Mason's earlier response to Ed's site.

So you're saying you don't like Ciaffone's advice because he recommends occationally 3-betting light from position?

Yeah, that's just a horrible idea....

Just to clarify, do you mean the writing was poor, the content was poor, or both?

If Mason thinks editing can fix it, surely he means the writing and maybe organisation of content rather than the content?

i don't trust any live player to write a book about NL cash games that is applicable to online 6-max.

That's what I assumed, just asking.

You neglected to state that the deal Miller got from Stoxpoker is pretty good. You also neglected to say that when Volume I was delivered to us it was written so badly that it had to go back for complete rewriting. You also neglected to say that the delays in getting Volume II done mean you have missed much of the sales as the market for poker book sales is now declining. And you also neglected to say that we have to deal with stuff like this:

http://www.elainevigneault.com/diary...and-twoplustwo

But most important of all, our relationship is now as bad as it can get, and given that's the case, I just believe that it would be in everyone's interest to just move on.

I believe that this will be a very difficult book to move through our comment and editing process where we, as you know, involve our authors and try to challenge them to improve the product. Given this to be the case, and all the problems that we have had, again it's my opinion that everyone is better off if the book goes elsewhere.

MM

But you have already been offensive. If you object to some of Ciaffone's advice, that is fine, and you certainly can comment on the specifics. I for one disagree with much of his advice on limit poker and these specifics have been stated and debated in the past. But your post was simply an insult.

As for being more well read than I am, when it comes to poker that is highly doubtful since I have read a lot of books, but if you are, than good for you. I also have a pretty good education. Perhaps you may want to put up a poll to see who our posters think is better educated, but I'm not sure what that would accomplish.

As for the thread/poll you propose, on these forums there are rules and posting guidelines. If you violate them, then you should get a vacation (if necessary). So if you think you can post what you propose and stay within our posting guidelines then it would be fine. But if you're asking this question, then I suspect that's not the case.

MM

I didn't read enough of the book to comment one way or another on the content, but in some cases you don't need to read much to see that a manuscript has a lot of writing issues. At the time we received this manuscript, which was in September of 2007, we could not take on another book because of our other commitments. In fact, it would have been at least a year before we could even begin to look at it.

One thing for sure, the manuscript that we received was only 38,000 words, and given the way our market has evolved, we would have required a book approximately double that length to consider publishing. So we told the author:

Best wishes,
Mason

Hi diebetter:

Let me speak generically here. Editing cannot always fix poorly written manuscripts. It just depends exactly how badly they are written. When this is the case, we send them back to the authors with our comments and ask for a complete rewrite.

Also, I'm not talking about content. But if the writing is bad enough, it can impact the content to the point that the writing becomes so unclear and confused you either don't know what the author mean or conclude he meant something completely different from what he intended. And in complex books like we are now publishing, this can be a real problem.

It's a difficult issue for us and usually does not sit well with the authors. However, given how competitive our market has become, if we can't produce a top notch book in all aspects, then we have to seriously consider not doing it.

Best wishes,
Mason

ok, thanks Mason.

Probably going to be easier for the authors to make their book a non 2+2 book; even if that does mean sacrificing some EV (and quality).

I'm confused.

What does this have to do with 2+2?

I would prefer a (poorly written) book half that length from Bruiser then a (well written) book twice that length from any of your current authors.

Best wishes,
Anybody beating 200nl+ online.