Launch of the Amateur Poker Association & Tour (APAT)

[Bongo]

You'll never be able to accurately tell that though.

How many rebuys did player X have?

How many comps have they entered without cashing?

What have they done online?

[Jon MW]

You'll never be able to accurately tell that though.

How many rebuys did player X have?

How many comps have they entered without cashing?

What have they done online?

I know. It would still largely rely on players deciding for themselves whether they were eligible and acting appropriately.

I don't see any way of avoiding this. But at least if there was a clear rule like this it would avoid any doubt from the honest players who wouldn't want to accidentally enter a tournament that wasn't really aimed at them and it would provide a clear rule for exluding someone if they had clearly broken this eligibility rule. This would still not be easy, and the reason I specified tournament profit was because cash wins would be completely untraceable rather than because they shouldn't count. Hopefully it would never come to it but if a tournament winner was suspected of not being an amateur it is within the APAT's rules to exclude them.

Overall, a rule so players themselves would know whether they were eligible backed up by common sense from APAT on the enforcement of this rule would seem to be the most practicable and workable solution to the problem.

[Jon MW]

I also think if somebody wins one of the Amateur titles and it comes to light that they won 50k playing poker the previous year the grassroots players would be right to question whether these tournaments were truly aimed at them.

[ripple11]

 one way of  helping sort out the am/pro issue would be to use the rolling European rankings......having a cut off of say 1000 points .(thats about 10k in winnings ish)

Your name is simply checked against the current list on the day.

[byronkincaid]

I also think if somebody wins one of the Amateur titles and it comes to light that they won 50k playing poker the previous year the grassroots players would be right to question whether these tournaments were truly aimed at them.

I look forward to welcoming players of all abilities to the APAT

[Bongo]

Thing is an amateur can still have big score. Win a $5 sat online, hit a bit of luck and win £50k. They then get excluded for 12 months?

Heck they could win the first event, goto the tourney they won entry too, get a decent cashing and not be allowed to play any more APAT events. Surely you can't say that would be right?

[Jon MW]

I also think if somebody wins one of the Amateur titles and it comes to light that they won 50k playing poker the previous year the grassroots players would be right to question whether these tournaments were truly aimed at them.

I look forward to welcoming players of all abilities to the APAT

But

...
2. The competitions are aimed at recreational/hobby players...

If

... all abilities ...

was taken literally it would still include full time professionals, a line has to be drawn somewhere otherwise it will default to the skilled semi-professionals who are likely to dominate.

[Wardonkey]

I also think if somebody wins one of the Amateur titles and it comes to light that they won 50k playing poker the previous year the grassroots players would be right to question whether these tournaments were truly aimed at them.

None of your solutions would stop this from happening. At least if the comp is open to all then everyone knows exactly where they stand and no-one feels aggreived.

What would happen if a 'pro' sneaked in under the radar and won an event? The whole thing would become a farce with bad feeling from all sides.

Drawing a distinction between pros and amateurs, and barring the pros is a recipe for disaster.

[Jon MW]

...Heck they could win the first event, goto the tourney they won entry too, get a decent cashing and not be allowed to play any more APAT events. Surely you can't say that would be right?

This is one of the pitfalls some definitions could fall into - but the qualifying period would be 12 months prior to the registration of the first event and be valid for the whole tour so nobody would find themselves unable to continue in the tour half way through the season just because they've just had a big win.

I'd love to win £50k through a £5 sat, if I did I wouldn't begrudge other people having a single season to enter a handful of amateur of tournaments, there would be plenty of tournaments of higher buy ins I would be able to afford with my £50k.

[Wardonkey]

From a purely financial point of view, most pros would not bother with an event like this. Quite simply they can expect to earn more money playing elsewhere, I very much doubt that the event would attract more than a handful of full-time pros.

[Jon MW]

I also think if somebody wins one of the Amateur titles and it comes to light that they won 50k playing poker the previous year the grassroots players would be right to question whether these tournaments were truly aimed at them.

None of your solutions would stop this from happening.

That's right it would still rely on players acting according to their conscience.

At least if the comp is open to all then everyone knows exactly where they stand and no-one feels aggreived.

Everyone would know where they stand - it would mean the tournaments would be dominated by pro's and semi-pros and the grass roots player would stop entering. I think by 'no-one' you mean the pro's and semi-pro's who have just got themselves a good series of tournaments. I think the genuine amateur player would have every right to feel aggrieved after having their tour hijacked.

What would happen if a 'pro' sneaked in under the radar and won an event?

I would expect that if that person could not reasonably justify defining themselves as an amateur they would be disqualified from that event and APAT and whatever normally happens if a player is disqualified to occur (Sadly I'm too much of an amateur to know what this is).

... The whole thing would become a farce with bad feeling from all sides....

I think the players that APAT state these tournaments are aimed at would have every right to show bad feeling to such a player, and I would hope that other more conscientious professionals would equally condemn such an act of bad faith.

If a player genuinely still didn't know whether they would qualify as an amateur they could always check with APAT.

Wow, this is hard, I feel really sorry for you people who actually have to make the decisions.

[ripple11]

...judging by the comments already, ...it would appear that a balck and white definition would be a great advantage, then everyone knows where they stand, and no one sneaks under the radar.

 I'm no expert on the euro rankings, but it seems a good list of pros/semi pros... even some "amateurs" to exclude because of their winnings in this particular rolling year. Its live tournaments only I believe...so Wardonnkey could prob. play ....and any online only pro....but so what,this is live and besides you have a black and white list to work on. its just a question of where you make the cut off.
Take me for example, I'm def am amateur!, but have 400 pts for a 4k win earlier this year.If the cut off is 1000 pts on the day I'm OK....but if I get lucky and win some big cash at a ranking event before, i can't play....seems fair enough.

[Wardonkey]

I've made all the points I intend to, as clearly as I can.

I'm now going to leave it to the decision makers to work out a practical solution.

[Jon MW]

...judging by the comments already, ...it would appear that a balck and white definition would be a great advantage, then everyone knows where they stand, and no one sneaks under the radar.

 I'm no expert on the euro rankings, but it seems a good list of pros/semi pros... even some "amateurs" to exclude because of their winnings in this particular rolling year. Its live tournaments only I believe...so Wardonnkey could prob. play ....and any online only pro....but so what,this is live and besides you have a black and white list to work on. its just a question of where you make the cut off.
Take me for example, I'm def am amateur!, but have 400 pts for a 4k win earlier this year.If the cut off is 1000 pts on the day I'm OK....but if I get lucky and win some big cash at a ranking event before, i can't play....seems fair enough.

I know nothing about the Euro Rankings, but from what you've said this could be a useful altenative to a strict cash limit.

[RED-DOG]

Defining status by winnings/rankings is farcical because of the very nature of tournament poker.

Mickey Wernick is the quintessential poker pro, he won the European rankings, and a lot of ££££s last year. He has been a professional player longer than most of us have been alive.

He had an 18 month period in 2003/2004 when he won nothing and couldn't make a final table.

During that period, he would have been eligible!