Why is the APAT payout structure so top heavy ?

[bolt pp]

I’ve been holding back on posting on the payout structure of the first APAt event as most who have commented on it have been either ridiculed or accused of sniping (in my view anyway)

I was not fortunate enough to gain a seat for the event and to be totally honest I now believe that wasn’t such a bad thing.  If I had been present and the poker gods had smiled on me enough to get me to the final table, to then find out that after MANY hours of play I would still get the same as a 9th place finisher as a 4th placer, I would be damn well miffed - putting it very politely!!  (And not mentioning about 10th getting nothing as Jen has brought this up already) this payout would not cover the majority of peoples expenses for the weekend and as such I think it’s plain wrong IMO. 4th getting 3.3% and first getting 50% with an added 8k package I believe is ludicrous. Flushy’s payout structure was a fairer, or take 10-15% off the top and add it to the bottom to still make it a flatter structure!

The general gist of the APAt idea from what I have read is to give amateur poker players a taste of the big festival event experience at amateur buy-ins, this has been stated again and again.  Why then does the payout structure not follow this?  “It was published on the APAT site” I have read on this thread, and apparently there were no complaints, well I looked for the payout structure before the draw was made and I could not find it anywhere (something that is also being addressed I believe) possibly there would have been more comments if it was easily available?

On the subject of no deals being mentioned, is it surprising there was no mention when it was made painfully clear that they were not allowed?  and measures put in place to ensure that it would be as hard as possible to achieve (Prizes paid by cheque) Also how many people have had played live enough to know how to go about making a deal, from the reports there were many first time live players and as such they are not necessarily confident enough to stand up and say what they want, or to disagree with the structure.

I was told that I was a typical APAt member, but the more I read the more I think I’m not, I will not play a tourney that I know I will be out of pocket playing unless I finish top 3, I’ve now decided I will not play any of the events unless I have no real travel or accommodation expenses, which could mean I never play any of them…. Shame.

I've not joined APAT yet simply because I have been waiting to see if there is likely to be an event that it is convenient for me to attend.  As for the other benefits of membership, I'm going to wait and see how things develop before deciding to join for that alone.

Other than the fact that I've not yet joined, my sentiments are 100% in line with Ginger's.  If I had been at that final table last weekend I would have been desperate to deal, but would not have dared suggest it.

The power of secret squirrel is strong!!, you may not think it now but if the oppoutunity to deal had presented itself you would've done what YOU felt was right at the time and if that meant dealing, unless it was memorialised somewhere that it was forbidden, thats what I'm sure you would've done Claire

[roverthtaeh]

Speaking of top heavy..... did you see that dealer on Table One?

[Card_Shark]

Congratulations firsty to everone that organised the broadway event, sounds to me like a great time was had by all..... well done for that.

I'm not yet a member of the APA but as a regular festival player i do have a concern:

Have the committee of the APA lost there marbles ? or have there principles been compromised due to large offers of sponsorship $. Before anyone jumps down my throat..... MONEY TALKS.

If the wonga factor didn't have any effect on your choice to run with a top heavy payout, what on earth made so many highly respected people in the poker community go against all of there beliefs and principles ?

Lead by example and start as you mean to go on, flatter payout's are what at least 85% of players that i speak to want.

Poker desperately needs an organisation like the APA, a group that will lobby to make changes for the good of poker and its players. Please dont make things worse for us by showing the casino's that top heavy payout's are the way forward.

I sincerly hope that i have not offended anyone with my post but thats how i feel, and honesty being the best policy and all that..... i just had to have my say.

ps. i been reading this thread for 2 days before posting, i'm still not sure that i should have.

Steve Read.

[ifm]

Poker desperately needs an organisation like the APA, a group that will lobby to make changes for the good of poker and its players. Please dont make things worse for us by showing the casino's that top heavy payout's are the way forward.

I actually find this to be the oddest thread.............everyone involved has said in the past they wan't flatter payouts and think deals are ok yet when given the chance go against it!!!!!!
It makes little sense to me.

