Amateur Poker Association & Tour
Poker Forum => Online Archive => Online Poker => National Online League => Topic started by: Chipaccrual on March 02, 2010, 23:02:32 PM
-
Matchday 1 tournaments are now available in the Betfair Poker lobby.
The tournaments are on Sunday 7th March 2010 and commence at 8pm.
Please make sure you have registered your details with your chosen club on the relevant club thread prior to the start of the tournament. If you have not posted your betfair id by 8pm on Sunday, you will not score matchday points for your club. (Once posted, you are registered for the season)
There you will see the division your club plays in.
You will not score points if you enter the wrong tournament for your chosen club.
You have been warned. Good luck at the tables.
Leigh
-
The password for all Online National League tournaments is currently :-
apatmember
-
Whats the password ::)
-
ARE you sure now LOL ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
just to confirm we dont have a northern ,central , southern division anymore we just have div 1 2 3
-
just to confirm we dont have a northern ,central , southern division anymore we just have div 1 2 3
Yes that is correct. The Clubs are split into 3 regions but all clubs will be represented in the division applicable to their finishing position last year eg. Div 1, 2 or 3
-
anyone else having trouble depositing on betfair?
-
anyone else having trouble depositing on betfair?
yes, but sorted, and a few others had issues too. Seems best way is to deposit through the sportsbook (at least that what I did), which worked.
-
why have her been 254 view of the League Tables and Matchday Results when there been no game ;D
-
Just a quick reminder to everyone that if you haven"t registered your Betfair Poker details with your club thread by 8pm tonight, you will not score any points this week.
If you do not register for the correct division tournament that your club plays in, you will not score any points this week.
Looks like a great turnout for tonight, good luck to everyone playing.
Leigh
-
The password for all Online National League tournaments is currently :-
apatmember
my password will only type in small letters and black
-
1st out on 1st hand :"( Do I win a prize?
-
You can have this invisible tenner!
Here ya go
-
1st out on 1st hand :"( Do I win a prize?
You can have the bad beat of the night award, pretty sure I folded a queen not that it will make you feel any better ;).
-
Not a great start!
Cannot complain about the manner in which I went out, but can we go back to 13 min levels? Additionally we don"t seem to have the same blind structure as last season. I may be mistaken but the BB seemed to jump from virtually nothing to 150 (now 200) in no time at all.
Not as appealing as last term, as you are basically knackered if you are card dead in the first hour or so.
-
what he said!!!
-
What is the blind structure?
Cannot find it anywhere...
Blinds levels need to be changed back to 12 mins though
-
Not a great start!
Cannot complain about the manner in which I went out, but can we go back to 13 min levels? Additionally we don"t seem to have the same blind structure as last season. I may be mistaken but the BB seemed to jump from virtually nothing to 150 (now 200) in no time at all.
Not as appealing as last term, as you are basically knackered if you are card dead in the first hour or so.
Agreed. Please fix it for the sake of the game.
-
let it be known that Dave "106isbest" Howard is a lucky donko and an embarrassment to the Solent team. We are not proud of him being on the team, and any points recieved for him in this event will be accepted bitterly.
-
I love you Bagley.
-
you had me at I
-
let it be known that Dave "106isbest" Howard is a lucky donko and an embarrassment to the Solent team. We are not proud of him being on the team, and any points recieved for him in this event will be accepted bitterly.
They will be accepted though.
-
ffs not my comp. Lost 10k pot with KK Vs AJ and J7, then 8.5k pot with AK vs 89, then got my last 2k in with 67hh Vs AQo and bricked.
gg gl solent
-
Not a great start!
Cannot complain about the manner in which I went out, but can we go back to 13 min levels? Additionally we don"t seem to have the same blind structure as last season. I may be mistaken but the BB seemed to jump from virtually nothing to 150 (now 200) in no time at all.
Not as appealing as last term, as you are basically knackered if you are card dead in the first hour or so.
Agreed. Please fix it for the sake of the game.
agree, it was like playing a turbo,no fun at all,becomes too much of an all in fest after an hour
-
Agreed. Push-fest after about 90 mins.
-
very much agree with general opinion that it turned into a crapshoot after 1st break. and i was lucky enough to build a stack (despite some software issues!) but still theres no play after 90mins.
Like ur hand: all in pre
Dont: muck.
Not much to like about that to be honest.
-
I agree too...please change the structure.
-
Solent doing well. Just lost two but two more still in with ten players standing.
Dave Howard down to 2nd place now but still laying waste around him with any cards and Dave Grimsdale in 9th hanging on for points.
-
This happened last season too I won the first game then you guys messed around with the blind structure then I never made a final table since, as it stands i"m 2/21 so I"M HAPPY WITH THE TOURNAMENT STRUCTURE!!!
EDIT: I"m actually now a massive chip leader...
-
Hey guys, Bubbled in 10th - bit of a cooler.. AQ all in for 9k on the button, snap called (knew I was behind) by Cowboys.. flop rag Ace (yay) King (nay)...
