Match Structure

[pables]

I play to lose too John, but we"ve only had 3 weeks so far, so making more than one final table is surely not relevant, IMO, although Lee Mardon finished 3rd week 1 and 2nd week 2.  

[mylesfdo]

I play for fun. APAT wants me to turn up for 15 consecutive weeks and spend USD 165 on the tournament series. To be honest I"d be happy if I got half that back.
What I do want though is a bit of bang for my buck. If I"m in fold or shove mode to any raise after an hour then that"s not my idea of a fun game. I"m not saying I want to be able to nit it up for three hours but I think it"s fair to give the players a decent game. How many players have made more than one final table so far?

+1

[RicayBoy]

 He should be banned for being too good then )
Seriously though I"m just trying to say it won"t be a late night for many people very often..

[AMRN]

Seriously though I"m just trying to say it won"t be a late night for many people very often..

Not really the point though - if someone can"t afford a late night, they probably wouldn"t register in the first place.

[WYoung83]

Yeh, it isnt worth it for anyone to get less than 4 hours sleep. Even if it meant winning a few hundred quid and scoring good individual points.
 If i had to get up early and was on the final table, i would use it as an excuse to gamble a bit. Worst case scenario is that u win some all ins and get in top 3 or better, may not get a good sleep but im sure your not gonna drop down dead on monday morning. And anyone would be lucky to make 2 finals in 15 legs (or even just 1 final tbh) and if you bust trying then go to bed.

[Des]

Thanks Leigh. So more dropped after wk2 than after wk1.    Might that have happened anyway, regardless of structure, or might it be an indication of feeling?

I"m sure there"s a structure out there that will suit most desires - Dave Howard made some good observations in the Match 3 thread last night, looking at the Stars 500 cap structure with 3k/10, but a shallower climb.

Can"t take any credit for the research of the 500 cap, that certainly wasn"t my suggestion! Kudos to the researcher though!

Fully believe the structure we currently have would be acceptable - with a couple of minor tweaks, that"s all!

oops of course I meant Adam Sharples and not Dave Howard  

In advance: Structure is too quick. More levels please.

However, I"m not just here to moan. I have a suggestion.

During the first 2 weeks, the average number of players is 500. APAT have consistently said that they want the league games to last 6hrs (ish). So...Pokerstars run a range of CAP tournaments. I had a look at the only completed 500 cap F/O that I could see in the lobby. It was an $8.80 that started at 10.15am and finished at 16.07pm - which is 5hrs 52m.

The blinds? 3k/10m, but the 72 level structure that Stars has, rather than the 56 level structure that we currently have. See below (We use the one in the middle/right, I propose we use the one on the left)



This seems to have been written specifically for these capped tournaments and seem to be perfect for what we want.

Interesting, PokerStars are proposing a 80 level tournament with 1500 starting chips and 15m blinds.  I"ve requested more comparative information.

[deanp27]

I quite like the $22 big antes comps which have a 500 cap, structure always seems to play really well to me. I know alot of the players on here might go "woah antes from the start" but the comp starts at 5/10 from memory and always seems a good comfortable structure with 3k chips and would probably fit quite well into our timeslot.

[WYoung83]

 One on the left is best structure by far (because the blind increase is not nearly as steep). Look at corresponding level numbers after level 6, level 11 is more than doubble on the other 2. This means more play early on obviously. Most people will be busto by level 10 anyway. Its the early levels where people want a bit more value.

[GiMac]

Is this whole discussion one big level?

APAT was supposed to be all about bringing well structured tournaments for reasonable buy ins. Tick

We all know that deepstack poker favours the better players. Tick

I, along with most poker players, do not consider a 12.30am finish late, which is roughly where the last 2 weeks have finished. Tick

Seriously guys if it ain"t broke there is no need to fix it.

And as a last point I, along with quite a few others I have spoken to, already aren"t happy to be attracted into a 15 week league only for the good structures to be pulled from underneath us ONCE THE LEAGUE HAS STARTED. This really isn"t on and should have been sorted before the league started. Now fair enough a 3am start first week was too late but last week was fine with a 12.30 finsih. Jeez I bet most of the moaners aren"t even finishing half way up the field, or bothering to rail their fellow teammates once out. They just want a structure that favours a lesser player who is prepared to gamble his way through a short stacked poorly structured tournie.


p.s. I just checked and over 90% of the field were out by 10.30pm last Sunday night!!! This whole change structure cos of late night finish is a complete red herring imho.

[WYoung83]

 Understand what you are saying because i am one of the dissapointed ones, but before week 1 (when 5k 15 min etc) apat never imagined 547 runners. So could not have forseen 3 am finish. People complained about late finish to their captains i believe, even though only 9 players made final table. And they were 7 handed for almost 1 hour which isnt normal in all honesty. Maybe the shortstacks were winning the all ins, or maybe people were wanting to ladder a bit.

