Amateur Poker Association & Tour

Poker Forum => Online Archive => Online Poker => National Online League => Topic started by: kaysing on February 20, 2010, 19:48:04 PM

Title: S4 Online National League - Discussion
Post by: kaysing on February 20, 2010, 19:48:04 PM
I notice they have already put details of the online league on the site.  However, no mention of how often the blinds increase (unless I am missing the obvious somewhere).  Filtering indicates they are considered to be "rapid" tournaments.  Lets hope its not less than 10 mins (preferably 12) as with 2500 starting chips it becomes a shove fest pretty quick.

Would one of the management confirm how often the blinds will increase for the online league. 

Dave
Title: Re: Betfair Poker - General Discussion
Post by: APAT on February 20, 2010, 19:54:14 PM
Hi Dave,

It will be the same as last year for the National league - 2,500 chips on 10 minute blinds.  The National Championship events will offer 10,000 chips and 12 minute blinds.  As always, we"ll review the amount of play you get after the first event and increase / decrease as per general consensus.

Regards,

Des.
Title: Re: Betfair Poker - General Discussion
Post by: AMRN on February 20, 2010, 19:57:39 PM

Hi Dave,

It will be the same as last year for the National league - 2,500 chips on 10 minute blinds.  The National Championship events will offer 10,000 chips and 12 minute blinds.  As always, we"ll review the amount of play you get after the first event and increase / decrease as per general consensus.

Regards,

Des.


think the league games last year were 2500 chips and 13 minute blinds..... not 10 minute.
Title: Re: Betfair Poker - General Discussion
Post by: kaysing on February 20, 2010, 19:59:52 PM
I thought after some chopping and changing 12 was settled on!
Title: Re: Betfair Poker - General Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on February 20, 2010, 20:01:57 PM
We"ll settle on it long before we get started guys, don"t worry about that.

;)
Title: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: kaysing on February 20, 2010, 20:02:06 PM
Poss started at 10 but considered it became a shove fest to soon.
12 (or 13) was settled on as a compromise to those who wanted 15.

15 was rejected because of the predicted late finish time.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: APAT on February 20, 2010, 20:34:42 PM
As Leigh said, we"ll sort!
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Mikeyboy9361 on February 20, 2010, 23:09:14 PM
Last seasons structure changed after about 2 or 3 weeks, and from then on was excellent, no need to change owt!
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Robbiebox on March 02, 2010, 19:47:54 PM
Is there any news on the league prizes yet ?

Tried selling it yesterday to some locals and it is hard when you can"t say what is up for grabs.

Please excuse me if this has already been mentioned, I couldn"t see it anywhere
.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on March 02, 2010, 20:11:39 PM

Is there any news on the league prizes yet ?

Tried selling it yesterday to some locals and it is hard when you can"t say what is up for grabs.

Please excuse me if this has already been mentioned, I couldn"t see it anywhere
.


Standard Betfair Poker payouts for each matchday, with no registration fees.


The top team in each division will receive 4 added value seats to live events (Awarded to their highest points scorers).

Division 1 - GUKPT Seats
Division 2 - APAT Professional Seats
Division 3 - APAT Amateur Seats
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: AJDUK on March 02, 2010, 21:35:57 PM
No kickback this year in terms of a percentage of future winnings from the prizes gained by the lucky 4 in each division?
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on March 02, 2010, 22:28:56 PM

No kickback this year in terms of a percentage of future winnings from the prizes gained by the lucky 4 in each division?


We have no plans to enforce anything, mainly due to the fact that over the course of the season we are giving away 24, yes you read that right  ;) , added value live seats.

Trying to keep a track of who would owe what to who is just an impossible task.

If captains and playing wish to make an agreement within their own clubs, then that is fine, although it would need a total agreement from the players, and that is not always an easy thing to do.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Robbiebox on March 03, 2010, 19:19:43 PM
Just another Question,

I am guessing there will be some relegation/promotion between divisions after the first 10 game league has finished and the divisions will be altered ready for the second  10 game league.

Is this right? How many teams up "n" down ?
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on March 03, 2010, 22:10:43 PM

Just another Question,

I am guessing there will be some relegation/promotion between divisions after the first 10 game league has finished and the divisions will be altered ready for the second  10 game league.

Is this right? How many teams up "n" down ?


Correct.  3 up, 3 down
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: duke3016 on March 03, 2010, 22:12:04 PM
like a big semi
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on March 03, 2010, 22:14:22 PM

like a big semi


exactly
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: bagface on March 07, 2010, 19:41:35 PM
This is gonna be fun, looking forward to it. What are the rules on collusion and chip passing? Allowed?

Edit: by collusion I mean passive playing and checking back against other players in your team, not MSN telling hands and teaming up. The way I interpret it without seeing any formal rules is that passive play is allowed, chip passing and collusion on MSN not.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: AMRN on March 07, 2010, 19:49:13 PM

This is gonna be fun, looking forward to it. What are the rules on collusion and chip passing? Allowed?

Edit: by collusion I mean passive playing and checking back against other players in your team, not MSN telling hands and teaming up. The way I interpret it without seeing any formal rules is that passive play is allowed, chip passing and collusion on MSN not.


Collusion - NO!
"Team Play" - Absolutely!
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Jon MW on March 07, 2010, 19:50:11 PM

This is gonna be fun, looking forward to it. What are the rules on collusion and chip passing? Allowed?

Edit: by collusion I mean passive playing and checking back against other players in your team, not MSN telling hands and teaming up. The way I interpret it without seeing any formal rules is that passive play is allowed, chip passing and collusion on MSN not.


It"s the same rules as any tournament played on Betfair, i.e. if Betfair catch anybody colluding they"ll deal with it like they would normally.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: bagface on March 07, 2010, 19:54:28 PM
Good, this is what I figured. Sounds like "team play" is hazy so I"ll just pot control like a maniac against team members.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: morlspin on March 07, 2010, 20:02:19 PM
Just a Morlspin moan here, move on if you cant be arsed to read lol

Why are we paying the same entry fees for all 3 divisions when there are 3 different value prizes to be won?

