HOH 2 has more errors than HOH 1

[sirana]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In Antwort auf:</font><hr />

The one I'm thinking of ( I think ) was the first problem on Page 29 about identifying the nuts. Goin' from memory here, but wouldn't JT give you the nut straight not 65?


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know if the example changed from edition1 to edition2 (I have edition1), but I don't see a mistake there.
The statement is: "There are four cards (4 treys) that give you the nut straight" which is correct in the context.

[Easy E]

In "Red Zone Strategy in Action", don't keep changing the labels of the players. The numbering indicates order but also which player is which. It's very irritating to have to switch your thoughts about Player 1 to Player 2 and so on.

[Easy E]

If you would have gotten called and won the pot, you would have almost tripled up to 400,500

130,500, your 150,000 and the small blind calls for 120,000.

[amulet]

yes there are errors. however, none that prevent you from understanding what is being said. they should not be there. but the book is terrific, and instead on nit-picking, just enjoy how great the book is, and enjoy life. get over it.

[Easy E]

It doesn't hurt them to have errors for potential repair in future printings identified for free, does it?

[konions]

Or even pot of 130,500 + your 120,000 (as 30,000 of your initial 150,000 is in the pot as the big blind) and the small blind calls for 120,000 = 370,500 rounded down to 370,000 in the book.

[Easy E]

If the book is showing the starting pot size (blinds and antes) WITHOUT subtracting the required money from the displayed stacks first, that is something else that needs fixed.

[konions]

This issue of whether stack sizes are before or after blinds/antes caused me some confusion. Perhaps the convention adopted should be set out at the start of the book (and from memory I can't recall any such statement).

Actually, on reflection, that makes a nonsense of my theory that the stack size is in fact 120,000 as I ignored the ante. Now I'm confused! Maybe 130,500 + 118,500 + 118,500 = 367,500? All of which only goes to prove your point.....

Hand 10-7, anyone?

None of this changes my view that HOH 1 and 2 are so good that all copies except mine should be destroyed!

[ChipLeader]

[ QUOTE ]
If the book is showing the starting pot size (blinds and antes) WITHOUT subtracting the required money from the displayed stacks first, that is something else that needs fixed.

[/ 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.

[ChipLeader]

I came to the forums to find out if anyone had corrected Hand 10-7. The minor errors in the text that I consider typos dont affect me, but this hand has me baffled!