betfair satellites - shouldn't the cheapest one be first?

[AllanD23]

I mentioned this in the middle of another post but not a sniff of a reply one way or the other so thought i"d start a new thread see if giving it it"s own title maybe gets an agreement or disagreement...

does nobody else think these betfair satellites are in the wrong order? by that i mean shouldn"t the cheapest be first?

I"m reluctant to play the $20 buck sat then a $10 and probably a $5....by the time you get to the 5 buck sat you"d have been as well buying in direct...i"m sure these sort of things used to start with the cheapest one so if you didn"t qualify then you could try the slightly dearer one the next night and so on...until you get to the last chance sat which is dearer.

The end result for me, and by the looks of it for loads of others, is i will play the $20 sat for the scottish live event as it"s a $120 tourney with a limited number of seats and i really want to play this as it"s closer to home than the rest for me and represents slightly better value than the online sat so i want to take every opportunity to qualify but i don"t fancy paying $20 for the online sat which is only for a $50 buck tourney as I wouldn"t even then want to play the $10 buck one if i failed as by that time i"d be as well buying in direct so i"m going to play the 10 and most likely the 5 buck sat for the online event.
Even looking at the numbers in the lobby tonight, surely the poorest turnouts for apat sats?
...or is this dooby just a little too strong for me?    

[Chipaccrual]

I did see your previous post, I think though it is just open for opinions on how we set out the satellites.

I don"t think there is a right or wrong answer and we will never please everyone.

Be interested to see what other players views are.  I don"t think you are the first to make this suggestion though.


Leigh

[AllanD23]

cheers leigh, at least i know i"m not posting into a void

[zzBlizzardzz]

I think APAT has got it right. I mean yes, it"s the norm to have the more expensive buy ins closer to the event. However sometimes the £5 rebuy is the most expensive one. Maybe that"s just me and Duke.

[Eck]

...or is this dooby just a little too strong for me?    

probably this

[Mikeyboy9361]

They are fine as fas as I am concerned, as i just play the $10, if I miss on that I buy in. End of.

[Shogun112]

I dont see a problem in what order they are played....  But...

As I said in the previous set of satellites, the scheduling is stupid, to play more than 1 game at a time, and it happened again last night..  There was a Satt for the Scottish live event (Which I won, did I mention) and at the same time, there was a satt to the online Scottish event coming up this weekend...

It does not need to be like that.  Why cant the online satts be on a differnet day than any other game..   How many blank days have we had between the last online game and that one yesterday?

Also I think them satts are too expensive... why a $20 satt into a $50 game...  should be $5 or $10 at most.

Also, if I win that game this weekend, there is an added seat to a pro event in Scotland..  Why?  By the time that game is finished on Saturday, all the satts and the click fest would have finished and we will probably have all seats taken for the amatuer game.  Myself and a lot of the players who play the amateur league are nearly half way through a league that we would like to win that particular league.  Why would I want to miss the amateur league game to take a seat in the pro league game..?

Carl..

[TightEnd]

Hi Carl, well done on your win btw

Unfortunately we had to push back the live sats by a week because of the problems we had with the initial venue. As a result the live and Online event sats were concurrent.

Normally, event problems aside, the Live event sats would be a week before the Online event satellites

[TheSnapper]

I did notice one time ( can"t remember which sat"s ) the Betfair software would"nt allow entry into both sats running at the same time, is there a benefit/concern, can this be changed to allow for more entries = a good thing.

[MintTrav]

As I said in the previous set of satellites, the scheduling is stupid, to play more than 1 game at a time, and it happened again last night..  There was a Satt for the Scottish live event (Which I won, did I mention) and at the same time, there was a satt to the online Scottish event coming up this weekend...

It does not need to be like that.  Why cant the online satts be on a differnet day than any other game..  

Unfortunately we had to push back the live sats by a week because of the problems we had with the initial venue. As a result the live and Online event sats were concurrent.

Normally, event problems aside, the Live event sats would be a week before the Online event satellites

Most of us can play a couple of games at the same time. Was happy to play both Scottish sats plus the Omaha tonight. Much better than spreading them out. Any chance of keeping it like this?