Launch of the Amateur Poker Association & Tour (APAT)

[Graham C]

An untalented player tournament - now you're talking

[TightEnd]

Des has asked me to let people who have asked him questions which remain unanswered know that he is away until the end of the week


The simple answer to the "chicken or egg: which came first? question re the business plan and the poker is: the poker came first, but he will talk more on his return

[goonner]

Have only managed the 1st 20 pages so far but I have to start work soon.
But I do have a couple of points
This sounds like a great idea, and for the future growth of the tour I hope a named player does not win any of the early events.
The £10 members fee is not a problem. I pay £10 a year just so I can play in a £30 / 3 freeze-put on Thursday nights in a members club in Uxbridge. I don’t think of it as a charge, it is an expense just like petrol or the bar bill.
Would I like to change the blind structure? Of course I would who wouldn’t. At least you know what it is before you pay your money over. How many off us have sat down only to find out that after the first hour it turns into a super speed game or the big blind doubles every time.
I don’t know Tikay personally but from reading posts by him and about him on this and other sites, and personnel recommendations from people who do know him including Mel the TD for these events. I am more than willing to risk a tenner that he or any project he has put his name to is not going to rip me off.
I have been most impressed with everyone connected with the APAT. They have answered the points raised by this thread and in some cases changed the details from the original press release.
The only problem I have is how do I get a seat. Along the majority player this tour is aimed at I work full time so being able to sit at my pc at midnight hoping to get a seat is not really something I would be able to do.
As I can see this event being over subscribed many times over, I feel the APAT should seriously consider allocating the seats in a draw. I know several players who are not going to try and enter because they are unable to get to a pc at midnight to try for a seat.
While on the subject of allocating seats. This is the English Amateur Poker Championship so surely residents of England should have first choice of seat. I know by excluding the dead money from Scotland and Wales it would make it harder to win. The same rule should apply if the Scottish and Welsh events are over subscribed.  The home players should get first choice to play.

[TightEnd]

As I can see this event being over subscribed many times over, I feel the APAT should seriously consider allocating the seats in a draw. I know several players who are not going to try and enter because they are unable to get to a pc at midnight to try for a seat.

This is what we are considering very strongly!

[tikay]

You would still get a competitive finish even if they dealt on the prize pool, as they would still be playing on for a much bigger prize, in the shape of the sponsors added seat to the winner.

At the recent Poker 6 event in Bolton there was considerable added prize money put in by the sponsors (almost £30k) yet we did not prevent players from dealing. We simply said that they must leave some money left over after they have dealt so as to ensure it remained competitive until the end.

While it is entirely APAT's choice to decide on whether they will allow deals or not, it seems a step to far to ban them outright. A ballot of signed up members would seem a fair way to do it. After all, it is a players association so surely it should be the member players, not those who run the association who have the final say on this sort of matter.

Thanks Jonathan.

I agree, the Poker 6 at Bolton was a huge success, & your innovative creation of the concept was responsible.

Your final pargraph - yes, I agree with the logic, but I have explained at length in this thread & elsewhere the process involved in building this thing from the ground up, & I'm happy to do so again in response to your comments.

The Launch day was last week, our Season One Tour begins next month, & Members are currently enrolling in significant numbers. It's just not possible to "organise" a Members Committee on Day One. So, as I have explained, for Year One, I was Selected, not Elected. During my tenure, it will be my responsibility to set up a Members Committee. At the end of Year One, the role of Chairman will be decided by a Members Poll. The Members will then have the right to vote in whomsoever they wish, & if they decide they want a "deals policy", then they will have the oppprtunity to seek it, by ballot if necessary, & whether or not I'm re-elected (elected?), that will be the mandate delivered to APA.

Your point is reasonable & valid, it is, but we are just starting this thing, & it takes some time to get all these things in place, but just because we have not done it yet, does not mean we will not.

So the Members WILL have their say, & that was always going to be the case.

I hope to see you Sunday, have safe journey back from Vegas.

[tikay]

Please don't let this thread turn in to a deal or no deal thread.
Oh go on then, I say that APAT are right and no deals is the way to go. I've said it before and will say it again, No Deals.

But you're not supplying any reasoning, you're just saying 'no deals'. I thought I was at least being helpful by providing reasoning and a solution to what I see are the main problems with deals - ensuring fairness and a competitive finish.

The 'Just Say No' approach didn't work for Grange Hill and it would be a farce if that were a player organisation's stance as well. Such policies should not be dictated to the members.

Tikay, it worried me that you had to be 'sold' such policies of the APAT by the founder. Who decides what is best for the members? The members themselves or the King of the Hill? Such issues should never be presented to the members as a fait accomplit.

I'm sorry if I'm coming across as negative about this whole venture, but the way I see it, it is just that - a venture - and I feel that issues which need to be addressed for the good of the game are being adopted as a side issue rather than as central to the reason the whole thing was set up.

