I was meaning online events, like if 10% of online games that go to the final pointa tally are non NLHE, then it might put people off playing at all, as they will be starting 10% down so to speak.
The association shouldn"t be constrained to just providing NLHE events as ranking events - there"s a lot more to poker than NLHE. If the membership want other events then we should be looking at possible ways of meeting this demand.
Haworth / War... I do agree that it is a personal choice, but my feelings are to further grow the APAT I"d suspect that growth would be better gained through concentrating on NLHE rather than explore (at this point in time) into games that are less popular.
Now this maybe a sweeping statement, but members joining the APAT I"m guessing are new to poker, or at least newish....and solely player NLHE, this being the most sought after version, on which books are written, TV shows are made, and the WSOP of Poker is based on. These " New " players join such forums to improve their game online and have a greater exposure to the live scene, which is crucial in anyones " career". IMHO
There"s a slight contradiction in your argument, you want the poker tour to grow, but you don"t want it to include the other forms of the game?
If new members are new to poker why channel them all down one route to a single variation of the game under the assumption they won"t like or won"t be able to cope with the other variations? I don"t actually agree with that anyway, I think that you"re pre-supposing an awful lot here, not quite patronising, but nearly.
APAT isn"t a bunch of people who aren"t sure yet if a flush beats a straight, not that you"re suggesting that, but I think it"s members are a little more savvy than you"re suggesting. I think a lot of people join APAT for lots of reasons, not necessarily just because they"re new to hold "em.
I think most join because they don"t have the funds to play at the higher levels, also because it"s a poker community with a reputation for some splendid
p*ss ups poker weekends.
No one is suggesting the tour should be split equally between the different variations anyway, just that there should be some variation. One or two non-NLHE tournaments a season can be accommodated I think without alienating anyone or dashing anyone"s hopes of winning the season points race.
The flip side to your argument is the is possibility that some APAT members might find a Hold "em only tour a little tedious and look for some Omaha or stud games instead of playing the Hold "em APAT games.
I don"t think either scenario is to the detriment of the tour though or would crush anyone"s chances of winning the end of season points prize.