Archive Boards > APAT UK & European Team Championships
European Amateur Poker Festival - November 2009
Honeybadg:
--- Quote from: APAT on May 27, 2009, 22:38:06 PM ---
--- Quote from: Honeybadg on May 27, 2009, 21:54:03 PM ---
I don"t think there is any fuss ... upfront selection basis better in my opinion.
I didn"t do any APAT last year ... (so nothing to go by)
The comment was made that teams might be bespoke based on Heads Up ability ... tough to measure that within the APAT tournaments.
Louis
--- End quote ---
This is not a wholly APAT focussed event Louis. We are inviting teams from all over Europe. The German, French and Hungarian teams who took part last year were amongst the first to enter this year"s event; demonstrating how much they enjoyed their APAT experience, and in addition we will be announcing further European entries very shortly. This will increase the prestige in this event and in the European Amateur Championship (individual) also.
--- End quote ---
Fair play - I was reading the stuff on APAT Vision and the two sort of go together.
I spoke(briefly) to Stuart in Walsall about representing Scotland (in the future) and how picks were made.
Upon reflection I would prefer an objective system (in the future) as it would give all the home based players something to "fight" for through the APAT season.
The Euro teams might have other criteria.
Aside - I am sure I am a long way from being a top 4 pick for Scotland at this stage.
I would weight "live" performances over online (where I do much better) - but going forward I would expect my "live" form to continue to improve.
Vision part - if the APAT becomes much bigger (I hope it does) then you might need more of a system.
My angle on Captaincy is that the bigger things are the harder it is to pick a team because you may not have full information.
Analogies regarding Pro Sport don"t quite match for me - because there is full(er) info on performance.
It is pretty tough to rate people"s heads up play - even looking at final tables - because often the blinds are so large.
I am sure all the Captains will make the best picks based on the info they have.
My own preference going forward would be to make things objective perhaps with a playing captain. State the criteria at the start of the season and run from there.
Louis
BOINGBLITZ:
PRETTY OBVIOUS REALLY......winners of English, Scottish, Irish and Welsh live events qualify period......if they all are say English for instance, then so be it.
I just feel that this "selection process" of Captains was not widely publicised.
Also, if more than one person applied for the Captains job, who made the choice ??
And in a team of just 4 players, surely all of them should be recent winners of live APAT events ?
Personally, as an online Champion I would love to be included myself. I just don"t see it happening and also having spoken to other Champions, they don"t think that they will either.
My mate Swinebag talks about Capello earlier......a good analogy Rob......but he doesn"t play either.
AMRN:
--- Quote from: BOINGBLITZ on May 28, 2009, 01:49:01 AM ---
PRETTY OBVIOUS REALLY......winners of English, Scottish, Irish and Welsh live events qualify period.
--- End quote ---
OY!!!!! What about the UK live event????????????
lukybugur:
::) That was just a Mickey Mouse tourney :)
Jon MW:
--- Quote from: Honeybadg on May 28, 2009, 01:21:18 AM ---
...
My angle on Captaincy is that the bigger things are the harder it is to pick a team because you may not have full information.
Analogies regarding Pro Sport don"t quite match for me - because there is full(er) info on performance.
It is pretty tough to rate people"s heads up play - even looking at final tables - because often the blinds are so large.
I am sure all the Captains will make the best picks based on the info they have.
My own preference going forward would be to make things objective perhaps with a playing captain. State the criteria at the start of the season and run from there.
Louis
--- End quote ---
You"ve essentially provided the arguments against your own system.
You won"t have the full information, you can"t judge people"s heads up play, and pro sports rankings are hard to judge even when they have more complete information.
Given how persuasively you"ve argued about how much information is missing, how can the teams be selected objectively?
From a basic statistical point of view there just isn"t a large enough sample size.
So basing any selection on any kind of apparantly objective criteria, isn"t actually objective, it just means people with good variance at the right time get picked.
This only really leaves judgement, intuitively it seems right that there should and could be a place for the national champions, world champion etc. but at the end of the day if there is no record to objectively measure the best people for the teams (and their isn"t) then leaving it as the Captain"s responsibility - and the Captain"s glory if they win - is the only realistic way to proceed.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version