Amateur Poker Association & Tour
Poker Forum => World Championship of Amateur Poker (WCOAP) => Live Archive => Live Poker => WCOAP 2015 => Topic started by: IrishTom on March 15, 2015, 19:58:56 PM
-
#1 Sat 28 Mar 14:00 Pot Limit Omaha Championship £50+£5 (8-handed)(2-day event)
Capacity 200 runners - 15k Stack - 30 Minute Levels - Alt/Late Entry 90 mins - Ranking Points 1st-9th
Day 2 will commence on Sun 29 Mar at 12:00
(The event/structure is subject to adjustment as deemed by APAT in the best interests of the WCOAP)
| LEVEL | SMALL | BIG |
| 1 | 25 | 50 |
| 2 | 50 | 100 |
| 3 | 75 | 150 |
| 4 | 100 | 200 |
| 5 | 150 | 300 |
| 6 | 200 | 400 |
| 7 | 300 | 600 |
| 8 | 400 | 800 |
| 9 | 600 | 1200 |
| 10 | 800 | 1600 |
| 11 | 1000 | 2000 |
| 12 | 1500 | 3000 |
| 13 | 2000 | 4000 |
| 14 | 3000 | 6000 |
| 15 | 4000 | 8000 |
| 16 | 5000 | 10000 |
| 17 | 6000 | 12000 |
| 18 | 8000 | 16000 |
| 19 | 10000 | 20000 |
| 20 | 12000 | 24000 |
| 21 | 15000 | 30000 |
| 22 | 20000 | 40000 |
| 23 | 25000 | 50000 |
| 24 | 30000 | 60000 |
| 25 | 40000 | 80000 |
| 26 | 50000 | 100000 |
-
This is no different from last year"s structure which was a 1 day event
-
This is no different from last year"s structure which was a 1 day event
and the point you want to make is? (although you"re wrong as it"s a capacity of 200 instead of 80)
-
This is no different from last year"s structure which was a 1 day event
and the point you want to make is? (although you"re wrong as it"s a capacity of 200 instead of 80)
Hi Tom,
Appreciate it potentially will have 2.5x the chips in play, but that is only going to add 3-4 levels of play into the mix, so a couple of hours max.
Hardly seems worth making it a 2 day event for that. I"m guessing that would be the point Matt was making.
-
Day 1 will have 10 hours (2pm-Midnight)
Say 8 hours is actual play (16 levels), leaving 2 hours for breaks
Blinds at the end of the play would be 5k/10k
Assuming 200 runners, that"s 3,000,000 chips in play.
You"d want average stack to be around 40 BB"s , so 400k, which would mean 7/8 players left at the end of Day 1.
Even if you make it the nittiest of APAT nitfests and say average will be 20 BB"s, that"s still only bringing back 15 players for Day 2 from a field of 200.
The structure feels as if it"s somewhere between a 1 day and a 2 day event.
-
I automatically assumed it would have the new structure which was used in Ireland and which was very well received.
-
This is no different from last year"s structure which was a 1 day event
and the point you want to make is? (although you"re wrong as it"s a capacity of 200 instead of 80)
Hi Tom,
Appreciate it potentially will have 2.5x the chips in play, but that is only going to add 3-4 levels of play into the mix, so a couple of hours max.
Hardly seems worth making it a 2 day event for that. I"m guessing that would be the point Matt was making.
Spot on, Leigh.
Had we filled the capacity last year (67 runners) then you may be onto something, Tom, but even the main event in Ireland drew less than 80 runners, so I"d be amazed if we got 100 in this. Have to say the format in Ireland was pretty much perfect for a two day event.
-
Constructive comments are always welcome thank you Leigh.
Whilst working within parameters, we have allowed for 200 players plus Alternates for 1.5 hours (we have to - to do otherwise would be folly!) and have built in the flexibility to "adjust accordingly" as we feel suitable to maintain the integrity (ie not a shove fest) of the event by clearly showing on every event:
The event/structure is subject to adjustment as deemed by APAT in the best interests of the WCOAP
If we do not hit the numbers, or the event is going too quick, then we have allowed for us to increase the clock if deemed appropriate on the day - there is nothing worse than having to reduce the clock (note HORSE 2014!).
We all want "decent" events, and this "flexibility" is built into every WCOAP structure to ensure we can give as good an event/structure on the day as possible.
