APAT Asks The Question #1

[MintTrav]

erm... "social" expense duly ticked  

Me too.

[Zozzy]

At the moment my live cash game as improved (or maybe variance is in my favour   ) which is funding live tournaments at the £30 - £50 buy-in level.
If I want to play bigger buy-in tournaments outside of my regular bankroll e.g. GPS or GUKPT I always play the online satellites to try to qualify.
This brings me to my blatant Brag
Tomorrow I am playing Day 1a £550 GUKPT ME Walsall. I played an online sharky freeroll which had 5 or 6 prizes. All the prizes were sub satellites (mostly £5.50 tickets) to main event seat. I finished first place in the freeroll winning a £55 ticket to another satellite which had 2 seats gtd to the ME.  The total number of entries in the £55 satellite generated 3 seats, and I binked one.
So I am playing in the £50K GTD GUKPT for a total outlay of FREEROLL  

[jjandellis]

I play online and live cash mainly to build the bankroll. Tourneys are just a bit of fun, bit of a punt really.

Everything comes out of my bankroll and exercise strict BRM. Sometimes way too strict.  I can be tight, so decide to sell % as don"t like taking chunks out for tourneys.  Usually sell 30%.

My new years resolution was to play satellites. I"m sooo lazy on playing them, but tbh they"re not really worth wasting hourly rate on.  Usually quicker to spin the required amount up in cash - plus its cheaper/more effective to pay for own hotels rather than some lavish package deal being played for.

Interesting approach Lee.  If you don"t mind me asking, what"s the max % of your bankroll that you would use to enter a live tourney ?  Or is it a case of only playing that tourney if you have generated the funds playing cash (so, setting yourself a target to hit in a certain time) ?

Very maximum for a tourney is 5% Usually looking more like 2 - 3%

If a tourney is a little out of my reach, or I"m being miserly, I"ll sell stakes. If its what I deem to be really excessive then I might just use whatever the excess is as a goal for a particular cash session(s)...so in a way I do kinda neglect strict BRM for that short period.  The tourney is then kind of a treat to myself!

I"m kinda happy that I"m on my own ticket - I could handle being backed, but don"t think I could deal with being in huge makeup. It does make me wonder about the credentials of some so called "name" players that are so deep in MU...

[AAroddersAA]

It"s a social expense for me. I don"t play live poker (it"s stupidly boring - would literally rather be in work than play a long live session). I go to APAT weekends, which are different and are obviously massive -EV once you take the way I treat an APAT weekend into account.

Online is very different (I do try to be profitable at this and therefore use pretty strict BRM) but live poker is clearly a social expense for somebody like me and a lot of the APAT regs. A bit surprised it is so low on the list to be honest and I think the reality is that that options is actually a lot higher for more people than want to admit it.

Also don"t see that live or online sats truly fund live poker (They just reduce the cost of it) and potentially allow you to fund future tournaments from your bankroll if you get a good live bink. It"s an interesting question though

[amcgrath1uk]

Social expense and depends on the tournament.

APAT games and say £100 games I"d never look at either satting or buying in, above that, it"s satting or being backed.

I generally now don"t have time to play at the local casinos, so just APAT's for me

[blowfly]

1. Bank of Mr D = Social expense  
2. BRM - we do this jointly - Mr D tops it up and I spend it  
3. Staked - Seats won in the BCPC live league
4. Have satted into things rarely by playing online  

[SirPercival]

1. Bank of Mr D = Social expense  
2. BRM - we do this jointly - Mr D tops it up and I spend it  
3. Staked - Seats won in the BCPC live league
4. Have satted into things rarely by playing online  

Have you hacked into your wife"s account again Andy?