In “Practical Rationality at Work – A New Argumentation Model” (2018, pp.193-230) Sàágua and Baumtrog offer what they call “a new ideal model of integrated practical reasoning and argumentation.” I will argue that their only really original contribution is a reconceptualization of argumentation schemes as producing pro tanto reasons, and such a reconceptualization is both wrong-headed in itself and makes their model less integrated than other models, not more. In fact, their work is itself an example of bad practical reasoning.In “Practical Rationality at Work – A New Argumentation Model” (2018, pp.193-230) Sàágua and Baumtrog offer what they call “a new ideal model of integrated practical reasoning and argumentation.” I will argue that their only really original contribution is a reconceptualization of argumentation schemes as producing pro tanto reasons, and such a reconceptualization is both wrong-headed in itself and makes their model less integrated than other models, not more. In fact, their work is itself an example of bad practical reasoning.