-
As the number of players entering can NEVER be predicted, a backup plan and clause is never to far away. Tom has this clause in reserve and the increase of the clock after certain levels have been played or number of players left in tournament, are live indicators that Tom will no doubt monitor.
I have always been a fan or clock increases the deeper the run in big tournaments, which of course lesson the need to turn it into a shove fest.
Look forward to taking part and I am sure Tom will make the best decision in respect to all players taking part.
-
As the number of players entering can NEVER be predicted, a backup plan and clause is never to far away. Tom has this clause in reserve and the increase of the clock after certain levels have been played or number of players left in tournament, are live indicators that Tom will no doubt monitor.
I have always been a fan or clock increases the deeper the run in big tournaments, which of course lesson the need to turn it into a shove fest.
Look forward to taking part and I am sure Tom will make the best decision in respect to all players taking part.
Strongly disagree with this, as a player it is important to know the structure you are playing, both before and during a tournament.
If sat on 15 bb"s halfway thru a 30 min level you may have a lot more time to be selective if next level is 45 mins and vice versa.
It would be very unfair to exit taking on a correct but marginal spot only to soon find that the next level will be extended.
-
As the number of players entering can NEVER be predicted, a backup plan and clause is never to far away. Tom has this clause in reserve and the increase of the clock after certain levels have been played or number of players left in tournament, are live indicators that Tom will no doubt monitor.
I have always been a fan or clock increases the deeper the run in big tournaments, which of course lesson the need to turn it into a shove fest.
Look forward to taking part and I am sure Tom will make the best decision in respect to all players taking part.
Strongly disagree with this, as a player it is important to know the structure you are playing, both before and during a tournament.
If sat on 15 bb"s halfway thru a 30 min level you may have a lot more time to be selective if next level is 45 mins and vice versa.
It would be very unfair to exit taking on a correct but marginal spot only to soon find that the next level will be extended.
Couldn"t agree more
As for this:
The event/structure is subject to adjustment as deemed by APAT in the best interests of the WCOAP
I"m more than happy to see any adjustments to make the event better, just not in the middle of the event as suggested. Once the event starts, then the structure (whatever it is) is the structure, end of story.
As I said in my previous post, we"ll be lucky to see 100 runners in this, I think a 15K double stack would make a great 2 day event, it is the World Championship after all. As it stands it"ll just be a couple of hours longer than last year.
-
Overall I think we did pretty well in 2014 and there won"t be much different in 2015 - but I can assure you, if we take the PLO for example, that any "major" adjustment that we feel needs done will be done at the start of the event when we have a very good idea of the numbers (with only the late entry unknown) - as Matt says, 200 for a PLO is a big expectation - but we"ve allowed for it (with alternates) - and IF any adjustment is felt needed within the event, then we would give AT LEAST 2 full levels notice of it - but I would hope that would not be required (as said, I think the only event we felt needed adjusted "in play" in 2014 was the HORSE).
-
I don"t remember saying anything about "changing the clock during the event", I merely said that the number of entries can be monitored and then if the organiser deems appropriate, the clock could be adjusted. During the tournament was your interpretation.
-
I don"t remember saying anything about "changing the clock during the event", I merely said that the number of entries can be monitored and then if the organiser deems appropriate, the clock could be adjusted. During the tournament was your interpretation.
Apologies I must have got it wrong.
Tom has this clause in reserve and the increase of the clock after certain levels have been played
or number of players left in tournament, are live indicators that Tom will no doubt monitor.
But these parts even when reread can certainly be construed as "changing the clock during the event" and is not an unreasonable "interpretation"
-
I don"t remember saying anything about "changing the clock during the event", I merely said that the number of entries can be monitored and then if the organiser deems appropriate, the clock could be adjusted. During the tournament was your interpretation.
Apologies I must have got it wrong.
Tom has this clause in reserve and the increase of the clock after certain levels have been played
or number of players left in tournament, are live indicators that Tom will no doubt monitor.
But these parts even when reread can certainly be construed as "changing the clock during the event" and is not an unreasonable "interpretation"
I agree with Matt and Brendan"s concerns. The Dublin event, from a players perspective was a huge success.
I had certainly hoped to have minimum of a 15k starting stack plus a 15k add-on (Dublin was 20k plus 20k) with a structure to suit.
I dont really see the point of possibly adding time to levels in running, when a good starting point would remove the need for it.
