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 No it doesn't make much sense for him to "take credit" for an unpublished document, but plenty of things Mason says don't make much sense.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 No it doesn't make much sense for him to "take credit" for an unpublished document, but plenty of things Mason says don't make much sense.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.)