that hasnt made it to print.

[/ QUOTE ]

In that case, expect a quick change of mind by Mason. His book review will now reverse to saying that Illusion of Action is correct, but it is a 2+2 Publishing idea.

Remember, there are only 2 types of ideas that are published in non-2+2 books.

1) Those that have not appeared in 2+2 books, and are therefore incorrect
2) Those that are correct, and therefore must be plagiarized from 2+2

[/ QUOTE ]

IMHO you just crossed the gray line. That goes too far.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

not to mention that Mason isn't even publishing Ray's book apparently.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
i havent read that book or even seen it, but the exact pharse "illusion of action" was coined by dave when writing our book that hasnt made it to print. i find it very troubling that he uses it simlarly to our use and was privy to the part of the manuscript that few have seen.

[/ QUOTE ]

A quick Google shows that Mason uses the term in "Poker Essays, Volume II" (1996), and the phrase appears in other internet poker discussions at least as far back as the late 1990's (including an archived 2+2 post by Sklansky in 1998).

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Hi Jack:

Poker Essays was first published in 1991 and the term was in that edition. Here's the quote from the current edition from the essay "The Future of Poker."

[ QUOTE ]
Game No. 3: Limit hold ’em. At the middle limits, more limit hold ’em is played than any other game in the cardrooms of Nevada and California. I think the short-term luck factor in this game needs to be a little larger to make it ideal, but this game does contain an “illusion of action” like no other form of poker. Consequently, limit hold ’em may have the best future of all forms of poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, as usual, these terms have been around a long time. Also, the essays in Poker Essays were all from original columns in the early editions of Card Player. So this essay may have appeared in print as early as 1989.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
So, as usual, these terms have been around a long time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course, you used it in a completely different way.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Remember, there are only 2 types of ideas that are published in non-2+2 books.

1) Those that have not appeared in 2+2 books, and are therefore incorrect
2) Those that are correct, and therefore must be plagiarized from 2+2

[/ QUOTE ]

IMHO you just crossed the gray line. That goes too far.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I was exaggerating a little obviously. But the basic principle is there. It's clear from all the silly posturing Mason has done vis a vis book discussions over the past few years. He is so biased and immature at times that he really should recuse himself from reviewing any books at all. Any objective person who has read some of his posts in certain threads knows exactly what I'm talking about. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's unethical for him to review other books (it's his prerogative in a free country), but there are a lot of people who think he has nearly 0 credibility because of his lack of objectivity and maturity.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
not to mention that Mason isn't even publishing Ray's book apparently.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say he was publishing the book. I used the term 2+2 Publishing to mean the company. No it doesn't make much sense for him to "take credit" for an unpublished document, but plenty of things Mason says don't make much sense.

And as I mentioned, the term Mason wrote years ago is unrelated to its usage in Tanenbaum's book. But Mason spends lots of time poring over all of 2+2's writings to find and prove that all these ideas originated there. It goes way past normal copyright infringement problems. WAY past.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
But Mason spends lots of time poring over all of 2+2's writings to find and prove that all these ideas originated there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually someone else found it. I then did a quick search of the computer file that contains the manuscript and the term popped up so I posted it here. All of this took less than a minute.

Also, for everyone else, but not for you since my reviews (according to you) can't be trusted, I have now read about 80 pages of Tennebaum's book and so far it is pretty good. And one final thought, Barry Tannebaum handed me copies at his own initiative of the the two new books that he is associated with. I can't help but think that if he thought my reviews were biased in the manner that you characterize them this would not have happened.


MM

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

While it is true that Mason has given all 2+2 titles a good review (which only makes sense, he wouldn't have published them if he didn't like them) he has also given some non- 2+2 titles high marks, even in some cases where he and the author don't seem to get along. True most books don't get very good reviews but it is also true that most suck.

RZ

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
not to mention that Mason isn't even publishing Ray's book apparently.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say he was publishing the book. I used the term 2+2 Publishing to mean the company. No it doesn't make much sense for him to "take credit" for an unpublished document, but plenty of things Mason says don't make much sense.

And as I mentioned, the term Mason wrote years ago is unrelated to its usage in Tanenbaum's book. But Mason spends lots of time poring over all of 2+2's writings to find and prove that all these ideas originated there. It goes way past normal copyright infringement problems. WAY past.

[/ QUOTE ]

I stopped reading ATF so I guess I will miss all the drama in the "Free jeffnc" thread.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
While it is true that Mason has given all 2+2 titles a good review (which only makes sense, he wouldn't have published them if he didn't like them) he has also given some non- 2+2 titles high marks, even in some cases where he and the author don't seem to get along. True most books don't get very good reviews but it is also true that most suck.

RZ

[/ QUOTE ]

2+2 books are generally pretty good on the whole. Obviously some titles are better than others, but compared to some of the trash put out by other publishers (esp. Cardoza) 2+2 is pretty far ahead, so if MM has some things he doesn't like about certain publications, so be it. As pointed out he has had positive things to say about some non-2+2 titles, as do most of us who read a lot of poker lit.