Des has not responded to my chicken and egg comment although Tikay has. Only Des can answer this question and I think it is important for potential members not to simply say ' hey lets join there's loads of added sponsor value' but to ask what the motives behind it are. I'm afraid I would have very little time for a players organisation that is supposed to bring change for the good of the game if it was set up as an afterthought in order to support and provide an excuse for a tour.

By all means set up a tour with added value, but it should be done completely separately from a players organisation that is supposed to lobby members views, improve various aspects of how poker is run and stick up for poker players rights. IMO the two do not sit well together.

Tikay says

"Everyone has the right to decide if they want to deal or not, that's always been my stance, as you correctly remind us. This is a different concept, & we have made potential Members aware of this facet of APAT Live Events BEFORE they joined. So they have the choice, & if it makes them uncomfortable, they will decide that APAT is not for them."

I guess this just means that APAT is not for me, which is a shame because at the risk of repeating myself, what is the point of a players organisation that prescribes how these sort of core issues will be dealt with rather than giving members the right to choose for themselves?

Hi (again!) Jonathan,

OK, I will try & take this point by point. I bare my soul & tell everyone everything, but in a way, it rebounds on me, as it seems to prompt even more questions but thats the way it is, I don't have anything to hide.

Jonathan says......

Tikay, it worried me that you had to be 'sold' such policies of the APAT by the founder. Who decides what is best for the members? The members themselves or the King of the Hill? Such issues should never be presented to the members as a fait accomplit.

1) Yes, Des had to "sell it" to me, & we debated for a long time. I'm opposed to banning deals, generally, as you know, but sometimes one needs to open one's mind to innovative ideas, & I think this is exactly that. I can, comfortably, accommodate both views, where appropriate, & I don't believe anyone should be forced to think exclusively one thing or the other. It's essential to be able to see both sides of any coin. The debate was quite robust, because Des HAD to get my approval for this & other Policies. The Members who have signed up so far, in the full knowledge of our Policies on Deals, are, one must assume, supportive.

2) Who decides what is best for Members? I have explained this previously. For APAT Year One, I have been entrusted with representing the Memberships views, until the Committee gets up & running. I don't see how else we can get started. The Members can vote me out after Year One if they think I don't accurately represent their wishes.

3) It's hardly a fait accompli if it is honestly, openly & fully explained to our prospective Members BEFORE they sign up as Members. It was. It was also explained at the outset that my role as Selected Chairman would only last 1 year, & the Membership would decide who next year's Chaiman will be. Until then, I am obliged to try & represent the Members views, & the Members will not sign up if they do not trust me so to do. Nobody is obliged to become a Member, & they will not sign up if the Policies I am driving forward are not to their taste.

I'm sorry if I'm coming across as negative about this whole venture, but the way I see it, it is just that - a venture - and I feel that issues which need to be addressed for the good of the game are being adopted as a side issue rather than as central to the reason the whole thing was set up.

Well, you are entitled to take that, or any view, & I respect you for your honesty. I think to say that issues such as Standardised Rules, Clocks & Structures that don't get changed halfway through a comp, the ability to engage in dialogue on behalf of the Members with Venues & the GC, the desire to improve discipline in Poker, to enable Recreational players to "play on a full-size pitch", are not side issues to me, & I'm working to achieve all these things. I have worked very hard on this for many months (along with several others), almost non-stop for the last 2 weeks, night & day, so it's a tad painful for me if you consider these are "side issues", because they are why I'm doing it. To me, they are THE issues.

Des has not responded to my chicken and egg comment although Tikay has. Only Des can answer this question and I think it is important for potential members not to simply say ' hey lets join there's loads of added sponsor value' but to ask what the motives behind it are. I'm afraid I would have very little time for a players organisation that is supposed to bring change for the good of the game if it was set up as an afterthought in order to support and provide an excuse for a tour.

As Tighty has explained, Des is having a few days break with his wife & children at Alton Towers (break?!), so he can't respond yet. To be honest, though I'm sure he'll respond, I'd rather he did not. I have made this point several times. If Des & Co make a few bob, I really don't mind or care. Whatever motive you wish to ascribe to his idea & initiatives, to achieve it, he needs certain things in place, & that includes being accountable to his Association. It was "sold" to PokerStars on that basis, & you don't mess with PokerStars. A PokerStars Director interrogated me - that's the correct word - at length, to ensure I understood the responsibility I had as Chairman, to the Members, & how we'd interact with APA. Only when they were satisfied, did they sign the deal with APA. At some stage, the Members are gonna have to trust me - we DID go through this extremely thoroughly. Des's idea resulted in me being given this clean sheet of paper, on behalf of the Members, & that's all that matters to me.  . 

By all means set up a tour with added value, but it should be done completely separately from a players organisation that is supposed to lobby members views, improve various aspects of how poker is run and stick up for poker players rights. IMO the two do not sit well together.

