S4 Online National League - Discussion

[Waz1892]

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.  

[MintTrav]

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.

[baldaceguy]

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.

[RiverAsUsual]

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

[MintTrav]

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#!

[TheSnapper]

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!

[RiverAsUsual]

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    

[TheSnapper]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/rookie    

Try reading it carefully, take your time.

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.

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

[RiverAsUsual]

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?

[TheSnapper]

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?

[RiverAsUsual]

[TheSnapper]

[RiverAsUsual]

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)  

[TheSnapper]

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!

[RiverAsUsual]

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