Sunday Sizzler ... NEWS

[tikay]

Ive learnt my lesson :-)

I love having the experience of playing players who are out of my league for the mere cost of $5.

Can I just ask though...why do players who have already qualified keep playing?

Is is to fill tables or for the $$?


Ok im guessing its to fill the tables........but........no offence but some games (sats) i play I wait till the good players get their seats then try my luck nearer the end as the best players are already in there and I have a better chance of qualifying.

I know you better players think you are maybe doing good by filling seats but to be honest I think you are doing more damage.

I wasnt going to play tonight then thought fk it..played every game bar 1 coz it was too early..so with $25 invested it was worth another go.

I was beaten at the end by a better player but i for one would prefer if the better players once they have qualified didnt play.

If the sats dont fill then fair enough I have saved $5 and then I might think about paying the $50 which to be honest is out of my league but at least i havent paid $5 every night and would consider it.

I thought the sats were for us poor, skint, not very good (learning) players.

Just my input but to be honest I look at the players reged and think ok......there goes another $5 but I will learn.

As this is the last sizzler this year can I suggest that the scary good players stay away next year and let the wee small time players play the sats?

Well I think you guys are being hard on Suzanne here, I thought her Post was actually quite thought-provoking.

I am, up to a point, one of those guilty of "multi-entering" these, partly to help fill them, partly to helkp support the blonde cause I suppose, just as I'd support the DtD or other causes.

But it's not quite what is seems Suzanne. The "2nd" or "extra" seat on one of the later Satellites was in fact donated by me, after I'd won my seat earlier in the week, so in some ways, this "multi-entering" also generates Bonus Seats for the comp.

I am sorry if you fialed to get in - next time maybe! - & your points are noted.

xx

[The Baron]

Good post Suz, it's something Kev and I will seriously take into consideration upon the next Sizzler.

[I, Zimbra]

To argue the opposite case:

I think a lot of players play these because they know they will be playing against friends; it's fun, it's only $5 - if someone were to win twice (has this actually happened yet?) they would get the $55 in cash, which is perfectly fair. It's almost like a $5 extended STT, except the structure is more top-heavy, and I know that people play these again and again on Blonde.

Essentially you get to play a fun comp against friends, with a slow structure, for just $5... 

I don't think you can stop people from multi-satting. You just have to hope that someone who has already won a seat doesn't have the heart to last the distance against someone who still has the 'hunger'...

Edit:

if someone were to win twice (has this actually happened yet?)

 I'm an idiot - obviously this has happened, otherwise suz wouldn't have posted in the first place. 

[Rooky9]

Poker is a game where you take other peoples money when you win. You can have other reasons for playing but at the end of the day there is no getting away from that fact.

If you stopped people from multi entering half the sats wouldnt have taken place. The rake generated through the sats is greater due to the effective double rake and you do get to play the best quality $5 poker there probably is. It seems a no brainer IMO.

[jezza777]

Ive learnt my lesson :-)

I love having the experience of playing players who are out of my league for the mere cost of $5.

Can I just ask though...why do players who have already qualified keep playing?

Is is to fill tables or for the $$?


Ok im guessing its to fill the tables........but........no offence but some games (sats) i play I wait till the good players get their seats then try my luck nearer the end as the best players are already in there and I have a better chance of qualifying.

I know you better players think you are maybe doing good by filling seats but to be honest I think you are doing more damage.

I wasnt going to play tonight then thought fk it..played every game bar 1 coz it was too early..so with $25 invested it was worth another go.

I was beaten at the end by a better player but i for one would prefer if the better players once they have qualified didnt play.

If the sats dont fill then fair enough I have saved $5 and then I might think about paying the $50 which to be honest is out of my league but at least i havent paid $5 every night and would consider it.

I thought the sats were for us poor, skint, not very good (learning) players.

Just my input but to be honest I look at the players reged and think ok......there goes another $5 but I will learn.

As this is the last sizzler this year can I suggest that the scary good players stay away next year and let the wee small time players play the sats?

Well I think you guys are being hard on Suzanne here, I thought her Post was actually quite thought-provoking.

I am, up to a point, one of those guilty of "multi-entering" these, partly to help fill them, partly to helkp support the blonde cause I suppose, just as I'd support the DtD or other causes.