Id have understood it if it was on Blue Square again as the league ran on there last year but with a new site and new league starting, its hard to get players to play for clubs in lower divisons

Division 1 has 151
Divison 2 has 79
Divison 3 has 51

Can we change teams after the start of the season? Id rather play the 151 player event with bigger prizepool and better overall prizes.....
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: ck1888 on March 07, 2010, 20:04:03 PM
looks like we have a ten minute clock  :"(
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: sopranoltd on March 08, 2010, 14:54:15 PM
I had 2 players from the same team on my table last nite , every time they were on button and bb they just checked it down and on several occassions when the bb checked being hewas short the button would auto fold , wtf .... I dont care guys but i reported both of them to betfair by phone as tourney was being played ..

It was an enjoyable 1st week , and i have never made so many notes on players than i did last nite .... lolol  I would like to have same players on my table next week ....
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: cincicrappykid on March 08, 2010, 16:53:10 PM
looks like we have a pro eh ..............
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: kaysing on March 08, 2010, 19:37:22 PM
Is someone able to point me in the direction of last nights results as I can"t find them anywhere?

Cheers,

Dave
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Ant1966 on March 08, 2010, 20:29:02 PM

I dont care guys but i reported both of them to betfair by phone as tourney was being played ..


Your"e joking,right?
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: BOINGBLITZ on March 08, 2010, 20:47:16 PM
ermmm......its a TEAM competition ?
If he is a pro, he must be Tom Dwan  (DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: AJDUK on March 09, 2010, 01:26:42 AM


I dont care guys but i reported both of them to betfair by phone as tourney was being played ..


Your"e joking,right?


Or just sad
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: cincicrappykid on March 09, 2010, 08:32:33 AM
mmmmmmmmm very sad
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Cyntaf on March 09, 2010, 12:42:50 PM

wtf .... I dont care guys but i reported both of them to betfair by phone as tourney was being played ..




You obviously know how to use a phone then? :o :o
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: AMRN on March 09, 2010, 12:48:23 PM

ermmm......its a TEAM competition ?
If he is a pro, he must be Tom Dwan  (DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR)


actually quite funny given his Betfair name is BURRR !!
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Digger on March 09, 2010, 13:37:21 PM

I had 2 players from the same team on my table last nite , every time they were on button and bb they just checked it down and on several occassions when the bb checked being hewas short the button would auto fold , wtf .... I dont care guys but i reported both of them to betfair by phone as tourney was being played ..  It was an enjoyable 1st week , and i have never made so many notes on players than i did last nite .... lolol  I would like to have same players on my table next week ....



LMFAO  ;D
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: MintTrav on March 09, 2010, 15:18:23 PM

I had 2 players from the same team on my table last nite , every time they were on button and bb they just checked it down and on several occassions when the bb checked being hewas short the button would auto fold , wtf .... I dont care guys but i reported both of them to betfair by phone as tourney was being played ..


I also reported a player for soft play. Betfair have just emailed me and rejected my complaint. They said that they ran an analysis against his other games and they can"t see any difference from Ant"s usual play.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: AMRN on March 09, 2010, 15:20:37 PM


I had 2 players from the same team on my table last nite , every time they were on button and bb they just checked it down and on several occassions when the bb checked being hewas short the button would auto fold , wtf .... I dont care guys but i reported both of them to betfair by phone as tourney was being played ..


I also reported a player for soft play. Betfair have just emailed me and rejected my complaint. They said that they ran an analysis against his other games and they can"t see any difference from Ant"s usual play.



LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Shogun112 on March 09, 2010, 16:21:20 PM
Gonna be a report on the homepage wordpress thingy for week 1?
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Mikeyboy9361 on March 09, 2010, 16:23:48 PM
Did you by any chance win Carl?? ;)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: cincicrappykid on March 09, 2010, 16:29:23 PM



I had 2 players from the same team on my table last nite , every time they were on button and bb they just checked it down and on several occassions when the bb checked being hewas short the button would auto fold , wtf .... I dont care guys but i reported both of them to betfair by phone as tourney was being played ..


I also reported a player for soft play. Betfair have just emailed me and rejected my complaint. They said that they ran an analysis against his other games and they can"t see any difference from Ant"s usual play.

lmao

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: smileriraq on March 09, 2010, 16:37:58 PM
I played most games last season and it was played in the right spirit .

Weve played 1 game this season and the amount of crap being posted anyone would think it was the WSOP

Im sure there are players out there that are colluding via msn as well as softplaying , using pokertracker as well as many other tricks of the trade that im not even aware of. It happens and it isnt going to go away regardless of how many phonecalls you make.

Im under no illusions about my ability but theres 2 reasons i play these events

1)To test my abilities against a generally good standard of play
2) FUN!!!!!!!


If it gets to the point that the game is no longer fun guess what I wont play any more quite simple
however the only scenario i can see that happening is if I still cant get to grips with betfairs software which I found to be a bit user unfriendly but that gripe aside im looking forward to the remaining 9 games and hopefully acquit my self better than i did in week 1

Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: cashman on March 09, 2010, 18:41:38 PM
Matchday 1 Results - Sunday 7th March 2010


Div One                                   Div Two                                           Div Three   
1   CookMySock (Liverpool)        1   BigAnorak52 (Plymouth)            1   Grim Ripper (Kent)
2   awsickriver (Belfast)        2   Hammerman (North London)        2   katos1 (Sunderland)
3   BartyUK07 (Walsall)          3   T6isbest (Solent)                        3   Shozboy (Nottingham)
4   NDND (Glasgow)                4   fatboy49 (Brighton)                  4   sTRINGBET (Nottingham)
5   Crazyloose (Edinburgh)        5   jedimindtrx (Plymouth)                5   fatblokey (Luton)
6   wiiman (Leeds)                6   v0ice0fj0e (Sheffield)                6   washman (Kent)
7   ckelly1 (Liverpool)                7   cashman0 (Dublin)                        7   SamBarnBrac (Nottingham)
8   b52bomber (Liverpool)        8   EddieFish58 (Brighton)                8   jbong (Sunderland)
9   TONYTRIPPSS (Walsall)        9   Jeno2 (Sheffield)                        9   fandangos (Luton)


