APAT Season 5: Discussion

[Fatcatstu]

It definately is a big enough hike, it must be, alot of people have said it is, if they are saying that then surely it shows a good case for keeping it the same no?

[AMRN]

The Nationals always sell out. They have always sold out. There is always an Alternate list. People keep coming back,

It ain"t broke - why do so many people want to fix it?

[josharp01]

It ain"t broke - why do so many people want to fix it?

+1

[Fatcatstu]

The Nationals always sell out. They have always sold out. There is always an Alternate list. People keep coming back,

It ain"t broke - why do so many people want to fix it?

good point, well made.

[WarBwastardo]

It definately is a big enough hike, it must be, alot of people have said it is, if they are saying that then surely it shows a good case for keeping it the same no?

Some people have said it is.  Some haven"t.  But you can obviously not know which buy-in would be more successful without trying them both.

[WarBwastardo]

The Nationals always sell out. They have always sold out. There is always an Alternate list. People keep coming back,

It ain"t broke - why do so many people want to fix it?

That"s a non sequitur.  I don"t think it"s a matter of it being broken, it"s about improving it and striving for the best tour possible, that"s the purpose of this thread. Whether the hike is progress to that end or not remains to be seen.  Something being OK as it is is not an argument for not trying to improve it.

[AceOnTheRiver]

Some points relating to the online league / number of players in a team debate:

I acknowledge that the current system needs looking at but the proposal of dividing points by the number of players in a team is flawed in my opinion for the following reasons.

1. Surely part of the role of the captain and team members is to encourage more and more players to join the team, which in many cases acts as their intro to APAT and in some cases "real" poker, so it"s all good. Under this proposal inexperienced players could make numbers a disadvantage.

2. The league is FUN and should remain as such whilst also being competitive with good added value. If I bust out very early three weeks on the bounce I will have directly negated good performances - I will feel like a bad team member. People might start to criticise poorly performing players.

3. If you have 50 runners, then 24th could be viewed as a positive result as it"s better than the average. This could encourage insanely nitty play and games would be ending sometime on Tuesday.

I acknowledge that I am saying all of this from the point of view of playing for one of the most populated teams, but that links back to point one. At Luton we have been actively recruiting and some of the new players in turn bought their friends along - our fun and friendly live game recently has also done us no harm either - and IMO THAT"s what APAT is about

Finally, it"s not all about quantity! We"ve got some quality too you know  

[pokerpops]

The Nationals always sell out. They have always sold out. There is always an Alternate list. People keep coming back,

It ain"t broke - why do so many people want to fix it?

That"s a non sequitur.  I don"t think it"s a matter of it being broken, it"s about improving it and striving for the best tour possible, that"s the purpose of this thread. Whether the hike is progress to that end or not remains to be seen.  Something being OK as it is is not an argument for not trying to improve it.

Sometimes the effect of trying to improve something that was pretty darned good to start with is errrmmm not good...

[thinsy147]

The difference between £75 buy-in and £100 buy-in isn"t really a massive amount and to be honest wont make a massive difference to the prizes for making it in the money unless your fortunate enough to make the final three...

For me I"d rather see my £300 bank-roll see me seated at four tournies @ £75 rather than three tournies @ £100

I"ve been fortunate enough to win a medal and take home a nice stash of cash (blantent brag   ) but I turn up and play because I enjoy the game, the structure, the value and the company. Four games is better than three!!!

Therefore, my opinion is stick to £75 (the worlds @ £100 is ok. A World Championship should have a bit more!)

[George2Loose]

APAT has always been over subscribed from day dot but it hasn"t stopped it making adjustments and tweaks to make the tour better.

This "if it ain"t broke don"t fix it" argument is pretty poor imo

[AMRN]

This "if it ain"t broke don"t fix it" argument is pretty poor imo

I was referring specifically to the debate further up this thread about whether the buy in should stay at £75, or move to a higher buy in to attract a different player market..... my point is that part of the tour"s popularity is the affordability. If it were failing to make the numbers, then targeting a different market by adjusting the buy in might be appropriate....... but as it stands, there simply is no need to change this aspect.

[RiverAsUsual]

Some points relating to the online league / number of players in a team debate:

I acknowledge that the current system needs looking at but the proposal of dividing points by the number of players in a team is flawed in my opinion for the following reasons.

1. Surely part of the role of the captain and team members is to encourage more and more players to join the team, which in many cases acts as their intro to APAT and in some cases "real" poker, so it"s all good. Under this proposal inexperienced players could make numbers a disadvantage.
2. The league is FUN and should remain as such whilst also being competitive with good added value. If I bust out very early three weeks on the bounce I will have directly negated good performances - I will feel like a bad team member. People might start to criticise poorly performing players.

3. If you have 50 runners, then 24th could be viewed as a positive result as it"s better than the average. This could encourage insanely nitty play and games would be ending sometime on Tuesday.

I acknowledge that I am saying all of this from the point of view of playing for one of the most populated teams, but that links back to point one. At Luton we have been actively recruiting and some of the new players in turn bought their friends along - our fun and friendly live game recently has also done us no harm either - and IMO THAT"s what APAT is about

Finally, it"s not all about quantity! We"ve got some quality too you know  

This seems to assume that you would be recruiting a disproprtionate amount of inexperienced players to that of other teams, but even then you"d be investing in the future for your team. Important Teams must not be allowed to refuse nor dissuade any players from joining or playing for their team.

[Claw75]

Claire, it"s like the January Sales... the more you spend, the more you save! I would have that as woman you would understand this concept... just basic economics really.

i"m not a normal woman though am I?  I"m a beer-drinking, fag-smoking, junk food-eating, foul-mouthed geezerbird.  innit.

[Foggy]

Claire, it"s like the January Sales... the more you spend, the more you save! I would have that as woman you would understand this concept... just basic economics really.

i"m not a normal woman though am I?  I"m a beer-drinking, fag-smoking, junk food-eating, foul-mouthed geezerbird.  innit.

LOLOLOLOLOL

[AMRN]

Claire, it"s like the January Sales... the more you spend, the more you save! I would have that as woman you would understand this concept... just basic economics really.

i"m not a normal woman though am I?  I"m a beer-drinking, fag-smoking, junk food-eating, foul-mouthed geezerbird.  innit.

PMSL!!!