Amateur Poker Association & Tour
Poker Forum => Live Poker => Seat Exchange => Topic started by: STEVEFRYER on January 27, 2009, 14:37:57 PM
-
1) Transactions cannot occur at a value above the advertised buy in price for the event.
Two seats for Walsall sold via this board so far and neither seems to adhere to this rule, is it just for show?
-
They are sold at face value = £75.
You are allowed to give a percentage of yourself away to others if you want. Many people exchange percentages - it increases your chances of cashing (although could potentially reduce your return if you do cash).
Has anyone sold their seat for more than £75?
-
So "£75 plus 15% of my winnings" has the same value as "£75"? If that were the case then why would people offer the percentage as a sweetener? Does something have to be money to have a value?
-
So "£75 plus 15% of my winnings" has the same value as "£75"? If that were the case then why would people offer the percentage as a sweetener? Does something have to be money to have a value?
I think you"re right that it involves a "flexible" definition of value.
Essentially it has been interpreted as just the immediate money sum.
But every transaction has to be agreed to by APAT customer services so there is "some" safeguard.
-
So just as long as I don"t mention extra money it"s ok?
£75 plus my car is good but £75 plus £50 (similar value(there"s that word again)) isn"t.
-
...
But every transaction has to be agreed to by APAT customer services...
-
...
But every transaction has to be agreed to by APAT customer services...
hence my first question, are half of the rules for this board just for show or will APAT enforce them?
-
I think it"s been fairly clear.
£75 is the value of the ticket
APAT have agreed that people can add a % of winnings as a sweetener
if this is the deal then there is little reason to assume that APAT won"t agree to it.
If it is an alternative deal then APAT will decide whether to agree to it or not.
For example
If you did offer £75 + a car, APAT could decide that it wasn"t going to accept this arrangement or they could decide that they were.
If they did accept it then people in future would know that adding a car to the offer was generally acceptable and if they rejected it then people would know that it wasn"t worth trying.
-
Got it, thanks Jon for clearing that up
Just for show it is then
-
I may have explained that badly.
-
Transactions cannot occur at a value above the advertised buy in price for the event.
Two seats for Walsall sold via this board so far and neither seems to adhere to this rule, is it just for show?
So just as long as I don"t mention extra money it"s ok?
£75 plus my car is good but £75 plus £50 (similar value(there"s that word again)) isn"t.
Must say I thought the same when I saw the transactions. They are not being sold for face value, though I"m not sure whether that really matters.
More importantly, Steve, if you"re interested in a ticket, what kind of car is it?
-
More importantly, Steve, if you"re interested in a ticket, what kind of car is it?
Obv the car was just an example, I"m saving that for when the buy-ins go up for the DTD games, will offer £75 plus 3 lifts down the pub in it if you"re tempted ;)
-
For what its worth, I"m with Fryer on this one. What is to stop someone getting a ticket via the clickfest with no intention of playing, then putting it up for sale at "Face value" with the caveat that the original purchaser retains a percentage of the person they sell the ticket onto? The successful clickfest applicant then has the possibility of winning a few quid without risking any of their own capital.
I hope this is just one of those one of those situations for which a ruling hasn"t been created, so can"t be stopped this time, but will be for future events. Yes, there are always going to be people who purchase a ticket in good faith, but because of circumstances beyond their control, can"t make it. However, i believe that practise of players selling seats at nationals, but retaining a percentage runs contrary to the spirit that APAT is supposed to stand for and needs to be quashed sooner rather than later.
-
Just for show it is then
I cant understand what the problem is here to be honest.
Transaction 1)You pay £75 to APAT for a seat.
If you cash
Transaction 2)APAT pays you.
Or alternatively
Transaction 1)I pay Joe Bloggs £75 for a ticket
If I cash APAT
Transaction 2)pays me £x
Transaction 3)I pay Joe Bloggs £x/5
The payment for the ticket is always the same amount (£75) This I have called transaction 1.
That is the deal done unless I cash in the tournament.
Nothing extra (like a car or a horse or whatever) is paid up front.
Therefore we are adding value but not to the amount we pay up front.
