blonde poker forum

I seem to remember that one of the keynotes in the setting up of APAT was to try and establish standardised rules.

and getting poker into the olympic games!

 

What's this got to do with the penny sweets?

He highlights his posts in blue?

still is, and there has been some progress. For example the Head of Poker at Grosvenor has agreed to join an Association committee aimed at heading towards standardised rules with the other major live providers. Takes a while though for various reasons

but some APAT rules aren't even consistently applied in their own events  ;ifm;

They are. Or should be, applied consistently across all events.

Yes I know gameplay rules are.  Was just talking about this one really, but it's a horse that's been flogged many times before:

ok, but different issue. Thanks for raising it though  ;shame;

Fair point - DTD don't explicitly use them.

But TDA rules aren't designed to cover everything. They cover tournament specific situations and ignore a lot of the more fundamental rules of the game. TDA rules are designed to work on top of your in house rules. There may be one or two minor differences (feel free to quote me any major differences) - in this scenario I believe you follow the TDA version.

I've looked at DTDs rules on their site. They have TDA and a few of their own house rules, but they aren't extensive enough to cover every scenario - including this one.

The ruling given in OP was because 3 people had acted behind. This rule is from RRs so i'm assuming that's what they're following.

it's listed in the rules though :D  you're welcome!

It is, but as you mention it its not as simple as that. APAT has run two European events this year, successfully, where the priority has been to spread the word first, and not be totally rigid as to our principles with Poker cultures different than our own.

1) what's apl?
2) if one aim of apat is to have standardised rules why introduce one that most players disagree with that goes against pretty much everyone else in the game?

wasn't really talking about the European events, more the one rule for amateur events and another for open events.

its consistent. the Amateur only events are different from those open to Pros too.

To be fair there have been a few small inconsistency's across some of the events. For example in Scotland it was that if it was checked down at the river both players had to show whereas in Ireland it was OK for a player to muck if they had a hand that could not win the showdown. I have to agree with Tighty that this is sometimes unavoidable if the players want the tour to grow (which we do).

I think this shows how hard it is to get a standard set of rules to work across the game. I think it will always be subject to rulings like the one in this thread as there are always going to be situations that the "rules" can't cover 100%

I still think DTD's ruling here was harsh and a little lacking in common sense, although not altogether incorrect.

Why on earth are APAT opposed to deals?

It's the players money, what they do with it is their choice surely and by helping to facilitate deals (working out chip count deals, paying out deal money not leaving it to players to pay the difference etc etc) it will make sure noone gets ripped off.

Seems like a bit of a contradiction, but meh.

Don't want to hijack this thread too much, but, out of interest..... APAT has been going for a few years now, and as part of it's inception was about bringing the voice of the players to the powers that be re standardised rules etc, are there any plans at any stage to discuss/review some of those issues that have been unpopular among a number of players (i.e. payout structures, rules against deal making)?

it's not just refusing to facilitate - any form of deal making in amateur events is very strongly discouraged.  the thinking behind it is that players should be playing for the medals and titles, over and above the prize money.  The top heavy payout structure is also supposed to encourage that mindset, but seems contradictory to me.  When APAT first launched, everyone knew in advance what the payout structures were and that there were no deals before taking part.  When it really started to get my goat though was when 'open' and 'pro' events were introduced and deals were allowed.  the reasons for that have been justified by APAT before, and I can't remember exactly what they were, but something along the lines of pros are reliant on poker winnings for income so are entitled to do what they want with the prize money to ensure the best return for their buck.  Not allowing amateur players the same level of autonomy over the prizepool they have contributed to just doesn't sit comfortably with me and feels more than a tad patronising.

I don't think the APAT ethos is unpopular with its players at all Claire. Yes there are occasional comments but they have been very much in a minority

The issues are often discussed by us running APAT, and can be raised at any time on the APAT forum, and will be considered every time by the team.

Don't get me started on the payout structure lol

Poker is about money, not titles, medals and cups.

The organisers of poker tournaments should not be able to tell players what they do with prizepool UNLESS there is added money.

possibly because people have seen APAT dig their heels in over the issue and don't think it's worth discussion.  Or maybe you're right.  I could start a thread on the forum, but it would be probably just be seen as stirring and people might not express a view for fear of 'going against the grain'.  The only way we'll get a full and open discussion with everyone expressing their views in a candid manner, imho, is if the discussion is opened and facilitated by an APAT official, and if people thought their views would be fully considered rather than just batted off.  Any chance of this?

