APAT Season Four - Pre Launch Discussion

[Honeybadg]

o

The question of those with bigger bankrolls is interesting - is there scope for some higher buy in events which would bring these players more into the centre of the APAT. I would be very keen to qualify for/play in these were they ran?

This surely would go against the whole ethos of APAT....what % of the APAT community has a "bigger bankroll".  The $10, or $50 aren"t even full, so a $500, or $1000 would surely be even less players entrying?

I joined the APAT because I felt (correct if Im wrong please) it was aimed at the Amatuer playing looking to play more online and live at realistic buy ins.  With the knowledge I"d be playing with players at my level, and playing with players I could learn from.

My guess would be that were there higher buy in events (in addition to the current ones - with qualifying routes) numbers would go up.

I wouldn"t ramp these up to $500/$1000 more like $100/$200 on-line (occasional tournaments - could be non-ranking - if that causes an issue)

Pro/Am event would be good ...

L

[Honeybadg]

Random Idea ...

I don"t know how this would work - but how about a championship for Cash Game Players?

Say you have 200 runners - re-draw every 2 hours say - limit the re-buys to some reasonable level - play cash for two days.

There is no-doubt a better format for this ... but would be interesting.

Thoughts.

L

[Jon MW]

Sat"s : True there is no cap : Hard to see how having extra sat"s would not produce more qualifiers.

The fact that APAT events are heavily over subscribed is an argument for more qualifiers of whatever type.

What are the stat"s here? How many more seats would sell?

In particular - I think the World Main Event should have more qualifying events - versus clickfest (which as you say is not convenient for many). These events could run through the year.

...

The same people play the satellites each time, it wouldn"t increase the number of individual players by the same proportion that the number of seats would be increased - I suspect it would in fact, almost stay the same.

So if more seats were available via satellite it would mean the people who play them have a disproportionately high chance of getting a seat.

Everybody who wants to can get a seat via a clickfest, this has always been the case and with the fall in demand (which has a few causes but imo is principally related to the economy) it has become even more the case.

By their nature online satellites have to be faster structured than most would like, and obviously a satellite is different to a freezeout - and online is different to live.

It just doesn"t make any logical sense that any significant proportion of of APAT seats for live deepstack freezeouts end up being won by players who are good at online, faster structured satellites.

[Honeybadg]

I think different people (and some of the same) would look to qualify if some of these were on Saturday/Sunday.

The structure in these was pretty good/slow.

The online sat"s are different to live freezeouts - but they are more similar than comparing a clickfest to face to face poker.

Clickfest suits me - but say 600 people wanted to play the Main Event - fastest finger first is a weird way to go!

Aside - it would be good to get more international players to play the event.

L

[Waz1892]

o

The question of those with bigger bankrolls is interesting - is there scope for some higher buy in events which would bring these players more into the centre of the APAT. I would be very keen to qualify for/play in these were they ran?

This surely would go against the whole ethos of APAT....what % of the APAT community has a "bigger bankroll".  The $10, or $50 aren"t even full, so a $500, or $1000 would surely be even less players entrying?

I joined the APAT because I felt (correct if Im wrong please) it was aimed at the Amatuer playing looking to play more online and live at realistic buy ins.  With the knowledge I"d be playing with players at my level, and playing with players I could learn from.

My guess would be that were there higher buy in events (in addition to the current ones - with qualifying routes) numbers would go up.

I wouldn"t ramp these up to $500/$1000 more like $100/$200 on-line (occasional tournaments - could be non-ranking - if that causes an issue)

Pro/Am event would be good ...

L

$100 or $200 still way over alot of people that play poker in my view, so again, not sure how numbers would go up.

Maybe its just me and my poultry BR.  I"m not against high buy ins of course, how selfish would that be, but not to replace any of the "normal" buy ins, which is I still feel the rock of APAT.

[Honeybadg]

I wouldn"t look to replace things ... and if there were higher buy in events I would look for qualifiers to these events.

L

[Jon MW]

I think different people (and some of the same) would look to qualify if some of these were on Saturday/Sunday.
...

A few more people would look to qualify if extra days were added, and almost all of the current would.

So in practice (within a few per cent), for example, doubling the number of satellites wouldn"t double the number of people who were able to get a seat this way - it would just double the number of chances each of the people who already try get.

And they"re already getting an "extra" chance or two to get a seat from playing in the existing qualifiers compared to those who don"t play online, I don"t see how giving even more chances to one subsection can be a good thing.

[Chipaccrual]

I think different people (and some of the same) would look to qualify if some of these were on Saturday/Sunday.
...

A few more people would look to qualify if extra days were added, and almost all of the current would.

So in practice (within a few per cent), for example, doubling the number of satellites wouldn"t double the number of people who were able to get a seat this way - it would just double the number of chances each of the people who already try get.

And they"re already getting an "extra" chance or two to get a seat from playing in the existing qualifiers compared to those who don"t play online, I don"t see how giving even more chances to one subsection can be a good thing.

Hear what you are saying Jon, but we must also remember that online satellites and other online games bring traffic to our sponsor who provides the added value for all players.

As always, there"s a balance to be found.  I can remember on previous threads players have asked for daytime satellites.

Perhaps one option would be to have a 10 man STT available on a loop, offering 1 seat to the winner, say $10 buyin.  Once it was full, then another would open.  Run them over a 72 hour period.

This might meet everyones requirements.

[MintTrav]

I also think that a lot of APAT members play within a bigger bankroll and are not as motivated to play a £75 deepstack over a long weekend, especially if it has been during a period of time when they may have played GUKPT or DTD deepstacks and fancy a weekend with the family. I dont agree that these players should not be allowed to represent their country or their forum, simply because they haven"t played many APAT events or have had their success at non APAT events.

I don"t follow your logic. If they are so important that the standard APAT events are beneath them or they can"t be bothered to play cos they want to be with their family, why should they leapfrog the people who attend all the APAT games to get a free pass into the team events?

because of this

the APAT community extends much further than the players who play in APAT comps.

I don"t know what this means. How does the "APAT community" include people who don"t play APAT events?
If four known names decide they want to play on the England team, would Redfern, Yates, etc would be shoved aside?

[Mikeyboy9361]

Qualifying for the APAT national teams is not possible at the moment as the team is selected, and the skippers do a great job, but surely we play enough live and on line events to make selection qualification based. Then if the guys who don.t play as many APAT events as others would have the added incentive to play them! I agree with the previous posters that places in APAT teams should be awarded to people who have success in APAT events.

[MAIR]

Qualifying for the APAT national teams is not possible at the moment as the team is selected, and the skippers do a great job, but surely we play enough live and on line events to make selection qualification based. Then if the guys who don.t play as many APAT events as others would have the added incentive to play them! I agree with the previous posters that places in APAT teams should be awarded to people who have success in APAT events.

At last someone who agrees with me..although from earlier posts, my view was not welcomed.

[APAT]

All views are welcomed.

[Swinebag]

whilst I dont agree with you on this Mary, please don"t confuse it with thinking other views are not welcome. Just expressing my opinion like everyone else.

[Jon MW]

Hats.

I think there should be a mandatory dress code for next season.

Primarily hat based, obv.

[SirPercival]

Hats.

I think there should be a mandatory dress code for next season.

Primarily hat based, obv.

or glasses