APAT Payout Structures

[PHIL_TC]

Please change to a more conventional payout structure.

And....

Please, please stop paying 1 x additional £75 place for each alternate that plays. Either -

If payout structure changes... just add it to the prize pool; or

If payout structure remains... aggregate the £75"s and pay additional prizes a little less than the existing bottom payout ie. if 20th pays £300 and there are 5 alternates, then have 21st pays £225 and 22nd pays £150.

I really cannot see why anyone would be happy to go away with just their entry fee... if you need you entry fee back that bad, stay at home!

This is exactly what was put in place for worlds main event, so I believe is already in place

[PHIL_TC]

My twopenneth... agree with these following points :

Better structured final table payouts, always thought it was wrong that 4th got the same as 9th, Will is spot on with "9th getting paid the same as 4th takes away a whole dynamic of tournment poker. If you were a good player with a decant stack on the final table, then you should be looking to exploit the people who are laddering for the extra £100 or so. The middle stacks hanging on for the shortie to go broke etc. That is exactly what final tables are all about, looking for any edge to help yourself get into the top 3"

No deals, as one of my best mates said at the final table in Edinburgh.. "its all about the win Des.. its all about the win"

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVj0795gkQA[/youtube]

Payouts start at people who make day two, although as all the venues always require a stay over for me and the Stockton massive it doesnt matter, it would make sense for more local players.

[gatso]

Ahem!! You could have credited the author.  

yeah, sorry. who was it?

[Luke1]

Would be nice to get views from those who have finalled and won on the FT structure

Ahem....well, I have Finalled...twice. Never won one...yet!

As a mod maybe u can answer why the online tourneys have a more traditional payout structure?

I can explain that one quite simply.  To use the same structure for the online events would require setting up a unique payment matrix with the software provider which was able to calculate the payouts dependant on the number of runners.

This is not possible to do with most software providers, hence having to go with the standard payout structures that the software use.

Ideally, the online games would mirror the live ones, and in the case of the added value, and lack of reg fees, we"ve got it closer this season, but the payouts is probably going to be one step we cannot resolve.

What about live Leigh? Are payout structures going to be discussed for season 5?

They are regularly discussed.  Personally, I am of the opinion that the final table shouldn"t be flat (4th-9th) and there should be structure to it.  I would still want the top three to be a significantly greater payout than the other ft"ers, as it is championship poker with medals, added value etc, but I"ve never really liked 4th getting the same as 9th.

As ever I agree 100% with you Leigh!

Can we introduce this so that whoever came 4th in the recent Ireland tournament gets an extra slice of the cake?!

[RioRodent]

Please change to a more conventional payout structure.

And....

Please, please stop paying 1 x additional £75 place for each alternate that plays. Either -

If payout structure changes... just add it to the prize pool; or

If payout structure remains... aggregate the £75"s and pay additional prizes a little less than the existing bottom payout ie. if 20th pays £300 and there are 5 alternates, then have 21st pays £225 and 22nd pays £150.

I really cannot see why anyone would be happy to go away with just their entry fee... if you need you entry fee back that bad, stay at home!

This is exactly what was put in place for worlds main event, so I believe is already in place

I think you may have missed my point? Yes, the line you have highlighted is the way it is now (or at least it was the last time I played).

I, me, personnally, see no point in the min cash paying just your buy-in back.

90% of the field will go home with nothing, 10% will cash... thats"s just the way it is. Most people who have already booked and paid for a hotel for the night will go home with nothing, they know that when they decide to play. But surely, if you get into the money it should at least be double your buy-in, ideally three times and go some way to covering your expenses.

[RioRodent]

I have no problem with the flat/top-heavy payout structure precisely for the reasons APAT have laid out.

APAT doesn"t really have any problems selling out it"s UK events and unless the number of available seats were to rise dramatically, I see no likelihood of any change in the pay-out structure.

This is a total red herring... if APAT had started out with a more conventional payout structure it would still be in exactly the same strong position it is in today.

Just because OTHER poker organisations have a more structured payout structure doesn"t make theirs better.

Yes, it does.

Overall, if I"m going to get a medal/top spot, I want to EARN it by better (or luckier) play not through trying to ladder up the payout structure by sitting back.

Poker is a game where a players standard is ultimately measured by how much money they win and the length of time over which they continue to do so... not by how many medals or cups they have gathering dust on their mantelpeice.

On the deal-making side, APAT have rules against it (for obvious reasons)

What are the reasons?

but, in truth, there is very little they can do to stop it..other than throwing out bans if it"s discovered. I wouldn"t do it but others might...it smacks of collusion too much for me.