Div One                                   Div Two                                      Div Three   
Liverpool       14                        Plymouth               14                   Nottingham   16
Walsall       8 (2 FT"s)                Brighton               8 (2 FT"s)          Kent           13
Belfast       8 (1 FT"s)                North London       8 (1 FT"s)           Sunderland   10
Glasgow       6                        Solent               7                   Luton            6
Edinburgh       5                        Sheffield               5                   Aberdeen            0
Leeds               4                        Dublin                       3                   Blackpool            0
Bristol       0                        Birmingham               0                   Bolton            0
Cardiff       0                        Dundee               0                   Carlisle            0
Manchester       0                        Newcastle               0                   Stoke            0
South London  0                        Stockton-on-Tees    0                   Swansea          0


Matchday Points

Div One           Div Two                   Div Three   
Liverpool     3      Plymouth          3        Nottingham          3
Walsall   2        Brighton          2        Kent                   2
Belfast   1        North London        1        Sunderland           1


WHAT DO THE MIDDLE SET OF POINTS MEAN?
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: pables on March 09, 2010, 18:50:45 PM
That individuals points for that particular tourney.

:)

add those points together for aggregate score


aggregate score  ;D
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on March 09, 2010, 19:56:44 PM
Players score points 1st - 9pts, 2nd - 8ts, 9th - 1pt.

The middle table is the total number of points each team scored in that matchday.  The top three teams then earn matchday points 3,2,1.

Exactly the same setup as last year (Well, apart from it being top 9 instead of top 10, but that is simply because we are playing 9 handed on Betfair)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Ant1966 on March 09, 2010, 21:07:38 PM

I also reported a player for soft play. Betfair have just emailed me and rejected my complaint. They said that they ran an analysis against his other games and they can"t see any difference from Ant"s usual play.


Surely the sample size of 1 game on betfair couldn"t possibly bare this out already? ...  :o
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: ForthThistle on March 09, 2010, 21:08:30 PM
What happens if you have more than 3 teams on the same points, ie relegation/promotion.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on March 09, 2010, 21:39:24 PM

What happens if you have more than 3 teams on the same points, ie relegation/promotion.


There will be a count back of 1st place finishes, then 2nd place finishes, then 3rd place finishes.

If that cannot split the teams, then the team who"s players have accumulated the most individual points over the 10 matchdays will be the higher placed team.

If that cannot split the teams, then each team will pick their top four players, meet in the carpark outside of DTD and the team of the last player standing will be the higher placed team.  ;D
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: ForthThistle on March 09, 2010, 21:45:48 PM
Thanks for clarification...
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: MintTrav on March 09, 2010, 23:40:30 PM

If that cannot split the teams, then each team will pick their top four players, meet in the carpark outside of DTD and the team of the last player standing will be the higher placed team.


If you end up tied with Liverpool, it might be advisable to just let them have the place.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: cincicrappykid on March 10, 2010, 09:06:16 AM

Players score points 1st - 9pts, 2nd - 8ts, 9th - 1pt.

The middle table is the total number of points each team scored in that matchday.  The top three teams then earn matchday points 3,2,1.

Exactly the same setup as last year (Well, apart from it being top 9 instead of top 10, but that is simply because we are playing 9 handed on Betfair)
youve put 1 = 9 pts 2 = 8 pts 9 = 1pts what does 2 3 4 5 6 7 positions  get  ???
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Foggy on March 10, 2010, 09:20:47 AM


Is there any news on the league prizes yet ?

Tried selling it yesterday to some locals and it is hard when you can"t say what is up for grabs.

Please excuse me if this has already been mentioned, I couldn"t see it anywhere
.


Standard Betfair Poker payouts for each matchday, with no registration fees.


The top team in each division will receive 4 added value seats to live events (Awarded to their highest points scorers).

Division 1 - GUKPT Seats
Division 2 - APAT Professional Seats
Division 3 - APAT Amateur Seats



I really cannot see why the different divisions have a different prize value?

Surely we are paying the same amount to enter, playing the same amount of games, but the reward for winning is £750 less, or £925 less per person depending on which division you are in.

Obviously pleased to see some reward, and well done on negotiating the prizes through sponsorship, but the disparancy is far to great I believe!
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Shogun112 on March 10, 2010, 11:03:39 AM



Is there any news on the league prizes yet ?

Tried selling it yesterday to some locals and it is hard when you can"t say what is up for grabs.

Please excuse me if this has already been mentioned, I couldn"t see it anywhere
.


Standard Betfair Poker payouts for each matchday, with no registration fees.


The top team in each division will receive 4 added value seats to live events (Awarded to their highest points scorers).

Division 1 - GUKPT Seats
Division 2 - APAT Professional Seats
Division 3 - APAT Amateur Seats



I really cannot see why the different divisions have a different prize value?

Surely we are paying the same amount to enter, playing the same amount of games, but the reward for winning is £750 less, or £925 less per person depending on which division you are in.

Obviously pleased to see some reward, and well done on negotiating the prizes through sponsorship, but the disparancy is far to great I believe!


The division 1 game had 151 runners, where the 2nd and 3rd div had 70 ish each...  
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Foggy on March 10, 2010, 13:14:46 PM
This will mean a higher prize fund each week in division 1, but does not alter the amount of rounds or the entrance money paid in the other divisions by the participants!
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Shogun112 on March 10, 2010, 13:42:32 PM
Agreed..!!!
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Roscopiko on March 10, 2010, 15:42:50 PM

This will mean a higher prize fund each week in division 1, but does not alter the amount of rounds or the entrance money paid in the other divisions by the participants!


Agreed, maybe as something of a compromise in Season 2 the prizes could be better split equally over the divisions as:

Division Winning Teams Top Point Scorer = GUKPT seat
Division Winning Teams 2nd top point scorer = APAT Pro Seat
Division Winning Teams 3rd top point scorer = APAT Amateur Seat

Would certainly add some (needed) incentive to get players into the lower divisions.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: coprey on March 10, 2010, 16:20:16 PM


This will mean a higher prize fund each week in division 1, but does not alter the amount of rounds or the entrance money paid in the other divisions by the participants!


Agreed, maybe as something of a compromise in Season 2 the prizes could be better split equally over the divisions as:

Division Winning Teams Top Point Scorer = GUKPT seat
Division Winning Teams 2nd top point scorer = APAT Pro Seat
Division Winning Teams 3rd top point scorer = APAT Amateur Seat

Would certainly add some (needed) incentive to get players into the lower divisions.


