Re: Just stumbled over this one- 9-7 p 183
 

My point exactly.

I believe that they may have done it the other way, to get to the $370 number- the $30000 affects my amount in this situation, but not the larger stack's ability to call. I haven't gone back during my first reading and checked to see if that's the standard method.

It wouldn't surprise me if it was the standard, given what they did with the changing player identifications in the 20-hand Red Zone exercise that I mentioned elsewhere.

Re: Just stumbled over this one- 9-7 p 183
 

[ QUOTE ]
I really dont care about the typos in text. Extra periods, improper pluralizations, things to this nature do not affect me much, though as an editor i do notice them and try to get passed it ASAP.

However, the quoted point is on that has been bugging me. Sometimes it makes no real difference in how the hand is played, but sometimes it makes all the difference. I think the antes and blinds that will be put in no matter the action should already be taken out of the displayed stacks. When I am on BB with 1000 chips and blinds are 100/200, no ante, i really only have 800 chips since im not getting those chips back without winning the pot. I suggest starting the stacks with antes taken out and having the blinds being displayed in the little ring he uses. In the example just given, id have 800 and (200) would be under my name inside the ring to indicate that 200 chips have been removed for blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]
I completely agree with your above statement.

Re: Just stumbled over this one- 9-7 p 183
 

[ QUOTE ]



Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I really dont care about the typos in text. Extra periods, improper pluralizations, things to this nature do not affect me much, though as an editor i do notice them and try to get passed it ASAP.

However, the quoted point is on that has been bugging me. Sometimes it makes no real difference in how the hand is played, but sometimes it makes all the difference. I think the antes and blinds that will be put in no matter the action should already be taken out of the displayed stacks. When I am on BB with 1000 chips and blinds are 100/200, no ante, i really only have 800 chips since im not getting those chips back without winning the pot. I suggest starting the stacks with antes taken out and having the blinds being displayed in the little ring he uses. In the example just given, id have 800 and (200) would be under my name inside the ring to indicate that 200 chips have been removed for blinds.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I completely agree with your above statement.


[/ QUOTE ]

I would love this too. I got in a bunch of arguments about some of these hands before I realized that the stacks were being shown prior to the blinds and anti's being removed.

Re: HAND 10-7 ?!
 

In hand 10-7, 'you' are player A under the gun (not the BB as marked in the diagram), the pot in the diagram is 1400 (not 200), your M is approx. 14 (not 24) and the pre-flop pot is 3,800 (not 3,200).

Well, that is my interpretation....

E&OE.

Re: HAND 10-7 ?!
 

[ QUOTE ]
In hand 10-7, 'you' are player A under the gun (not the BB as marked in the diagram), the pot in the diagram is 1400 (not 200), your M is approx. 14 (not 24) and the pre-flop pot is 3,800 (not 3,200).

Well, that is my interpretation....

E&OE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason, Dan- This one has GOT TO BE FIXED.
I love the problem, as it is one i have trouble with- an AJ hand from horrible position, UTG no less, and a good sized stack but still in the yellow zone. However, i dont know if your play is based on having an M of 24 or 14.

Also, is the ante ever half the SB? I thought it was generally 1/4 - 1/3 of the SB? (edit: or significantly smaller)
In this problem ante is 100, SB 200, BB 400...

Re: HAND 10-7 ?!
 

Have the antes and the pot size been transposed i.e. blinds 200+ 400 + antes 200 = pot of 800? M is then 19,800/800 = 24 (approx).

Pot of 800 + your raise to 1200 + call of 1200 = 3,200 pot preflop.

QED?

Re: venom and anger
 

of course not, and it can be done in a helpful way. but the venom and anger often expressed on this site gets old.

Re: HOH 2 has more errors than HOH 1
 

[ QUOTE ]
A second point is that there is a big difference between careless errors that for the most part are obvious to the reader and conceptual errors (like Ciaffone's) that are not obvious and will lead people astray.

[/ QUOTE ]

i.e. a mis-read board in the 'board reading' section of a book for beginners?

in all seriousness though, there are a lot of mistakes in HOH I, and I'll probably wait for the errata before purchasing HOH II. After reading HOH I, I made a list of the mistakes/typos which I found, and I emailed it to Mason (and also PM'd him). Not that I was expecting an award, but some reply would have been nice, even just to say that he got it and would take a look. oh well..

Re: HOH 2 has more errors than HOH 1
 

I wish I had waited for a second printing.

Re: HAND 10-7 ?!
 

Glad I seached before I ranted- I just ran into this mess.