Amateur Poker Association & Tour
Poker Forum => General Discussion => Topic started by: SirPercival on February 13, 2008, 20:16:57 PM
-
The APAT team have done a fantastic job of promoting good quality, friendly games with no registration fees and sponsor added prizes.
In many threads people have expressed views on improvement for season 3 and it is quite clear that Des and the team will never please everyone all of the time.
Some want to increase the buy-in, some don"t. Some want more games, some less. some prefer online, some live and so on and so on....
What about other poker games? I was brought up in the days before the NL Holdem "boom" and enjoy playing Draw, Omaha, Stud, 2-7 Low, etc etc Limit, Pot Limit and No Limit.
Any views on more variance for Season 3 ?
-
I think there"s an improvement already in season two with regard to other poker variations. In August there is due to be a Razz, Omaha and Stud tournament at the Grosvenor in London.... http://www.apat.com/schedule_S2_National.php
I do agree with Stuart that APAT does concentrate on NLHE, but I suspect it may be a "let"s walk before we can run" scenario - APAT is, afterall, less than 2 years old. The events due to be played in August may be in place to test the water before decisions are made for season 3.
I would suggest that we do all we can to support those events in August, and hopefully more will follow.
-
I"d also suggest that 90% of the members only (or mostly) play holdem. So it"s providing what the market wants.
There"s definitely a place for other variations though, and like Ian intimated, they"ll probably be introduced slowly over time. Online probably more so than live (I"d guess).
-
What a great thread.. As soon as i saw it, i was thinking YES..
I would love to some of the other games, the only other game i know anything about it Omaha (which i call dirty poker).. :o The only reason because I see other play it and thinks its nuts..
I want to learn the other, I suspect people will just say learn it then, but I want it to be fun, and with like minded people who are learning with me, the same as it was when i learned NLH..
Great post sir.. :)
-
We need to learn how to play holdem properly first... ;D
-
We need to learn how to play holdem properly first... ;D
Isn"t playing other games (badly as well) supposed to help your holdem
How about a bit of limit and Pot limit Holdem to mix it up too
-
Some Limit HE would be the business, as well as PLO or PLO8.
-
I"d also suggest that 90% of the members only (or mostly) play holdem. So it"s providing what the market wants.
Did this 90% know they wanted NLHE before they started playing poker?
-
Great post sir.. :)
ty ;D
-
I"d also suggest that 90% of the members only (or mostly) play holdem. So it"s providing what the market wants.
Did this 90% know they wanted NLHE before they started playing poker?
It"s a well known fact that 90% of people don"t know what they do want! :-\
-
Great post sir.. :)
ty ;D
Big Head ;D
-
I"d also suggest that 90% of the members only (or mostly) play holdem. So it"s providing what the market wants.
Did this 90% know they wanted NLHE before they started playing poker?
A lot, yes. They"ve seen in on telly, and want some of that NLHE action!
Most people who play in APAT events aren"t playing their first poker though are they? They"ve played a bit before somewhere. I"d guess that the majority have played NLHE.
In the current market, poker in the mainstream is synonymous with NLHE. GUKPT, GBPT, EPT, etc. - they all focus on NLHE.
I agree that some others thrown into the mix would be a good idea, but I still think the majority want NLHE. Probably about 72.96% do anyway.
-
More like 79.45%
-
Of course you are all diregarding the fact that 94.8% of all statistics are made up on the spot. ;)
As far as other variations of poker are concerned, it is funny but I played 4 x GUKPT"s, the Grand Prix and the Euro Deep Stack Champs in the last 12 months and the game everyone, including the top pro"s enjoyed playing far more than NLH was the Pot Limit Omaha Events. They also hold quite a bit of prestige in the pro ranks, even if the cash prize is far less. Unfortunately because of the grip that NLH has, i.e. from sponsorship, TV etc, it"s a game that is fast dying out. Shame, cos in a tournament format, it"s a game which involves quite a lot more skill than NLH, and 88% of pro"s interviewed for this post agreed. :o
-
Great post Gordon.
Many of the the top pros (87.6% I think) want the world championship to settled by the $50,000 HORSE event rather than the current $10,000 NLHE.
I think it"s sad that even the HORSE event turns into NLHE for the final table for the purposes of the TV. Are TV watching poker player to stupid to learn a new game? I don"t think so and I"m sure 98.6% of them aren"t.