(i think others saying they want to rail friends on final table is fine of course, but these people now moaning that they want to watch friends but dont want to go to bed after 1 am is a bit like, umm whats the sentance im looking for? Get a life maybe ?? naah thats a bit harsh, but if youve gone busto, go to bed lol)

last week there was slightly over 200 less players than week 1. I would not be surprised if most dropped out because week 2 was such a punt. So no point in saying over half field were out by 10.30, because thats what apat wanted anyway, to get it finished by 1 am. "if it aint broke then dont fix it" cant apply to this situation because what is broke for some people may be fine for others. Week 1 was fine for me, but not ok for people who have a proper job where they dont get cash in hand lol. And week 2 was ok for people who have proper job, but not really ok for me because i want to give this a crack and give myself the best chance possible to get some points and a good tourny over 15 weeks, and dont mind staying up untill 3 am.

fwiw, i know that lots of players dont contribute to forum, and in week 2, on my starting table, think i was probably the only one who knew of the change to clock and starting stack, there were 3 welsh players who were all asking why we only had 4k (whos their captain and why didnt you tell your team?).  everyone else seemed surprised and this was obvious by the chat in the box.

[TightEnd]

Gordon, you haven"t read most of the thread

Frankly, you are talking a lot of ******** (insert smiley)

In a nutshell

- The vast majority of the field need to get up for work on the Monday morning, that is the overwhelming feedback

- The European team, in particular had huge problems with a late finish, especially with an hour"s time zone difference. The team would in all likelihood have had to fold, the Captain assured us repeatedly. Not desirable from their point of view, or APATs.

- Railing has always been a big part of APAT leagues and final tables.

- The structure change is very much because of a late finish. No other reason, The opposite of a red herring

- No APAT player has suggested a lesser structure to remove the skill element. The overwhelming majority of APAT players could be characterised as "tight" "conservative" types. There is a reluctance, I think, to adjust playing style to suit structure



As to Will Young"s points. The structure change was communicated via facebook, twitter and forum. Captains should also have communicated it as widely as possible. I also don"t think telling people who traditionally rail their mates to "get a life" or go to bed is at all helpful. Who are you to say that they need to do that? The railing is part of what the community is about, and has been for years.


As I keep saying we have two very different constituencies to cater to here. Those that want to play deep and long and those that can"t risk a late finish. Impossible to say how many have pulled out for which reason.

we might have a structure for week 4 onwards that provides a solution, suggested by Stars, that the captains are considering now

It is far shallower in the early levels, and will allow conservative types plenty of time to play. Finishing time would be roughly the same as now, because the starting stack is much lower. Better structure though

We"ll see what the captains want to do

[GiMac]

fwiw, i know that lots of players dont contribute to forum, and in week 2, on my starting table, think i was probably the only one who knew of the change to clock and starting stack, there were 3 welsh players who were all asking why we only had 4k (whos their captain and why didnt you tell your team?).  everyone else seemed surprised and this was obvious by the chat in the box.

Tbh you have a point, cos I spoke to a few players who didnt play after week 1 cos it was too late a finish but when i said the structure had changed to 4k with a 12min clock and that the game was finished by 12.30am they all said, why didn"t someone tell them the structure had changed cos they would have played for sure. I think there is a large silent majority who do not use the forum regularly who still do not know that the structure has changed from that first game, some might say their loss, but I say maybe thats APAT's loss.  

[GiMac]

Frankly, you are talking a lot of ******** (insert smiley)

Thanks for a constructive comment to my post, which was meant to be constructive. (stickyersmileyupyer@rse)

[TightEnd]

Frankly, you are talking a lot of ******** (insert smiley)

Thanks for a constructive comment to my post, which was meant to be constructive. (stickyersmileyupyer@rse)

Gave you a very constructive reply

Just thought it was a bit off to sound off so pointedly without reading the thread Gordon. If you had done so you would discovered most of your points were moot

[GiMac]

Frankly, you are talking a lot of ******** (insert smiley)

Thanks for a constructive comment to my post, which was meant to be constructive. (stickyersmileyupyer@rse)

Gave you a very constructive reply

Just thought it was a bit off to sound off so pointedly without reading the thread Gordon. If you had done so you would discovered most of your points were moot

Well i have read most of the thread and I do not think my points are moot. 

So does that now mean I am allowed to say I think you are talking *********? (nosmileyintendedorrequiringinsertion)

No it doesn"t cos I tend to treat people with a bit more respect, you obviosuly don"t have the social skills to do so.