UKIPT London v GUKPT Luton

[cambridgealex]

I've never cashed in a UKIPT or GUKPT. Both rubbish tours imo

I don't think the UKIPTs are very good, not much fun, too many online qualifiers, I don't make an effort to travel to them really. Stars blows the competition out of the water though, everything so slick and well-run.

GUKPTs are much softer fields and lower rake sure, but that's because the quality of the product is lower. I think they've changed them now but they used to have the most awful chips. The dealers are noticeably worse, and prizepools a lot smaller than stars events. Also Stars run events in some actually decent places to travel to. Whereas the GUKPT seem to just pick the worst places in England and say "hey lets run a poker tournament here".

Just my 2 cents.

[The Camel]

I've never cashed in a UKIPT or GUKPT. Both rubbish tours imo

I don't think the UKIPTs are very good, not much fun, too many online qualifiers, I don't make an effort to travel to them really. Stars blows the competition out of the water though, everything so slick and well-run.

GUKPTs are much softer fields and lower rake sure, but that's because the quality of the product is lower. I think they've changed them now but they used to have the most awful chips. The dealers are noticeably worse, and prizepools a lot smaller than stars events. Also Stars run events in some actually decent places to travel to. Whereas the GUKPT seem to just pick the worst places in England and say "hey lets run a poker tournament here".

Just my 2 cents.

I agree about the dealers at most GUKPTs. Although it isn't necessarily their fault. They aren't used to dealing big poker tournaments and have to start somewhere.

Does piss me off a little bit when a local inexperienced dealer tries to play Billy Big Bollocks and enforce rulings without calling the floor or calls the clock without being asked by players.

The dealers from the Vic are almost all excellent and Grosvenor should ship 4 or 5 them around the country to deal the later stages of the GUKPT events.

I can't imagine how pissed off I'd be if an experienced dealer cost me a big pot by taking my cards when I'd raised or something similar.

[FUN4FRASER]

Agree with some of the points and often avoid Stars festivals tournies and live poker in general because of the hassles of buying in, PS Live, side events selling out, cash games full. Much prefer a smaller festival where I know I can get a seat in a cash game or a side event if I bust.

However, factors you didn't consider. GUKPT re-entry (up to 4 bullets), UKIPT is a straight freezeout. If you are comfortably rolled for multiple bullets then this gives you a big advantage in GUKPT. If you bust strong player on day one, he goes to the cash desk buys in again and gets an extra life

Field size. UKIPT is much bigger, more up top, when you get the final it is likely to be a weaker/softer field imo.

Those drink holder/phone chargers on the table and the blue neon stripe around the edge didn't pay for themselves you know!

I think this is a great point and a massive factor when considering where you play.

I really want to play The WPT £3K main at DTD but have to admit I am somewhat put off by the fact players can have four bullets if required .

[relaedgc]

I read, and re-read this thread twice over before electing to post a response. For those of you who know me, you'll know I am a Grosvenor man through and through - and whilst I no longer work at either Luton nor the GUKPT - you can quite rightly make the presumption that there's going to be a level of bias involved in my response.

The GUKPT exists to provide a 'festival' poker experience to UK poker players across their own venues around the country. This starts from the 'grass roots' aimed Goliath tournament - for the recreational player who simply cannot afford to punt it in for in excess of £1,000 - up to the Vic's Grand Final Event.

The use their own venues, thus while it's not a cost it is a disruption to the local business, and many tend to stay away from these festivals because it's simply far bigger than they're comfortable with. They have to pay upto 20% tax on all of the registration/revenue generated from hosting the event. They have to cover the cost of the dealing staff - who ironically are the same people that work on EPT/WPT and a myriad of other European events.

Stars are an online Internet giant that generate about as much in this profit as Grosvenor do in gross revenue - so the scale of sums involved and the difference is vast. They hold their events across Europe to attract a far better bankrolled level of player. The buy-in is smaller for their main event - but it attracts a different calibre of player on the whole. Not your average happy go lucky casino poker playing punter.

In all that they offer, they benefit by taxing the players more and paying less tax on all of the revenue generated. The cost of the staff is funded by the players. The venue is probably paid for by an agreement with the venue involving the revenue generated by the players, too.

In essence, whilst they are putting on a fantastic experience in exotic locations it is neither sharing the same targeted audience nor are the resources on a level playing field.

I understand that a casino is unlikely to attract sympathy - but they exist by fronting a bank to which a player can elect to gamble against them for slightly unfavourable odds. There is still a financial commitment and risk involved in this business. Poker players, most of whom don't touch a table game, seem to feel that a casino should make it all cheap as possible because someone, who isn't them, will cover the costs by doing their bollocks in the pit.

Pokerstars, on the other hand, risks nothing beyond fronting a platform for people to gamble against other people whilst taxing them for the privilege while contributing a minimal amount back in to the system. Thus, they generate sky high profits and make the appearance of looking after you all amazingly well. But they're just giving you pack a tiny piece of your own rake whilst probably making profit on the events by passing all the costs on to you.