Deals = Collusion?? wtf is that all about?

Regards,
Alan
(Probably alone, on the outside of the tent, again, fml!!)

[daveyb147]

i thought apat was apat,,never knew it was a training ground for bigger events ?
  Top heavy preferred,,,day 1 down to the money preferred,,,no deals preferred,,,once the deal is done lets go home,,,dont like that attitude,,,people do not play the same once the deal is done !!!

[Cyntaf]

Payout I agree that a flatter payout would be good. I made an F.T. early season. I went for the win and ended up getting payed for fifth, the same amount as ninth got.  Now had the structure had been flatter i would still have gone for the win from that point. So it would not have affected my strategy or my finishing position, however i would probably of nearly doubled my payout....on that occasion. I do have to add though, that the payout was furthest from my mind, 1st Pos(Title), Gold Medal and the added seat were my goals. If pay structure remains the same i won"t mind too much.

Day 2 Payouts  I think it would be quite difficult on a regular basis to get down to payouts by the end of day one. Also there have been a number of times that very short stacks have come back to win money and medals. Sadly me not being one of them......as stated earlier, a lot of people travelling have booked their hotels prior to arrival, so why should we rush the tourneys so that more local people can decide whether or not to drive home or stay. If somebody has a  a decent stack come 1  a.m. Why should they have to carry on for 2 or 3 levels longer at risk of making major mistakes(creeping in through tiredness) to appease those that want to either get a big stack or go home. Sorry to be blunt but,

                                                   Apat Two Day Event


Deals
I think i fall to the negative side on this one. My feelings are that especially with a more balanced structure, deals would not need to be made. Also as a sportsman i do want to win, i would not run a race with Phil T.C. and one and a half miles from the finish say,"shall we call it a draw, and share the spoils"? That may seem a strange analogy but it"s not. The mindset is to win, be it poker, running or golf. I want to be first and without a step up from anybody else.
I also as a short stack would feel like a cheat if i were to increase my payout by dealing, and i certainly wouldn"t have the gaul to ask for one. Maybe i am just too soft or think differently to alot of other people. Yes, life changing moneys? ie £30k or £85k on a deal, a different thought approach may kick in.                    With regards to this:

there is no way that deals have never been done it apat tournaments. at the moment they have to be done away from the table which isn`t great. by allowing them to be done in public and have the actual physical payouts reflect the done deal you`re removing the possibility of people being ripped off when someone wins a comp and then goes back on a deal.

Should not be doing deals, they are against the rules of the tournament you have entered. Can"t really moan about somone not standing up to an illegal deal. I know your just making a point as to why you think deals should be allowed.

I too have fallen foul of deals, Massive chip leader and could have pressured others into submission. I then agree a part deal just to be nice(because i"m a p#ssy), the casino then immediately up the blinds by 10x. Which now diminishes my stack by BB?? becomes a shovefest, i end up 3rd and top 2 chopping for most of the rest.. Well ripped off, no mention of increase when deal was suggested..suggested?.. i have to say badgered into one, some people will just not accept no for an answer. Yes it"s easy to say no, but some people harp on and in groups to bully the big stack, or maybe that"s just where i play.

Anyways.  Flatter......Yes
              Day 2.........No
              Deals.........No
              50%.........Yes, why not.

[AAroddersAA]

Overall, if I"m going to get a medal/top spot, I want to EARN it by better (or luckier) play not through trying to ladder up the payout structure by sitting back.

Poker is a game where a players standard is ultimately measured by how much money they win and the length of time over which they continue to do so... not by how many medals or cups they have gathering dust on their mantelpeice.

True but in APAT the titles and the medals do mean a lot. If yo are just talking about money won then tournaments mean very little it is all about cash games. Whilst I strongly agree with this it is a whole different discussion, I think it is safe to say that when playing  APAT tournament the medals mean as much as the money (or come pretty close).

I would say this is something that is special about APAT

I too have fallen foul of deals, Massive chip leader and could have pressured others into submission. I then agree a part deal just to be nice(because i"m a p#ssy), the casino then immediately up the blinds by 10x. Which now diminishes my stack by BB?? becomes a shovefest, i end up 3rd and top 2 chopping for most of the rest.. Well ripped off, no mention of increase when deal was suggested..suggested?.. i have to say badgered into one, some people will just not accept no for an answer. Yes it"s easy to say no, but some people harp on and in groups to bully the big stack, or maybe that"s just where i play.