Here"s hoping it changes.
-
The Dublin event, from a players perspective was a huge success.
Blatant "I FTed in Dublin" post if you ask me.
Mods, please sort
-
I think it"s good as is.
-
Really hoping this is 15k plus 15k
-
I for don"t think a dubble stack is a good idea. I longer clock is always better then a stupidly large amount of chips.
-
I for don"t think a dubble stack is a good idea. I longer clock is always better then a stupidly large amount of chips.
for no limit i agree, but this is plo. Why we arnt operating on the same format as the successful Irish leg is a big surprise, irrespective of the additional numbers possible...
-
I for don"t think a dubble stack is a good idea. I longer clock is always better then a stupidly large amount of chips.
for no limit i agree, but this is plo. Why we arnt operating on the same format as the successful Irish leg is a big surprise, irrespective of the additional numbers possible...
Pls tell me what you mean about NL or PL as I don"t see why you need more chips to play a PL game.
-
I for don"t think a dubble stack is a good idea. I longer clock is always better then a stupidly large amount of chips.
for no limit i agree, but this is plo. Why we arnt operating on the same format as the successful Irish leg is a big surprise, irrespective of the additional numbers possible...
Pls tell me what you mean about NL or PL as I don"t see why you need more chips to play a PL game.
Not the limit, but the game. And not necessarily a double starting stack, but a double chance where players can choose to take the 2nd stack anytime upto a certain level.
Bigger average pot sizes in PLO make the same size stack last less time compared to NLHE. Add that equities run much closer in PLO than NLHE and it"s easier to be forced into a flip for your tournament life. Double chance ensures people can take that shot with a bullet behind = less nitty = more action/bigger stack sizes/better comp.
Doubling the starting chips only a couple of levels difference in the grand scheme of things. 2m chips at 10k/20k is the same BBs in play as 4m at 20k/40k - which 1-3 levels further on depending on how generous the structure is.
But gives more play to everyone at the start.
-
So more chips more gamble.
More chips more chance of suck outs
-
So more chips more gamble.
More chips cards more chance of suck outs
-
So more chips more gamble.
More chips more chance of suck outs
The opposite. Less action and a nitfest encourages shorter stacks and then everyone just waits to get it in pre and flip.
Every tournament reaches that point, but delaying it as long as possible gives stack size time to diverge. If everyone has the same stack size everyone is hamstrung.
-
25k SS for a two day event a good compromise?.. Always large pots early on in a PLO game and bust outs towards end of day 1 would be thick and fast with a smaller 15k SS..
Would be great to see 30-40 make day2.. Would prehaps help the numbers for the later game as those who bust out hop into new event ;)
-
25k SS for a two day event a good compromise?.. Always large pots early on in a PLO game and bust outs towards end of day 1 would be thick and fast with a smaller 15k SS..
Would be great to see 30-40 make day2.. Would prehaps help the numbers for the later game as those who bust out hop into new event ;)
This
-
I think it"s good as is.
I for don"t think a dubble stack is a good idea. I longer clock is always better then a stupidly large amount of chips.
25k SS for a two day event a good compromise?.. Always large pots early on in a PLO game and bust outs towards end of day 1 would be thick and fast with a smaller 15k SS..
Would be great to see 30-40 make day2.. Would prehaps help the numbers for the later game as those who bust out hop into new event ;)
This
This monkey is not for turning ;)
-
however we arrive at a larger starting stack for a "two day" plo comp with a decent structure is the goal.
I really am confused by trying to develop a structure that has flexibility...a decent structure should be able to withstand 70-170 runners and shouldn"t have to be revised based on the number of runners...
Get the structure right in the first place and a back up plan shouldn"t be required...
-
A 2 day event with a 15k starting stack and 45min clock is bang on perfect for NLH think this is proven with the success of the Nationals.
IMO a 2 day event 15k SS with 30 min clock PLO is going to be a little shallow even if you run a 45 min clock I think at the end of day1 you wouldn"t be left with many runners..
Looking forward regardless but hope to see prehaps 20/25k SS ;D
-
Less than three days to go now - has a decision been made yet?
-
We"ve now agreed the structure and the "individual event" topic has been updated for #1
-
We"ve now agreed the structure and the "individual event" topic has been updated for #1
Thanks Tom, that"s great news. It"ll be a terrific tournament, I"m sure