Joe Navarro book, Nov 7th - Page 9

Mason Malmuth · #81 09-09-2006, 12:22 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I really wish you'd make them stand up to the wear and tear a real student of poker gives them.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has been a problem for us for many years, how to make the books stand up to a usuage level that no other books get. We now believe our books will now do this thanks to an upgraded binding procedure along with superior binding glue.

Best wishes,
mason

Gomez · #82 09-09-2006, 01:29 PM

"Read the post, my friend."

Hey Pal, he's not your friend.

I think your posts in this thread have damaged the sales potential of this book.

mucked4u · #83 09-09-2006, 02:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I really wish you'd make them stand up to the wear and tear a real student of poker gives them.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has been a problem for us for many years, how to make the books stand up to a usuage level that no other books get. We now believe our books will now do this thanks to an upgraded binding procedure along with superior binding glue.

Best wishes,
mason

[/ QUOTE ]

AMEN

uDevil · #84 09-09-2006, 03:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This book has definitely dropped off the 'must have' list now. If a forum discussion on a site where you never post can put you on forum tilt, I think you may need to work on your ability to control your emotions. The silly challenge to a poker duel does not seem like someone who has written material on persuasion and psychology.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

Of all the minidramas that have happened on this forum, this is certainly the worst performance by an author. mkarlins, author of a book on tells, grossly misjudged his audience here.

Ironically, TT's original post had me thinking the book was worthwhile for me. I'm still interested, but not so much.

7n7 · #85 09-09-2006, 04:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
this is certainly the worst performance by an author. mkarlins, author of a book on tells,

[/ QUOTE ]

Sadly enough, mkarlins is actually the writer not the author.

JussiUt · #86 09-09-2006, 05:30 PM

This has been an interesting debate and I think both of the publishers brought their points across well in the beginning. Still, I'm a little shocked to see two respected publishers needing to have a pissing contest in an internet forum because that's what it's come down to.

May I say, Mason hasn't been the most easily approachable or cordial person in this thread and I don't understand a reason for that.

[ QUOTE ]
Dear Mason,

Your memory DOES serve you well; however, the $10 and $20 figures must be adjusted for inflation (the book was written in 1980!)and was mainly aimed at players involved in negative expectation games (which, of course, poker is not). Also, my congratulations for your successful publishing ventures and this website. Hope to see you at a final table soon!

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason was given a nice compliment and there was nothing personal in this post. Still this has come down to that with these silly heads-up challenges. Mason's approach could've been a little less harsh, eh? That's all.

*TT* · #87 09-09-2006, 07:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Ironically, TT's original post had me thinking the book was worthwhile for me. I'm still interested, but not so much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its amazing that the regular 2+2 audience seemed to understand this, yet the writer of the book could not. My OP and following posts have shown each time that the book would be good for a segment of the intended audience, but not the entire targeted audience. In fact I think many potential readers of the book will actually hurt themselves by reading such a book without an expert grasp of the fundamentals, especially if they use it as a recipe book of x+y=z because the authors over emphasize the value of tells when in reality they actually provide such a tiny edge to an already expert player. Additionally it was my opinion that players who have natural good observational skills and are not interested in the physiological reasons behind tells

Lastly for what it is worth, although I shouldn't admit it because the writer has proven to be such an ass, I liked its writing style. If you felt that from my OP and following posts that you fit in the category of someone who could benefit from this book, even though I feel its for a much smaller audience who can see through the errors of the author's presentation, then I wouldn't want to discourage reading it when its released (we can't all get advanced copies, lol).

Finally I think someone owes this forum an apology, I'm sure you can all guess who that someone is.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

benfranklin · #88 09-09-2006, 10:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I liked its writing style.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you know about style? How many Pulitzer Prizes do you have? [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

maurile · #89 09-10-2006, 02:58 AM

[ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
Let It Ride? Dew Mason is the same author who wrote a very good poker book (with Rolf Slotboom). That's surprising.

ericicecream · #90 09-10-2006, 08:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Phil's book made it because: (1) it was well written; (2) it was published by a major house (HarperCollins) and (3) it was authored by a person who had a proven track record AT THE TABLES.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a bit of publishing experience (non-poker). Points 2 and 3 I agree with. The book sold because of Phil's name, the exposure the book received from the publisher, and the timing. For many people who were WPT watchers, it is probably the only poker book they have bought, and now they play avidly, and we all thank Phil for that opportunity and the "knowledge" he armed these people with.

As for point #1 being well written, the quality of the book is poor. It is not the first poorly written book to sell well because of good exposure/timing.