WCOAP 2015 - Cash Tournament Feedback

[Sugar_Free]

I was gonna play this one, but now not so sure. I"m not rolled to play £100 cash games effectively, and whilst introducing unlimited reloads does indeed make it more akin to a natural cash game, it takes it away from the low cost approach for which APAT is famous.   I would take a punt with a couple of buy ins, but those with deep pockets can abuse this and will have a significant advantage - and that kinda goes against what APAT is supposed to stand for.

I agree with Steve (gasp). I thought the idea was rather than make it just feel like a cash game, it was supposed to have the feel of a tourney in that at some stage your tournament life could be on the line so that you don"t just get the "F*** it" calls, followed by another reload.

Where next? Unlimited rebuys in the sides?

[LombBomb]

I was gonna play this one, but now not so sure. I"m not rolled to play £100 cash games effectively, and whilst introducing unlimited reloads does indeed make it more akin to a natural cash game, it takes it away from the low cost approach for which APAT is famous.   I would take a punt with a couple of buy ins, but those with deep pockets can abuse this and will have a significant advantage - and that kinda goes against what APAT is supposed to stand for.

I agree with Steve (gasp). I thought the idea was rather than make it just feel like a cash game, it was supposed to have the feel of a tourney in that at some stage your tournament life could be on the line so that you don"t just get the "F*** it" calls, followed by another reload.

Where next? Unlimited rebuys in the sides?

Matt and Steve have put this better than I could, I totally echo their thoughts.

[jgcblack]

I agree with the points above... They are of concern.

However in actuality the players you are worried about didn"t either play the event, or in my case, didn"t play it as you fear.  There were quite a few players who played with £50 or only re bought once who managed to do very well.  I was only in for £105, I didn"t bully or make any "f*ck it calls".  I did however make a call some questioned when it got opened to £6 on the 25/50p level by Mr J Murphy, called in 5 spots (including myself) then an all in from an apat regular for 32.  Everyone folded round to me and I called quickly with 86ss.   This isn"t a hopeful call but instead an almost certainly profitable call based on my price and hand.  The gent had AKo and I made a straight.  He was visibly frustrated but it is a cash game and I make that call vs all unknowns and 95% of people I know as it is just printing money.

It played exactly as I hope it will from now on, like a small stakes cash game with a time pressure tournament element.  I emplore you to not worry about any deep pockets or tournament life.  Just enjoy a good structure with friendly people.  All of the tables I played on were the embodiment of the apat I have heard of.
With maybe only myself representing a little bit of chilli sauce on the side.

[IrishTom]

Thanks for the feedback.

With the events I"ve organised I think at most I"ve seen 3 rebuys - and they were not for the full £100 - more like "topping up when below £50" - is it not more the fear/worry/possibility of unlimited rebuys that is drawing negative thoughts?

Bearing in mind, if someone re-loads say 7 times - that means he has dropped below £50 on 7 occasions (or gone broke if only having £50 max - or something in between!), meaning he has probably lost circa £350 (min - anything up to £700!) before he does an 8th reload to have a max of £100 in front of him - therefore, other players at the table have that £350-£700 in their stacks.

Probably unfair from the "tournament" element of the Cash Tournament - but he has to make the Final Table - and then win or come 2nd in that to benefit from the "tournament buyins" - having spent £350-£700 and then having to qualify from a "reload of £100 max" with blinds at 25p/25p or 25p/50p max.

Probably great for the "cash" element of the Cash Tournament - others are benefiting.

[AAroddersAA]

I was gonna play this one, but now not so sure. I"m not rolled to play £100 cash games effectively, and whilst introducing unlimited reloads does indeed make it more akin to a natural cash game, it takes it away from the low cost approach for which APAT is famous.   I would take a punt with a couple of buy ins, but those with deep pockets can abuse this and will have a significant advantage - and that kinda goes against what APAT is supposed to stand for.

I agree with Steve (gasp). I thought the idea was rather than make it just feel like a cash game, it was supposed to have the feel of a tourney in that at some stage your tournament life could be on the line so that you don"t just get the "F*** it" calls, followed by another reload.

Where next? Unlimited rebuys in the sides?

Most certainly respect the opinions offered here by these guy"s and maybe it is something that needs to be looked at if this is the opinion of most of the regulars. I don"t think the game will get as much passing trade as the WCOAP in Stratford did on the tour.