-
I think at last years $50,000 HORSE they did still rotate the games on the final table. The year before when Chip Reece won they had NLHE only on the final table.
-
Great post Gordon.
Many of the the top pros (87.6% I think) want the world championship to settled by the $50,000 HORSE event rather than the current $10,000 NLHE.
I think it"s sad that even the HORSE event turns into NLHE for the final table for the purposes of the TV. Are TV watching poker player to stupid to learn a new game? I don"t think so and I"m sure 98.6% of them aren"t.
You really think that most pros think the HORSE event should be the one that determines the "best player"? It"s made up of games that many of them don"t play more than a handful of times a year.
97.6% of pros said their cats prefer NLHE.
-
Great post Gordon.
Many of the the top pros (87.6% I think) want the world championship to settled by the $50,000 HORSE event rather than the current $10,000 NLHE.
I think it"s sad that even the HORSE event turns into NLHE for the final table for the purposes of the TV. Are TV watching poker player to stupid to learn a new game? I don"t think so and I"m sure 98.6% of them aren"t.
You really think that most pros think the HORSE event should be the one that determines the "best player"? It"s made up of games that many of them don"t play more than a handful of times a year.
97.6% of pros said their cats prefer NLHE.
He didn"t say "most pros" - he said "most top pros"... Most proffessional poker players probably think that HORSE is just one of the large brown animals that they lose half of their poker winnings on.
By "top pros" he meant those that have been around a while (you know; started shaving, don"t know how to set a VCR etc), the ones that were making a living out of poker before the interweb... the top "poker" proffessionals, who know how to play other games than NLHE.
And just remember what Mark Twain said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
And in the words of Forest Gump, "That"s all I have to say about that!"
Hey, lets be careful out there! 8)
-
Come on Des, take the bate and tell us there "are exciting plans which will be announced next week"
-
surely the title of the thread should be poker tour or NLHE poker tour
as the tour and the assoc arent the same thing
-
Great post Gordon.
Many of the the top pros (87.6% I think) want the world championship to settled by the $50,000 HORSE event rather than the current $10,000 NLHE.
I think it"s sad that even the HORSE event turns into NLHE for the final table for the purposes of the TV. Are TV watching poker player to stupid to learn a new game? I don"t think so and I"m sure 98.6% of them aren"t.
You really think that most pros think the HORSE event should be the one that determines the "best player"? It"s made up of games that many of them don"t play more than a handful of times a year.
97.6% of pros said their cats prefer NLHE.
He didn"t say "most pros" - he said "most top pros"... Most proffessional poker players probably think that HORSE is just one of the large brown animals that they lose half of their poker winnings on.
OK, we struggled to define "pro", now we"re going to define "top pro".
By "top pros" he meant those that have been around a while (you know; started shaving, don"t know how to set a VCR etc), the ones that were making a living out of poker before the interweb... the top "poker" proffessionals, who know how to play other games than NLHE.
So the top pros in any other sport or game are only the ones who"ve been around for a long time? Nadal isn"t a top tennis pro? That Cesc Fabregas has to wait another 10 years before he"s a "top pro"?
Annette isn"t a top pro then? Interesting...
Also, as an aside to the problem of defining "top pro" I still think you"ll find that most of the "old pros" (which is what I think you"re referring to) don"t believe that the HORSE winner is the "best" player. Most of them don"t play razz regularly, so why should this be part of the tournament that decides the "best" player?
Roger Federer is the best tennis player in the world (pretty much fact). When was the last time he won a men"s doubles tournament, what about mixed doubles?
And just remember what Mark Twain said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
Also remember what Hitler said:
“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it”
And in the words of Forest Gump, "That"s all I have to say about that!"
He also said something about chocolates.
-
Being newish to the Poker scene, and the basis that APAT is an amatuer organistion, I think (Could be wrong) bring in less main stream games such as Omaha, etc..the numbers for these events would be even lower.
Also it may put off people playing at all, if say 10% are not NLHE games and thus points to be lost?
-
The Omaha, Stud and Razz events schedules for later this year should give an indication of the demand for different variations of poker.
I can"t see people deciding against playing the NLHE nationals because of the inclusion of ranking events that are not NLHE.
I"m sure the vast majority of people play the NLHE national events because they want to have a good weekend away and maybe win some money rather than to pick up the ranking points on offer.
