Hold ‘Em Hostage

355 Comments

1. J. Herbert says:

   November 3, 2010 at 12:41 am

   This is a great addition to her other books on Texas Hold ‘Em. I feel she gives enough info on the game without being too technical about it. I know generally about poker so I wasn’t unfamiliar with the game but I was glad she discribed what the actual terms were. I saw the humor in the but and I found it a very quick read. On a side note I’m one to glance at the ending before I’m half way through a book–not a good idea with this one. I had the wrong idea about the hero of the book for most of the time I read it, although it didn’t quite have the ending I thought it would-the expected is sometimes boring–I feel it ended it with an opening for yet another Bea Cool story.
   Rating: 4 / 5

   Reply
2. vegaswedding96 says:

   November 3, 2010 at 1:31 am

   This series is fun. I like the Vegas setting, the excitement of the tournaments, with the mystery and comedy thrown in. Bee has a lot of fun sidekicks, that add to the charm of this series. I can’t remember if it was this one or “Cashed In” that I was surprised to see Council Bluffs mentioned (I grew up there), so that was a fun side note for me.
   
   I gave the book 5 stars, Mr. Brown’s one star review is unfair for this type of book, so I wanted to offset his one star as much as I could. Otherwise I would have given it four stars for the tiny gripe that if I put down the book for a day and went to pick it back up I had trouble remembering what was going on. There are a lot of characters all off doing things and it’s hard to keep track.
   
   But big deal. This is otherwise well-written, and entertaining. I can’t comment too much on Mr. Brown’s dissection of the poker hands, I don’t play, but if there are few mistakes here and there, it’s no biggie to me.
   
   I liked the end alot, but I can’t say why because that will give it away. But, it leaves things open to more adventures, so I hope Ms. Chance pays no attention to Mr. Brown, and I hope she’s got another Bee Cool mystery in the works.
   Rating: 5 / 5

   Reply
3. Aaron C. Brown says:

   November 3, 2010 at 3:35 am

   This is the third book the series that began with Death On the Flop, a terrible book. The second entry Cashed In was a distinct improvement, not good, but an improvement. Hold’em Hostage has all the bad features of the first book, and adds some new ones.

   I have to qualify the review that I do not normally read romance books, so perhaps I fail to see some good qualities that would appeal to a fan of the genre. I read this book only to write a review article of the current crop of poker mysteries. The main reason I’m posting here is to warn people against the non-fiction poker advice at the end of the book. The author does not know the rules of poker, neither the hand rankings nor the betting mechanics. While there are other bad poker advice books, I suspect the authors actually had played the game, and sincerely believed their advice was sound. I don’t know why someone would write, and even less why Penguin Group would publish, advice from someone who hasn’t even read the rules of the game.

   The heroine managed to get through the second book without crying once, a major improvement over the first book. In the third book tears are back, and she has also taken to vomiting and swearing at unpleasant news. The plot is make-it-up-as-you-go-along. Random events happen for 216 pages, then a minor character overhears the bad guys’ entire plot, which he explains to the heroine. Then we hear the plot was defeated, although not how. The heroine wins $2 million, which she gets in cash in a small envelope that fits in her purse (in hundreds, the highest denomination US currency, it fills two medium suitcases and weighs 40 pounds). There is no withholding, because she promises to pay her taxes (ha!). Then the book is over. There is no detection, no resolution. The plot explains about 10% of the events in the book, and even those not very convincingly. We’re left with 90% loose ends.

   As in the previous books, a good many pages are spent describing what the heroine eats and wears. For the first time, there are no food contradictions, but she still has magic clothes. She puts on a folk print midthigh dress with ballet flats that turns into a miniskirt with stilletto heels after she leaves the room. You get the idea the author is just filling pages, neither she nor you care what the heroine has on.

   There is some good news on the author’s poker education. She has learned that a full house beats straights and flushes, and that if you go all in and win, you don’t necessarily win the other person’s entire stack (you win the smaller of the two stacks). None of the hands use more than five cards, and none has the same card appearing more than once. The wisest decision is to put in much less detail about the poker hands, so it’s harder to contradict herself.

   The author still doesn’t have all the hands down, on page 160, three fours beats three tens. On page 180, she claims A2345 is the second highest straight flush after a royal flush (it matters in the hand, too, because a 45678 straight flush is possible after the flop). Oddly, she knows that A2345 unsuited is the lowest straight.

   Her biggest remaining misconception is she thinks you can continue to raise after you have been called. This occurs several times in the book. For example, heads up after the river has been dealt we get, “He raised. I called. He reraised. I called again.” There’s a similar problem with “check raise.” The author thinks she can do it as one betting action, and that it will lull the other players into thinking she has a weak hand. There’s lots of other incorrect stuff, and even more that is wildly implausible. Poker terms are misused throughout, “nuts,” “couterfeit,” “blank,” “pocket,” “outs” and “counting cards.” In fairness, the author also doesn’t know the meaning of non-poker terms like “innuendo” and “angst.”

   Writing poker fiction without knowing how to play the game is lazy, but no more. Adding a non-fiction chapter of poker advice that you know you are not qualified to give is a disservice to readers. Both author and publisher should be ashamed.
   Rating: 1 / 5

   Reply