First--2-star review of this book (insert Golf clap here) (insert "I hate golf" comment here) (placeholder to remind me to adjust previous placeholders here).
The title is apropos--if quite common--and the cover art conveys the setting very well.
Like a baboon grooming a friend to calm the nerves, I shall begin with nitpicking.
In the prologue, young Elle practices her quick draw and shootin' skills (clearly setting up her later life). However, minutes later (book time) she hears a gunshot and thinks, "They wouldn't fire a gun unless there was trouble!" But didn't you---you were just--ah well.
The real nitpick is the history. Matthews gets a good deal right--at least from a timeline plausibility point of view. She alludes to the Meiji Restoration with the proper year. Helena Duels? Yep. Billy the Kid and Jesse James were, at least, alive during the 1878 setting. Tommy Bond did play for her favorite team at the time and did have a 40-win season--but more on that later and by later I mean right now.
Baseball plays a far bigger role in a sapphic historical western than you might expect even if it had been called the "National Pastime over 30 years at this point. The main reason for its inclusion is, presumably, to give Izzy something that she is actually good at (better than) the gang. Izzy's favorite team is the Boston Red Stockings (not to be confused with the Boston Red Sox who came later, this team eventually becomes the Atlanta Braves).
Unfortunately for Izzy, the Red Stockings had officially been called the Red Caps for two years at this point (again being 1878). Izzy lists all the teams in the National League but seems to have missed the news that many of those teams folded a year or two before and that baseball's popularity was relatively low.
She also gushes about her favorite player, Tommy Bond (not the actor who played Butch in the Little Rascals). He did have a 40-win season as Izzy said (in 1877) but acts like this was a feat he accomplished a while ago--not the previous season. Again, what she didn't seem to be aware of is that had another that same year (and another the year following, which she couldn't have known).
As for "The Old West", while Jesse James, Billy the Kid, and Wyatt Earp were alive--only Billy operated out of the New Mexico territory. She notes Jesse was more of a Missouri guy--but he's also arguably the most famous outlaw of all time, so I get why he's mentioned. Wyatt Earp was almost certainly in Kanas throughout the period of this book--but as with Jesse, he's the most famous "law man"--and he's only mentioned. Yeah, like I said, I get it. This builds the credibility of Elle and her gang (or Rose and the town for Wyatt), but if you're going to have them interact with these people, I wish it was more consequential. It was more groan inducing than "ooo, cool" for me.
At some point, Elle and/or Izzy enjoy some oatmeal cookies. Heavens to Fannie Farmer, the first recipe for oatmeal cookies wasn't even published until 1896. Not saying someone couldn't have made them but...
Okay, enough nitpicking, let's get to the real problems and they are problems encountered by so many in the romance genre: The main characters.
Elle being the Artful Dodger to Rose's Fagin is fine. Elle being presented as having a mostly Robin Hood moral code in a world where the outlaws, including her mentor, are murderous--unlikely.
Worse, while her initial plan to collect a bounty on Izzy made sense (even if the idea should have been hideous to her), it became improbable and aggravating over time. Izzy saved her life. She (and her gang) obviously liked her. Elle repeating her "she's just a payday" mantra was wholly unbelievable--especially because Izzy wasn't made of peanuts rolled over a sweet caramel center. What?
Elle also falls for the broad trope of "I suffered a traumatic loss--now I won't get close to anyone" syndrome. Except, she has--and she did. I don't mean Izzy. I mean Raven and her gang. She had already created a family. She and Raven became blood sisters. I'm assuming Elle didn't have romantic feelings toward her parents, so why does it crop up when it is romantic/sexual? I don't want to say so the story can happen--but it's so the story can happen.
Late in the story, Elle has a letter intended for Izzy (long after she assumes Izzy is gone from her life) and she didn't open it because it wasn't addressed to her. Yeah, she wouldn't want to break the law--she's a respectable stagecoach robber.
Still, overall Elle isn't so bad, Izzy on the other hand...
In the book and in glowing reviews, Izzy's stubbornness is presented as charming or adorable or just so damn Izzy. However, much like there is a thin line between love and hate, there is a thin line between stubborn and stupid, and Izzy crosses it repeatedly.
She's told to lay low, and she decides to ad-lib her backstory and play the piano and sing. It's done (mostly) for comedy but comedy often comes from stupid.
She's told to lay low again and she immediately goes to town, goes on a shopping spree, and has a nearly disastrous encounter with Rose. When Rose asks where she's from originally, Izzy warns herself to be careful, then says, "Boston!" which is exactly where she's from.
She's told not to go out into the wilderness because she'll get lost. She immediately goes out into the wilderness, leaving her coat, gun, and any food behind--and gets lost. She's not obstinate, she's a fool. These are the kind of things one of Adam Sandler's or Will Ferrell's idiot characters would have done.
As to that last point, that brings up a dramatic storytelling problem. In a movie or TV show (or another book), a character getting lost in the wilderness would be "A THING" and it sets up to be one--except Elle finds her on literally the next page.
Later, she's kidnapped by Jed. This is MUCH worse than being lost in the wilderness. Now, while it does lead to Elle being injured, again she is found on the next page despite having been taken many miles away to a different town. Izzy was not sexually assaulted (a good, if unlikely thing) but she isn't even hurt.
To pile on, the event was precipitated by another recurring problem in this story: stuff inexplicably happening. Major events result from moments that had no build up. For the Jed kidnapping it was basically, "One day Elle leaves for the day and comes back and Izzy is missing. Gasp!" Earlier, Elle and Izzy go on a trip to Santa Fe. This should have been a huge event to build to, but it just "happens" so the romantic getaway/sex can happen.
And, you know, the sex scenes were not that good. Elle's sex scenes with Miriam were hardly less described than the ones with Izzy. Moreover, Miriam (a brothel whore) was treated like one and then summarily dismissed. It's suggested that Miriam's affection for Elle was purely transactional, but their interactions and Miriam's sudden departure to marry a man suggest otherwise. A missed opportunity for drama and depth here.
The ending scene itself with Luna was intended to be touching but it, like Elle's insistence that Izzy was just a payday, was unnecessary. In the five months they were officially together, Elle never said Luna followed her home and Izzy couldn't tell that Luna wanted to be with her? Izzy was committing the same error that Elle and Izzy's parents had, trying to force what they thought was best upon her. Does no one learn anything? Must it always be explicitly spelled out with the bluntness of a slap to the face?
Criminally underused: Matsu. For whatever story-padding reason, Lori gives Matsu a lesbian samurai backstory that sounded, let's face it, far more fun and interesting than the main story. Since this book was recently released, maybe that story will come? I doubt it, but it sounds like one with more visceral tragedy and depth than this one could imagine--especially since Elle forgives the person who ordered the death of her father (and by extension her mother), making that major event a tad irrelevant.