Noted. Anyone has the right to try & set up a Players Organisation, but they (P-Os') are conspicious by their absence. To do it in the manner you suggest needs a bunch of guys to do it off their own back, if you do not believe it can sit comfortably alongside a commercial entity. Nobody has set one up thus far, which tells it's own story.

I guess this just means that APAT is not for me, which is a shame because at the risk of repeating myself, what is the point of a players organisation that prescribes how these sort of core issues will be dealt with rather than giving members the right to choose for themselves?

As I have said, the Members will have the right to choose.

I hope that now we can - or those who are, or will be, Members, can - focus on the opportunities we have here to change a few things for the better. Thats the whole idea.

Take care now.

[Acidmouse]

I will join up when you have a policy on how people get a place in tournaments, if say 500 want 120 places then there is a real problem and if you don't get lucky whats the point in joining?

[dik9]

Acidmouse, the point of membership, is not to gain entry into comps. The point is to join an association isn't it?

The comps are a bonus as far as i can see.

Just a quick question though and sorry to ask another question irrelevant to players, and looking from the casino's side.

Gala own Coral and now VC
Grosvenor have Blue Sq.

With Pokerstars albeit behind the scenes backing, I feel that there maybe some anomosity between the 2 largest chains in the UK, and as such maybe not the 100% backing that should be expected will be fulfilled, which then may not reach the right corners. These Chains MUST be onboard in time as they hold over 80% of the comps in GB. Maybe they will come round, who am I to say, but my limited knowledge and understanding of how these chains work, is that if a 3rd party isn't completely independant then they will do it themselves and thus defeat the object? Again, maybe I have missed the mark? Sorry to keep looking for problems, but I am sure they must be addressed ASAP to ensure a success for APAT.

[tikay]

I will join up when you have a policy on how people get a place in tournaments, if say 500 want 120 places then there is a real problem and if you don't get lucky whats the point in joining?

Thanks Acid. We have indicated in this thread that we are attempting to find the fairest way to allocate seats for our Tour Events should they be over-subscribed, & we will make a decision this week. It will NOT be a midnight click-fest.

However, there is more to us than Live Events, but equally, we respect your right to be interested in only certain aspects of Membership.

[tikay]

Acidmouse, the point of membership, is not to gain entry into comps. The point is to join an association isn't it?

The comps are a bonus as far as i can see.

Just a quick question though and sorry to ask another question irrelevant to players, and looking from the casino's side.

Gala own Coral and now VC
Grosvenor have Blue Sq.

With Pokerstars albeit behind the scenes backing, I feel that there maybe some anomosity between the 2 largest chains in the UK, and as such maybe not the 100% backing that should be expected will be fulfilled, which then may not reach the right corners. These Chains MUST be onboard in time as they hold over 80% of the comps in GB. Maybe they will come round, who am I to say, but my limited knowledge and understanding of how these chains work, is that if a 3rd party isn't completely independant then they will do it themselves and thus defeat the object? Again, maybe I have missed the mark? Sorry to keep looking for problems, but I am sure they must be addressed ASAP to ensure a success for APAT.

Thank you Rich.

Eventually, I hope we can start to look at the positives, but we are grateful for your concern.

We are indeed au fait with the way the UK Casino Market operates, & who is in bed with whom, corporate-wise that is. It may well be correct to say that 80% of the current Poker Festivals sit with just a few Casino Groups, but that will not impede our plans. 7 Events are scheduled for Season One, & although we can't reveal the Venues until negotiatons are signed & sealed, we have no major problems in this area that I'm aware of. Season One runs through until next Summer, but most of our Venues have already been identified. Des & I visit the prospective Venues to ensure suitability & compatability in every respect. These meetings with the Venues are most thorough, & we go into a great deal of detail, please rest assured. Naturally, they want to know a lot about us, but it's a two-way street, & we are certainly insisting on certain conditions being met. My role is to get the best possible environment for our Members to enjoy their day, & I leave the contractual & financial matters to Des to sort, these are outwith my remit &, indeed, interest.


As I have said, everything possible is being done to ensure our Members are well looked after at Tour Events.

[Colchester Kev]

"As I have said, everything possible is being done to ensure our Members are well looked after at Tour Events."

Can I apply for the job of warm up man, I will do my stand up routine before each event....

[Bainn]

"As I have said, everything possible is being done to ensure our Members are well looked after at Tour Events."

Can I apply for the job of warm up man, I will do my stand up routine before each event....

That would solve the over-attendance problem for sure

 

[Colchester Kev]

LOL touche !!

I will be doing a few pre comp presentations at the blonde bash, so prepare yourselves

[Bainn]

Memo to self : - Purchase ear plugs

[AlrightJack]

Tikay,

Thanks for your responses. I will take a keen interest in the development of APAT over time and will keep an open mind about it. If it appears to be working well for the good of the game I will be the first person to admit my fears were unfounded. Good luck, I hope it works.

JR