To add to Monkeymans point, I agree that a reserve list from day 1, or some other method may be a better long term solution, however this would surely involve more work for the APAT team who already have so much on to get these events running.
I do not however feel that anyone is going to go through the ordeal that is the clickfest just to gain a percentage of some unknown amateur and therefore do not feel it is in any way contrary to the spirit of APAT.
Heres hoping a long term solution that keeps EVERYBODY happy is in the offing.
-
Nothing extra (like a car or a horse or whatever) is paid up front.
Therefore we are adding value but not to the amount we pay up front.
what difference does it make if I say £75 plus my car today or £75 today plus my car next month (provided I don"t change cars in the meantime)
-
Fair points Pilf, although I still believe that accepting anything whatsoever above cost price for a seat represents a blow to the ethics that are supposed to be in place for this organisation. The payment of £75 should represent the cost of taking part in a national amateur poker tournament, nothing more, nothing less and no gain should be made by anyone not attending.
No, I don"t believe anyone would go through the clickfest with the intention of getting a share of an unknown amateur, but that does not mean the current situation is free from the possibility of being abused. What"s to stop someone purchasing a ticket so they can partake of the national experience, then selling their seat to someone they know to be a better player in the hope that this gives them a better chance of making a few quid? Nothing at present. I"m certainly not suggesting this has happened so far, but if deals of this nature are allowed to proliferate, then people WILL start buying tickets with the intention of selling them on.
The situation is very similar to what has happened to the demand for tickets to music festivals over the last few years. I used to go to these events regularly, but haven"t been for several years because I refuse to pay a large sum of money several months in advance without knowing who is appearing. The reason festivals frequently sell out on the day tickets are released, is that lots of people make a purchase not because they want to attend, but because they can sell their purchases on at a profit. This is precisely the situation APAT will be faced with if above-face-value transactions are allowed to continue. APAT nationals are already so heavily oversubscribed, the potential for abuse needs to be addressed.
-
I think this is the first time that this percentage thing has come into play, but having percentages in people is a poker thing, so I would suggest it is okay. I do though see where you are coming from, I had to sell my Dublin seat last year and could have done so quite easily for £150, but the spirit of APAT says its £75 and for me that is fair enough.
-
Nothing extra (like a car or a horse or whatever) is paid up front.
Therefore we are adding value but not to the amount we pay up front.
what difference does it make if I say £75 plus my car today or £75 today plus my car next month (provided I don"t change cars in the meantime)
None.
- Monkeyman, I think we are just about on the same page.
-
Nothing extra (like a car or a horse or whatever) is paid up front.
Therefore we are adding value but not to the amount we pay up front.
what difference does it make if I say £75 plus my car today or £75 today plus my car next month (provided I don"t change cars in the meantime)
None.
So why make the distinction of adding value up front or otherwise?
It"s coming back to that word value again, clearly seats are being sold above face "value"
-
So why make the distinction of adding value up front or otherwise?
It"s coming back to that word value again, clearly seats are being sold above face "value"
Because we are adding implied value that can not be measured before the tournament is over. It is my belief this is the key distinction.
-
Because we are adding implied value that can not be measured before the tournament is over. It is my belief this is the key distinction.
So something that has no value now, but may have value next month?
-
So why make the distinction of adding value up front or otherwise?
It"s coming back to that word value again, clearly seats are being sold above face "value"
Because we are adding implied value that can not be measured before the tournament is over. It is my belief this is the key distinction.
"Because we are adding implied value" - therefore the ticket is not being sold at face value. APAT only has two rules with regard to the transfer of seats. The first is "Transactions cannot occur at a value above the advertised buy in price for the event".
As you have admitted the deal struck includes value above the basic cost of the ticket, anyone selling a national seat including a clause in the transaction including a potential percentage of winnings of the purchaser, would appear to be in breach of the rules.
QED
-
I hope this is just one of those one of those situations for which a ruling hasn"t been created, so can"t be stopped this time, but will be for future events.
i believe that practise of players selling seats at nationals, but retaining a percentage runs contrary to the spirit that APAT is supposed to stand for and needs to be quashed sooner rather than later.