-
The Omaha, Stud and Razz events schedules for later this year should give an indication of the demand for different variations of poker.
Totally agree. The folk wanting alternative variations of poker (including me) need to support these events. It"s the only way of proving a demand for these games.
I can"t see people deciding against playing the NLHE nationals because of the inclusion of ranking events that are not NLHE.
Neither can I.
I"m sure the vast majority of people play the NLHE national events because they want to have a good weekend away and maybe win some money rather than to pick up the ranking points on offer.
Absolutely, although the "win some money" bit is pushing it a little far ;D As for ranking points, sorry, what are they ? ;D
I generally participate for the experience, fun, to catch up with friends, and to watch my other half out perform me time and again.....
Having the opportunity to play Omaha, Razz, Stud etc within the APAT community can only enhance the player experience, IMHO.
-
Great post Gordon.
Many of the the top pros (87.6% I think) want the world championship to settled by the $50,000 HORSE event rather than the current $10,000 NLHE.
I think it"s sad that even the HORSE event turns into NLHE for the final table for the purposes of the TV. Are TV watching poker player to stupid to learn a new game? I don"t think so and I"m sure 98.6% of them aren"t.
You really think that most pros think the HORSE event should be the one that determines the "best player"? It"s made up of games that many of them don"t play more than a handful of times a year.
97.6% of pros said their cats prefer NLHE.
He didn"t say "most pros" - he said "most top pros"... Most proffessional poker players probably think that HORSE is just one of the large brown animals that they lose half of their poker winnings on.
OK, we struggled to define "pro", now we"re going to define "top pro".
By "top pros" he meant those that have been around a while (you know; started shaving, don"t know how to set a VCR etc), the ones that were making a living out of poker before the interweb... the top "poker" proffessionals, who know how to play other games than NLHE.
So the top pros in any other sport or game are only the ones who"ve been around for a long time? Nadal isn"t a top tennis pro? That Cesc Fabregas has to wait another 10 years before he"s a "top pro"?
Annette isn"t a top pro then? Interesting...
Also, as an aside to the problem of defining "top pro" I still think you"ll find that most of the "old pros" (which is what I think you"re referring to) don"t believe that the HORSE winner is the "best" player. Most of them don"t play razz regularly, so why should this be part of the tournament that decides the "best" player?
Roger Federer is the best tennis player in the world (pretty much fact). When was the last time he won a men"s doubles tournament, what about mixed doubles?
And just remember what Mark Twain said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
Also remember what Hitler said:
“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it”
And in the words of Forest Gump, "That"s all I have to say about that!"
He also said something about chocolates.
Touchy yesterday as well, eh??
-
I can"t see people deciding against playing the NLHE nationals because of the inclusion of ranking events that are not NLHE.
I was meaning online events, like if 10% of online games that go to the final pointa tally are non NLHE, then it might put people off playing at all, as they will be starting 10% down so to speak.
-
I was meaning online events, like if 10% of online games that go to the final pointa tally are non NLHE, then it might put people off playing at all, as they will be starting 10% down so to speak.
Surely that"s an individuals choice as to whether they play the other variants or not, in the same way that it"s my choice not to play online, putting me 50% in arrears as far as ranking points are concerned.
The association shouldn"t be constrained to just providing NLHE events as ranking events - there"s a lot more to poker than NLHE. If the membership want other events then we should be looking at possible ways of meeting this demand.
-
Waz, Perhaps it"s up to those individuals to accept that it"s a poker tour and poker doesn"t begin and end with NLHE? Just as live players have to accept that poker is also played on the intrawebs and vice-versa.
I don"t play any of the online games so as far as points go, like Haworth, I"m handicapping myself, but I play poker to win money attempt to win money and to enjoy the table banter so the points the whole tour offers are not really important to me.
I do think anyone reluctant to have a stab at the other variations of poker are denying the themselves opportunity to get involved in some great games. It seems quite impoverished just to restrict yourself to NLHE. If it"s online tournaments we"re talking about, it"s only going to cost you $5 to sample these games. Why not just give it a go?
Also, to the guy who was keen to have everyone post their bad beat stories, Omaha is a drawing game anyway so bad beats are rare, but when they do occur they"re particularly brutal so you should get hear some quite juicy ones.
-
Am I missing something here or isn"t part of the aim of the association supposed to introduce new players to "the game"?
