Archive Boards > APAT UK & European Team Championships
European Amateur Poker Festival - November 2009
Eck:
--- 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 ---
You serious that you think this is fair? To win one live event you should get automatically picked ahead of others who may be far more consistent performers? Should the captain be hamstrung into choosing someone who may have run like god for a day or two??? (not suggesting that is the case with anyone btw).
I don"t get the opportunity to play live very often so should I be penalised because of that and those with more live experience and success be given preference? I don"t know the answers to these questions but I think the captains last time made considered choices and it is quite disrespectful to suggest that they won"t do that again.
Personally I would like to play this event (especially after getting an earbashing from Phil Starrs last week :) ). All I or anyone else can do is say they would be available and put forward what they think they bring to the table. Therefore if captain is interested I play low to mid stakes tournies on Crypto until recently and now on ipoker and here are my stats for consideration:
http://www.pokerprolabs.com/JimmyEck/ipoker.aspx
If not selected I will be 100% supportive of those that are chosen "mon the Scots!!!
Honeybadg:
--- Quote from: Eck on May 28, 2009, 11:11:01 AM ---
--- 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 ---
You serious that you think this is fair? To win one live event you should get automatically picked ahead of others who may be far more consistent performers? Should the captain be hamstrung into choosing someone who may have run like god for a day or two??? (not suggesting that is the case with anyone btw).
I don"t get the opportunity to play live very often so should I be penalised because of that and those with more live experience and success be given preference? I don"t know the answers to these questions but I think the captains last time made considered choices and it is quite disrespectful to suggest that they won"t do that again.
Personally I would like to play this event (especially after getting an earbashing from Phil Starrs last week :) ). All I or anyone else can do is say they would be available and put forward what they think they bring to the table. Therefore if captain is interested I play low to mid stakes tournies on Crypto until recently and now on ipoker and here are my stats for consideration:
http://www.pokerprolabs.com/JimmyEck/ipoker.aspx
If not selected I will be 100% supportive of those that are chosen "mon the Scots!!!
--- End quote ---
Great graphs ... well played ...
Aside - how do they deal with sats my graphs take a pounding when I lose in the $2.5m g"tee which I qualified for.
L
Honeybadg:
--- Quote from: Jon MW on May 28, 2009, 09:35:32 AM ---
--- 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.
--- End quote ---
When you say that it "is the only realistic way to proceed" ... I don"t find myself agreeing ...
What is unrealistic about offering places to those top of the combined rankings at date x?
You could split the places between rankings and the Captain"s picks - two each - say?
I don"t think I defeat my own argument - it is not correct to say that without 100% info you cannot have objective measures.
"From a basic statistical point of view there just isn"t a large enough sample size."
Add all the APAT events together and you have a system with a similar amount of data to the Ryder Cup qualification system.
I am chilled about all of this - but in terms of adding spice to the APAT season I think some form of qualification for this event would be a good addition (in the future).
Louis
Mikeyboy9361:
Great stats Eck !
Jon MW:
--- Quote from: Honeybadg on May 28, 2009, 15:53:59 PM ---
...
Add all the APAT events together and you have a system with a similar amount of data to the Ryder Cup qualification system.
I am chilled about all of this - but in terms of adding spice to the APAT season I think some form of qualification for this event would be a good addition (in the future).
Louis
--- End quote ---
If you add all the APAT events together you you don"t get a similar sample size to the Ryder Cup qualification - you get a similar sample size for all the people who are able to enter all the APAT events.
For those who only enter 2 or 3 a year you have a sample size of 2 or 3 to measure their ability.
I agree a form of qualification would be good, but the only "meaningful" ways of doing this (for example it would have to be live wouldn"t it?) would also be logistically unfeasible - at least in the current climate.
Also, although it is down to the captain"s judgments - the rankings are a very big influence on their opinion where it does provide an appropriate guide.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version