APAT Cash Game ...

[Paulie_D]

I think this will run fine without eliminating players or voting off. Would set a minimum of 100xBB but cap at 200xBB

OK, I have no interest in this personally but if this is supposed to be some sort of objective competition then it would only make sense that everyone start with the same amount.

100BB seems logical.

It"s cash.  Doesn"t have to be the same amount imo, just within parameters, ie 100-200x.  People can top up any time they want so restrictions shouldnt be made on buy-ins. 

But if this thing is supposed to "prove" something then you have to have standard and objective criteria that apply to all....otherwise it"s just a normal cash game that could break out any time.

[Marty719]

Cash sucks if everyone has 100x.  Also, what if the table fish has 300x and I want to top-up...this should obv be allowed.  The beauty of cash is that u can reach into ur pocket again and again, so theres no point restricting buy-ins (to a certain degree).  The difference between this idea, and other random cash games is that it would be 100% apat players and have a competitive element to it (most profit wins).  Cash doesnt have objective criteria for all - thats the beauty of it.

[AAroddersAA]

Cash sucks if everyone has 100x.  Also, what if the table fish has 300x and I want to top-up...this should obv be allowed.  The beauty of cash is that u can reach into ur pocket again and again, so theres no point restricting buy-ins (to a certain degree).  The difference between this idea, and other random cash games is that it would be 100% apat players and have a competitive element to it (most profit wins).  Cash doesnt have objective criteria for all - thats the beauty of it.

Yep was about to say pretty much exactly the same thing.
The only thing that "proves" anything in cash is who makes a profit and who doesn"t. WE could try and get this going in Cardiff I guess?

[Paulie_D]

The difference between this idea, and other random cash games is that it would be 100% apat players and have a competitive element to it (most profit wins).  Cash doesnt have objective criteria for all - thats the beauty of it.

Some fish buys in for £50, doubles up and skedaddles...he"s up 100%.

Some fish buys in for £50, some shark buys in for £200 and eats fish...shark is only up 25%.

They"re both up the same £50...so it doesn"t "prove" anything.


No reason not to make it an APAT only table...the casino probably wouldn"t have any objections to making it a private game...but as a "competition"...I just don"t see it.

...but like I said, it"s not for me....unless we can play PLO8!  

[Marty719]

Its not judged in % of stack sizes won....its judged on £ won.

You may not be able to see it as a competition, but many people seem eager to get it going, and the competitive cash games such as the big game and million dollar cash game have pretty much revolutionised tv poker.  In these shows, there are no buy-in restrictions as it goes against what cash games are about.  I dnt understand how a 100-250x buy-in would be a problem or negative at all...

[MintTrav]

I"ve been waiting for the post where someone asks who is an APAT member and how can people be excluded when everyone is a member as soon as they play. I hope Stuart raises this question soon so I can watch the various discussions merge into one and go round in circles - haven"t got much planned for this weekend.......

[Marty719]

I"ve been waiting for the post where someone asks who is an APAT member and how can people be excluded when everyone is a member as soon as they play. I hope Stuart raises this question soon so I can watch the various discussions merge into one and go round in circles - haven"t got much planned for this weekend.......

Easily avoidable if u set the starting table and initial waiting list before-hand through people that apply on a forum thread.  If people that show up on the day wish to play, they can put their name on the list but it will be low down.

[Fatcatstu]

Surely it has to be % of profit, rather then just actual amount won, as if your not having a standard buy in that just suits people with a bigger bankroll who can afford to buy in for more and therefore have a larger stack to double up (for example)

[Marty719]

Won"t be too much of an issue if the buy-in is capped at 200/250x.  Its effectively recording bb/100.  What if people go bust and rebuy a few times?  Thats y all the televised games record $ won.  It would suck being penalised for buying in deeper, or having motivation not to top-up.

[Paulie_D]

Surely it has to be % of profit, rather then just actual amount won, as if your not having a standard buy in that just suits people with a bigger bankroll who can afford to buy in for more and therefore have a larger stack to double up (for example)

This is weighted in favour of the shortstackers then...see my example above....it won"t prove anything.

Just have an APAT table, have a laugh and play some cards....no need to treat it as a "competition".

[Marty719]

Surely it has to be % of profit, rather then just actual amount won, as if your not having a standard buy in that just suits people with a bigger bankroll who can afford to buy in for more and therefore have a larger stack to double up (for example)

This is weighted in favour of the shortstackers then...see my example above....it won"t prove anything.

Just have an APAT table, have a laugh and play some cards....no need to treat it as a "competition".

Same could be said about anything.  People want to treat it as a "competition" as its a new format for people to compete in.  It hasnt been done before and would be something new and exciting.  While u obv do not want to take part in it, many others would like to...

[Fatcatstu]

Surely it has to be % of profit, rather then just actual amount won, as if your not having a standard buy in that just suits people with a bigger bankroll who can afford to buy in for more and therefore have a larger stack to double up (for example)

This is weighted in favour of the shortstackers then...see my example above....it won"t prove anything.

Just have an APAT table, have a laugh and play some cards....no need to treat it as a "competition".

This would also be my preference by the way

[Swinebag]

Surely it has to be % of profit, rather then just actual amount won, as if your not having a standard buy in that just suits people with a bigger bankroll who can afford to buy in for more and therefore have a larger stack to double up (for example)

This is weighted in favour of the shortstackers then...see my example above....it won"t prove anything.

Just have an APAT table, have a laugh and play some cards....no need to treat it as a "competition".

This - keep it simple

[kinboshi]

Surely it has to be % of profit, rather then just actual amount won, as if your not having a standard buy in that just suits people with a bigger bankroll who can afford to buy in for more and therefore have a larger stack to double up (for example)

This is weighted in favour of the shortstackers then...see my example above....it won"t prove anything.

Just have an APAT table, have a laugh and play some cards....no need to treat it as a "competition".

This - keep it simple

You playing it then?

[Honeybadg]

Surely it has to be % of profit, rather then just actual amount won, as if your not having a standard buy in that just suits people with a bigger bankroll who can afford to buy in for more and therefore have a larger stack to double up (for example)

This is weighted in favour of the shortstackers then...see my example above....it won"t prove anything.

Just have an APAT table, have a laugh and play some cards....no need to treat it as a "competition".

When you say it "won"t prove anything" - the idea wasn"t to try to prove something - what does an MTT prove? In an MTT Someone wins it - the others cash and the rest don"t ... it doesn"t prove anything ...

A cash game would be interesting - just report the +/- : If fish want to donk their big stacks great : Create some parameters to make it playable : Create a player/waiting list on the forum : If a "local" wants to play then great but they join the bottom of the waiting list ... and maybe they then "join" APAT going forward.

Can 888 be involved in some way - I am sure they would enjoy the cash traffic etc ...

L