So the real crux of the matter is surely, Is "the game" NLHE or poker in general?
If it"s poker in general, as I think most people would hope it was, then to meet it"s own aims it should provide an introduction to the other poker variants.
Nuff said me thinks. ;)
-
I was meaning online events, like if 10% of online games that go to the final pointa tally are non NLHE, then it might put people off playing at all, as they will be starting 10% down so to speak.
The association shouldn"t be constrained to just providing NLHE events as ranking events - there"s a lot more to poker than NLHE. If the membership want other events then we should be looking at possible ways of meeting this demand.
Haworth / War... I do agree that it is a personal choice, but my feelings are to further grow the APAT I"d suspect that growth would be better gained through concentrating on NLHE rather than explore (at this point in time) into games that are less popular.
Now this maybe a sweeping statement, but members joining the APAT I"m guessing are new to poker, or at least newish....and solely player NLHE, this being the most sought after version, on which books are written, TV shows are made, and the WSOP of Poker is based on. These " New " players join such forums to improve their game online and have a greater exposure to the live scene, which is crucial in anyones " career". IMHO
-
I was meaning online events, like if 10% of online games that go to the final pointa tally are non NLHE, then it might put people off playing at all, as they will be starting 10% down so to speak.
The association shouldn"t be constrained to just providing NLHE events as ranking events - there"s a lot more to poker than NLHE. If the membership want other events then we should be looking at possible ways of meeting this demand.
Haworth / War... I do agree that it is a personal choice, but my feelings are to further grow the APAT I"d suspect that growth would be better gained through concentrating on NLHE rather than explore (at this point in time) into games that are less popular.
Now this maybe a sweeping statement, but members joining the APAT I"m guessing are new to poker, or at least newish....and solely player NLHE, this being the most sought after version, on which books are written, TV shows are made, and the WSOP of Poker is based on. These " New " players join such forums to improve their game online and have a greater exposure to the live scene, which is crucial in anyones " career". IMHO
There"s a slight contradiction in your argument, you want the poker tour to grow, but you don"t want it to include the other forms of the game?
If new members are new to poker why channel them all down one route to a single variation of the game under the assumption they won"t like or won"t be able to cope with the other variations? I don"t actually agree with that anyway, I think that you"re pre-supposing an awful lot here, not quite patronising, but nearly.
APAT isn"t a bunch of people who aren"t sure yet if a flush beats a straight, not that you"re suggesting that, but I think it"s members are a little more savvy than you"re suggesting. I think a lot of people join APAT for lots of reasons, not necessarily just because they"re new to hold "em.
I think most join because they don"t have the funds to play at the higher levels, also because it"s a poker community with a reputation for some splendid p*ss ups poker weekends.
No one is suggesting the tour should be split equally between the different variations anyway, just that there should be some variation. One or two non-NLHE tournaments a season can be accommodated I think without alienating anyone or dashing anyone"s hopes of winning the season points race.
The flip side to your argument is the is possibility that some APAT members might find a Hold "em only tour a little tedious and look for some Omaha or stud games instead of playing the Hold "em APAT games.
I don"t think either scenario is to the detriment of the tour though or would crush anyone"s chances of winning the end of season points prize.
-
APAT isn"t a bunch of people who aren"t sure yet if a flush beats a straight, not that you"re suggesting that, but I think it"s members are a little more savvy than you"re suggesting.
Of course we are. We all know a flush beats a straight. But of course, three of a kind beats anything. Especially if they"re jacks.
-
The association shouldn"t be constrained to just providing NLHE events as ranking events - there"s a lot more to poker than NLHE. If the membership want other events then we should be looking at possible ways of meeting this demand.
Perhaps it"s up to those individuals to accept that it"s a poker tour and poker doesn"t begin and end with NLHE? Just as live players have to accept that poker is also played on the intrawebs and vice-versa.
Most excellent points I think.
-
Whos to say that in 5 or 10 years time another game wont be the number one choice, from what ive heard its widely predicted that omaha hi lo could take over as the number one choice of game in the nearish future
-
Whos to say that in 5 or 10 years time another game wont be the number one choice, from what ive heard its widely predicted that omaha hi lo could take over as the number one choice of game in the nearish future
Will that be 4 card or 6 card?
Either way - just a game for degenerate gamblers and bingo players.