If this happens then I would have to agree with no deals. If making a deal turns the game into a crapshoot then that is bad. Surely it is possible though for a deal to be made for the cash and to allow play to continue for the medal and added value.

We are all in agreement the medals are important and we do not want to affect that. I am just not at all convinced flattening the pyout structure would do that.

To try and sum up what he members seem to be saying here:-

1) We would like a flatter payout structure in an ideal world, although nobody is too bothered if it stays the same

2) We certainly like the no deals rule so that should stay (not my personal opinion but reading thread it seems to be what most people like).

3) We want the medals to retain their prestige - and deals may affect this hence we do"t like them.

4) Most importantly APAT is about meeting up with people who you only see every now and again and having a couple of beers and a good weekend playing a well run poker tournament that feels like it means something. This needs to be preserved whatever.

I am really impressed by the points made by some respected members of APAT and the way they have been put across. I have no doubt that the views will be taken into account by APAT when planning next season

[pables]

i thought apat was apat,,never knew it was a training ground for bigger events ?
  Top heavy preferred,,,day 1 down to the money preferred,,,no deals preferred,,,once the deal is done lets go home,,,dont like that attitude,,,people do not play the same once the deal is done !!!

Now that is true.

But to be honest I attend APAT events not to worry about the money,- my wife does enough of that for me,- but for the craic!

See you at Luton

Dead Money

[Paulie_D]

We are all in agreement the medals are important and we do not want to affect that. I am just not at all convinced flattening the pyout structure would do that.

To try and sum up what he members seem to be saying here:-

1) We would like a flatter payout structure in an ideal world, although nobody is too bothered if it stays the same

2) We certainly like the no deals rule so that should stay (not my personal opinion but reading thread it seems to be what most people like).

3) We want the medals to retain their prestige - and deals may affect this hence we don"t like them.

4) Most importantly APAT is about meeting up with people who you only see every now and again and having a couple of beers and a good weekend playing a well run poker tournament that feels like it means something. This needs to be preserved whatever.

I am really impressed by the points made by some respected members of APAT and the way they have been put across. I have no doubt that the views will be taken into account by APAT when planning next season

Steve...I think you nailed it on the head....thanks for kicking this off.

[RioRodent]

We are all in agreement the medals are important and we do not want to affect that. I am just not at all convinced flattening the pyout structure would do that.

To try and sum up what he members seem to be saying here:-

1) We would like a flatter payout structure in an ideal world, although nobody is too bothered if it stays the same

2) We certainly like the no deals rule so that should stay (not my personal opinion but reading thread it seems to be what most people like).

3) We want the medals to retain their prestige - and deals may affect this hence we don"t like them.

4) Most importantly APAT is about meeting up with people who you only see every now and again and having a couple of beers and a good weekend playing a well run poker tournament that feels like it means something. This needs to be preserved whatever.

I am really impressed by the points made by some respected members of APAT and the way they have been put across. I have no doubt that the views will be taken into account by APAT when planning next season

Steve...I think you nailed it on the head....thanks for kicking this off.

LOL... that"s that put to bed for another year then.  

[Jon MW]

We are all in agreement the medals are important and we do not want to affect that. I am just not at all convinced flattening the pyout structure would do that.

To try and sum up what he members seem to be saying here:-

1) We would like a flatter payout structure in an ideal world, although nobody is too bothered if it stays the same

2) We certainly like the no deals rule so that should stay (not my personal opinion but reading thread it seems to be what most people like).

3) We want the medals to retain their prestige - and deals may affect this hence we don"t like them.

4) Most importantly APAT is about meeting up with people who you only see every now and again and having a couple of beers and a good weekend playing a well run poker tournament that feels like it means something. This needs to be preserved whatever.

I am really impressed by the points made by some respected members of APAT and the way they have been put across. I have no doubt that the views will be taken into account by APAT when planning next season

Steve...I think you nailed it on the head....thanks for kicking this off.

LOL... that"s that put to bed for another year then.  

1. There seems to be a consensus that people want at least a nominal difference in prize money for each position rather than completely flat between 9th and 4th

2. There seems to be a consensus against allowing deals, however as has been pointed out - if no one wants deals, there"s no need to discourage deals.

So both of these points could be changed.

Nothing needs to change - it just could do.

[Claw75]

(Probably alone, on the outside of the tent, again, fml!!)

far from it I reckon.  I"d say I"m pretty much in the same sleeping bag

[RioRodent]

(Probably alone, on the outside of the tent, again, fml!!)

far from it I reckon.  I"d say I"m pretty much in the same sleeping bag

Ooo-er!