^ THIS ^
Whether the value can be measured before or after the game has taken place there is still EXTRA value in selling with a percentage therefore I believe this should be against the rules also...
If you choose to swap % with players in the same competition or whatever then that"s fine and part of everyday poker but selling a seat with the promise of % as a sweetener to intice the transaction is wrong in my opinion...
-
Clearly we have a different view on this situation Steve. I don"t believe there is any value me trying to explain things much more from my perspective. I"m not a words man, more a numbers man, hence I play poker as a passtime and gamble for a living.
Because the implied value is directly linked to what we are purchasing I think this situation is ok (only my opinion of course)
If I were to play devils advocate I could state something like; the person who has 25% of me could theoretically sell this to somebody for £15 (Now that would be a bargain!) and therefore lock in a profit on the sale. However I do not see this as being a real problem that is currently facing APAT.
I think if APAT have/had released a statement stating that in this situation allowing only a % of winnings as a "sweetener" (way of adding implied value) then we should be happy with this for the time being until it does become a genuine issue.
-
If you choose to swap % with players in the same competition or whatever then that"s fine and part of everyday poker but selling a seat with the promise of % as a sweetener to intice the transaction is wrong in my opinion...
Why is this fine then?? APAT clearly has a rule stating that no deals are allowed in APAT tournaments. This would IMO constitute a deal.
FWIW I agree that this is fine, but if we look at the rules in Black and White as we appear to be doing, how is it fine?
-
Sorry I haven"t got involved in this thread sooner, been busy this afternoon. ;D
Any seat exchanges must be completed for no more than the face value of the seat (i.e. £75)
Due to the high demand for these tickets, players are offering a percentage of themselves to stand a chance of getting one as and when they become available. This is only potential additional money, should they cash.
To the best of my knowlewdge, this is only being offered by players looking for a ticket and not by anyone selling (i.e. I can"t make it, so selling my seat for £75 + I want 50% of whoever buys it).
What we want to do is ensure seats are exchanged in a simple and fair way. By sticking to the £75 rule (which I believe each transaction so far has done, and if anyone knows any different, then please pm me) we do not have the situation of people getting seats just to make a profit from.
That would go against what APAT is all about. Offering a % of yourself to get a ticket, just shows how keen you are to play.
Hope that answers the queries.
Leigh
-
I play poker as a passtime and gamble for a living.
Do I know you?
I don"t believe there is any value me trying to explain things
I saw what you did there ;)
-
If you choose to swap % with players in the same competition or whatever then that"s fine and part of everyday poker but selling a seat with the promise of % as a sweetener to intice the transaction is wrong in my opinion...
Why is this fine then?? APAT clearly has a rule stating that no deals are allowed in APAT tournaments. This would IMO constitute a deal.
FWIW I agree that this is fine, but if we look at the rules in Black and White as we appear to be doing, how is it fine?
The no deal rule relates to the players currently in the tournament in question. You are comparing that with a situation where a % has been agreed to someone not playing in the tournament (as they are selling their seat).
Two completely different situations.
-
Offering a % of yourself to get a ticket, just shows how keen you are to play.
And offering a premium above the value of a concert ticket just shows how keen you are to see the concert, it doesn"t stop the person you"re dealing with being a tout
-
Thanks Leigh, clears everything up. ;D
Steve, I don"t think you know me. I"m easily locatable on APAT website or Hendon Mobs poker database (or through google) if you wanna see if you recognise me.
If you gamble a lot you"ve probably had a few of my hard earned on Betfair too.
And if you laid Denman at 20/1 for me at the National, Thanks. I"m now on a £500 freeroll....../brag.
-
Also, Leigh. Could you point me in the direction of the rules on the website please?
Haven"t really played since season 1 and could do with a read through before I set off to Walsall.
Thanks a lot mate.
-
Also, Leigh. Could you point me in the direction of the rules on the website please?
Haven"t really played since season 1 and could do with a read through before I set off to Walsall.
Thanks a lot mate.
Standard rule are under Association on the menu.
