Bk Rvw: The Complete Book of H 'em by Gary Carson

Many of us know that Gary repeatedly attacked other writers. He trashed my book, "The Psychology of Poker," (Two Plus Two, 2000)at least ten times.


But his attacks did not stop him from plagiarizing it. If you read his discussion of categories of players on page 197 or so, you will see it was copied from pages 73-78 of my book. The dimensions and terms describing each extreme type are identical. He even used the term "Stone Killer" in exactly the way I had used it, and I believe that term does not appear in any other poker book.


I don't know whether to be flattered or offended. In my world plagiarism is taken very seriously. Legitimate writers don't steal other people's work. If he wanted to use my material, he should have asked permission. At the very least he should have stated that he was copying from me.

I am constantly amazed by the virulence of Gary's personal attacks on Mason, David and others, and yet Mason writes a fair, even partially positive review, ignoring the author.


Gary could learn how to be a human being from people like Mason.


If I were you, I would quietly contact the publisher..


Mark

Thanks for your comments and for the emails I've gotten. Unlike Gary, I don't enjoy battles. I just want to play poker, write about it, and enjoy life. To date all I've done is post here and at RGP.


Someone on RGP asked Gary about the plagiarism. Here is his reply. The material directly relating to plagiarism was cut and pasted exactly as he wrote it, including the numerous typos.


"There is a paragrpah on pages 197-198 of my book where I introduce the sclaes of loose/tight and passive aggresive and also weak/tough straightforward/tricky.


"In the last edit, my editor added a bunch of stuff to the middle of that paragraph where he used the terms rock, maniac, calling station, stone killer to describe the exremes of the loose/tight and passive/aggresive scales. I didn't really like that usage, in fact elseqhere in the book I define maniac very specically as something that's more than just loose/aggresive. But, I didn't want to argue about it, so I left it in." END OF QUOTED MATERIAL


I've made the following post to RGP.


YOU'RE COPPING OUT, GARY

You've admitted that material in your book was lifted directly from mine, but you blame your editor. You also state that you didn't like some of it. You read the final version of the text, and you approved it.

Mature adults do not avoid responsibility. If my words appear in your book, it is your responsibility. Plagiarism is theft, and serious writers don't do it.

You should also note that Mason did not attack your book or you personally, even though you have repeatedly attacked him, David, me, and dozens of other people. Personal integrity and maturity are far more important than poker. The bottom line is that you attacked me many times, then stole my work, and even now refuse to accept responsibility for doing so.

There is nothing in Carson's nor your posts that indicates he "stole" your work. What exactly did he steal that isn't common usage anyway?

I believe that part of the reason that you cannot profitably play any two suited cards is because that is what everyone else is doing. So your T5s will often run up against a larger flush draw.

What is your evaluation of this (short) chapter, and what do you think about the given starting hand recommendations?


ThanX Mason!

This is a misconception that many people have. Suppose you are in a game where everyone plays 100 percent of their hands, but you only play 90 percent of your hands. I think we can agree that since you are playing better than the others you should win in this game.


Let's look at the worse hands that you play. Let's call them hands 81 percent to 90 percent. Now answer this question. Do any of these hands produce a positive EV? If you think about it I believe the answer that you will come up with is no they don't. So even though you are playing winning poker in this particular game, you are still playing some hands that are costing you money. (There is a concept which we refer to as the "Horse Race Concept" that comes into play here. We have a discussion of it in SCSFAP-21.)