What Day Should Online Series Games Be Played On?

[Des_D]

Let me throw an idea out.

What if the buy in was reduced for online ranking events to $5 and APAT held an event on a weekday night (eg, Thurs) and a weekend night (Sat or Sun).  

Lets say there were 20 rounds to the online series in season two, so effectively players would have access to up to 40 events across both nights. 

However, players would only be able to see their top 15 (TBC) online results count towards their overall rankings position.

[Bodddders]

I think this idea has some legs, 15 from 40 seems a fair amount. Maybe the number of ranking points awarded could also be increased. Top 20/25 as happens in the live events (top 18).

[Hammerite]

  Sounds very good idea to me Des. Perhaps $10 instead of $20 as you could enter both for same cost as now. I think your top 15 finishes is great idea and would help those players unable to participate in each tournament.

[ThinkerJE]

Social life???  What"s that?

[Des_D]

Social life???  What"s that?

lol......the real cost of entry!

[ThinkerJE]

Let me throw an idea out.

What if the buy in was reduced for online ranking events to $5 and APAT held an event on a weekday night (eg, Thurs) and a weekend night (Sat or Sun).  

Lets say there were 20 rounds to the online series in season two, so effectively players would have access to up to 40 events across both nights. 

However, players would only be able to see their top 15 (TBC) online results count towards their overall rankings position.

Top idea, however 15 final tables would be an achievement in itself!!!  Therefore would all finishing positions count?  Rather than just points for final table as it is at the moment?

[Des_D]

Let me throw an idea out.

What if the buy in was reduced for online ranking events to $5 and APAT held an event on a weekday night (eg, Thurs) and a weekend night (Sat or Sun).  

Lets say there were 20 rounds to the online series in season two, so effectively players would have access to up to 40 events across both nights. 

However, players would only be able to see their top 15 (TBC) online results count towards their overall rankings position.

Top idea, however 15 final tables would be an achievement in itself!!!  Therefore would all finishing positions count?  Rather than just points for final table as it is at the moment?

This is a difficult one, and a question that pops up quite often.  It is obviously very difficult to get to a final table.  Yet, after 25 events, nearly 200 players have scored ranking points.  Yet, in our last two or three online events, several players have been appearing at their second final table. 

The question for me, is how do we protect the "achievement" value of members earning ranking points, while possibly rewarding more players. 

It is also important to have a different reward structure for online and live events.  So I do not think we should award the same number of points for an online win and a live win. 

A suggestion might be to retain the 1 to 18 points allocation for live events, while amending the online ranking points structure to 2 to 10 points for a final table and 1 point for any player who makes the money (typically down to 18 or 27) but does not make the final table. 

Again, when we have some more members in the forum, we can thrown this open to a more formal process.

[RioRodent]

Again, when we have some more members in the forum, we can thrown this open to a more formal process.

Has the existence of this forum been advertised? I only found out by accident, and even then struggled to find it from the APAT home page... I couldn"t find a "Forum" option in any of the menus.

[Divitts.]

Thats an interesting suggestion Des. It would give anyone who cant make the saturday a midweek chance instead. I would agree that $5 is a bit low and that $10 sounds about right.  

[Des_D]

Again, when we have some more members in the forum, we can thrown this open to a more formal process.

Has the existence of this forum been advertised? I only found out by accident, and even then struggled to find it from the APAT home page... I couldn"t find a "Forum" option in any of the menus.

No Alan, the forum has only been soft launched through one email to a limited number of existing members.  Once we feel comfortable that it works as it should, then we will open it up to passing traffic.

I have seen several little gremlins that we shall fix prior to launch.  For example, in the top left hand corner of each thread, the member viewing information is shown as green on a grey background, and it is not possible to see the member"s name.  

[RioRodent]

Hi Devil"s Advocate here.

By doubling the number of tourneys and reducing the buy-in... therefore reducing the prizepool... you may end up with less players.

[Des_D]

Hi Devil"s Advocate here.

By doubling the number of tourneys and reducing the buy-in... therefore reducing the prizepool... you may end up with less players.

I"m not sure.  There are far larger events out there for similar buy ins to the APAT events, if players are chasing value per event.  For example, PokerStars offers some great $10k and $20k guaranteed events for $10 buy ins.

I think the majority of APAT members are more interested in the "series" element - trying to gain and improve their rankings throughout the season - and the community that has built up around those games.  They are seldom quiet but it is extremely rare to come across the horseplay that goes on at some point or other in most other online tournaments.

I would be surprised if we did not attract more players overall by reducing the entry buy in and offering members a more convenient schedule.  That said, I"m not sure what impact an idea like this would have on the community.  

[mikelott]

I agree that gaining 15 results would be very difficult and so the top 15 factor would be irrelevant

[Bodddders]

It is also important to have a different reward structure for online and live events.  So I do not think we should award the same number of points for an online win and a live win.

Des

Could you please clarify why you say it is important to have a different reward structure for online and live events.

[Des_D]

It is also important to have a different reward structure for online and live events.  So I do not think we should award the same number of points for an online win and a live win.

Des

Could you please clarify why you say it is important to have a different reward structure for online and live events.

There are a few reasons in my opinion, but very topline:-

1)  Access - there are far fewer live games than online games, so online specialists will have several opportunities to score points.

2)  Convenience - you can play an online game at home in your slippers with a cuppa.  When you play live, you will have to travel (sometimes hundreds of miles) and stay in hotels etc.  This takes a player well outside of their comfort zone.

3)  The need for a more complete game - you will need to utilise skills in a live game, like reading players, hiding your emotions etc, that you will not have to endure online.

Possibly above all else, the core objective of APAT is to promote standards in live play.  The stakes seem to be higher on every front in those tournaments and it feels right that the ranking point rewards should be higher also.

That said, APAT is here to listen to our members and if the masses think otherwise, then nothing is set in stone.