Would like to hear APAT's opinion on the highlighted bit as this is certainly not my understanding of what they are trying to achieve here. It is in no way suppose to feel like a tournament, they are different skill sets, and this is meant to be a cash game. It just needs to have a winner and this is a way of achieving it. It is not a pure cash game but it is pretty close, if the idea is to give a tournament feel it is failing as it feels nothing like a tournament. I don"t believe that was the idea though so it is a success.

That said I don"t see the problem with a rebuy being a side event either.

[LombBomb]

I agree with the points above... They are of concern.

However in actuality the players you are worried about didn"t either play the event, or in my case, didn"t play it as you fear.  There were quite a few players who played with £50 or only re bought once who managed to do very well.  I was only in for £105, I didn"t bully or make any "f*ck it calls".  I did however make a call some questioned when it got opened to £6 on the 25/50p level by Mr J Murphy, called in 5 spots (including myself) then an all in from an apat regular for 32.  Everyone folded round to me and I called quickly with 86ss.   This isn"t a hopeful call but instead an almost certainly profitable call based on my price and hand.  The gent had AKo and I made a straight.  He was visibly frustrated but it is a cash game and I make that call vs all unknowns and 95% of people I know as it is just printing money.

It played exactly as I hope it will from now on, like a small stakes cash game with a time pressure tournament element.  I emplore you to not worry about any deep pockets or tournament life.  Just enjoy a good structure with friendly people.  All of the tables I played on were the embodiment of the apat I have heard of.
With maybe only myself representing a little bit of chilli sauce on the side.

Hi John, and firstly congrats on the win. It was myself you busted with the 68 lol. I was always limping there with the intention of coming over the top of any raise as the table had been quite aggro. Was more frustrated that I ran so bad throughout the event but didn"t have a problem with your call given your stack size. Was just happy to get it in good with all the dead money in there.

[PokerRoyalFlush9]

I thought everything for this ran well. My only thought would be when running it as 1a,1b make everyone at the end of both day have a full chip count (£) and then invite back the top 8 back for the final from across both flights. At the WCOAP 2015 -1a cash players top 4 and 4 reserves we all higher in stakes (£) then all but two from 1b.

[MintTrav]

Murphy!??!!

[fandango]

Murphy!??!!

Could of been Easily been Paddy.. Easy mistake to make to be sure bejesus

[GGUK2008]

I fully agree with IrishTom's appraisal of the situation.

If somebody is desperate to fire multiple bullets of £100 with the aim of making the final table then let them. To me the purpose of a cash game tournament is this: show that you are the best player at navigating cash games. You do this by playing optimally against people who are looking to get it in at any cost. The deeper pockets do not have an automatic advantage in this format.

I did have one reservation about the format played at WCOAP. I really did not understand the utility of an arbitrary pause of the clock in the last ten minutes, followed by a count of the stacks, followed by five more hands. I understand that this gave people an idea of what they were aiming for in order to make the final table, but it gave a 20-minute pause in the action and I think it actually removed the flow of the game. Also, I don"t understand why the clock was paused instead of run down to zero and THEN count (if absolutely necessary) and then play the last five hands.

Regarding my reservations: it may just be that my table did not see any benefit on this one occasion, but it didn"t seem to stimulate any action or make people do stupid things just to make the final table.

[Paulie_D]

I did have one reservation about the format played at WCOAP. I really did not understand the utility of an arbitrary pause of the clock in the last ten minutes, followed by a count of the stacks, followed by five more hands. I understand that this gave people an idea of what they were aiming for in order to make the final table, but it gave a 20-minute pause in the action and I think it actually removed the flow of the game. Also, I don"t understand why the clock was paused instead of run down to zero and THEN count (if absolutely necessary) and then play the last five hands.

This is, as I recall, something the casino put in..not APAT.

They have specific reasons for doing so...and they did it during the WCOAP Main event too.

[IrishTom]

I did have one reservation about the format played at WCOAP. I really did not understand the utility of an arbitrary pause of the clock in the last ten minutes, followed by a count of the stacks, followed by five more hands. I understand that this gave people an idea of what they were aiming for in order to make the final table, but it gave a 20-minute pause in the action and I think it actually removed the flow of the game. Also, I don"t understand why the clock was paused instead of run down to zero and THEN count (if absolutely necessary) and then play the last five hands.