Isnt the opportunity to build a team and instill a bit of pride, along with the opportunity of promotion to a higher division, and added value prizes not incentive enough for those in the lower divisions? Instead of focusing on what is being offered other teams, you might be better served by focusing on what added value and promotion opportunities exist for you.

Last season the incentive was the same for every single team created. Division 1 teams were relatively successful in attracting players and achieving some results, and are now being rewarded for that hard work and commitment. APAT are focused on the bigger picture and I can see what they are trying to achieve with this league. :)

Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: cincicrappykid on March 10, 2010, 16:31:40 PM
maybe u cud handicap players maybe they would  have to play blind 1 in 3 hands or they only score 1/2 a point because there house is bigger than urs ,,,
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Roscopiko on March 10, 2010, 16:32:21 PM



This will mean a higher prize fund each week in division 1, but does not alter the amount of rounds or the entrance money paid in the other divisions by the participants!


Agreed, maybe as something of a compromise in Season 2 the prizes could be better split equally over the divisions as:

Division Winning Teams Top Point Scorer = GUKPT seat
Division Winning Teams 2nd top point scorer = APAT Pro Seat
Division Winning Teams 3rd top point scorer = APAT Amateur Seat

Would certainly add some (needed) incentive to get players into the lower divisions.


Isnt the opportunity to build a team and instill a bit of pride, along with the opportunity of promotion to a higher division, and added value prizes not incentive enough for those in the lower divisions? Instead of focusing on what is being offered other teams, you might be better served by focusing on what added value and promotion opportunities exist for you.

Last season the incentive was the same for every single team created. Division 1 teams were relatively successful in attracting players and achieving some results, and are now being rewarded for that hard work and commitment. APAT are focused on the bigger picture and I can see what they are trying to achieve with this league. :)



Meh just an idea. 

Kinda agree there should be some reward but some teams will never be able to attract the numbers to compete solely down to geography.  
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: MintTrav on March 10, 2010, 16:50:43 PM

(http://www.thebigpictureproject.org/images/sce/bigpicture_individual.jpg)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Foggy on March 10, 2010, 17:32:51 PM

maybe u cud handicap players maybe they would  have to play blind 1 in 3 hands or they only score 1/2 a point because there house is bigger than urs ,,,


Are you from this world or just totally spaced out
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: cincicrappykid on March 11, 2010, 10:12:38 AM
its called wit , look it up under gulilble
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: AMRN on March 11, 2010, 10:15:11 AM

its called wit , look it up under gulilble


what"s "gulilble"?
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: BOINGBLITZ on March 11, 2010, 11:30:02 AM
Look it up under "Tony"

Foggy......win promotion and you play for bigger prizes .........THAT is why the 10 teams are in the top Division, they WON there way there.
GL all.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: technolog on March 11, 2010, 12:50:25 PM
Speaking as a member of a Division 3 side (albeit a sleeping giant  :D ) surely it"s absolutely right that those in the higher divisions should be playing for the better prizes. (http://blondepoker.com/forum/Smileys/default/dontask.gif)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Swinebag on March 11, 2010, 14:22:35 PM

Speaking as a member of a Division 3 side (albeit a sleeping giant  :D ) surely it"s absolutely right that those in the higher divisions should be playing for the better prizes. (http://blondepoker.com/forum/Smileys/default/dontask.gif)


you would have thought so. If the rewards in the football championship were the same as those in the premier league then there would be no point having different divisions and no point having promotion/relegation
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: RioRodent on March 11, 2010, 19:15:08 PM


Speaking as a member of a Division 3 side (albeit a sleeping giant  :D ) surely it"s absolutely right that those in the higher divisions should be playing for the better prizes. (http://blondepoker.com/forum/Smileys/default/dontask.gif)


you would have thought so. If the rewards in the football championship were the same as those in the premier league then there would be no point having different divisions and no point having promotion/relegation


I think this analogy would have some relevance if football teams could only recruit players from their own geographic catchment area. (http://blondepoker.com/forum/Smileys/default/dontask.gif)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: undisputed on March 14, 2010, 18:54:16 PM



I dont care guys but i reported both of them to betfair by phone as tourney was being played ..


Your"e joking,right?


Or just sad

sorry to say that theres plenty of sad  pathetic people doing similar things. . ..
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Newportlad on March 14, 2010, 19:47:05 PM
Not sure if this has been posted elsewhere, but is there a player list for each Division?
Trying to find out who is who is proving to be tricky. Some people dont seem to tell you who they are when you sit down at there table, which i find a bit against the APAT spirit.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on March 14, 2010, 19:50:46 PM

Not sure if this has been posted elsewhere, but is there a player list for each Division?
Trying to find out who is who is proving to be tricky. Some people dont seem to tell you who they are when you sit down at there table, which i find a bit against the APAT spirit.


HERE (http://www.apat.com/forum/index.php?topic=5459.0)

I will need to update it for new players this week though.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Mikeyboy9361 on March 14, 2010, 22:05:31 PM
First game I have played this season, FWIW I think the structure is still too fast, not a lot of time to play poker. I will play these when I can, but not alot of fun TBH. Sorry to sound negative, but still some tinkering to be done. Why can"t we replicate the structure that we finished with on BSQ, that was pretty darn spot on.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: ian.ski309 on March 14, 2010, 22:23:49 PM
FWIW I think the structure is still too fast, not a lot of time to play poker.


Seconded.

Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: smileriraq on March 14, 2010, 22:28:18 PM
agreed mikey boy, just doesnt seem the same as last year !!!!!!!!!!!! Its not one specific thing but seems lots of little things giving an overall less fun and pleasant experience. Last night was an improvement so maybe well get it sorted eventually
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: coprey on March 14, 2010, 22:33:18 PM
Agreed very crapshooty by 10pm.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Swinebag on March 14, 2010, 22:33:34 PM
whilst the increase to 13 minutes is a welcome improvement, the blind structure is different from last year.

this year we have.

10/20
15/30
25/50
50/100
75/150
100/200
150/300

last year it was much smoother

10/20
15/30
20/40
39/60
40/80
50/100
60/120
80/160
100/200
120/240
150/300

never got any further than this so dont know the rest ;D

still room for improvement.

