This was ok, though I felt like I was missing stuff - I realized *after* the fact that it was an abridged version.

WHAT IS THE POINT OF ABRIDGED?!?!?! ( )

If I had known how crappy this book was I never would have read it. Like a bad Hollywood movie. ( )

This is the first book of Baldacci's series that pairs Sean King and Michelle Maxwell, two members of the US government Secret Service Squad. Both have faced the unthinkable - the loss of the person they were supposed to be protecting on the job. Both take these losses very hard and try to compensate for their personal guilt by working on a current case independently of the Secret Service, but together as their own team. From the start they are in sync and have a good working relationship uncluttered by personal attractions or anything to take their focus off the job they've assigned themselves. Split Second starts off as a page turner and continues that way throughout.

Unfortunately, the plot itself is highly improbable. So much so that at times it made me laugh rather than draw me into some kind of suspense or tension. However, those pages did keep on turning because whether or not the plot is credible, I had to find out how all the loose ends would resolve. While the ending did stay true to the over-the-top plot basics, it was a satisfying finish and tied everything together in a better conclusion than I expected.

As thrillers go, I think Baldacci is adequate, and would definitely read more of his books in this series. ( )

Death, more death, betrayal and a little romance. What's not to like? ( )

I like the reader (Scott Brick, who also read The Wish List), so enjoyed the book, despite its inconsistencies. Kate Ramsey knew nothing that could help the investigators. Then she knew a little. Then within minutes she knew a lot. She couldn't conceive of her mother having an affair with Thorston (spelling?), yet she knew they were engaged eight years later. Continuity was lacking. Joan thinks about a Trojan horse just before she's blindsided by one? Katy says she knew of nothing in her dad's past that would have kept him from getting a professorship at a better college. Then a few minutes later she says he was in a protest in the '70s and was accused of murder and that had kept him from getting on with a better university.
Baldacci loves to tell you that the protagonist has clues that he isn't yet ready to share with his partner or the reader. The mystery isn't so much "who done it" as "what does he know".
Too many of the solutions were things the reader couldn't have known about, and the bad guy was an unbelievable character. ( )