Reprint of the Year Award 2018: Let the Voting Commence!

After two weeks of canvassing and persuading it is now time for the voting to begin, to see which reprint of 2018 will be crowned Reprint of the Year. Below are the final 20 nominations which have been selected for the vote. 17 of these were nominated by myself and 8 other bloggers, but the other 3 were blog reader choices, (randomly selected by a generator). You are allowed to vote for up to 3 texts, as I felt this would make everyone’s lives a lot easier.

If you’re unsure how to cast your votes you can take a look at Week 1 and Week 2’s posts for further details on 17 blogger choices.

The poll will run for the next week and the winner will be announced next Saturday.

So get voting!


  1. I am slightly surprised to see Verdict of Twelve as I thought it was republished in both Britain and the USA in 2017.I cannot find a 2018 edition online but am open to correction.

    Liked by 1 person

      • Sorry to harp on about this but I still cannot find a 2018 edition, apart from an audiobook. I did not realise that audiobooks qualified as reprints.


      • I’ve contacted the reader who nominated the book so I’ll see what publisher they were thinking of. I hadn’t really thought about audiobooks, but I think it can be considered as a form of reprinting.


      • My copy of Verdict of Twelve – an ARC of the U.S. version of the British Library book from the publisher – is marked “Publication Date October 2017” and my review was posted 9/18/17.


      • That was me. Might well have been the Audio book because I was until last month an Audible subscriber, and routinely check new mysteries and histories. But I cannot say for sure. The US Amazon date though is 2017.
        Unlike Kate I AM Machiavellian and would have no objection to a vote-splitting second title by Bush or Vivian …


      • I really do not object to it being left in as it is an interesting choice. I simply wanted clarity. As a fan of both Bush and Vivian I would rather not “split the vote” albeit that neither of the nominated works is the best of their reissues!
        If I were to suggest a wild card as a reward for introducing a red herring, what about Colin Watson’s Bump in the Night reissued by Farrago?


      • I’m afraid the only reward for clarity, (there is no red herring prize- we’re not the daggers after all), is peace of mind. The 20 in the list will stand. I’m not adding any more in titles, as that would be unfair on those who have already voted.


    • Curt’s second choice (the Millar title) shouldn’t qualify either. It was reprinted in 2017 in an omnibus. And his reasoning for his choice due to the single digital book being released in January 2019 made me go “Huh?”


      • Sinister has a point. Has anyone seen the Millar’s 2018 birth certificate? The UK date is 2017, and that is Curtis’s jurisdiction.(2017 in the US too.) I think it is ineligible.


      • Except that wasn’t my reasoning, John, but rather your spin on it, which has me too going, “Huh?” I simply thought the Collected Millar was available until this year, whatever the dates on Amazon say. It wasn’t reviewed in the WSJ until April.


    • Yes you can only vote once for a given title, so if you want to use all votes you have to select three titles. When voting you also need to select all three titles before pressing the vote button at the bottom.


  2. This was a great idea. I still think it needs a name, and still favour The Farjeon.

    A curse, er, I mean thanks, to the bloggers who have burdened my TBR unconscionably! A special thanks to JJ for not doing so! 😉

    I have voted on several considerations. Firstly, what has weighted down my TBR the most. That is QPQ, by a mile. I am on my fifth, and have purchased a dozen more. None has been a masterpiece but all have been good, engaging, and different reads. So far it seems that QPQ writes the kind of thing EQ was aiming for in the Wrightsville books, but more successfully. Puzzle Doctor was the one who first made me aware that QPQ was back in print, but doesn’t earn my vote for it!

    I like JFNorris’s approach. The award should be for the best unearthing, not just best single book (which isn’t on the list, Malice Aforethought!).

    A sentimental choice would be the Millar. I lived in her home town. But there are other choices I want to read first.

    I gave up on the Boca I must say.

    Liked by 1 person

    • There may still be a name for the award. Discussions are in progress…
      The random generator didn’t turn up MA but it did give you an extra PQ title, so you can’t complain too much.
      Glad you put so much thought into your voting!


  3. Hey, is it too late to request that the title of Adey’s book be corrected? The poll says ‘Locked Rooms’ when the full title is Locked Room Murders. It’s gonna win anyway, but this is a transparent attempt to throw off its many champions 😛

    Liked by 2 people

    • haha you credit me with far too much political savviness. I’ve changed it to the correct title. Thanks for letting me know. Knew I was going to get at least one title wrong. Surprised I didn’t end up missing one out.


      • It’s gonna win anyway, but this is a transparent attempt to throw off its many champions

        I demand international election observers monitor this poll! Only thing that can actually keep Locked Room Murders from a landslide win is rampant vote-rigging.


  4. I confess to my embarrassment that I’ve not read any of these titles! I’ve read other titles by some of these authors this year, but haven’t got round to these specific titles. Since best is for last… 😅😅

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I simply thought the Collected Millar was available until this year, whatever the dates on Amazon say. It wasn’t reviewed in the WSJ until April.

    By the way, I’m from the US! I’ve never even been to the UK.


  6. I can’t figure out why it was reviewed on the WSJ, by Tom Nolan of all people, in April 2018 if it was available so many months earlier. Maybe we should ask Soho/Syndicate, I’m sure they would want to fight for this award!


  7. Ironically I was going to do a Patrick Quentin (or. Q. Patrick), but with three others on the list by those clever fellows I decided at the eleventh hour to switch to Millar (vote splitting, don’t you know). Well, if it’s disqualified, maybe it can be nominated for next year based on the appearance of the eBook version in January. IF John would accept that reasoning. Merry Christmas!


      • Yes. I’m aware of what the rules say, but I’m explaining that I assumed a major outlet like the WSJ would be reviewing the Millar at the time it came out.

        It seems strange to me that there would be such a long lag between the review and the actual release, capeesh?

        I was under the impression that the Collected set was not actually fully available until 2018, but I may be wrong.

        Having published books, I know that the dates on Amazon do not always match the actual release dates.


  8. Let me add as well that I don’t really care whether the book is left on or off (I just wanted to do a nice piece on the book), but since my putative reasoning was characterized above as, well, stupid shall we say, I felt I should attempt to clarify what my actual reasoning was, as opposed to that which was attributed to me by another blogger.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.