8)
-
APAT isn"t a bunch of people who aren"t sure yet if a flush beats a straight, not that you"re suggesting that, but I think it"s members are a little more savvy than you"re suggesting.
Of course we are. We all know a flush beats a straight. But of course, three of a kind beats anything. Especially if they"re jacks.
lol. A Flush beats a straight. You are such a kidder Daniel.!!!
-
I was meaning online events, like if 10% of online games that go to the final pointa tally are non NLHE, then it might put people off playing at all, as they will be starting 10% down so to speak.
The association shouldn"t be constrained to just providing NLHE events as ranking events - there"s a lot more to poker than NLHE. If the membership want other events then we should be looking at possible ways of meeting this demand.
Haworth / War... I do agree that it is a personal choice, but my feelings are to further grow the APAT I"d suspect that growth would be better gained through concentrating on NLHE rather than explore (at this point in time) into games that are less popular.
Now this maybe a sweeping statement, but members joining the APAT I"m guessing are new to poker, or at least newish....and solely player NLHE, this being the most sought after version, on which books are written, TV shows are made, and the WSOP of Poker is based on. These " New " players join such forums to improve their game online and have a greater exposure to the live scene, which is crucial in anyones " career". IMHO
There"s a slight contradiction in your argument, you want the poker tour to grow, but you don"t want it to include the other forms of the game?
APAT isn"t a bunch of people who aren"t sure yet if a flush beats a straight, not that you"re suggesting that, but I think it"s members are a little more savvy than you"re suggesting. I think a lot of people join APAT for lots of reasons, not necessarily just because they"re new to hold "em.
I think most join because they don"t have the funds to play at the higher levels, also because it"s a poker community with a reputation for some splendid p*ss ups poker weekends.
I understand you comments, but My opinion is that in order to make the tour, I think this would be best achieve d sticking to the main game of Poker.
And I couldn"t agree more with you that APAT are more than a bunch of Flush / Straight clueless players, and again yes people join the APAT to play more acceessable live events, whilst sharing info tip, hints etc, to improve their own Online game at stakes on the lower end. This is exactly why I joined myself, but I think they join to play in most cases NLHE, and so I think, for now, it would do more harm than good....I guess we will see!
I have been wrong many , many times before!!..lol
-
... but I think they join to play in most cases NLHE
Could this be because in most cases NLHE is the game being offered?
I don"t think anyone is suggesting that every other event should be something other than NLHE. I also think that the inclusion of the additional variations as part of an end of season festival is a good idea (although I"m not sure the timing is right, bank hol weekend?)
To gauge support for alternative games, how about a supporting event on day 2 of the national event... say £30 buy-in 3000 chips / 30 min clock... make it a PL or Limit mixed game of some description, perhaps HE & Omaha on alternate blind levels.
-
How about a supporting event on day 2 of the national event... say £30 buy-in 3000 chips / 30 min clock... make it a PL or Limit mixed game of some description, perhaps HE & Omaha on alternate blind levels.
That"s something I was thinking about suggesting as well Alan, although my suggestion would be to play a single variation. Similar buy in, stack and clock to what I was thinking though.
This would, hopefully, have a few beneficial effects...
1. Players get the opportunity to test the waters with the different variations.
2. APAT gets a reasonable idea of the demand for these games.
3. More players around on day 2, either playing or supporting.
4. Enhanced player experience ?
I like this idea...... 8)
-
... but I think they join to play in most cases NLHE
To gauge support for alternative games, how about a supporting event on day 2 of the national event... say £30 buy-in 3000 chips / 30 min clock... make it a PL or Limit mixed game of some description, perhaps HE & Omaha on alternate blind levels.
Sounds like a good idea, Sir.
-
I agree with the comment about Ohama and bad beats, it is a drawing game.
Regarding this debate over whether APAT should include different variations of poker, I think it is a good idea, and one that I feel is being addressed with the end of year festival, where some of the different variations are being tested to see what the demand is.
For all those wanting non NLHE events to be included in the future, surely supporting these events should be a priority, I am hoping to participate in them, as I love (most) varients.
Also surely APAT's aim to be THE tour and Association for poker players in the UK, we need to be inclusive not exclusive in what variations are offered.
The different variations of poker have different skill sets, and what is learnt in one variation, can improve your understanding in others. I think the pros/cons of whether to be a one trick pony, or learn a variety of game is discussed in super system2.
;D