Poker Forum > WCOAP 2014
WCOAP 2014 Team Championship Discussion Thread
AMRN:
--- Quote from: bear21 on January 07, 2014, 18:51:46 PM ---
WCOAP says it all
there"s more than one game in poker and think a world championship should include more , stud/razz etc to name a few
that"s the whole point !!
it will show the winning team has a great variety of player talent
or they were very lucky ;D ;D
--- End quote ---
^^This.
It"s the WCOAP, not WCOANLHE
Des:
--- Quote from: TheSnapper on January 10, 2014, 03:42:24 AM ---
--- Quote from: CW86 on January 09, 2014, 18:47:57 PM ---
Shouldn"t a team event include the best players/specialists, otherwise it does lack some credibility no?
--- End quote ---
With the greatest respect Chris.
This event has never lacked credibility, quite the opposite and to imply as much falls somewhere between naive and complete nonsense.
There is a lot of small picture thinking and self interest itt imho. I really don"t think the previous introduction of PLO did much to enhance the event over the previous format.
I am fearful that this new development which at face value looks positive in terms of adding some strategic element, may ultimately be problematic for the already struggling smaller teams. Losing some of those teams or diminishing their ability to compete will be counter productive for all.
--- End quote ---
+1
s4ooter:
--- Quote from: TheSnapper on January 10, 2014, 03:42:24 AM ---
--- Quote from: CW86 on January 09, 2014, 18:47:57 PM ---
Shouldn"t a team event include the best players/specialists, otherwise it does lack some credibility no?
--- End quote ---
With the greatest respect Chris.
This event has never lacked credibility, quite the opposite and to imply as much falls somewhere between naive and complete nonsense.
There is a lot of small picture thinking and self interest itt imho. I really don"t think the previous introduction of PLO did much to enhance the event over the previous format.
I am fearful that this new development which at face value looks positive in terms of adding some strategic element, may ultimately be problematic for the already struggling smaller teams. Losing some of those teams or diminishing their ability to compete will be counter productive for all.
--- End quote ---
But surely thats because its never been suggested that it should run in such a way that specialists are needed?? ie, until the suggestions ITT its always been all players play all formats, instead of a possibilty of a "specialist round etc" or extra disciplines being introduced?
We can all play NLH to a decent standard, but if the event has rounds of PLO/HU then surely the team cpt should be picking a team that can win the event??
I, personally, would like to see the game played out with a Specialist round in which there are 4 sngs and you have to put a player into each.
PLO
PLO8
STUD
RAZZ
This way when teams are picked, players will be chosen on strengths....also it will encourage players to learn a new discipline for the year after, if they want to break into their countries team? This should also, in turn, mean that numbers in the Worlds Side Events, and online mixed games will increase which is only a good thing.
Gives Captains more chance to actually be tactical, as normally its all random draws (like the seating in the Homes). I was just "England B4" and all seating is done.
At least this way, captains can actually influence the outcome. They can mix it up and sacrifice a round to try and have the edge in other disciplines etc.
You say it doesnt lack credibility, but if you look at the England Team over the years, some players have featured so many times where others have never had the chance to play etc? When there is such a vast player pool to select from, and so many strong players is it not a surprise that some will want it looked at??
This year is an odd one, as England have declined their chance to play in the event as all 5 players cant be picked, so its going to be 4 new players competing to defend the title.....amazingly the event is 3 or so months away and England dont have a Captain techinally (as Carl passed it to Steve and they have both declined the opportunity)
This could be the year that a fresh faced captain is selected and some newer blood can be tried out on the bigger stage? Who knows....
I think the key thing is getting something set in stone asap, and sticking to it as well as getting the Teams confirmed asap also....I know, for myself, id like to know what im doing in London, if i am playing for my country or if i am free to play side events all week?? All these things are important to me, as i have to start putting money away for that like now :)
Fatcatstu:
I think the main point that people are raising Dann is that people want to get value for playing, and they dont think they will get it if the format is changed (see Gimac"s post)
I personally would have agreed to play snap if it was put in, as I just want to play for my country, but I can see both sides of the argument. IF you do go down the route of specialists then surely it is going to narrow the number of people playing for their country. How many people are decent Stud or PLO8 players in APAT?
bear21:
--- Quote from: Fatcatstu on January 11, 2014, 15:10:21 PM ---
I think the main point that people are raising Dann is that people want to get value for playing, and they dont think they will get it if the format is changed (see Gimac"s post)
I personally would have agreed to play snap if it was put in, as I just want to play for my country, but I can see both sides of the argument. IF you do go down the route of specialists then surely it is going to narrow the number of people playing for their country. How many people are decent Stud or PLO8 players in APAT?
--- End quote ---
[/b]
True Stu !! and that"s the whole point ^^^^
a team for a world championship shouldn"t include just one variant , ie NLH in whatever format !!
so many other games which should be included and as you said above ,
If you can"t play it LEARN , you might like it LOL
I"m glad PLO has been included and hope ,many more will be in the future !! ;)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version