Also, I have no way of finding the structure on this site.

You look in the lobby and under "betting structure" it simply says "2500 chip"

This is dark ages and surely bad for business. Who in their right mind enters a tourney without knowing the structure? (apart from APAT members looking to support our new sponsor)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: coprey on March 14, 2010, 22:39:30 PM

whilst the increase to 13 minutes is a welcome improvement, the blind structure is different from last year.

this year we have.

10/20
15/30
25/50
50/100
75/150
100/200
150/300

last year it was much smoother

10/20
15/30
20/40
39/60
40/80
50/100
60/120
80/160
100/200
120/240
150/300

never got any further than this so dont know the rest ;D

still room for improvement.

Also, I have no way of finding the structure on this site.

You look in the lobby and under "betting structure" it simply says "2500 chip"

This is dark ages and surely bad for business. Who in their right mind enters a tourney without knowing the structure? (apart from APAT members looking to support our new sponsor)



Thanks Rob, and that explains the different experience. So sad that a lot of players are reconsidering whether to continue with the league. We had a whole year of "testing" last year to learn from, but unfortunately this was not exploited, I fear many new players may not return, regardless of added value. The main priority must be to make the games enjoyable and fun, and that means sorting out the poor structure.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Mikeyboy9361 on March 15, 2010, 08:59:40 AM
Thanks for that Rob, I thought that was the case, but couldn"t find last years structure. No structure in the tourney lobby is a joke! Leigh, Des I have asked why can"t we just replicate last years structure, but no one seems to know the answer. Also last years league games started at 7 pm (Ithink!)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: coprey on March 15, 2010, 09:02:15 AM

Also last years league games started at 7 pm (Ithink!)


Last years games started at 8pm and generally finished around 12:30am
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Roscopiko on March 15, 2010, 09:30:33 AM
Shove botting is a skill imo  ;D

Structure seems fine to me.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: cincicrappykid on March 15, 2010, 13:28:13 PM
another crap shoot  why bother is what im thinking
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: coprey on March 15, 2010, 13:32:11 PM

another crap shoot  why bother is what im thinking


Why indeed? I"d give up if I were you. :D
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: technolog on March 23, 2010, 20:55:42 PM
I"ve just registered for matchday 3 and it appears that they"re scheduled for 6pm on Sunday. Even allowing for a one hour change in the clocks (this Saturday night/Sunday morning :-)) there appears to be a dicrepancy. Can you check it out and get back to us?
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on March 23, 2010, 21:36:30 PM

I"ve just registered for matchday 3 and it appears that they"re scheduled for 6pm on Sunday. Even allowing for a one hour change in the clocks (this Saturday night/Sunday morning :-)) there appears to be a dicrepancy. Can you check it out and get back to us?


I"ll get onto it in the morning.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: technolog on March 23, 2010, 21:43:21 PM


I"ll get onto it in the morning.



(http://blondepoker.com/forum/Smileys/default/thumbs.gif)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: technolog on April 25, 2010, 19:53:16 PM
Does anyone know which clubs the following aliases are registered with, if any?

LizLieu
nel ashton
paspa2
slimjimb
sword12
XblowMeX
ILuvBlakey

They"ve all been registered in the Div 3 game at various times of the season.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on April 25, 2010, 20:00:08 PM

Does anyone know which clubs the following aliases are registered with, if any?

LizLieu
nel ashton
paspa2
slimjimb
sword12
XblowMeX
ILuvBlakey

They"ve all been registered in the Div 3 game at various times of the season.


Let me have a look for you
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on April 25, 2010, 20:06:03 PM

Does anyone know which clubs the following aliases are registered with, if any?

LizLieu - Not registered
nel ashton  - Not registered
paspa2 - Walsall
slimjimb - Not registered
sword12 - Belfast
XblowMeX - Sunderland
ILuvBlakey - It"s Matt Russell

They"ve all been registered in the Div 3 game at various times of the season.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: AAroddersAA on May 15, 2010, 23:32:41 PM

Speaking as a member of a Division 3 side (albeit a sleeping giant  :D ) surely it"s absolutely right that those in the higher divisions should be playing for the better prizes. (http://blondepoker.com/forum/Smileys/default/dontask.gif)

I agree with this, however it does run the risk, if there are two clubs close together, one in div one and one in div three players are more likely to register for the club in Div 1 than the one in Div 3 which ends up with basically 0 players. Don"t think there is much that can be done about this as players are entitled to do this and as you say there should be better prizes for higher division clubs.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Jon MW on May 16, 2010, 13:47:24 PM


Speaking as a member of a Division 3 side (albeit a sleeping giant  :D ) surely it"s absolutely right that those in the higher divisions should be playing for the better prizes. (http://blondepoker.com/forum/Smileys/default/dontask.gif)

I agree with this, however it does run the risk, if there are two clubs close together, one in div one and one in div three players are more likely to register for the club in Div 1 than the one in Div 3 which ends up with basically 0 players. Don"t think there is much that can be done about this as players are entitled to do this and as you say there should be better prizes for higher division clubs.


If it happens too much then I wouldn"t be surprised to see consolidation - just merge the smaller one with the bigger one and reduce the total number of clubs.

I expect the total number of clubs to eventually drop by 3 or 4, and I don"t see why this should be a problem.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: AAroddersAA on May 16, 2010, 23:19:19 PM



Speaking as a member of a Division 3 side (albeit a sleeping giant  :D ) surely it"s absolutely right that those in the higher divisions should be playing for the better prizes. (http://blondepoker.com/forum/Smileys/default/dontask.gif)

I agree with this, however it does run the risk, if there are two clubs close together, one in div one and one in div three players are more likely to register for the club in Div 1 than the one in Div 3 which ends up with basically 0 players. Don"t think there is much that can be done about this as players are entitled to do this and as you say there should be better prizes for higher division clubs.


If it happens too much then I wouldn"t be surprised to see consolidation - just merge the smaller one with the bigger one and reduce the total number of clubs.

I expect the total number of clubs to eventually drop by 3 or 4, and I don"t see why this should be a problem.