As far as the "illusion of action" bit, yes it appeared in print a long time before Fromm's DVD or the Zee/Fromm project. I don't think it's that big a deal, it could well be something each thought up independently. I used run a website called "freakonomics.com" for our college's econonomics program, several years before there was a best-seller by the same name (we actually sold the domain to the authors before I knew about the book). It's also very unlikely the authors knew about us since we hardly did anything serious with the site. It would be kind of pointless to debate over who had it first is what I'm getting at. These things happen, it's not like someone plagarized a paragraph or whatever. I'm sure RZ didn't know and I'm sure Fromm didn't steal anything. No biggie.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

Comparing 2+2 to Cardoza just because there are personal grudges doesn't impress anyone. D&B lead the way for quality.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Comparing 2+2 to Cardoza just because there are personal grudges doesn't impress anyone. D&B lead the way for quality.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, there is no real comparison between 2+2 and Cardoza whatsoever was my point. Further, the grudges don't concern me at and nothing I wrote has anything to do with trying to impress anyone. While Cardoza does have a few decent titles, most (for example Cloutier's books, and "Online Poker") are so bad that they speak volumes about their publishing standards.

If the grudge your talking about refers to the chips lose value issue with Snyder's book, what do you expect? Did Snyder ever concede his error?

D&B on the other hand have some very decent titles out of those I've read so far, even if their scope is pretty narrow (since they deal primarily with LHE and PLO). While the ones I've read are generally good, they're certainly not mindblowing. For example, I'm reading the "Secrets of PLO" book right now and Rolf is dragging on and on about shortstacking (and I'm a pretty good ways into the book).

Considering that 2+2 pretty much lays claim to the seminal works to several major forms of poker (notably excepting PLO, of course), I think D&B has a way to go. Maybe I have only read the lesser of the D&B releases and the rest will really astound me (I haven't read the book referred to in OP yet and have high hopes for it). For now though, none of the titles I've read, while good, rival the kind of depth you see in books like 7CSFAP, Zee's hi-lo book, ToP, Harrington's tourney series (etc.). I have read Hold 'em on the Come, the Pot Limit HE book and the "How Good is Your..." books, and reading the RS PLO book at the moments.

Now if you definition of "quality" refers to the number typos or something rediculous like that, well that's just not a concern for me, at least as a reader.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]

Now if you definition of "quality" refers to the number typos or something rediculous like that, well that's just not a concern for me, at least as a reader.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or as a writer, obviously. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Now if you definition of "quality" refers to the number typos or something rediculous like that, well that's just not a concern for me, at least as a reader.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or as a writer, obviously. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
If you're going to criticize someone's writing (over a typo or two on a message board), you might want to at least read up on sentence fragments. Then, afterwards, that smiley face of yours can lick my [censored], and then [censored] my [censored].

Anyway, my point (prior to getting pulled over by the spelling police) was that I can forgive a few typos in a book with very good poker content, as opposed to a slick-looking POS.

Sure it's irritating to design a cover for something and then see errors on it (which often occur at the print shop, by the way), but does it really distract you from learning? Didn't you ever see mistakes in school textbooks before? I know a lot of people buy poker books only to admire them on a bookshelf, but that's not their purpose. Mine have writing in the margins, highlighter marks everywhere, some have clear packing tape on the bindings (etc.).

To put the thread back on track, I'm interested in other people's reviews. I plan on devoting some serious time to this and re-reading WITGH. I'd also love to see the Zee/Fromm book published somewhere, maybe D&B can jump on that.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]

If the grudge your talking about refers to the chips lose value issue with Snyder's book, what do you expect? Did Snyder ever concede his error?



[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't aware that Snyder was ever shown to be in error on that issue. Do you have any links or references showing that Snyder was wrong? (Snyder's initial assertions on this in his book were qualitative rather than quantitative, but later work by others back up his arguments with math.)

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
If the grudge your talking about refers to the chips lose value issue with Snyder's book, what do you expect? Did Snyder ever concede his error?

[/ QUOTE ]
I was alluding to Mason's frequent veiled references to inferior rivals. I assumed he meant Cardoza and there was a history of animosity. No one except Mason takes Cardoza books seriously. D&B are the competition.

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I was alluding to Mason's frequent veiled references to inferior rivals.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm always curious where stuff like this comes from. I don't think you'll be able to produce one reference.

As for D&B, it's always been our intent to steer our readers towards what's good no matter who is the publisher and away from that which is questionable. We allow D&B to post here and talk about their products, and have already given good reviews to some of them.

MM

More on \"Illusion of Action\"
 

Hi Everyone:

I did a little more research (plus a friend had a better memory than me). The term illusion of action appears in HPFAP. Here's the quote from the Psychology chapter of the current edition:

[ QUOTE ]
Another example of this type of play is to throw in an extra raise early in a hand with cards that don’t really warrant it, in order to give the illusion of action. For instance, you can occasionally raise the pot with a hand like 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. This play costs only a fraction of a bet in mathematical expectation, but gains you a tremendous amount in future action on subsequent hands. However, this play should probably not be made in loose games where you are against people who play too many hands and go too far with their hands, because you get excess action anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except for the last sentence, this same paragraph appears in the original edition of HPFAP that was first published in 1988. We give a similar "illusion of action" example in SCSFAP which was first published in 1989 and which Ray Zee is one of the authors.

But it shows up in our work even earlier than that. In David's book Essays on Poker which was published in 1981 (and is now part of the book Sklansky on Poker this exact same example appears.

Also, notice that we are using the term illusion of action in almost the same way that Tannebaum is.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Review, Advanced Limit Holdem Strategy (Tanenbaum)
 

It has been a while since I read Positively Fifth Street, but McManus makes a reference to Cloutier saying bad things about MM and DS in his book, which is published by Cardoza. I don't recall MM saying anything out and out bad about Cardoza. In fact he gives the SS1 and SS2 10s.