Deal making at APAT tournaments

[RioRodent]

No comments (so far) - http://www.apat.com/forum/index.php?topic=6002.msg102481#msg102481 - so clearly too subtle.  

It seems a deal was done between the final two in the Vienna tournament at the weekend.

Does this mean that APAT's policy of not allowing, or at least actively discouraging, deal making has been changed?

I realise that now that the prize money is paid in cash at the venue, there is really nothing to stop participants from making deals should they really wish to, but I suspect a lot of people would be reticent about suggesting deals as it is not the "APAT way".

[AMRN]

yeah i read that as well, but was waiting for others to pass comment. I like the APAT concept of discouraging (banning?) deals - it makes the tournament about winning rather than about earning money, and that"s one of the main differences between Amateur and Professional poker.

I"m sure this was a one off, and I hope we stick to a ban on deals.

[Paulie_D]

I was surprised when I heard that a deal had been done and I was there. Tighty mentioned it to me and I don"t want to misquote him so I"ll let him reply.

The basic answer is nothing has changed about the "rules".... this was a one-off thing.

[RioRodent]

yeah i read that as well, but was waiting for others to pass comment. I like the APAT concept of discouraging (banning?) deals - it makes the tournament about winning rather than about earning money, and that"s one of the main differences between Amateur and Professional poker.

I"m sure this was a one off, and I hope we stick to a ban on deals.

How does it make winning more important than earning money? Winning is only more important because you earn more money!

[AMRN]

yeah i read that as well, but was waiting for others to pass comment. I like the APAT concept of discouraging (banning?) deals - it makes the tournament about winning rather than about earning money, and that"s one of the main differences between Amateur and Professional poker.

I"m sure this was a one off, and I hope we stick to a ban on deals.

How does it make winning more important than earning money? Winning is only more important because you earn more money!

I meant that it lessens the impact of the ladder - the win is the win, and that is supposed to be more important than the money. By doing a deal that flattens out the final payouts, you decrease the need to win.

When I play non-APAT tournaments, I am always watching the ladder, and happy to deal when it means guaranteeing more money.... but in APAT games, it"s always about the win, and the win only.  The tolerance of deal making would detract from this approach.

[RioRodent]

yeah i read that as well, but was waiting for others to pass comment. I like the APAT concept of discouraging (banning?) deals - it makes the tournament about winning rather than about earning money, and that"s one of the main differences between Amateur and Professional poker.

I"m sure this was a one off, and I hope we stick to a ban on deals.

How does it make winning more important than earning money? Winning is only more important because you earn more money!

I meant that it lessens the impact of the ladder - the win is the win, and that is supposed to be more important than the money. By doing a deal that flattens out the final payouts, you decrease the need to win.

When I play non-APAT tournaments, I am always watching the ladder, and happy to deal when it means guaranteeing more money.... but in APAT games, it"s always about the win, and the win only.  The tolerance of deal making would detract from this approach.

I understand where you"re coming from Steve and know how much you value your APAT successes... I just don"t agree with the "No Deals" policy - at least as far as the cash is concerned. The cash is the players money and if all remaining participants are in agreement I beleive they should be allowed to redistribute it as they see fit. (Except for giving money to the "bubble boy", but that"s just a pet hate of mine.)

Any added value from the sponsor ie. GUKPT seat, is another matter... that can"t really be split and will always be there as a proper incentive for the winner.

In actual fact I have very rarely suggested making a deal in any tournament that I have cashed in... however, I am always willing to listen to offers if everyone else wants it - except giving money to the bubble!

[Chipaccrual]

Probably best that I clarify what happened, as I was there.  Although the TD did have to translate for me.  

We had explained prior to the tournament that one of the APAT "rules" was no deals.  The card room manager said at the time that he was okay with that.  He said 50% of the times, there are normally chops in his tournaments.

When it got down to the final table, I had another conversation with him, and he said he planned to make sure that should any discussions take place, he would at the least ensure that an amount was left to play for between the players.

This seemed a fair situation, as a lot of the players were new to APAT.  As it happened, a chop was only discussed when we were heads up, and as Christophe explained in his post, it was declined at first.

When it swung the other way, it was discussed again, and they agreed to chop 3k euros each, and play for the remaining 700 euros + the GUKPT seat.

This all took place in German, and to be fair to the players, it could have easily passed me by.  I had been at the final table for a few hours by then, and I was aware the discussions going on at that point weren"t just about how nice a weekend it had been.  

APAT's stance on deals hasn"t changed.  We have always discouraged deals from being made.  We, of course, aren"t naive enough to think that this is something we can totally control, as once the players have been paid out, what they choose to do with their winnings is entirely up to them.

But in essence, APAT is all about play to win, and that hasn"t changed.

[RioRodent]

One day I"ll sit inside the tent, in the dry.  

[daveyb147]

NO DEAL !!!!