Awards Discussion

[Santino67]

Absolutely fair point Des. Too late to change this year's nominations so may be worth starting a thread around the nomination process in the middle of 2012.

Cheers

[AMRN]

Someone has seen fit to nominate the guy - there's nothing at all wrong with that, but it doesn't mean he's won the award.

My vote went to a more recognised APAT face, as I'm sure did many others. Democracy is a wonderful thing.

[samuel_9]

WAS  IT ME AMRN

[NoCash]

Ha ha just spotted this. I'll be first to say that I was surprised to be nominated in this category so sorry if this has upset anyone.

I have played 6 or 7 APAT events of the last few years which doesn't qualify me as an APAT reg but I will be more involved this year. I was highly unlikely to win this so sorry If I blocked someone more deserving.

Dave

[MintTrav]

I have to say it seemed an odd nomination, as I can think of at least three players who had an outstanding year in APAT events and who were IMO more deserving of the recognition, but who didn't appear on the list. Nothing against Dave, who I was seated beside at the Forum Team event last January and had a great laugh with, but I think it was the only APAT he played apart from the one he won.

I am also a little surprised that discussion is not encouraged on the "Awards Discussion" thread before voting has completed. What is the purpose of it if members are told not to discuss the awards?

[AJDUK]

I have to say it seemed an odd nomination, as I can think of at least three players who had an outstanding year in APAT events and who were IMO more deserving of the recognition, but who didn't appear on the list. Nothing against Dave, who I was seated beside at the Forum Team event last January and had a great laugh with, but I think it was the only APAT he played apart from the one he won.

I am also a little surprised that discussion is not encouraged on the "Awards Discussion" thread before voting has completed. What is the purpose of it if members are told not to discuss the awards?

We were asked to nominate and then to vote. I'm not sure why discussion is needed. There's too much chance of offending someone if discussion takes place. It's so easy to read more into written comments than the writer intends.
Anyone who appears in the top 4 of our nominations deserves their place on the list, regardless of our own personal opinions.

I suggest a tweak for POY and hall of fame type awards: We could allow members to openly nominate their choice and why.  Not much different from now, but Des could operate a closed thread on which those that wish to "big up" others could indirectly post. Private nominations allowed too. This could result in a more informed nomination process for all of us and should ensure nobody worthy of consideration is overlooked. Like John, I can think of one or two individuals completely overlooked in a couple of categories. Not necessarily missed winners, but just getting a mention could give great encouragement to someone. Just a thought.

Congrats to all the winners.

[TheSnapper]

I have to say it seemed an odd nomination, as I can think of at least three players who had an outstanding year in APAT events and who were IMO more deserving of the recognition, but who didn't appear on the list. Nothing against Dave, who I was seated beside at the Forum Team event last January and had a great laugh with, but I think it was the only APAT he played apart from the one he won.

I am also a little surprised that discussion is not encouraged on the "Awards Discussion" thread before voting has completed. What is the purpose of it if members are told not to discuss the awards?

I have to say I don't find it odd at all John, granted I don't play as many Apat events as you guys but Dave is a player I am quite familiar with maybe that's just because his game impressed me though. I did watch the finale at DTD where from 2 tables out it appeared there would only be one winner and imho that superb performance was enough on its own to merit nomination.

I guess that's the crux of the matter though, some will have good insight into the individual player and others will exclaim Dave who? It's kind of similar to the inevitable dilemma faced by successive Team England Captains, they have such a broad choice over such a large geographical area that it's impossible to to know all potential candidates and thus somebody somewhere will be proclaiming how they got it so wrong.

People are voting on the awards this week...this may or may not influence how they vote.

Is it possible the naysayers may have swayed some votes in the winners direction?

[Chipaccrual]

I think the nomination process ensures that those people from APAT organising the awards are aware of all potential suitors for an award.  Everyone is given equal opportunity to make nominations, and really, once those nominations are released I think it is unfair for anyone to comment on who should be in or not.

One thing I would like to see is the removal of the voting process for the Hall of Fame entry.  I would hope that I am not speaking out of turn here, but I think people should be able to put forward a nomination for the APAT Hall of Fame along with a seconder at anytime.  The nominations could be reviewed annually and any number of people could be included.

as I mentioned in the other thread, I feel that the other three nominees deserve the accolade in their own rights for many differing reasons and for it to be down to a vote which can often be influenced by the timing of it, seems a little unfair.

Just my thoughts.




Do I get a trophy Des ?   

[s4ooter]

This "Awards" happen anymore??

[Des]

Yes, this year the awards will be announced around the WCOAP.