Amateur Poker Association & Tour
Poker Forum => General Discussion => Topic started by: Honeybadg on May 27, 2009, 09:22:06 AM
-
This might be in the wrong place - but the APAT Policy area hasn"t seen any posts for over a year.
I was looking for something else last night and stumbled upon this thread about the vision for APAT.
I would be very interested as to the view of where APAT wants to get to.
Some observations:
1. APAT really gave my game a kick forward - made me want to play again.
2. Face to Face events seem spot on.
3. Numbers playing the Online Events seem very low - there was talk of there being 10,000 members - but for the online events there are usually about 150 players.
Questions: Does the APAT want to become a big(ger) organisation in its own right?
It strikes me that most poker players are amateurs, but also that there is sometimes a feeling that APAT is a feeder to the GUKPT/other bigger tours.
I like the idea that APAT stands stronger (not withstanding that people will play GUKPT/EPT/WSOP/whatever as well).
Aside - what is the position with regards to professionals being part of the APAT?
My main question here is how do we get more people playing in the online events, but welcome any thoughts on any of the above.
If answered elsewhere please direct me.
Louis
-
Live events are always sold out and the structure is great, the on line events after some early tweaks also have a perfectly good structure. There was always going to be a drop in numbers for the league tourney as certain teams drop out of contention, and some of our more illustrious members play events more suitable to their bankroll. A $10 event that takes 4 to 5 hours isn"t worth the effort for some of our members, and that is fine, everybody plays at the level thats suits them best. I agree it is a shame the numbers have dropped, I think we only had about 45 for the last central division game as opposed to about 140 for the first one, but thats life I suppose!
-
Agree totally Mikey. I think that the online League is a terrific idea and at least the top 4 players who get to play in the Final for the qualifying teams will be the players who have gained the most points throughout the season. They will not be "chosen" by someone who knows someone else as will be the case in the "European Team Championships"......but that is a moan for another page and one that I am sure will ruffle a few feathers.
I have nothing against any APAT players but I do feel strongly that for ANY team events, there should be a qualifying criteria laid down ALWAYS !!
-
It would be interesting how the numbers would be affected with a higher buy in.
I am not really arguing for that ... but the twenty week marathon structure might also put runners off.
By anecdotal observation lots of the regular players do play much higher levels too.
I play any Sunday that I am in.
I would argue going forward if the current numbers persist to merge all the runners into one freezeout - where you could split out results into regions if so desired?
That way you get a 150 runner event which mimics a face to face APAT event.
Thoughts?
Louis
-
Agree totally Mikey. I think that the online League is a terrific idea and at least the top 4 players who get to play in the Final for the qualifying teams will be the players who have gained the most points throughout the season. They will not be "chosen" by someone who knows someone else as will be the case in the "European Team Championships"......but that is a moan for another page and one that I am sure will ruffle a few feathers.
I have nothing against any APAT players but I do feel strongly that for ANY team events, there should be a qualifying criteria laid down ALWAYS !!
I made this point elsewhere ... and totally agree that selection to the team events should be on some fixed (APAT) criteria.
Louis
-
The biggest issue with the online games seems to, me and the people i speak to, be the variation in team sizes.
Its difficult for a team of 10 to beat a team of 50 over any length of time and that leads to people becoming disintrested.
Not sure how you solve that though.
-
The biggest issue with the online games seems to, me and the people i speak to, be the variation in team sizes.
Its difficult for a team of 10 to beat a team of 50 over any length of time and that leads to people becoming disintrested.
Not sure how you solve that though.
I know where you"re coming from, and your point is completely logical, however if you take a look at some of the recent results in the Central division, there are a number of players who are in the top10 in every round. The fact that a large portion of those regular final tablers are from the Leeds team is the reason why they are top of the league. Now, if the Leeds team only had 10 players, going on recent performances, they would still be flying high. (and that has been achieved in the largest and most populated of the three leagues!!)
Overall, in terms of the National tours live and online, the online league, and the World and Euro feature events, I think APAT has got it absolutely spot on!! There is no other poker organisation in the world that offers such a great opportunity at such great value.
-
Spot on Steve we (Leeds) only had 6 players on Sunday, but 4 made the final table. So smaller teams can just as easily get points if they play the events.
-
Spot on Steve we (Leeds) only had 6 players on Sunday, but 4 luckboxed their way to the final table. So smaller teams can just as easily get points if they shut their eyes, wear bras on their heads, and pray.
FYP
-
Most things the APAT do are good, but the league needs tweaking. For the last 4 events i have been 1 of 2 or 3 members from my club(mostly 2) and even if you win it your almost certain not to get three points and are lucky to get 2. I have found myself taking a few more unnecessary risks.
-
Steve you forgot the main one.....Play sober!!
-
Most things the APAT do are good, but the league needs tweaking. For the last 4 events i have been 1 of 2 or 3 members from my club(mostly 2) and even if you win it your almost certain not to get three points and are lucky to get 2. I have found myself taking a few more unnecessary risks.
Chris,
It"s a tricky one. There are 2 or 3 of you in Luton that have played most of the games and you are 2nd in the points for Luton. If you are only going to get 2 or 3 registering each week, it is tough (not impossible) to get league points.
Luton has 37 players registered to play in the league. A list of them is on the forum. I can"t answer why they are choosing not to play. We promote the league through the forum, emails, facebook to try and make sure everyone knows when they are happening.
In my opinion, I think the structure of the league games is great for a $10 buyin and they are played in a great sprit. If only the games I play were that enjoyable.
Clubs have proved that even with 5 or 6 runners, you can pick up league points, and we are only just coming up to the halfway stage, so very much all still to play for.
You get 10 points for winning each week, and to give you an idea, 10 points would have seen your club 2nd for 3 of the weeks and 3rd for another 2 of the weeks. It is possible, but a few friendly faces on the final table does help. ;D
Leigh
-
Whem i said about tweaking i was really refering to the league system and points, not to the tourney itself which i think is very good. I think to keep more peoples interest perhaps an individual players league running in at the same time say top three from each club into a separate tourney.
-
well i think its great join the brummies mate we ko each other every week lol long live apat woop woop here i come dublin tomoz
-
The biggest issue with the online games seems to, me and the people i speak to, be the variation in team sizes.
Its difficult for a team of 10 to beat a team of 50 over any length of time and that leads to people becoming disintrested.
Not sure how you solve that though.
I can only speak for the Southern league Ross, but the likes of Bristol weren"t getting massive numbers until the captain there seemed to give every a kick and remind them about the games and get some team spirit going. That seems to have done the trick.
I"d have thought Newcastle would be a hotbed of poker ?
-
The biggest issue with the online games seems to, me and the people i speak to, be the variation in team sizes.
Its difficult for a team of 10 to beat a team of 50 over any length of time and that leads to people becoming disintrested.
Not sure how you solve that though.
Totally agree. I have lost interest because of this and realised before the comp started that this would happen. I think the 20 week haul is a bit of a long drag too.
The regional thing is good but teams have to be limited in size to make it a fair competition, say maximum of 10, like the forum challenge. To ensure eveyone plays you could have Manchester (A), Manchester (B),,,,, and so on.
Perhaps do the league as a 6 week thing, top 3 teams go through to an A final, next 3 through to a B final and the rest into a C final. Where prizes are GUKPT ME seats, GUKPT side event, Online/APAT seats respectively.
Just an idea ::)