-
Sorry to be a pain Leigh, but I wholeheartedly disagree with you on this one. As I mentioned in my last post, the APAT rule regarding the transfer of seats clearly talks about "Value" and not "Purchase price". Allowing transactions which include anything other than the purchase price (in this case a slice of the purchaser"s potential winnings) is therefore in contravention of both the letter and spirit of the rule in question.
-
If you choose to swap % with players in the same competition or whatever then that"s fine and part of everyday poker but selling a seat with the promise of % as a sweetener to intice the transaction is wrong in my opinion...
Why is this fine then?? APAT clearly has a rule stating that no deals are allowed in APAT tournaments. This would IMO constitute a deal.
FWIW I agree that this is fine, but if we look at the rules in Black and White as we appear to be doing, how is it fine?
While it may constitute some sort of a deal to swap % with mates prior to a tournament I personally interpret the APAT rule to mean no deals at the final table etc. I thought it was so people PLAYED it out to the end for the win and the best (or luckiest) player wins. I personally felt this rule was in place to ensure the integrity of the APAT championship and champions.
I still feel swaping ticket for £75 + % of a player is selling the seat over it"s original value. Nobody can deny that it"s being used as a sweetener and is working. Where will it end - is there going to be a limit on the % you can offer? What about Mr X, the guy who doesn"t care about £ and only wants the experience, could he say feck it and offer to buy a seat for £75 + 100% of any winnings he might recieve in exchange? Surely that would be putting other potential buyers at a massive disadvantage of gaining a seat and you can"t deny that is massive added value? Yes it"s an extreme and unlikely scenario but it could very well happen. There are definitely people out there who play in APAT events and don"t care about the money... so where does it stop?
-
Offering a % of yourself to get a ticket, just shows how keen you are to play.
And offering a premium above the value of a concert ticket just shows how keen you are to see the concert, it doesn"t stop the person you"re dealing with being a tout
I really think suggesting that the seat exchange on APAT is like ticket touting is a bit out of order and I would ask you to retract that statement.
We can appreciate people"s frustrations at wanting a seat, but numbers are restricted. The transactions that take place on the seat exchange are for a monetary value of £75. At that moment in time, no one is making a profit from the transaction. If players are prepared to give a % of themselves when looking for a seat, then that is fine. (Bearing in mind, 90% of the time that will be worth nothing).
I cannot see how that can be abused. Is anyone really going to go to the trouble of getting a seat, just to sell it for what they paid for it, with the chance of some cash if that person does well ?
Whereas if we were to allow seats to be sold for above £75, then that is open for abuse as you create a situation where someone can make easy money by getting the seat for £75 and selling it for instant profit, which would not be good for APAT or the players.
-
I really think suggesting that the seat exchange on APAT is like ticket touting is a bit out of order and I would ask you to retract that statement.
I do retract, I have hopefully kept this discussion light hearted other than that final statement and gladly and willingly retract it
-
PILF!! Great to see you back. You playing the live events this season?
I"ll have a percentage of you... ;)
-
I really think suggesting that the seat exchange on APAT is like ticket touting is a bit out of order and I would ask you to retract that statement.
I do retract, I have hopefully kept this discussion light hearted other than that final statement and gladly and willingly retract it
Many thanks.
I think you can safely say, that from this thread, discussions will be had behind the scenes to make sure that it is as fair a situation for all involved.
Leigh
-
PILF!! Great to see you back. You playing the live events this season?
I"ll have a percentage of you... ;)
Timing is everything. ;D
-
I"m with Leigh on this and cannot believe the amount of energy being spent on this thread. Any added percentage is wholly theoretical (and almost for entertainment value for the poor blighter who has had to give his seat up), whereas 15% of a car would clearly add to the face value of the tournament seat.
If 21st century touts have stooped to clickfesting into a £75 APAT event, followed by processing a series of emails and posts to pass the seat on for 15% of a 1% shot that your stoolie will win a 200 runner event, then that particular industry is not progressing. ;)
-
I meant to ask......what type of car are we talking about? ;D
-
Maybe we should look at changing the wording of the rule in question then.
My final word on the subject
-
Maybe we should look at changing the wording of the rule in question then.