[Card_Shark]

Looks to me like a U turn, but why ?

[ripple11]

Just to add my two penny worth...I like Ginger am a member, and fully support the aims and principles of APAT,.....but also like her,I wouldn't have like to have played with the massively top heavy stucture on offer.

Yes, the added value from Poker Stars is a fantastic achievement , but the payout stucture isn't right IMHO.

Otherwise, everyone seems to have really enjoyed the first live event, so keep up the good work APAT.

[Suited_Jock]

Speaking of top heavy..... did you see that dealer on Table One?

[tikay]

Looks to me like a U turn, but why ?

Hi Steve,

I explained "why" in detail in the 8th Post on Page One of this thread. I may well have been wrong, or misguided, but in answer to "why", please see that Post - I was asked the reasons, & carefully set them out, & how I came to my view.

[tikay]

Congratulations firsty to everone that organised the broadway event, sounds to me like a great time was had by all..... well done for that.

I'm not yet a member of the APA but as a regular festival player i do have a concern:

Have the committee of the APA lost there marbles ? or have there principles been compromised due to large offers of sponsorship $. Before anyone jumps down my throat..... MONEY TALKS.

If the wonga factor didn't have any effect on your choice to run with a top heavy payout, what on earth made so many highly respected people in the poker community go against all of there beliefs and principles ?

Lead by example and start as you mean to go on, flatter payout's are what at least 85% of players that i speak to want.

Poker desperately needs an organisation like the APA, a group that will lobby to make changes for the good of poker and its players. Please dont make things worse for us by showing the casino's that top heavy payout's are the way forward.

I sincerly hope that i have not offended anyone with my post but thats how i feel, and honesty being the best policy and all that..... i just had to have my say.

ps. i been reading this thread for 2 days before posting, i'm still not sure that i should have.

Steve Read.

Hi Steve,

"....have the committee of APAT lost their marbles?"....

It was not a committee decision, it was my decision. I set out, in detail, on Page One of this thread how & why I decided to give that structure a try. It was a "concept".

I don't think I've "lost my marbles", but at my age, one never knows.

"....or have there principles been compromised due to large offers of sponsorship $. Before anyone jumps down my throat..... MONEY TALKS...".

Can you explain what you mean by this please. 

[M3boy]

The one positive thing I can see this structure doing is that it SHOULD teach the players on the final table to "go for the win" and not to ladder as 4th is the same as 9th.

Thats not to say I agree or disagree with the use of that payout structure

[matt674]

The one positive thing I can see this structure doing is that it SHOULD teach the players on the final table to "go for the win" and not to ladder as 4th is the same as 9th.

Thats not to say I agree or disagree with the use of that payout structure

you could still keep the payout structure top heavy but stagger the prizes from 9th to 4th so at least whoever finishes 4th has some sense of achievement for lasting 5 extra places longer than whoever finished 9th.

[Ironside]

i understand the reason for apat wanting a "big prize" for first in there first event for those playing no one mentioned the money it was the EPT seat we all had our eyes on but for the press the £4.5k +the EPT seat looks so much better than £2.5k

with future events all hopefully having more runners the need to make the top place so top heavy will be nullified as the total prize pool will be much heavier
i have to agree though that the flat structure from 9th to 4th made for a great table i for one would of played a totally different game if passing would of allowed ladder climbs although it might have been easier to steal with players relunctant to call knowing that they could also ladder climb


hopefully for future events there will be a similair structure but less top heavy so that people making the final can cover costs but there is still proper poker played

we have all expressed views so i think we should sit back allow those at the APAt work out how they want to make the payouts for event 2

i dont think they can make there mind up untill they work out how many people they can host for event 2

[Bongo]

Why is ladder climbing not "proper poker"?

[tikay]

Isn't it extraordinary how evocative this subject is?!

[Bongo]

Yes.

I think you're in a lose:lose situation too as whatever you do you'll just be in for criticism.

I guess it's a mark of how well the APA is percieved if people feel strongly about it's policies.