APAT Season Seven Announcement

[AMRN]

I would prefer to see the rebuy broken into four optional £25 chunks. These should then be considered "top ups" rather than "rebuys", and a top up (or multiple top ups) can be used at any time so long as topping up your stack does not take it over the max sit down of £100 (standard for any cash table with a max buy in).

This would take away any disadvantage of losing an early pot, and would allow players to keep stacks topped off at £100 (until they run out of top ups)


Agree that the final table should be based on the 8 most profitable players rather than the 8 biggest stacks in play.

No it should be the 8 biggest stack in play surely

The idea is to create a deep stacked cash game as I understand it. To do that you need the biggest stacks in play. Just give everybody the option to add on their unused rebuys at the end and its the same thing anyway. I like the idea of 4 top-ups btw.

If one person buys in for £100 and no top ups, and finishes with £349 (profit £249), then another player uses all tops so total buy in is £200, and he finishes with £350 (profit £150), and he finishes as the 8th biggest stack, do you believe it"s fair for him to go through to the final ahead of the guy with £349 but a much bigger profit?   I take your point about needing as many chips in play on the final table as possible though

[dwh103]

I would prefer to see the rebuy broken into four optional £25 chunks. These should then be considered "top ups" rather than "rebuys", and a top up (or multiple top ups) can be used at any time so long as topping up your stack does not take it over the max sit down of £100 (standard for any cash table with a max buy in).

This would take away any disadvantage of losing an early pot, and would allow players to keep stacks topped off at £100 (until they run out of top ups)


Agree that the final table should be based on the 8 most profitable players rather than the 8 biggest stacks in play.

No it should be the 8 biggest stack in play surely

The idea is to create a deep stacked cash game as I understand it. To do that you need the biggest stacks in play. Just give everybody the option to add on their unused rebuys at the end and its the same thing anyway. I like the idea of 4 top-ups btw.

If one person buys in for £100 and no top ups, and finishes with £349 (profit £249), then another player uses all tops so total buy in is £200, and he finishes with £350 (profit £150), and he finishes as the 8th biggest stack, do you believe it"s fair for him to go through to the final ahead of the guy with £349 but a much bigger profit?   I take your point about needing as many chips in play on the final table as possible though

Aaaaannnndddd....Dann Williams - here is your cue!

[Chipaccrual]

Fair point Rodders, but I think in most circumstances, the most profitable players will also be the biggest stacks.  The discussion here seems to revolve areound the marginal stacks that may or not make the FT and surely the more profitable players deserve to go through, with the worst case scenario of £100 difference in potential chips on the final table (which is likely to be a small % overall)

[AMRN]

Fair point Rodders, but I think in most circumstances, the most profitable players will also be the biggest stacks.  The discussion here seems to revolve areound the marginal stacks that may or not make the FT and surely the more profitable players deserve to go through, with the worst case scenario of £100 difference in potential chips on the final table (which is likely to be a small % overall)

Actually, I suspect it would be the other way round and *could* favour the volume of chips on the final table.  eg If I were to get through to the final as one of the 8 most profitable players, I would almost certainly take the remaining top ups as addons..... this would therefore increase the chips in play on the final...... the less profitable player who has already used his top ups would not be able to put any more additional chips onto the final table.

[Chipaccrual]

Fair point Rodders, but I think in most circumstances, the most profitable players will also be the biggest stacks.  The discussion here seems to revolve areound the marginal stacks that may or not make the FT and surely the more profitable players deserve to go through, with the worst case scenario of £100 difference in potential chips on the final table (which is likely to be a small % overall)

Actually, I suspect it would be the other way round and *could* favour the volume of chips on the final table.  eg If I were to get through to the final as one of the 8 most profitable players, I would almost certainly take the remaining top ups as addons..... this would therefore increase the chips in play on the final...... the less profitable player who has already used his top ups would not be able to put any more additional chips onto the final table.

Actually, you are probably correct.  How annoying.

[SirPercival]

Maybe we need a breakout thread - Rumours that the cash tournament rules are changing

Just because someone has more chips starting with £100 as opposed to the guy who has bought in for £200 doesn"t mean they have made the most profit. Surely profit can only be measured once you go to the cash desk. Making the call as whether to use your extra £100 or not is also a skill, as is when to use it. As this is a cash game (albeit with a difference) then normal cash dynamics of someone having deep pockets should be part of the game IMO.

If I see a cash game and it has a cap of £2000 with a minimum buy-in of £100 then I can choose to play it or not. I personally wouldn"t play this cash game tourney without being prepared to risk the full £200.

I think there should be a minimum and maximum buy-in and a defined amount of "rebuys/top-ups" both in terms of number and amount.

[s4ooter]

As Steve was pointing out. My 2nd £100 was in my hand to be added to stack for Final Table, whereas Ian and Frankie had already bust once and couldn"t. There would have been £93 more at FT if the rules allowed me to do so

[dwh103]

Aaaaannnndddd....Dann Williams - here is your cue!

As Steve was pointing out. My 2nd £100 was in my hand to be added to stack for Final Table, whereas Ian and Frankie had already bust once and couldn"t. There would have been £93 more at FT if the rules allowed me to do so

Dance puppet, DANCE!

[deanp27]

I reckon a live cash tournament should start 250bb deep anyway to be interesting, so either increase stacks or decrease blinds (or both)

[CW86]

I reckon a live cash tournament should start 250bb deep anyway to be interesting, so either increase stacks or decrease blinds (or both)

Once it got to 1-2 the average was around 250bb anyway

[s4ooter]

Aaaaannnndddd....Dann Williams - here is your cue!

As Steve was pointing out. My 2nd £100 was in my hand to be added to stack for Final Table, whereas Ian and Frankie had already bust once and couldn"t. There would have been £93 more at FT if the rules allowed me to do so

Dance puppet, DANCE!

Ok sir

[s4ooter]

My question is when/where can i reg for cash in Cov??

I have booked the day off so i can get there.

Reserve i up please!

[CW86]

My question is when/where can i reg for cash in Cov??

I have booked the day off so i can get there.

Reserve i up please!

+1

[4KSuited]

I haven"t seen any mention of sponsorship this season. Are APAT going it alone now?

Are WH adding anything for us having to sign up / play there?

William Hill have sponsored the next two events Stuart; which we held over from the end of last season to give support to DTD with the ISPT.  We"re in talks with other third parties from event 4 onwards, but WH"s sponsorship effectively supports the budget for the Vegas and WCOAP packages. 

They are offering a deposit £10, get £10 extra for players also. 

Des - after lots of hand-wringing and nail-chewing, I finally opened up a new player account on William Hill"s. I was finally convinced of this need because a) I was tempted to play the Freeroll tonight for the seats at Coventry and b) there is this offer of £10 free for a £10 deposit.

Imagine my chagrin when I downloaded, signed up, deposited £10 and then waited for the arrival of my extra £10 from the internet ether.... A quick chat-room enquiry followed, wherein I was advised that the offer had been "discontinued" 2 weeks ago...

Shurely shome mishtake...

I know you"re busy, but hey £10 is 2 pre-reg fees!!

[Chipaccrual]

I"m on the case with our William Hill contacts at the moment Phil.

I"ll get back to you as soon as I have an answer.



Leigh