My final word on the subject
Don"t let it be your final word. What would you propose the wording should be?
-
Imagine if Ian buys a seat with the promise of a percentage of his winnings... Trading Standards will be brought in.
(Only joking sir)
-
Maybe we should look at changing the wording of the rule in question then.
My final word on the subject
Don"t let it be your final word. What would you propose the wording should be?
Did you have to ask ?
He"s already admitted to being a pain, now you really want his opinion.
I guarantee it will be poetic and rhyme. ;D
-
Hypothetical situation:
You buy a lottery ticket for £1.
Agree to sell it to someone for £1 + 15% of any winnings...
No added value in this?
You"re being given the chance to participate and have the chance (no matter how slight) to win money without having to invest any of your own capital, and in the case of poker, time and skill...
I"ve got a seat to Walsall so not really minding what the outcome of this whole situation is right now. I just like debates... :D
-
Hypothetical situation:
You buy a lottery ticket for £1.
Agree to sell it to someone for £1 + 15% of any winnings...
No added value in this?
You"re being given the chance to participate and have the chance (no matter how slight) to win money without having to invest any of your own capital, and in the case of poker, time and skill...
I"ve got a seat to Walsall so not really minding what the outcome of this whole situation is right now. I just like debates... :D
Nope, you bought for a pound and sold for a pound - the 15%"s not worth a jot today. The actual added value you"ve received is in making someone very happy, as presumably this was the last lottery ticket in the country.
Question back to you. Would you go out and buy something on the strength of the 15% you"d secured?
-
PILF!! Great to see you back. You playing the live events this season?
I"ll have a percentage of you... ;)
Alright Boshi, I"m hoping to play a few of the live events. I know I cant make Ireland :( due to a wedding but all the others are on my radar. I"m also gonna play the regionals on a Sunday night although am yet to post my colours to a mast so to speak.
And everyone will want a percentage of me......surely?!?
-
Hypothetical situation:
You buy a lottery ticket for £1.
Agree to sell it to someone for £1 + 15% of any winnings...
No added value in this?
You"re being given the chance to participate and have the chance (no matter how slight) to win money without having to invest any of your own capital, and in the case of poker, time and skill...
I"ve got a seat to Walsall so not really minding what the outcome of this whole situation is right now. I just like debates... :D
Nope, you bought for a pound and sold for a pound - the 15%"s not worth a jot today. The actual added value you"ve received is in making someone very happy, as presumably this was the last lottery ticket in the country.
Question back to you. Would you go out and buy something on the strength of the 15% you"d secured?
Not if he had a percentage of me.
-
Hypothetical situation:
You buy a lottery ticket for £1.
Agree to sell it to someone for £1 + 15% of any winnings...
No added value in this?
You"re being given the chance to participate and have the chance (no matter how slight) to win money without having to invest any of your own capital, and in the case of poker, time and skill...
I"ve got a seat to Walsall so not really minding what the outcome of this whole situation is right now. I just like debates... :D
Nope, you bought for a pound and sold for a pound - the 15%"s not worth a jot today. The actual added value you"ve received is in making someone very happy, as presumably this was the last lottery ticket in the country.
Question back to you. Would you go out and buy something on the strength of the 15% you"d secured?
I don"t agree at all. I personally think there"s added value because you"re still in with a chance of winning something. Yes it"s worth diddly squat right now but it could be...
At the end of the day we"re all gamblers and love a punt - no matter how we justify our poker habbits to ourselves and the missus - at the end of the day poker is gambling (albeit with favourable odds). I"ll agree to disagree for the sake of peace though... :D
-
Crikey, don"t you lot go on?
-
At the end of the day we"re all gamblers and love a punt - no matter how we justify our poker habbits to ourselves and the missus - at the end of the day poker is gambling (albeit with favourable odds).
IE - I"ll take a free punt on a random horse if you"ll give me it...
Not sure that read exactly as it was meant..
-
Maybe we should look at changing the wording of the rule in question then.
My final word on the subject
Don"t let it be your final word. What would you propose the wording should be?