I am, of course, biased. I also recognise Stars are catering to demand - but just try to keep it in scale. They make fortunes from -you- and you should expect an amazing time with good reimbursements. That's not entirely true when it comes to people playing at the GUKPT. They offer, in my opinion, a fantastic tour on limited resources.

[Chompy]

Agree with some of the points and often avoid Stars festivals tournies and live poker in general because of the hassles of buying in, PS Live, side events selling out, cash games full. Much prefer a smaller festival where I know I can get a seat in a cash game or a side event if I bust.

However, factors you didn't consider. GUKPT re-entry (up to 4 bullets), UKIPT is a straight freezeout. If you are comfortably rolled for multiple bullets then this gives you a big advantage in GUKPT. If you bust strong player on day one, he goes to the cash desk buys in again and gets an extra life

Field size. UKIPT is much bigger, more up top, when you get the final it is likely to be a weaker/softer field imo.

Those drink holder/phone chargers on the table and the blue neon stripe around the edge didn't pay for themselves you know!

Disagree about field strength.

Average Pokerstars player is going to be a lot stronger than average Luton regular (Edna Adams excepted obv)

You might get really lucky at Luton and draw Tom Myland, Dick Lynch, Chompy and Nirvana #pokerplayersheaven

The Main will be absolutely flooded with lolregs this year, and these regs are nothing like the regs of 4, 5, 6 years ago. That'll be down to the weekly G schedule these days.

Lynchy has disappeared, don't think Edna's playing, Nirvana is 1.01 to stuff the entry fee back into a pillow case and I'm a more doubtful runner than Muthmir after heavy overnight rain.

Thomas Bernard Myland will be present, though, most likely with a cashmere sweater draped round his shoulders if tonight is any guide.

Gl anyone taking part and may your God go with you.

[Rupert]

Maybe it's an online thing or something, but the GUKPTs I've played in Walsall and Coventry were miserable affairs (even despite having Blatch a week prior blowup in one!) whereas the first UKIPT I went to in Galway, I met Sam Squid among others for the first time and it was genuinely one of the most fun poker events I've been to. Maybe it's just me, I really like meeting people I've been playing online with lots rather than withstanding a table with 8 of Britain's most sarcastic bitter regs (present company excluded!).

The re-entry effect is probably underestimated. I'd have to look at some numbers but if the GUKPTs are getting a decent amount of re-entries then it's very likely UKIPT is better value ROI% wise after rake. If GUKPTs abolished re-entry it would be a clear better value tournament to play. That said it is obviously better for the player if rake is reduced all round. I wasn't around for these glory days where casinos added 45k or chucked in a main event seat to final tablists and they sound cushy. But the market is a lot more competitive now. Players don't cash the main event and spunk it all up the wall at craps as often. Poker is no longer a loss leader and there is a bigger requirement for the poker tours to be self sufficient.

I think the payout structure argument is a bit mute. There are two things at play: a flatter payout structure takes money away from the best players and gives it to everyone else. Paying less people takes money away from the best players and gives it to everyone else. I think Stars have made a decent compromise. A lot of people satellite in and so they pay more places while still maintaining big first prizes. I'd hazard a guess that it lowers variance for good players more than say a flat payout structure with less places paid. If it were me I'd prefer top heavy not many places paid. But there is some value in maintaining local poker economies. And it's fine by me if Joe Mincasher wants to register the sunday million or take a shot at an EPT Satellite. Better than it being washed down in the abyss of the roulette hole.

The satellite argument is mute too. If Grosvenor were putting in 1/4 of their players from their site (or even live sats) there's a much higher chance regs would play it. The reason Aussie Millions has always been so successful (and quite popular among a lot of British pros old and new) is that they run live satellites all year round. No one resents them for raking $100 per player each time they do, because year on year they put in hundreds of people who wouldn't otherwise play in them and that creates values for pros while the recs get a spin.

Anyway, I'm not saying UKIPT London is better than GUKPT Luton value or experience wise. But I don't think it's worse and a lot of people like the atmosphere, the chance of getting mentioned on the Stars blog, getting to play with some Stars pros, meeting up with people they have been battling with online (the rec players love this too), playing somewhere that's not Luton, opportunity to qualify online in your pyjamas etc. Depends what your after I suppose. If you want to have the opportunity to win 6 figures, maybe play with Liv Boeree, get a bit of fame and glory for a brief moment in time then UKIPT is gonna be a better shout. If you want to sit in Luton on a Thursday night looking to grind out a profit and get live updates on which live pro is going to whine on social media next then maybe GUKPT is better value for you.

Oh regarding the patch thing - I'd be surprised if someone "forced" Jaffa to wear the patch or he can't play (it's possible of course), I have won a seat to Stars events before and worn another patch, even after asking. Stars often take photos of pros wearing other patches and put it on their blog. I don't think they feel too threatened.

[pleno1]

Great post!

[easypickings]

Something that is not strictly relevant to an A vs B debate, but that I always wonder when discussion comes up about how much a casino charges in rake to make a poker tournament worthwhile:

A poker tournament that is in a casino is primarily run to get punters through the door, so that they might gamble on the table games during the breaks, or after their tournament is over. How much of a factor is there that the average amount gambled per head has gone down over the last 10 years, and is this a threat at all to casinos wanting to put on a poker tournament?

