Mark Blade's, "Professional Poker"

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Steamy:

I disagree. The best way to sell your subsequent books is to write a great first book. It also helps if your second (and third) books are also great. Today, thanks to the Internet, word gets around quickly. I think both Dan Harrington and Bill Robertie will strongly agree with these comments.

best wishes,
Mason

[steamboatin]

You are right. He first book is a blatant attempt to sell more books but I am less inclined to buy the next one.

[SNOWBALL138]

Who cares? Magazines have adds. Television programs have "to be continued" cliffhangers, and 2+2 uses the same "To fully understand this, we recommend you buy x, y, and z books of ours."

Profit rules. Get with it.

[steamboatin]

I have a large number of 2+2 books and I don't remember a single blatant plug.

Have you read Mark Blade's book or are you just talking out of your ass?

[GoSharks]

I could list more but here are a few specific examples from Tournament Poker for Advanced players where they are in effect shilling for other 2+2 books. . .

TPFAP: pg 106. . . "see Gambling Theory and Other Topics by Mason Malmuth for further discussion"

pg 3. . . "If you are not yet at that level where you can beat medium sized poker games, you need to study The Theory of Poker, Hold 'em Poker for Advanced Players, Seven-Card Stud for Advanced Players, High-Low Split Poker for Advanced Players, and other appropriate books published by Two Plus Two Publishing LLC."

pg 7. . . "See my book Poker, Gaming, & Life for more discussion"

pg 52. . . "For those interested in Omaha high-low-split eight-or-better, I suggest High-Low Split Poker for Advanced Players by Ray Zee."

pg 95. . . "A more detailed analysis of rebuying can be found in Poker Tournament Strategies by Sylvester Suzuki."

-----------

So, is this an egregious breach of trust? Hardly. 2+2 books are regarded as the industry standard across most categories, and the listings make sense in the context of the discussion at hand on those particular pages. The advice to check out these books for more in-depth discussion on concepts that don't necessarily need further expansion in a book about specific tournament strategy is good. People would be well advised to read these specific books if their interest is in a certain game, or concept. TPFAP isn't about general poker strategy, so it rightly points readers in the right direction if they have an interest in a particular topic beyond the stated goal of the text.

It's just that saying 2+2 never does it is wrong. They do, but I think they do so responsibly. They're not trying to sell second-rate books from a bunch of hacks, which some poker books undoubtedly are, they're pointing people in the direction of books they have published, partially to boost sales, but also because they BELIEVE in the quality of those books. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I do have a problem with authors who intentionally truncate their books in order to offer a follow-up volume, which could easily have worked as a single book, in a blantant effort to extract more sales. Most of the time, people who resort to this sort of nonsense probably don't deliver the goods in either volume. Can anyone say Phil Hellmuth?

[steamboatin]

I didn't veiw these as sales pitches. They are discussing a specific topic and giving an exact reference to where you could get more information.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Steam:

We also don't say something like:

And now, let me toot my horn, toot, toot, and recommend the very best book on poker ...

Best wishes,
Mason

[Jeffage]

Something about picturing you saying that with a little horn in your hand just made me crack up lol.

Jeff

[Wada]

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't veiw these as sales pitches. They are discussing a specific topic and giving an exact reference to where you could get more information.

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally agree. Its completely two different things.

About half way through his book, I got so sick and tired of reading the "Read my next book" lines along with the commercial/sales pitch footnotes. It got so redundant that after a while I was able to tell that in the next couple of sentences I knew I would be reading his sales pitches.

Totally annoying and because of it, I probably wont buy his future books. It sounded so much like a plea for help rather than just producing a book and allowing the reputation to precede itself for the future books.

[Mark Blade]

Hi Wada,

Fair enough. As you, Steamboatin, and Mason have pointed out, the mentions of my upcoming books may have been overdone. Although other readers have informed me that it wasn't an issue for them, I'd be foolish to ignore such comments as yours. And especially from such an informed reader like Mason. So I won't. They will be toned down in any future printing.

Thanks for the feedback. I truly appreciate it.

Best regards,
Mark Blade