Fair point. It would not really be a problem if that happened.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: technolog on June 27, 2010, 19:34:29 PM
Would anyone like to lay claim to "cindyella" who"s reg"ed in the Div 3 game?
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Waz1892 on June 27, 2010, 19:41:02 PM

Would anyone like to lay claim to "cindyella" who"s reg"ed in the Div 3 game?


Not Luton that I"m aware ofl....but I said that last time around with Merkland, who ended up Luton!
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on June 27, 2010, 19:44:04 PM

Would anyone like to lay claim to "cindyella" who"s reg"ed in the Div 3 game?


Cindyella is Gregg Keattch.  Can"t see if he"s regged for anyone though.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Lankylad on August 04, 2010, 11:07:50 AM
I don"t know if this has been mentioned sorry if it has but haven"t read through the whole thread! ;)

Just had a quick butchers at the structure and it"s got 15 min blinds. Can you confirm whether or not they"re staying that way or going back to 13 mins?

Cheers.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on August 04, 2010, 11:42:11 AM

I don"t know if this has been mentioned sorry if it has but haven"t read through the whole thread! ;)

Just had a quick butchers at the structure and it"s got 15 min blinds. Can you confirm whether or not they"re staying that way or going back to 13 mins?

Cheers.


Not going to change it for this week now, but will look at getting it back to 13 mins in future, depending on finsihing times.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Lankylad on August 04, 2010, 12:11:57 PM


I don"t know if this has been mentioned sorry if it has but haven"t read through the whole thread! ;)

Just had a quick butchers at the structure and it"s got 15 min blinds. Can you confirm whether or not they"re staying that way or going back to 13 mins?

Cheers.


Not going to change it for this week now, but will look at getting it back to 13 mins in future, depending on finsihing times.


Shame really because I"m actually in favour of 15 mins blinds, although not many people seem to be. I played a few after it went up to 13 min blinds, and the endgame still became too much of an all in shove-fest for my liking. It"s a difficult one, you probably can"t have a really decent structure because of possible late finishing times, but the better the structure in a league format like this the more chance of the best really shining.

On the other hand an extra 2 minutes might not make a blind bit of difference, pardon the pun.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: AJDUK on August 04, 2010, 12:25:25 PM
If we could just replicate the structure that existed on Blue Square that would be perfect. Put the levels back in that were removed and a 12 min clock would be fine. Or give us more chips to start with. As it is it"s far to shovey too early IMO.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Lankylad on August 04, 2010, 12:49:50 PM

If we could just replicate the structure that existed on Blue Square that would be perfect. Put the levels back in that were removed and a 12 min clock would be fine. Or give us more chips to start with. As it is it"s far to shovey too early IMO.


Aye, I hit on that point as well last season, and that"s probably a better solution tbh. If we had an Ultimate Bet or Full Tilt type blind structure (for example) you could easily have the blinds at 12 minutes, possibly even 10. The tournament shouldn"t finish any later and there"ll be more play in the endgame, as stack sizes will be decent in relativity to the blinds.

So I think the way the blinds rise (quite steeply) would be better being looked at rather than the length of the levels. As I said I don"t really expect it to be looked at but it"s just a shame there isn"t more play allowed near the end.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: RiverAsUsual on November 18, 2010, 09:00:12 AM
Online team games

Lessening the advantage of the larger teams.

One thing that doesn"t seem to have been considered is dividing "the number of points won by a team" by "the number of members of that team who played that game" (or even a division of this latter number).

These following methods can be adjusted as necessary.

eg.1.  Team Hollywood comes 1st and 6th for lets say, 18 points and has a total of 11 players entered. Their score for that game is 18/11 = 1.64 (rounded up). Using larger points scale will be necessary for more realistic looking tables as people may underestimate the value of even a single league point difference.

eg.2. Divide the number of players entered by 3 (or whatever number seems best) always rounding up, before making a similar calculation as above. So 18 points would be divided by (11/3 = 3.66r, rounded up = 4) giving 18/4 = a score of 4.5. Again these scores can be increased by awarding a larger points scale.

The same methods using a larger number of participants eg 19 players would award (eg.1) 0.95 pts or (eg.2) 2.57 pts

Even then, these award figures can be multiplied by 10 for more realistic looking points tables.


Larger teams will still have the advantage of being more likely to have the opportunity to employ team tactics.

All that either of the above two methods does, is to better award points proportionally in relation to team numbers in any given game. In these circumstances people like myself will be more willing to turn out for a smaller team, knowing our lack of numbers is not now such a massive handicap as although smaller teams will win points less often, when they do, their awarded score will tend to be bigger.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Foggy on November 18, 2010, 10:39:28 AM
Must agree, on face value this seems a better option than the one we are using at the moment.

It is becoming difficult to motivate yourself with the larger teams saturating the  league.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: AJDUK on November 18, 2010, 11:15:54 AM
I like this idea too. Especially since Solent would be even further behind Walsall by this method!

I can"t decide though whether this would act as a disincentive to sign up new "random" players once a team has reached an "average" size, because each new player would mean points gained being spread more thinly. Being too big could probably be a hindrance. And not signing up players is not what APAT is about (sorry for the double neg).

Interesting idea John.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: cincicrappykid on November 18, 2010, 11:19:14 AM
Half of the Walsall team dont score any points any how so we can give them to Birmingham if they want to SATURATE THE LEAGUE , Quality not quantity is what Walsall is about...... i fank u
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: ian.ski309 on November 18, 2010, 12:33:50 PM
Whilst I understand and agree with the objectives behind introducing new members to APAT... Division 2 has become a recruitment tournament rather than a poker tournament. Well, unless you play for one of the "big two" of course.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: TheSnapper on November 18, 2010, 13:55:04 PM

Though I have championed the idea of change to the current format, that change has got to be even handed and cannot be overly penal on the bigger teams.

Its going to be difficult to sell to those who currently hold the numerical high ground and tbh their successes at recruitment are deserving of some reward. That said, I do think the value of numerical advantage in the teamplay dynamic (especially at the business end) is totally underestimated.

A prerequisite for any new format has to be to allow small teams to get at least some team points on the board, how can you decide relegation places when 50% of teams have Zero points!

Is there anyone who sincerely believes that a format that allows this crazy anomally can entice the lower place teams to continue to make up the numbers.

To achieve any meaningful change.....




Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Waz1892 on November 18, 2010, 19:56:47 PM
Firstly it is a shame that the bigger clubs are getting a little bad press over the numbers they do get.   I can only speak with our club (Luton) but we manage to get high numbers through good networking within our club, and some hard work put in at the start in recruiting (Maybe sometimes a little too eager! ::))  But my point is, we have done nothing different that other clubs could do?   ???

Anyhoooo...

The points player ratio is a good idea, but was mentioned before maybe distracts from APAT obtaining newer players, promoting its brand through the online league.

And, again as before, it could detract from clubs signing up new players.

So my 2p..

To have a squad of players in each club but have a maximum of XX per club actually playing the matchday.

A) Each club could have numerous members - making sure APAT grows

B) No club with smaller members are "punished" for a lack of numbers.

It could be up to the captain to select that weeks palyers, or could be done on a rotation basis..or APAT could enforce that all players must play at least 5 games...etc....

Just thoughts running through my head....and now putting it out there....i"m sure I havent thought of all angles and this certainly hasn"t been fully thought out yet!  :)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: TheSnapper on November 18, 2010, 23:27:26 PM


Firstly it is a shame that the bigger clubs are getting a little bad press over the numbers they do get.   I can only speak with our club (Luton) but we manage to get high numbers through good networking within our club, and some hard work put in at the start in recruiting (Maybe sometimes a little too eager! ::))  But my point is, we have done nothing different that other clubs could do?   ???

Anyhoooo...

The points player ratio is a good idea, but was mentioned before maybe distracts from APAT obtaining newer players, promoting its brand through the online league.

And, again as before, it could detract from clubs signing up new players.

So my 2p..

To have a squad of players in each club but have a maximum of XX per club actually playing the matchday.

A) Each club could have numerous members - making sure APAT grows

B) No club with smaller members are "punished" for a lack of numbers.

It could be up to the captain to select that weeks palyers, or could be done on a rotation basis..or APAT could enforce that all players must play at least 5 games...etc....

Just thoughts running through my head....and now putting it out there....i"m sure I havent thought of all angles and this certainly hasn"t been fully thought out yet!  :)


Some nice ideas in there.

I don"t see it as the bigger clubs getting bad press at all tbh and GL to you, as I"ve said many times your trojan efforts at recruiting deserve some reward and should carry some advantage. Currrently that advantage is insurmountable for some teams.

Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Foggy on November 19, 2010, 09:36:30 AM



Firstly it is a shame that the bigger clubs are getting a little bad press over the numbers they do get.   I can only speak with our club (Luton) but we manage to get high numbers through good networking within our club, and some hard work put in at the start in recruiting (Maybe sometimes a little too eager! ::))  But my point is, we have done nothing different that other clubs could do?   ???

Anyhoooo...

The points player ratio is a good idea, but was mentioned before maybe distracts from APAT obtaining newer players, promoting its brand through the online league.

And, again as before, it could detract from clubs signing up new players.

So my 2p..

To have a squad of players in each club but have a maximum of XX per club actually playing the matchday.

A) Each club could have numerous members - making sure APAT grows

B) No club with smaller members are "punished" for a lack of numbers.

It could be up to the captain to select that weeks palyers, or could be done on a rotation basis..or APAT could enforce that all players must play at least 5 games...etc....

Just thoughts running through my head....and now putting it out there....i"m sure I havent thought of all angles and this certainly hasn"t been fully thought out yet!  :)


Some nice ideas in there.

I don"t see it as the bigger clubs getting bad press at all tbh and GL to you, as I"ve said many times your trojan efforts at recruiting deserve some reward and should carry some advantage. Currrently that advantage is insurmountable for some teams.




Just a small point and not sour grapes because of the Brum league position,which is due to poor turnout and lack of interest, as I have been led to believe. Is the proximitry of the clubs! Looking geographically at the clubs around the UK, there are miles between the competing teams, but not in the Midlands. We have a team in Birmingham and also a team in Walsall, just a small wedge from our centre. My suggestion would be to close the Walsall club and transfer them all to Birmingham under the guidance of our captain Ant 66
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: ian.ski309 on November 19, 2010, 10:30:43 AM

Firstly it is a shame that the bigger clubs are getting a little bad press over the numbers they do get.  


I don"t think that"s what anyone intended Waz, as Brendan quite rightly points out your efforts at recruitment are to be applauded. It"s just that when two teams regularly supply 65% of the runners, the competitive element is removed for the other teams and it ceases to be a contest.

Of course, there"s nothing to stop the rest of us simply stumping up our $10 and just playing for the cash - but when you factor in team play, etc, the also-rans are again at a disadvantage.

If I were a newcomer to APAT looking to get involved in this league with the current criteria in place, there only seems to be two options... either join a team which already has huge numbers or don"t join at all - hence the strong will get stronger and the weak get weaker.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: TheSnapper on November 19, 2010, 13:55:50 PM



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.



Totally correct, that would be as unfair on the bigger teams as the current format is on the smaller teams.


Quote from: AceOnTheRiver


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



Again. your point is well made and irrefutable. The challenge is to both retain that aspect and provide a format that offers a chance to compete for the smaller teams who either don"t / can"t put as much effort into recruiting or are genuinely limited to a smaller pool of players.

Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Waz1892 on November 19, 2010, 18:08:46 PM


Firstly it is a shame that the bigger clubs are getting a little bad press over the numbers they do get.  


I don"t think that"s what anyone intended Waz, as Brendan quite rightly points out your efforts at recruitment are to be applauded. It"s just that when two teams regularly supply 65% of the runners, the competitive element is removed for the other teams and it ceases to be a contest.

Of course, there"s nothing to stop the rest of us simply stumping up our $10 and just playing for the cash - but when you factor in team play, etc, the also-rans are again at a disadvantage.

If I were a newcomer to APAT looking to get involved in this league with the current criteria in place, there only seems to be two options... either join a team which already has huge numbers or don"t join at all - hence the strong will get stronger and the weak get weaker.


Good point well made.  :)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: MintTrav on November 19, 2010, 22:48:26 PM
Can"t see any merit at all in the "divide by number of players" notion. It would add nothing except a disincentive to recruiting players to your team. Anyway, why should a team of 3 have the same chance of winning as a team of 20?