This is, as I recall, something the casino put in..not APAT.

They have specific reasons for doing so...and they did it during the WCOAP Main event too.

As far as I"m aware guys this IS something APAT put in - when they devised the "cash tournament" initially - but Des or Leigh will be best placed to advise on this as I wasn"t around in those days.

However, even if it was instigated in the early days by 1 or more casinos, it most certainly was something I instigated in the events I"ve run since coming to APAT - including recent WCOAP.

Saying that I don"t think "the origins" really matter now - it is something that happens now.

Reading Gareth"s comments about his reservations, my view is that players want/need to know what they are aiming for, and because we have multiple tables, the way we achieve that is to decide "at a specific time" to do a chip count and then let the game play to complation after that - when players are then aware of what they need to aim for to qualify for the Final Table.

Of course, the "Top 8/10" stacks that we call out at this point can change in either direction - ie either up or down - so the "stop clock for last 5 hands" is a guide only at that given time.  Of course we could also play out the full 3 hours, then do a count, then play the last 5 hands - but I don"t see that being any different to what we do now except have  10 mins or so more playing time - and of course we could do it "earlier" than last 5 hands - then that could/would be too early and counter-productive (ie stacks could have changed soooo much that you really have no idea of what you are aiming for)?

I would add that Des devised this concept (and developed with Leigh etc I believe), and at a guess I think it came from a "tournament perspective" to give tournament players an opportunity to experience "cash" - and I"m sure they"ll correct me if wrong by maybe Des and Leigh are more "tournament" players than cash players - where I would consider myself foremost a cash player and therefore any "changes" I"ve implemented since picking up on this are probably from a more "cash" perspective - therefore I believe it started out more with a "tournament" feel to it, but has moved more towards a "cash" feel to it.

Again thanks for all the feedback, we are listening and will continue to do so.

[GGUK2008]

Very interesting, Tom. As long as there"s consistency over a series of these events I think there"s little room for complaint.

edit: And it was certainly a fun format!

[Des]

This was my baby, not sure that anyone else fed into the initial proposition in too much detail - but it was clear that the idea would need to evolve over time.  That said, happy to add my thoughts on a couple of areas that were discussed above that I continue to have an opinion on.

1)  Event duration.

For me this is best ran as a one day event.  I think momentum and information is important in this format, so to have a 24 or 48 hour delay between your qualifying, and the final, is an odd one for me. 

2)  End of the qualifying session.

Personally, I preferred when there wasn"t a chipcount or final x number of hands.  For me, it"s about the players needing to maintain an awareness of where they are in the game across the final hour - by understanding the average stack sizes and how they compared.  The imperfect information and session 1 deadline would encourage the fight or flight behaviour that was evident when we first ran this in the WCOAP.  Now it seems a little too easy to decide.

3) Top ups.

It"s an APAT event, so personally I would limit top ups to 2 or 3 times the buy in.  Otherwise an unlucky hand or two can wipe out a well planned strategy.  And we don"t necessarily want lucky players winning this event, we want players who have best adapted to the format.

That aside, the objective of this event is to introduce tournament players (70% of all players) to cash.  The fact that they"re playing with cash chips (so real value), fixed antes, the occasional straddle and the fact that they can stand up at any point and walk away with the money in front of them is more than enough to achieve this objective.  I don"t think we need to allow unlimited reloads also.  If anything, this will frighten some tournament players from giving the format a try.

4) Last longer.

I would award 100% of the last longer fees to the winner.  A high percentage of players in this format will walk away with money - certainly far more than in a tournament (although some of those may walk away with less than they entered with).  For me, we shouldn"t incentivise anyone to finish second.

Those points aside, I"ve been really pleased with the success of the format.  Those who"ve played it, tend to strongly like it and offer opinions on how to improve it (always a good sign).

I thought John was a great winner at Aspers.  Generally I wouldn"t like his mouthy approach in a normal APAT, but it seemed to be a useful tool in this event, and he won more by skill than luck.  Particularly liked turning over the four in the hand against Sean that ultimately won him the bracelet.  It was great theatre...and next year we just have to stream this event.