I agree

Well, to a large extent the APAT events are about the medals, cups etc (and the added value seat for first).  But even more of a reason why people would continue to play for the win whatever they've done to divvy up the prize money imo.

The concept behind APAT is different, it has been a great success, continues to be so and its players, many of whom were new to Live Poker via APAT, embrace it

Yes, over time the concept may change and adapt. There are always new initiativesa, mostly successful

It would be wrong to say there is anything other than minority calls for changes in the concepts on payout, dealmaking etc. If that changes, no doubt APAT will respond


p.s Poker is now in the Mindsports Olympics.

Batted off? Don't think that has ever happened. Not our style. My back is raked with the scratches of previous debates!

Start a thread, you'll get a range of views and no APAT official will be preventing that.

Thing is Tighty is right and is Claw- most of the members are happy with the way things are so APAT will continue to run things the way they are for now with minor tweaks and if a debate was started most members would just go with the status quo so there's probably no point in doing so.

I think you've missed the point of my post :(  A lot of APAT supporters are, rightly so, very loyal to APAT and won't express a view that goes against something APAT have dug their heels in on when the discussion has been raised before.  You say it's a minority that would like to see a change in payouts, dealmaking etc, but the point is we don't really know unless the proper conditions for people to express their views openly without fear of being seen to be critical of APAT as a whole are put in place.

There are a few reg members- name no names, who jump on any person or point that is deemed to be disloyal to APAT. Good points Claire

Fair enough, perhaps I notice those factors less than you do. Certainly no one should have a problem expressing their view within APAT. I wasn't aware that people did

Leave it with me, I might have to start a thread or two.

Your just making it sound like fun now George

thanks.  I don't think it's so much about people having problems expressing their views, more not wanting to get involved in discussions about things they don't feel they have any power to influence, so no need to upset the applecart. (an anonymous poll probably wouldn't go amiss though!)

The pertinant point is Stu, and it is an important one. I have no idea why I care about APAT pay out structures because I have never even remotely been near one in about 5 years.

apat forum is very similar to the sky forum in that both are tend to be a bit of a love in

look at the views on here where people will talk openly about apat and most apat members seem to not like the payout/deal situation

lol - same here.

Surely the best way to discourage deals is to have a very flat payout structure, not the opposite.

it is true that apat members who went to apat via blonde, and still mostly post on blonde are more anti,yes. 

Keith u probably need to read up a bit more on APAT. The payout structure is extremley flat. So much so it pays the SAME for everyone finising 4th-9th

I can see peoples points about deal making and prize structure in APAT. In fact it probably should be allowed at this point, as the added value makes the pay structure top heavy enough. I also disagree with it being allowed in the APAT pro events but I don't play them so can't really be bothered to get into an argument about them.

One thing that I would say is that I am not aware of many of the APAT players being that unhappy with it. APAT is clearly for amateurs, and the players ARE interested in the medals almost as much as the prize money, don't underestimate their importance (this would be different for pros I know). The good thing about the structure of an APAT is that it does encourage players to become more aggressive to go for the top spot. This should lead to better poker being played. Most players of APAT level could do with learning a bit more aggression (I include myself in that) so the rules help players get better in that way.

I have spoken to quite a few APAT regulars recently and most of them are quite happy with the structure, although I suspect most would not be opposed to deal making being allowed or the payout table being flatter.

One thing though. APAT would have to ensure the casino allows the tournament to be played out for the medal whatever deal is done. Winning a gold medal as part of a deal would devalue them.

$%^& - in the time I typed this post 12 new replies to this thread, it is a good thread though (or is it now two threads?)

and blonde is presumably the main independent place where apat matters are discussed? or is there somewhere else I don`t know of where the predominant view is that apat have it right?

again, fair point..though it could be discussed anywhere

However the APAT forum is or should be independent in the sense that you, or anyone, can post a view against the status quo on there easily enough and it can be debated. Even if you think it's "Stepford" like!

I remember in 2005-2007 when the knock against blonde was it was the "Stepford Wives" forum. Sky and APAT will go there soon enough...its the life cycle of forums...

My main reason for the payout structure always has been is that APAT is supposed to be a training ground for amateur players. A step toward moving up. Laddering a final or playing FTW is a huge part of a tournament and is completely ignored in a sense with the payout structure as it stands. I believe, after 5 seasons, it's time to change it to be a proper payout structure. However I think most either disagree or a apathetic to the issue altho im not sure why

Oh, someone on the thread wrote the jumps were pretty steep.

Sorry.

all the apat organisers work for sky don't they?

That line, right there.