A points system where points are spread across more teams is a good idea - it would create a fairer situation, both for the teams near the top and those further down.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: baldaceguy on November 19, 2010, 23:14:09 PM
As a matter of interest i cannot think of an example anywhere in any form of team competition where any one team has a numerical advantage over another team.Unless of course a team has been penalised in some way after the start of competition.If anyone can give me an example to the contrary i would be obliged.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: RiverAsUsual on November 19, 2010, 23:54:43 PM




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.



Totally correct, that would be as unfair on the bigger teams as the current format is on the smaller teams.




Totally correct? LMAO. Totally INCORRECT!! Maybe totally correct if the only players you are signing up are rookies but I don"t think that would be the case except by freakish circumstance
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: MintTrav on November 20, 2010, 00:05:01 AM

As a matter of interest i cannot think of an example anywhere in any form of team competition where any one team has a numerical advantage over another team.Unless of course a team has been penalised in some way after the start of competition.If anyone can give me an example to the contrary i would be obliged.


You must have missed Athletico Bilbao"s match against a team of 100, playing a 30-60-17 formation (3 goalkeepers).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZo7pVOzqGc&feature=player_embedded#!
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: TheSnapper on November 20, 2010, 00:23:56 AM






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.



Totally correct, that would be as unfair on the bigger teams as the current format is on the smaller teams.





Totally correct? LMAO. Totally INCORRECT!!   Maybe totally correct if the only players you are signing up are rookies inexperienced, but I don"t think that would be the case except by freakish circumstance



Surveillance should precede saltation! ::)

Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: RiverAsUsual on November 20, 2010, 00:55:17 AM







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.



Totally correct, that would be as unfair on the bigger teams as the current format is on the smaller teams.





Totally correct? LMAO. Totally INCORRECT!!   Maybe totally correct if the only players you are signing up are rookies inexperienced, but I don"t think that would be the case except by freakish circumstance


Surveillance should precede saltation! ::)





http://www.thefreedictionary.com/rookie    ;D
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: TheSnapper on November 20, 2010, 01:59:41 AM



http://www.thefreedictionary.com/rookie    ;D



(http://i1013.photobucket.com/albums/af253/7lb12oz/baseball-bat.jpg)

Try reading it carefully, take your time.

Quote from: AceOnTheRiver


Under this proposal inexperienced players could make numbers a disadvantage.



Quote from: TheSnapper


Totally correct, that would be as unfair on the bigger teams as the current format is on the smaller teams.



Quote from: RiverAsUsual


Maybe totally correct if the only players you are signing up are rookies



(http://i1013.photobucket.com/albums/af253/7lb12oz/pennydrop.jpg)

Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: RiverAsUsual on November 20, 2010, 02:10:54 AM
Yes, I re-read it and absolutely nowhere does it use the word "inexperienced" apart from the FOUR times in the definitions.


ps where is that icon with the little boy putting the fire out with warm yellow water?
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: TheSnapper on November 20, 2010, 12:46:43 PM



Yes, I re-read it and absolutely nowhere does it use the word "inexperienced" apart from the FOUR times in the definitions.

ps where is that icon with the little boy putting the fire out with warm yellow water?



When you say "it" do you mean your post?



Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: RiverAsUsual on November 20, 2010, 14:05:53 PM
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: TheSnapper on November 20, 2010, 14:52:13 PM
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: RiverAsUsual on November 20, 2010, 15:44:27 PM
Ah right, I see now. How stupid I"ve been!! None of the definitions mention anything to do with inexperienced poker players, just "inexperienced person" (which poker players obviously are not)  ::)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: TheSnapper on November 20, 2010, 18:18:56 PM

Ah right, I see now. How stupid I"ve been!! None of the definitions mention anything to do with inexperienced poker players, just "inexperienced person" (which poker players obviously are not)  ::)


Not quite sure what all that means ???

Get the feeling I need to keep this simple so Maybe you can clarify your position?

The statement, "Under this proposal recruiting inexperienced players could make numbers a disadvantage" is .......

[ ]   Totally correct!
[ ]   Totally incorrect!

Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: RiverAsUsual on November 21, 2010, 16:13:08 PM


Ah right, I see now. How stupid I"ve been!! None of the definitions mention anything to do with inexperienced poker players, just "inexperienced person" (which poker players obviously are not)  ::)


Not quite sure what all that means ???

Get the feeling I need to keep this simple so Maybe you can clarify your position?

The statement, "Under this proposal recruiting inexperienced players could make numbers a disadvantage" is .......




[   ]   Totally correct!
[   ]   Totally incorrect!
[ x ]   Not in keeping with APAT ethos

Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: TheSnapper on November 22, 2010, 14:31:12 PM



Totally correct? LMAO. Totally INCORRECT!!




[  ]   Totally correct!
[  ]   Totally incorrect!
[  ]   Not in keeping with APAT ethos





Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: RiverAsUsual on November 23, 2010, 07:56:37 AM




Totally correct? LMAO. Totally INCORRECT!!




[  x ]   Totally correct!
[  x ]   Totally incorrect!
[  x ]   Not in keeping with APAT ethos






Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: technolog on March 12, 2011, 11:02:48 AM
Hi Leigh, I"m sure it"s on your list but the online league terms & conditions need updating. When you get a minute :)
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: dazzammm on March 13, 2011, 21:21:22 PM
considering we now have 2 larger divisions have the points scoring system remained the same ???
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: Chipaccrual on March 13, 2011, 22:08:41 PM

Hi Leigh, I"m sure it"s on your list but the online league terms & conditions need updating. When you get a minute :)



considering we now have 2 larger divisions have the points scoring system remained the same ???


Dealing with both of these this week.

And yes, points scoring system has been revamped.
Title: Re: Online National League - Discussion
Post by: PantsMan on March 14, 2011, 17:21:57 PM


As a matter of interest i cannot think of an example anywhere in any form of team competition where any one team has a numerical advantage over another team.Unless of course a team has been penalised in some way after the start of competition.If anyone can give me an example to the contrary i would be obliged.


You must have missed Athletico Bilbao"s match against a team of 100, playing a 30-60-17 formation (3 goalkeepers).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZo7pVOzqGc&feature=player_embedded#!


That is awesome!  All football should be played like it!