Anyway good fun, bit of a shove fest from 1hr onwards, but pleased with my first showing for Team Solent. Just a shame didnt get top 9.
Dave
-
Just occurred to me that with 140 players and only the top 9 scoring over just 10 matchdays the overall results may be well within variance. Maybe have the number of scoring players as a function of the number of entrants. 18 felt better for today, for example.
-
We"ll definitely look at the structure for the next leg.
-
maybe points scored by players could mirror those who make the money as per betfair"s structure?
-
maybe points scored by players could mirror those who make the money as per betfair"s structure?
I like that.
-
Just occurred to me that with 140 players and only the top 9 scoring over just 10 matchdays the overall results may be well within variance. Maybe have the number of scoring players as a function of the number of entrants. 18 felt better for today, for example.
Gotta agree cos we had four players still in with fifteen left and only one of them scored points, the others finishing 10th, 11th and 15th for nothing. Please backdate the scoring system to include the 1st game.
-
Please backdate the scoring system to include the 1st game.
and last season
-
Just occurred to me that with 140 players and only the top 9 scoring over just 10 matchdays the overall results may be well within variance. Maybe have the number of scoring players as a function of the number of entrants. 18 felt better for today, for example.
Gotta agree cos we had four players still in with fifteen left and only one of them scored points, the others finishing 10th, 11th and 15th for nothing. Please backdate the scoring system to include the 1st game.
that would have been moi! gutted to a) miss the money and b) miss the points.. argh!
-
Just occurred to me that with 140 players and only the top 9 scoring over just 10 matchdays the overall results may be well within variance. Maybe have the number of scoring players as a function of the number of entrants. 18 felt better for today, for example.
But wouldn"t this just favour the bigger teams?
The deeper the points go, the advantage would surely move to the bigger teams.
With only 9 players scoring and cream rising to the top, wouldn"t quality and not quantity win the league?
-
\weeeeeeeee.... Happyyyyyyyyyyy... I won the Northern game... you know... thr big one with the most players (151)... weee......
Congrats!
-
that was Carl on my account FML - he came round after winning and used my compter to post -- must have been the win that did it
-
LOL....
I thought I was logged on as myself.... DOH...
I was a bit excited as I just won the Division 1 league game, welllll happy....
hehe...
Well done everybody in the Liverpool team... Are we winning?
Cheers
Carl..
-
Just occurred to me that with 140 players and only the top 9 scoring over just 10 matchdays the overall results may be well within variance. Maybe have the number of scoring players as a function of the number of entrants. 18 felt better for today, for example.
But wouldn"t this just favour the bigger teams?
The deeper the points go, the advantage would surely move to the bigger teams.
With only 9 players scoring and cream rising to the top, wouldn"t quality and not quantity win the league?
Any scoring system favours the bigger teams: that"s built into the luck component of poker. My complaint last year was the bigger teams had an unfair edge. The new divisions have helped a lot. Now the weightings feel off in this other way, to me anyway.
Note that APAT have a (possibly orthogonal) motive to continue allowing bigger teams an advantage, as this encourages growth of the tour.
-
Just occurred to me that with 140 players and only the top 9 scoring over just 10 matchdays the overall results may be well within variance. Maybe have the number of scoring players as a function of the number of entrants. 18 felt better for today, for example.
Gotta agree cos we had four players still in with fifteen left and only one of them scored points, the others finishing 10th, 11th and 15th for nothing. Please backdate the scoring system to include the 1st game.
Um, I don"t think it"s appropriate to ask APAT to change the scoring system just because it would benefit your team from the results yesterday... In fact asking for the scoring system to be backdated to give you guys a better result is out of line IMO. If they finished outside of the points the rules should not be changed to benefit them, DUCY?
-
Just occurred to me that with 140 players and only the top 9 scoring over just 10 matchdays the overall results may be well within variance. Maybe have the number of scoring players as a function of the number of entrants. 18 felt better for today, for example.
Gotta agree cos we had four players still in with fifteen left and only one of them scored points, the others finishing 10th, 11th and 15th for nothing. Please backdate the scoring system to include the 1st game.
Um, I don"t think it"s appropriate to ask APAT to change the scoring system just because it would benefit your team from the results yesterday... In fact asking for the scoring system to be backdated to give you guys a better result is out of line IMO. If they finished outside of the points the rules should not be changed to benefit them, DUCY?
Whom it benefits is incidental. I wouldn"t expect the system to be changed until next season anyway.
-
However, or even if you change the scoring system, you just CANNOT do it until the end of this 10-game season. You CANNOT move the goalposts once the game has started.
The dynamics of last night"s FT would have been totally different had 18 players scored instead of 9 and therefore you cannot alter it retrospectively.
Likewise therefore, you cannot alter the forthcoming games for the same reasons.
If anything is to be changed, then do so for the 2nd set of 10 games.
Personally, I like the way this is scored. I think it is spot on.
If teams have more players, so be it. We at Walsall had 9 I believe last night compared to much bigger turnouts by several other teams, yet we still made 2 to the FT and finished 2nd.
What next.......shall we handicap those players who enter the "Professional" live games with less chips aginst us amateurs because they are too good for the rest ?