Keith its flatter than a normal casino payout, in percentages paid out, by design. Except that there is considerable added value to the winner

Two do, one doesn't. I'm freelance but do some work for them. So the answer is most.

Well, as I said earlier, if there's added value, you have every right to stop dealing making.

Out of interest, what is the added value?

keith, typical payout

1st £3.5k+champion of champions seat
2nd £2.25k
3rd £1.25k
4th to 9th £600
10th to 20th £400

It`s more odd than either flat or topheavy

gukpt main event seat, or gukpt grand final seat, to the winner. £1k plus minimum

top heavy in that the first three prizes are considerably higher than the others, with the rest of the final table receiving a flat payout.  Example pay out structure:


Prize Pool   
First Position – 23% of Stakes   
£3,500.00 Cup, Gold Medal PLUS
Additional Prize: 1 x GUKPT Package
Estimated – $3,000

Second Position – 17% of Stakes   
£2,500.00
Silver Medal

Third Position – 10% of Stakes   
£1,500.00
Bronze Medal

Fourth to Ninth Positions – 5% of Stakes   
Each – £700.00

Tenth to Twentieth Positions – 2% of Stakes   
Each – £300.00

Total Value of Prizes Awarded   
£15,000.00

I don't think APATs payout structure is flat at all.

Imagine plotting the prizes as a graph.

APATs will have a straight line from 9th-4th then suddenly jumps massively for the top 3 positions. That's a top heavy structure. The sample on their site is:

1st: 3500
2nd: 2500
3rd: 1500
4th-9th: 700

1st place gets 5 times what 4th place gets. Even DTD (who i think are maybe too top heavy at times) isn't that harsh. 3rd gets more than twice as much as 3rd!

I've just off the top of my head made up what I think would be a flatter payout structure using the same amounts of money:

1st: 2700
2nd: 2000
3rd: 1500
4th: 1200
5th: 900
6th: 800
7th: 750
8th: 700
9th: 650

For me that's much better. Obviously first isn't as much but you say it's not all about the money in these events. Using such a structure I think people would be more likely to play for the win and there probably wouldn't be much talk of deals.

And also: I don't see why added value should stop deal making. It's been put in the prizepool. It's the players playing for it. It's up to them what to do with it.

The winner would also get the Champion of Champions seat which is entry into a tournament where the first prize is a $20,000 package for next year.

I assume it is OK to link to Blonde from the APAT forums?

Thanks for clarifying.

What is the point of the strange payout structure?

Why not just have normal payouts (like cf's example), and then add the extra prize to the top?

I wouldn't be happy coming 4th in a tournie and getting the same money as 9th.

APAT Champion of Champions seat, just to clarify. APAT winners play it.

Winner gets $20k sponsorship from Betfair next year

it`s both flat and topheavy tbh which is pretty impressive

cheers!

keep it coming though, I like the feedback

Sigh at the APAT hijack.  I guess we forget all about the ruling issue now then?

yes, sorry. can we split this into a separate thread maybe?

Split into three please. Dont forget the penny sweets.

Sorry I know the thread has not split yet but posted this on the APAT forum I think it would be interesting to see if the opinion there is the same, please all post your views as I reckon the organisers would take notice if everybody would like something different.

http://www.apat.com/forum/index.php?topic=7106.0

Linking APAT from here is OK isn't it?

I've ordered Volume I, and will probably order Volume II soon.

?

Enjoy them.

Kinboshi in "I'm a tool of the highest order" shocker!!

http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=49978.0

is this the wrong place to enquire about local sausage festivals then?

Seems alright to me. Thread has covered everything else :)

Sure I saw someone post about the Ryder Cup a few mins ago but they've since deleted their mistake...

I didn't think it was a mistake - thought it was a joke and I was joining in. 

#fail

:D I'm quicker on the delete button than the average mod.

Topic split and renamed

Phew when half thread disappeared thopught I'd taken too many tablets :)

Sorry Dan. I read your joke post before I'd read the rest of the thread.

It was much more entertaining when I realised you were actually doing a funny.

Please feel free to call me a tool of the highest order at your earliest convenience.

If the majority of APAT players are happy with the 'no deals' policy, then why do you need a 'no deals' policy? You only need one person to say no to a deal and it doesn't happen.

If you [Tighty] are right then I doubt a deal would ever take place if they were allowed.

excellent post

I'm getting better as this computer mularky.

I went out for a few hours and came back to find that I'd started a new thread.

I have always maintained that APAT events continue to flourish despite the horrible payout structure certainly not because of it.

And I am invariably informed that I do not have to play their events if I dislike it so much.