If we get to the point where we are all agreed that that the arrangements being discussed are OK, then the rule should read "No player may pay another player more than the advertised buy in price in exchange for a seat at an APAT national". I think there is a subtle difference between this and the existing rule and I think it permits the degree of flexibility we are now seeing. Not wishing to encourage too much more debate on the subject, but I"m open to constructive debate on this one (dives for cover).
Besides which, I couldn"t care less whether Doyle Brunson, Phil Hellmuth and the Devilfish buy seats and agree a percentage, I"m going to win the damned thing anyway. ;D
-
Maybe we should look at changing the wording of the rule in question then.
My final word on the subject
Don"t let it be your final word. What would you propose the wording should be?
Did you have to ask ?
He"s already admitted to being a pain, now you really want his opinion.
I guarantee it will be poetic and rhyme. ;D
Leigh, noooooooooooooooooooooo. You know what happened on my blog when I mentioned poetry. Yep that"s right, those relatives of mine who use this forum stopped taking their medication and posted page after page of utter drivel. Please don"t encourage them.
(having said that, I may soon attempt the impossible and write a poem which mentions a trip along the M6, a visit to Wolverhampton racetrack and 2 nights in a Holiday Inn in Walsall!)
-
Imagine if Ian buys a seat with the promise of a percentage of his winnings... Trading Standards will be brought in.
(Only joking sir)
Sigh
-
I have a seat and need a new car. I don"t think Stevefryer should be allowed to post an offer of his car plus £75 in exchange for a ticket without more info on the car. How can I make a decision as to whether to sell my ticket to him without knowing what colour the car is and if it"s got space for shopping and somewhere to put my handbag? ???
BTW I want to play Walsall but if the cars a goodun I may be swayed.....
-
I have a seat and need a new car. I don"t think Stevefryer should be allowed to post an offer of his car plus £75 in exchange for a ticket without more info on the car. How can I make a decision as to whether to sell my ticket to him without knowing what colour the car is and if it"s got space for shopping and somewhere to put my handbag? ???
BTW I want to play Walsall but if the cars a goodun I may be swayed.....
I"ve got an old Matchbox Fiat from 1990, it"s white with Italia "90 logo all over. It"s got a few miles on the clock but is in immaculate condition... What do you say?
-
I have a seat and need a new car. I don"t think Stevefryer should be allowed to post an offer of his car plus £75 in exchange for a ticket without more info on the car. How can I make a decision as to whether to sell my ticket to him without knowing what colour the car is and if it"s got space for shopping and somewhere to put my handbag? ???
BTW I want to play Walsall but if the cars a goodun I may be swayed.....
I"ll swap you my handbag for your car.
-
I have a seat and need a new car. I don"t think Stevefryer should be allowed to post an offer of his car plus £75 in exchange for a ticket without more info on the car. How can I make a decision as to whether to sell my ticket to him without knowing what colour the car is and if it"s got space for shopping and somewhere to put my handbag? ???
BTW I want to play Walsall but if the cars a goodun I may be swayed.....
I"ll swap you my handbag for your car.
Where"s Noel and Keith when you need them.
-
I have a seat and need a new car. I don"t think Stevefryer should be allowed to post an offer of his car plus £75 in exchange for a ticket without more info on the car. How can I make a decision as to whether to sell my ticket to him without knowing what colour the car is and if it"s got space for shopping and somewhere to put my handbag? ???
BTW I want to play Walsall but if the cars a goodun I may be swayed.....
I"ll swap you my handbag for your car.
I"ve seen it and I don"t like it sorry - a silver clutch bag just isn"t me.... looks good on you though Kin.
-
I have a seat and need a new car. I don"t think Stevefryer should be allowed to post an offer of his car plus £75 in exchange for a ticket without more info on the car. How can I make a decision as to whether to sell my ticket to him without knowing what colour the car is and if it"s got space for shopping and somewhere to put my handbag? ???
BTW I want to play Walsall but if the cars a goodun I may be swayed.....
I"ll swap you my handbag for your car.
I"ve seen it and I don"t like it sorry - a silver clutch bag just isn"t me.... looks good on you though Kin.
I know. It matches my heels.