This system is proven to work. Please leave it alone.......though you can return the stating stacks to what they should be !!
-
The bigger teams will have an advantage over the smaller teams whether it"s the top 9 or top 18 that score - and it"s ambiguous as to which would have less impact; so I don"t see the harm in changing it - but I also don"t see the need for it.
For each individual it"s easier to be in the winning team if you"re in a large team - but a larger team makes it harder for you to get one of the top 4 spots which will give you the individual added seat prize.
Similarly more people will enter the higher divisions because of the better prize - so they have a better prize, but it"s harder to get.
i.e. there are checks and balances built in to the system, I wouldn"t be surprised if some clubs end up dying off by the end of this season but fundamentally the system as it is can be supported by the player pool.
-
Just occurred to me that with 140 players and only the top 9 scoring over just 10 matchdays the overall results may be well within variance. Maybe have the number of scoring players as a function of the number of entrants. 18 felt better for today, for example.
Gotta agree cos we had four players still in with fifteen left and only one of them scored points, the others finishing 10th, 11th and 15th for nothing. Please backdate the scoring system to include the 1st game.
Um, I don"t think it"s appropriate to ask APAT to change the scoring system just because it would benefit your team from the results yesterday... In fact asking for the scoring system to be backdated to give you guys a better result is out of line IMO. If they finished outside of the points the rules should not be changed to benefit them, DUCY?
Whom it benefits is incidental. I wouldn"t expect the system to be changed until next season anyway.
That is entirely coincidental and had nothing to do with my support for the proposal. On reflection, I feel that top 18 is too many and there should be points for top 15 only.
-
However, or even if you change the scoring system, you just CANNOT do it until the end of this 10-game season. You CANNOT move the goalposts once the game has started.
The dynamics of last night"s FT would have been totally different had 18 players scored instead of 9 and therefore you cannot alter it retrospectively.
Likewise therefore, you cannot alter the forthcoming games for the same reasons.
That isn"t likewise. If you can change the blind levels you can change the payout.
-
What were the results for the 3 Divisions last night?
-
What were the results for the 3 Divisions last night?
I won Division 1.... Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
-
nothing wrong with the points system..........i agree the structure didnt seem right,,,all in or fold after the break made it a bit bingo,,im sure these are just teething problems though and will be adjusted !!!!
-
What were the results for the 3 Divisions last night?
I won Division 1.... Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
And we won 5-1, it doesn"t get much better, well played Carl.
-
What were the results for the 3 Divisions last night?
I won Division 1.... Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
And we won 5-1, it doesn"t get much better, well played Carl.
Aye, and how u know I support Everton.. :)
-
points scored should mirror betfairs payout structure. You cant have players scoring for their leagues but bombing out of tourneys before making the money. Then we"re rewarding players for failure. In the div 3 match yesterday, only 51 pitched up, so 9 got paid. Appropriately, only top 9 also scored for the league. If next week we get 200 and betfair pays top 10%, i.e 20, then top 20 should also only earn points
-
Just like to point out fraac.....blind levels last season WERE 12 minutes.......making them 10 IS changing them !
-
Just like to point out fraac.....blind levels last season WERE 12 minutes.......making them 10 IS changing them !
I agree with your comment about last year, but, I think the point he was making is, if you change the clock now after we have played game 1 of the season, it is the same as changing the points after game 1 of the season. Either way, if one change is allowed, after review, at this point, then the other change SHOULD also be allowed, after review, at this point.
-
What were the results for the 3 Divisions last night?
on the night, Kent won the tournament vs HU agaisnt Sunderland
Pts
3 to Nottingham (2 players finshing in 3rd and 4th)
2 to Kent
1 to Sunderland
-
Final Tables, Points, League Tables are all updated HERE (http://www.apat.com/forum/index.php?topic=5206.0)
-
Just like to point out fraac.....blind levels last season WERE 12 minutes.......making them 10 IS changing them !
I agree with your comment about last year, but, I think the point he was making is, if you change the clock now after we have played game 1 of the season, it is the same as changing the points after game 1 of the season. Either way, if one change is allowed, after review, at this point, then the other change SHOULD also be allowed, after review, at this point.
and your point is.............. ;)
-
Just like to point out fraac.....blind levels last season WERE 12 minutes.......making them 10 IS changing them !
I agree with your comment about last year, but, I think the point he was making is, if you change the clock now after we have played game 1 of the season, it is the same as changing the points after game 1 of the season. Either way, if one change is allowed, after review, at this point, then the other change SHOULD also be allowed, after review, at this point.
and your point is.............. ;)
I was waiting for you to point me in the right direction.. ;)
-
at least this isn"t just another pointless thread.
-
I was gonna join in, but i just can"t see the point.
-
Regarding points.. can we change our team name from "Stockton-on-Tees" to "A team from Stockton" please? Just so we can be 4th instead of 10th? ;)
-
I know there are still a few match days yet before the end of season. But it must of already been decided how many teams will get promoted/relegated from each league.
Is it just the top team? Or top three?
-
top three
this