Re: Outs Chart in Professional No Limit Hold'em--Is it correct?

[MarkD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


From what I understand they are dividing by the wrong number so all of the percentages are wrong and this has been admitted by Flynn. Pretty sure this is exactly what they have ripped on other authors for doing.

[/ QUOTE ]


i have not ripped on any authors for something like this.

it was an Excel typo. the divisors were hotlinked. the chart was correct, then columns were added elsewhere to do other work, which changed the reference divisors. i had zero clue they had changed and so did not check it again. my fault, no one else's. and quite embarrassing.

i did hand check every hand calc, and there are far fewer errors there than in other books. so can we get partial credit? ;-)

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. No explanation necessary. I'm sure you can do the math and I was not implying that you have made a rip on anyone in the past and I'm sure it is a simple typo. I was just pointing out that in the past Sklansky (and I'm pretty sure Malmouth as well) have called out authors on errors such as this. That it has now happened in one of there books is slightly amusing to me is all.

I don't have the book yet but I'm sure it's still good despite your inability to calculate drawing percentages. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Doc T River]

I was really looking forward to this book and was going to order it along with the Full Tilt book and The Poker Mindset.

To my fellow posters, is this a big enough error that I should reconsider and wait for a revised edition or is the meat of the book good enough to compensate for the error.

To Matt Flynn, will this error lead to a revised edition?

Thank you in advance for any responses.

[felson]

The effect of this error is very small. I would go ahead and buy the book now.

[MarkD]

Doc,

I don't have the book but it's an error in an outs chart. You should never use those charts in a book anyways. Just learn to calculate the chart correctly on your own and do it that way. You will gain way more in the long run knowing how to calculate it.