HOH EXPOSED CONTINUED....

[Easy E]

I think I need to speak to your mother about using some soap....

My ears are still blue!

[KeyToTheMint]

[ QUOTE ]

Please be more specific, I can't figure out what you are saying

[/ QUOTE ]

No sarcasm.

HOH is an outstanding book. I can appreciate what a monumental effort it took to edit.

I am most impressed with Mason's response.

Thanks Mason.

Also sorry for how my post reads. I feel like a jerk.

2+2 customer 4 life.

[sexdrugsmoney]

KeyToTheMint,

I'd just like to thank you for pointing out these errors to us.

I had planned to buy Harrington on Hold'em sometime in the future, the only thing that has changed is that now I'll buy the 2nd printing.

I love 2+2 books, they have done alot for poker, but we as customers do share some of the responsibility to make sure what we read is correct in regards to the numbers involved, which is why it is vital to discuss things we don't understand or seem curious on this great forum.

Cheers,
SDM



[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Please be more specific, I can't figure out what you are saying

[/ QUOTE ]

No sarcasm.

HOH is an outstanding book. I can appreciate what a monumental effort it took to edit.

I am most impressed with Mason's response.

Thanks Mason.

Also sorry for how my post reads. I feel like a jerk.

2+2 customer 4 life.

[/ QUOTE ]

[burningyen]

Just to follow up on my earlier post, I believe page 185 is incorrect in advocating 40% folds with KQ in MP when no one has entered the pot.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Just to follow up on my earlier post, I believe page 185 is incorrect in advocating 40% folds with KQ in MP when no one has entered the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ofcourse that's a mistake.

Harrington is a tight player, but he's not *that* tight to fold KQ when you are the first one in & in Middle Position.

You raise, or limp then re-raise or call ... I don't know which, that's why I buy the books. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[GFunk911]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Mint:

Due to the way HOH: Volume I was written, it was much tougher than normal to get all the "superficial errors" out of it. We are not happy with this, but believe we have (most) everything fixed on the second printing.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Was the book mind-wished to the printer by manuscript fairies? Was it printed in real time, with Dan and Bill scribbling furiously in the back? What kink in the process resulted in there not being a finished manuscript that could be proofread.

If the writing process or schedule lead to this, who's fault is that? Does the book say "Published by 2+2 (The Good Parts). Written by Dan & Bill (The Errors)?"

Edit: Mason in a later post said this:

[ QUOTE ]
For reasons which are too long to explain here, HOH: Volume I was extremely difficult to get all the errors out of. We literally caught and corrected hundreds of them but obviously not all of them. The final blame reasts with me since I'm the publisher.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly what should have been in the 1st post. The original post seemed to be saying that yes there were errors but they were unavoidable, which they certainly were not. Anyway, I retract anything implications of my original post now that Mason has added a clarification.

[GFunk911]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Mint:

Due to the way HOH: Volume I was written, it was much tougher than normal to get all the "superficial errors" out of it. We are not happy with this, but believe we have (most) everything fixed on the second printing.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

While i love your books and your material, the OP has a point. Scrutinizing error-checking obviously wasn't your first priority. You obviously, understandbly, are more concerned wtih getting your books out quickly. I think the part that people have a problem with is the fact that you play it off as though you put a much larger effort into editing than the product reflects. In other words, people assume based on the way you present yourself, that you would, for example, hold back a book's release in order to correct errors because you care so much about the quality of your product. If this were the case, the so called "fixed second printing" would have been the first printing!

BTW, i understand you put a lot of effort into editing. My point is that you make it seem as though you go above and beyond the necessary editing standards, when in reality this simply isn't true.

I have zero complaints on the content and present this post with the uttmost respect for you and your publishing efforts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Zygote:

You're absolutely correct. I suggest you read and study books that we don't publish.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. What a ....... *holds back* ....... interesting response.

Note: I added a quote of the post being responded to by Mason, in order to make it clear that the poster was totally respectful.

[Easy E]

[ QUOTE ]

Note: I added a quote of the post being responded to by Mason, in order to make it clear that the poster was totally respectful.

[/ QUOTE ]

totally respectful? With all due respect, maybe you should really read those posts again.

[Easy E]

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Only_Why]

You are an absolute joke.
If I ever said something like this to a customer who had a complaint, the BBB would be all over my ass. It's pretty hard to believe so many people put up with your attitude.