Poker Forum > Live Poker
Too Many Satellites
Jon MW:
--- Quote from: Geo on March 10, 2010, 19:45:52 PM ---
--- Quote from: Jon MW on March 10, 2010, 18:31:02 PM ---
I think there should be less satellites.
The Swansea seats, for example, sold out in about 5 minutes.
This is one of the smallest venues and 5 minutes to click to register is still quite a long time.
But, if less seats were given to satellites then it would take even longer for the direct entries to sell out - so however sausagey your fingers then having 6 or 7 or 8 minutes to click on register and enter a password really should be enough, shouldn"t it?
--- End quote ---
I know you"ll disagree Jon, you just do, however:
Surely this actually makes a case for there being more sats for the swansea event. Rather than giving people a 5 min opportunity to attempt to reg on the lobby clickfest, have sat only qualification and overall the more skillful players should win seats as opposed to fastest finger first.
FWIW I think the sats are fine as they are. I actually played all 3 because I was unable to make the clickfest. More options available the better imho
Geo
--- End quote ---
This is the bit I disagree with, when you had to fill in loads of details then almost everybody who wanted to was still able to get in - - but - - at least there is an argument that it unfairly favoured the faster typists.
But now the registration is so simple that nobody has any advantage as long as they have a stable internet connection (and if you don"t then you"re going to have a problem with the satellites as well)
Actually I disagree with the opinion that satellite only means that the most skillfull players get a seat as well.
The event we want a seat in is a deepstack live freezeout - the satellites are fast online satellites
You can be good at fast tournaments and not good at deepstacks
You can be good at online tournaments and not good at playing live
You can be good at satellites and not good at freezeouts
So seats only available by this route could easily mean a championship event full of great online players while all the great live players are sat at home
Paulie_D:
--- Quote from: Jon MW on March 10, 2010, 18:31:02 PM ---
The Swansea seats, for example, sold out in about 5 minutes.
This is one of the smallest venues and 5 minutes to click to register is still quite a long time.
But, if less seats were given to satellites then it would take even longer for the direct entries to sell out - so however sausagey your fingers then having 6 or 7 or 8 minutes to click on register and enter a password really should be enough, shouldn"t it?
--- End quote ---
I think you"re comparing apples & oranges here Jon.
Swansea is an aberation for S4. There were only 67 seats left after the satellites which, as you say, sold out in 5 minutes.
If we scale this up to the pre-S4 normal size of 200* seats then 15 minutes would have been about right.
*Don"t get me started on the reduced normal number in S4
Personally, I think 3 satellites for a live event is about right...squarely in the middle between not enough and too many. I"ll generally only play the higher priced one and if I"m unlucky (as is usual) then I"ll go for the click regfest,
However, I agree that there should ALWAYS be a non-sat way to enter. Some of us are better live than online.
Geo:
I"ll agree to disagree. Most of the APAT bigger online winners that I know are amongst the top APAT live players also.
Geo
rivertaff:
--- Quote from: Jon MW on March 10, 2010, 18:31:02 PM ---
I think there should be less satellites.
The Swansea seats, for example, sold out in about 5 minutes.
This is one of the smallest venues and 5 minutes to click to register is still quite a long time.
But, if less seats were given to satellites then it would take even longer for the direct entries to sell out - so however sausagey your fingers then having 6 or 7 or 8 minutes to click on register and enter a password really should be enough, shouldn"t it?
--- End quote ---
If it took 5mins to sell the 67 seats, then the extra 23 seats from the sats would have extended the "Bingo Game" of clicking a button the fastest by approx 1 min 40 seconds.
Yes, the sats do involve a fair bit of luck, they must do I qualified. But to replace the sats with an extra 100 seconds of button clicking IMHO is madness.
The sats give you 3 options of evening, the clickfest has only one. Maybe because of the geography Swansea may not have had massive demand, but for the North West, Midlands and London events it would only be a measure of reaction time.
At least the sats represent something more akin to the event you are entering, than finger licking clicking.
There was also the fact that 10 seats were kept back for Betfair. Will 10 seats (or 10% of the seats in the case of Swansea) be kept for Betfair in every "main event"?
Jon MW:
--- Quote from: rivertaff on March 11, 2010, 20:37:46 PM ---
--- Quote from: Jon MW on March 10, 2010, 18:31:02 PM ---
I think there should be less satellites.
The Swansea seats, for example, sold out in about 5 minutes.
This is one of the smallest venues and 5 minutes to click to register is still quite a long time.
But, if less seats were given to satellites then it would take even longer for the direct entries to sell out - so however sausagey your fingers then having 6 or 7 or 8 minutes to click on register and enter a password really should be enough, shouldn"t it?
--- End quote ---
If it took 5mins to sell the 67 seats, then the extra 23 seats from the sats would have extended the "Bingo Game" of clicking a button the fastest by approx 1 min 40 seconds.
...
--- End quote ---
No it wouldn"t.
The seats sold leapt up almost instantly - that was the people who were there waiting for it
The last 20 or so seats slowly ticked up until they were all sold, that"s why I suggested an extra 2-4 minutes for the extra seats, the average time to sell was fast - but that was only because of how many went instantly.
"Bingo Game"? how long do you need to click a button?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version