Poker Forum > WCOAP 2008 - 2012

APAT WCOAP Team Event Post event reflections

(1/8) > >>

AMRN:
Another awesome performance from Wales (did I mention that my family is half Welsh?), coming from so far down the table on the final day!  Quality!!

In my opinion though (without any disrespect to the winners whatsoever), this calls the whole MTT aspect into question. If I recall correctly, Wales were second bottom after all the STTs, PLOs, and HUs, had completed...... to me that suggests that the scoring mechanism places too much emphasis on the MTT section and negates the need to do well in the rest of the competition.

Mikeyboy9361:
Firstly to congratulate APAT and the team on another fantastic team event, and Wales for doing as the Yanks call it a Re - peat!
Having been there for day one these are a few of my thoughts, and as a none player feel free to shoot me down. I felt the stacks for the SNGs in NL and PLO could have been a bit deeper, one mis played hand and you were crippled. I think you were all wrapped up for just after 11pm, so defo room for a deeper stack.
The MTT had to much of a baring on the overall result, taking nothing away from Wales, I am sure they will agree after the SNGs and HU they would have been out of it under the old points system. It really changed the whole competition into a one tournament event, which was a bit of a shame for the teams that had amassed good results over the two days. It is nice to still have a shot coming into the final event, and adds to the excitement of the closing hours, but maybe coming from second last to win is a bit much. So maybe a look at the points allocated to the MTT.
But as I said earlier a great APAT event, ony wish I could have been there for more than one day. Good luck to all playing the Main Event, and Cymru yn gwneud yn dda !

Jon MW:

--- Quote from: AMRN on August 27, 2011, 08:55:36 AM ---
...

In my opinion though (without any disrespect to the winners whatsoever), this calls the whole MTT aspect into question. If I recall correctly, Wales were second bottom after all the STTs, PLOs, and HUs, had completed...... to me that suggests that the scoring mechanism places too much emphasis on the MTT section and negates the need to do well in the rest of the competition.

--- End quote ---


Comparing the MTT result to the final result supports that view - you could almost not bother with any of the other events and just have the MTT if this format were kept.

But you can only win what"s there so well done on another win for Wales.

George2Loose:
Quote from AMRN:

In my opinion though (without any disrespect to the winners whatsoever), this calls the whole MTT aspect into question. If I recall correctly, Wales were second bottom after all the STTs, PLOs, and HUs, had completed...... to me that suggests that the scoring mechanism places too much emphasis on the MTT section and negates the need to do well in the rest of the competition.

This may be quite long and a tl;dr but I think yesterday threw up some really interesting points/debate and I think it would be a good idea to discuss these. I know the mods will be busy organising the main so it will give us a couple of days to discuss.

1) First of all, I"d like to say a huge well done to Wales. None of what I"m about to say is sour grapes or detracts from their victory- they got their tactics right and had some superb MTTers in their side. At the end of the day, the rules were the same for everyone and to have 3/4 navigate their way to the final table is some achievement.

2)I thoroughly enjoyed and thrived on the team dynamics that were ever changing. As a tournament player you"re constantly adjusting to stack size/opponent/position etc but in this case it brought things to a new level. I"m not sure how many people off the forum heard but we had a situation 5 handed where Wales had won and Dan Owston started playing with reckless abandon and knocked out Scotland who were playing for bronze. There was some furore and talk of disrespect from Dan from other teams as they were still playing for points. I"ll post my own thoughts a little later.

3)There is a dilemma when it comes to the mtt. If you weight it too heavily than it makes the first day kinda irrelevant. If you don"t weight it enough it"s not as exciting for some teams who could find themselves out of it and you get the whole "Dan Owston " effect. How do we combat this?

I have a few suggestions for the next team champs. I"m not sure how feasible they are but here goes:

1) First of all, I do NOT think Dan was out of order. It"s just another part of the dynamic. When I was sat quite short stacked 2 tables out, I had a Spaniard who had nothing to losing opening half the pots and an Italian on my left who didn"t care much either. Was it wrong that they were messing about? Nope. Team spoilers is another dynamic to take into consideration and as a good tournament player you have to adjust.

2) Take out a small amount from the total prize pool and use it for the MTT. And when I say small, I mean very small. Make first in the team champs 2500 and pay the winner an APAT main event seat. This will see individuals who nothing to lose, something to gain. I"m sure, even for £100 this would have seen some take it more seriously. Esp on the final when there"s medals to play for.

3) Rather than award points on the first day. Have the points correlate to the team"s chipstack in the MTT. So for example you could award 1000 chips per 10 points or whatever works. This means staggered chip stacks. The finishing points in the MTT are what actually matter so anyone can still win but it does mean the first day is just as important as the MTT.

Thoughts?

Honeybadg:
The "furore" was settled an hour later - no problems - I"d say move on, on that part of the thread.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page