Launch of the Amateur Poker Association & Tour (APAT)

[ripple11]

..but would he enter ??...very unlikely...but if the rules say the odd pro running dry are "let in " good luck to them...sitting on the left of Mickey would be a pleasure

[Bongo]

I don't think that it would be correct to exclude people based on ability level, just because someone is good doesn't mean that they shouldn't be allowed to play.

I don't think there any many criteria that I would find acceptable within how I see the spirit of the organisation. Just because someone is successful doesn't mean they are no more an amateur than any other player. If someone is independantly wealthy and can play more often and higher stakes than someone else, should they be excluded?

[Jon MW]

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!

I don't think it would be possible to get away from a definition which wasn't in the end self policing and reliant on players own judgement.

This would have made him eligible, but would a player in that position make the implicit admission that he expected his bad spell to last for the next 12 months? Wouldn't he be more interested in rebuilding his poker career in the professional circuit?

But if a pro-fallen-on-lean-times was technically eligible under a tighter definition then they would be allowed to enter. My main emphasis has been my worry about pros and semi-pros sneaking in and dominating, but it's not just about winning. If the occasional pro-fallen-on-lean-times was to enter these amateur tournaments it would add a bit of colour to the proceedings and wouldn't be a wholly bad thing. Especially if they did badly.

[RED-DOG]

..but would he enter ??...very unlikely...but if the rules say the odd pro running dry are "let in " good luck to them...sitting on the left of Mickey would be a pleasure

Would he enter? That's not the point.

"Sitting on the left of Mickey would be a pleasure " I couldn't agree more!

Providing "Grass roots" amateurs with a chance to play against some of the top players, in a comp with a good structure would be a great idea.

[RED-DOG]

Rob Yong is far far above amateur standard. The money/EPT entry would not be an incentive for him. He seems keen to enter.

[ifm]

..but would he enter ??...very unlikely...but if the rules say the odd pro running dry are "let in " good luck to them...sitting on the left of Mickey would be a pleasure

Would he enter? That's not the point.

"Sitting on the left of Mickey would be a pleasure " I couldn't agree more!

Providing "Grass roots" amateurs with a chance to play against some of the top players, in a comp with a good structure would be a great idea.

As a pro he couldn't enter, have i missed something?

[ifm]

Rob Yong is far far above amateur standard. The money/EPT entry would not be an incentive for him. He seems keen to enter.

He's barred from the Broadway

[Royal Flush]

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!

Well if he won nothing in 2003/2004 then he didnt have an income from poker did he!

[Colchester Kev]

Im bored of reading about APAT, and it hasnt even started yet LOL LOL

[Jon MW]

..but would he enter ??...very unlikely...but if the rules say the odd pro running dry are "let in " good luck to them...sitting on the left of Mickey would be a pleasure

Would he enter? That's not the point.

"Sitting on the left of Mickey would be a pleasure " I couldn't agree more!

Providing "Grass roots" amateurs with a chance to play against some of the top players, in a comp with a good structure would be a great idea.

As a pro he couldn't enter, have i missed something?

If eligibility was defined by a limit on tournament winnings in the 12 months prior to the registration of the first event of the season.

[Jon MW]

Rob Yong is far far above amateur standard. The money/EPT entry would not be an incentive for him. He seems keen to enter.

Mr Yong is someone who I respect greatly as a business man and as a player. He is precisely the type of player who this definition is needed for. With an ambiguous definition people could argue whether he is an amateur or a semi-pro, with a concrete definiton he is likely to be one of the players who's eligibility would see-saw from year to year as his poker winnings rose and fell.

Although it is slightly incongruous for someone to keep on changing whether they are classed as an amateur or not it would provide a workable compromise between barring very good amateur/semi-pros for good (a bit harsh for them), and allowing a virtual free for all (a bit harsh for the majority of grassroots players).

[ifm]

..but would he enter ??...very unlikely...but if the rules say the odd pro running dry are "let in " good luck to them...sitting on the left of Mickey would be a pleasure

Would he enter? That's not the point.

"Sitting on the left of Mickey would be a pleasure " I couldn't agree more!

Providing "Grass roots" amateurs with a chance to play against some of the top players, in a comp with a good structure would be a great idea.

As a pro he couldn't enter, have i missed something?

If eligibility was defined by a limit on tournament winnings in the 12 months prior to the registration of the first event of the season.

He's not an amateur though, he can't be considered by any criteria if they are going to keep the name APAT.

[RED-DOG]

Jon, please note. I'm not knocking APAT, I wish you every success. I'm just shaking it too see what falls off.

[RioRodent]

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.

How can it be run as an 'open' tourney, when it's winner is to be given the title of 'English Amateur Poker Champion'?

It has to be open only to 'amateur' players.

Whether or not a fair and workable method of determining eligibility can be found remains to be seen... but a line has to be drawn somewhere.

[booder]

going back to the structure etc............



when breaking tables ,  will it be the shortstack that moves ?