People used to enjoy poker because they were old school gamblers, and the two were nicely merged. Now, there must be a trend that the type of person getting into poker has done so because they enjoy games rather than gambling, strategy rather than superstition, and are more aware of the mathematical edge that the house has. There must be a number of the top UK poker players who have barely staked a penny on tables games whilst at a casino poker tournament.

[relaedgc]

They generally qualify around 1/4 in my experience.

Is it fair to say that there's a generational gap between preference for Casino Poker festivals and the metropolitan party feel to Stars events?

[The Camel]

Maybe it's an online thing or something, but the GUKPTs I've played in Walsall and Coventry were miserable affairs (even despite having Blatch a week prior blowup in one!) whereas the first UKIPT I went to in Galway, I met Sam Squid among others for the first time and it was genuinely one of the most fun poker events I've been to. Maybe it's just me, I really like meeting people I've been playing online with lots rather than withstanding a table with 8 of Britain's most sarcastic bitter regs (present company excluded!).

The re-entry effect is probably underestimated. I'd have to look at some numbers but if the GUKPTs are getting a decent amount of re-entries then it's very likely UKIPT is better value ROI% wise after rake. If GUKPTs abolished re-entry it would be a clear better value tournament to play. That said it is obviously better for the player if rake is reduced all round. I wasn't around for these glory days where casinos added 45k or chucked in a main event seat to final tablists and they sound cushy. But the market is a lot more competitive now. Players don't cash the main event and spunk it all up the wall at craps as often. Poker is no longer a loss leader and there is a bigger requirement for the poker tours to be self sufficient.

I think the payout structure argument is a bit mute. There are two things at play: a flatter payout structure takes money away from the best players and gives it to everyone else. Paying less people takes money away from the best players and gives it to everyone else. I think Stars have made a decent compromise. A lot of people satellite in and so they pay more places while still maintaining big first prizes. I'd hazard a guess that it lowers variance for good players more than say a flat payout structure with less places paid. If it were me I'd prefer top heavy not many places paid. But there is some value in maintaining local poker economies. And it's fine by me if Joe Mincasher wants to register the sunday million or take a shot at an EPT Satellite. Better than it being washed down in the abyss of the roulette hole.

The satellite argument is mute too. If Grosvenor were putting in 1/4 of their players from their site (or even live sats) there's a much higher chance regs would play it. The reason Aussie Millions has always been so successful (and quite popular among a lot of British pros old and new) is that they run live satellites all year round. No one resents them for raking $100 per player each time they do, because year on year they put in hundreds of people who wouldn't otherwise play in them and that creates values for pros while the recs get a spin.

Anyway, I'm not saying UKIPT London is better than GUKPT Luton value or experience wise. But I don't think it's worse and a lot of people like the atmosphere, the chance of getting mentioned on the Stars blog, getting to play with some Stars pros, meeting up with people they have been battling with online (the rec players love this too), playing somewhere that's not Luton, opportunity to qualify online in your pyjamas etc. Depends what your after I suppose. If you want to have the opportunity to win 6 figures, maybe play with Liv Boeree, get a bit of fame and glory for a brief moment in time then UKIPT is gonna be a better shout. If you want to sit in Luton on a Thursday night looking to grind out a profit and get live updates on which live pro is going to whine on social media next then maybe GUKPT is better value for you.

Oh regarding the patch thing - I'd be surprised if someone "forced" Jaffa to wear the patch or he can't play (it's possible of course), I have won a seat to Stars events before and worn another patch, even after asking. Stars often take photos of pros wearing other patches and put it on their blog. I don't think they feel too threatened.

An excellent post Rupert (apart from using the word "mute" when you meant "moot".  That was tilting. What do they teach you at university these days?)

Maybe I was coloured by the thoroughly miserable experience I had on my first table at the UKIPT. If I was a novice who was having my first spin at a poker tournament and landed there. I doubt there would be a return visit.

I do have one question though. How many of the 1080 players in the UKIPT ME do you think were +ev after 14% juice and (let us estimate) £250 in expenses?

[tonytats]

G at Luton is full of fanny on the pi55 on a Friday and Saturday -surely that's a better reason to play it ??

[Royal Flush]

G at Luton is full of fanny on the pi55 on a Friday and Saturday -surely that's a better reason to play it ??

Yeah the westend is deserted

[Woodsey]

G at Luton is full of fanny on the pi55 on a Friday and Saturday -surely that's a better reason to play it ??

Yeah the westend is deserted

Luton is classy birds though innit 

[Ironside]

Great points. Obv the flip side is

Central London>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>War Stricken Countries>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Luton

FYP

[tonytats]

G at Luton is full of fanny on the pi55 on a Friday and Saturday -surely that's a better reason to play it ??

Yeah the westend is deserted

They're higher maintenance tho
A few years ago in the smoking cage at luton it was "" ooh you're a poker player ?"
You could almost tell they were getting damp downstairs at the prospect of a bad beat story
You'd need a Bentley story to achieve the same with a west end girl