Launch of the Amateur Poker Association & Tour (APAT)

[TightEnd]

This does suggest that maybe Doubleups definition incorporating tournament winnings might be the way to go.

If you've won less than a certain amount in the last 12 months before the registration of the first tournament you can enter all the tournaments for the following season (this would stop anybody finding themselves in the position of being unable to enter halfway through the season just because they've won some cash in a tournament).

doesn't adopting an entry criteria based on any of the following

- career winnings over $xk
- last year winnings over -$xk
- if you are in say top 200 of Euro rankings

risk penalising the successful amateur who might have a full time job and yet have hit any of these crtieria


Do you not prefer merely excluding those who are sponsored pros?

What other ways are there to define entry away from the very grey area of "who is a pro?"

[ifm]

I think it is pretty straight forward, if you pay tax you are an amateur, if not then you are a pro.

[TightEnd]

 - I strongly suspect this will be a quick sell out event.  I have joined and paid my £10, but if I'm not quick enough at keying in my card payment details, or I happen to be in the loo when the buy-in function becomes live, I might not get to play in a single event this year.  Is anything going to be done to address this?  It doesn't seem fair that a lot of members won't get to play the live events after paying their membership fee.

Hi Joe


The first point to make is that your £10 is giving you membership of the association. We expect that to bring tangible benfits to you over the first year. It is not £10 merely for the right to play in the comps

It is also a necessary pre-condition of entry into our tournaments though.

We have the same problems that all other events have, the capacity of UK venues which cannot keep pace with demand.

I am on record earlier in this thread as saying I am uncomfortable with a "pop concert" type situation where only those on redial at midnight get seats in the comp. We are looking at alternatives, perhaps a random ballot, to ensure everyone has an equal chance of gaining entry.

[Jon MW]

This does suggest that maybe Doubleups definition incorporating tournament winnings might be the way to go.

If you've won less than a certain amount in the last 12 months before the registration of the first tournament you can enter all the tournaments for the following season (this would stop anybody finding themselves in the position of being unable to enter halfway through the season just because they've won some cash in a tournament).

doesn't adopting an entry criteria based on any of the following

- career winnings over $xk
- last year winnings over -$xk
- if you are in say top 200 of Euro rankings

risk penalising the successful amateur who might have a full time job and yet have hit any of these crtieria


Do you not prefer merely excluding those who are sponsored pros?

What other ways are there to define entry away from the very grey area of "who is a pro?"

If you only include the 12 months prior to the first tournament this will penalise a successful amateur - but only for a year. If they are winning over this amount on a regular basis I'd say they'd have to be classified as a semi-pro at least. And if you did have such a successful year wouldn't you want to build on it by entering more professional tournaments the following year? This may seem odd being able to skip between being a pro and an amateur but I think it leaves a workable solution to the problem and I totally agree now that this should be the way to go.

Barring sponsored players may also have the benefit of clarity but the reason I started mentioning anything about the pro/am debate at all is because the consensus seemed to be heading towards allowing anybody who isn't sponsored - this is an awful lot of people. A large proportion of professionals and I would expect nearly all semi-professional players aren't sponsored. The pros are using their winnings and cash games to enter and the semi-pros their main job. These are precisely the people who I would worry about coming to dominate the tour and who would put off the true amateurs from participating.

[Tonji]

just some quick thoughts/observations...

This venture has obviously generated enormous amount of interest & excitement, showing how Tikay & Tighty et al have understood the needs of the amateur & semi pro Poker community in the UK, in fact I think they have been a little caught of guard at how much interest there is, & the amount of debate over certain issues that have arisen. I hope this does not overwhelm them (sure it won't). It seems like the first event will be well oversubscribed, how this effects the rest of the Tour, & how it is handled IMO will be interesting & crucial to its success.

This is all positive, and I can only see the game moving forward over the next few years, as the APAT looks to set the bench mark on how things should be run.

Good Luck guys

[ifm]

i think 27 pages on here and only the odd reply elsewhere says much for this forum/community

[TightEnd]

i think 27 pages on here and only the odd reply elsewhere says much for this forum/community

yeah you are all awkward so and sos!


seriously though, great stuff..we can only improve as a result of this feedback

[boldie]

I'm amazed at the number of decent poker pros (whether or not they consider themselves pros or not) that actually want to be a part of an amateur event - is it for the easy competition?  This has obviously sparked a lot of debate and I appreciate it's hard to technically define who is a pro.

Are the actual amateurs of the game going to suffer by being a part of APAT?  They are certainly going to have to play against some of the better players in the country.  Perhaps I should stick to my local £50 freezeout once a month.

i love the idea of an amateur league...but I would also love to pay 75£ and play against the pro's...afterall that's when you start picking up some serious pointers.



I think it's a great idea though and will look out for the scottish event.

[thetank]

I just made a steal raise in a sit n go, and busted someone with their AK.

They called me a ****ing amateur. So good news, this means I can play. 

[Sark79]

    you will try anything to be able to play with the ordinary players tank

[Graham C]

I'd love to play against pros too, don't get me wrong, but if I'm entering competitions to try and win a seat to bigger events and it's aimed at amateurs I'm going to be a bit miffed if it's full of people that are just there to make easy money.  Happy to face the pros in the next level up, or even just one or two in this level but I think it would take the fun out after a while if you know that you stand a less than average chance of winning.

[Jon MW]

I'd love to play against pros too, don't get me wrong, but if I'm entering competitions to try and win a seat to bigger events and it's aimed at amateurs I'm going to be a bit miffed if it's full of people that are just there to make easy money.  Happy to face the pros in the next level up, or even just one or two in this level but I think it would take the fun out after a while if you know that you stand a less than average chance of winning.

 

[Sark79]

Playing against better players may bring out the best in an amateur though.  It will also give them a lot more respect from other players  if they have beaten a stronger field.

I once competed in the egg and spoon race at sports day with kids three years older than me.  The extra competition brought about by leg length meant I tried harder and tripped up more people to win.  I like the idea of playing against better people.

Graham makes an excellent point though. 

[thetank]

    you will try anything to be able to play with the ordinary players tank

Believe me Sark, when I play Live, I'm the Live one.

[Sark79]