Poker Forum > General Discussion
Season 6 Discussion
Fatcatstu:
--- Quote from: RicayBoy on October 03, 2011, 22:23:46 PM ---
If teams regularly only get 4 or 5 players, then that is clearly unsustainable in any event. For example, Stockton could become part of the "North East Poker Club" which would include Sunderland. Organisers could look at this at the end of each season to decide if battle lines need to be re-drawn.
--- End quote ---
lol geddddoooouttahere! Cant go dismantling teams of APAT regulars really can you? Stockton are overacheiving if anything.
BOINGBLITZ:
If there is some sort of "National League Live" event, will the West Midlands have to have just one hole card instead of two as a Handicap for being successful ??
Are Wales gonna be stopped from playing the live team events because they keep winning ?
Oh.....as an aside, we have lost a lot of our regular players this season due to the problems early in the season with 888 and their running of tournaments.
It is always going to be a problem for teams at the lower end of a league to keep interest and numbers up and nothing you can do or say will change that.
If APAT think the Online League isn"t working then scrap it, because if you have a North-East team, a North-West team et-al, the same will apply in that the lower teams wont get many runners if they have no chance at the season"s-end.
TheSnapper:
--- Quote from: RicayBoy on October 03, 2011, 22:23:46 PM ---
I can assure you I am wide awake!
--- End quote ---
Touchy? If your gonna get upset when your points are challenged maybe tucked up in bed is the best place for you, or maybe you could step out of your defensive position and open your mind sufficiently so as to understand the intended context for those two words in my post.
--- Quote from: RicayBoy ---
The League in its current format had plenty of players in week one. You have put forward your view for the decline to the latest event and I put forward mine.
--- End quote ---
Your view being...
"in my view the reason for the decline in numbers this year is because the league has been (this season) less than well-run. Much of this has been out of our control with a couple of software failures, date changes, lack of notice of new times, players unsure of what site the games would be played on and now a different start time."
Yet we had various members post their concern about the League format HERE prior to these recent hiccups.
--- Quote from: RicayBoy ---
You have arrogantly assumed yours is correct and dismissed mine.
--- End quote ---
Lighten up ffs, its an opinion on a card game not world peace. Fwiw you give freely of your opinion as do I. Our opinions differ and I have tried to make a reasoned counter to your position, seems pretty standard and reasonable debate to me but if there's any particular words that caused you offence I'll happily revisit.
--- Quote from: RicayBoy ---
In my view the larger teams should have some advantage over the smaller teams. If a team captain or team members work hard to recruit new members to their team, they deserve some reward for it. This season a method was put in place to only give points to the top 4 scorers from each team. Perhaps that could be tweaked further, but I don't think it's far out.
--- End quote ---
So far you have opined on what you don't want to happen, what tweaks would you like to bring to table?
--- Quote from: RicayBoy ---
If teams regularly only get 4 or 5 players, then that is clearly unsustainable in any event.
--- End quote ---
Wow we agree on something ;D. The team size point is more about being inclusive and thus sustainable. I have acknowledged the very valid point previously, some Team Captains have played a storming recruitment game but the Captains efforts is not the only variable in success or failure in recruiting players indeed a hugely successful recruiter would likely fail miserably when fishing in a lesser stocked pool (metaphor alert: this is not about Angling).
With the competitive teamsize bar currently set at 20 plus we lessen our chances of growing the numbers. Lowering the bar will make a competitive team attainable in more areas. Lets not be blinded defending current positions of strenght over striving for a genuinely competitive and vibrant League. What will be more satisfying, effortless domination of an ever declining League or stretching yourselves to the last day in a super competive League.
Not saying my proposal delivers that but imho changes are needed and I put it forward only as a starting point.
AJDUK:
Scrap the online team league. Or seriously revamp it. There"s been more back biting sniping nasty ill thought out divisive and often incorrect remarks made about this one event than anything else. Certainly that"s how it felt to me as a Walsall player. Just not good for APAT and god knows what any new players must have thought about it all. Merging the Birmingham team into the Walsall team was an own goal (initially I thought it was a joke), and I half thought it was done to shut up the constant moaning of the Birmingham players about Walsall. It"s kinda ironic that most of WM"s points appear to be coming from the Birmingham side of late! And the merger just gave more "super team" ammunition to the rest.
I stopped playing the league a while ago. It"s just not what I joined APAT for.
I don"t see how you can make a league work as well at the end as at the beginning. As soon as a few teams are stuck at the bottom they will struggle to maintain their numbers. Happens in all the leagues I"ve ever played in, even in leagues that are made up of individual players never mind teams. Perhaps if the league was very short, say 4 or 6 weeks a time so that lots are still in with a chance at the end, it might just work.
If they do go on, I think more thought has to be given to how to ensure "added value" is distributed fairly amongst all participants in a winning team. If you"re in a winning team you should win something, but the current arrangement only rewards a few. I"m therefore not a fan of the current seat prizes, although APAT could rule that any winnings from seats get distributed e.g. 50% to the seat player and 50% to the rest of the team in relation to points gained. Another option would be just to have a prize pool awarded to the winning team in relation to points. It wouldn"t be hard to manage?
MintTrav:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version