But it's not quite what is seems Suzanne. The "2nd" or "extra" seat on one of the later Satellites was in fact donated by me, after I'd won my seat earlier in the week, so in some ways, this "multi-entering" also generates Bonus Seats for the comp.

I am sorry if you fialed to get in - next time maybe! - & your points are noted.

xx

I think Suze is talking about good players m8. You can play as many as you like

[tikay]

Ive learnt my lesson :-)

I love having the experience of playing players who are out of my league for the mere cost of $5.

Can I just ask though...why do players who have already qualified keep playing?

Is is to fill tables or for the $$?


Ok im guessing its to fill the tables........but........no offence but some games (sats) i play I wait till the good players get their seats then try my luck nearer the end as the best players are already in there and I have a better chance of qualifying.

I know you better players think you are maybe doing good by filling seats but to be honest I think you are doing more damage.

I wasnt going to play tonight then thought fk it..played every game bar 1 coz it was too early..so with $25 invested it was worth another go.

I was beaten at the end by a better player but i for one would prefer if the better players once they have qualified didnt play.

If the sats dont fill then fair enough I have saved $5 and then I might think about paying the $50 which to be honest is out of my league but at least i havent paid $5 every night and would consider it.

I thought the sats were for us poor, skint, not very good (learning) players.

Just my input but to be honest I look at the players reged and think ok......there goes another $5 but I will learn.

As this is the last sizzler this year can I suggest that the scary good players stay away next year and let the wee small time players play the sats?

Well I think you guys are being hard on Suzanne here, I thought her Post was actually quite thought-provoking.

I am, up to a point, one of those guilty of "multi-entering" these, partly to help fill them, partly to helkp support the blonde cause I suppose, just as I'd support the DtD or other causes.

But it's not quite what is seems Suzanne. The "2nd" or "extra" seat on one of the later Satellites was in fact donated by me, after I'd won my seat earlier in the week, so in some ways, this "multi-entering" also generates Bonus Seats for the comp.

I am sorry if you fialed to get in - next time maybe! - & your points are noted.

xx

I think Suze is talking about good players m8. You can play as many as you like

How did that lovely Kezza get mixed up with you, one wonders?

[Colchester Kev]

Suz, to say you were beaten by better players does you a disservice, You got unlucky heads up ... on another day you take it down, simple as that.

Poker is a game of "you pays ya money, you take ya chance" .. I am totally against limiting the sats to players that havent qualified previously.  Look at all the fields for every sat that has been played, about 6 people have played every single one this week INCLUDING the rebuys, Some won a seat... some didnt ... thats poker im afraid.

The SIZZLER had sats for 6 days of the week ... at different times (the thought being that it would hopefully mean that everyone could find at least one night and time that suited them) .... The fact that if it wasnt for the same people entering every sat then 4 of the 6 wouldnt have even taken place, suggests that it is the only viable way of getting bums on seats....  Of course if we were getting 25-30 players for each sat we might have had a rethink.

The SUNDAY SIZZLER will be back in the new year with a few adjustments, I hope that you will like what is planned, and continue to support the event.

[kinboshi]

It's not just the better players that win them either!! 

I managed to completely outplay Kev on Wednesday, but still played in the other sats, as they're fun and only cost the same as a pint of beer in the pub.

Suz, was it Kev that beat you heads up?  If that's the case, you must be being ironic when you said you were beaten by a better player. 

[suzanne]

Can I please be banned from posting on a Saturday night 

Ok the point I was trying to make was that when this comp was first announced Kev said there would be sats for those who couldn't afford the buy-in so giving everyone a chance to play.

I dont play $50 games and would feel out of my depth playing them but I like the long structure on this one so would love to give it a go but my bankroll is not big enough.

I may be wrong but I think that most of the players in these sats play above the $5 STT level that I play at, certainly the quality of the players are much better than your average $5 game so I go into the game perhaps with a negative attitude.

I too play them in the Blonde spirit coz I love playing with you guys and it is, as I have said educational but obviously I would like to win 1.

If people who have already qualified keep playing them then obviously it is going to reduce mine and any other small stakes player a chance of winning into this game which I though was the reason for the sats in the first place.

I know on some nights it has looked like it was struggling to make the 9 and people (me included) have sat to make up the numbers but just MAYBE some of the smaller stake players are staying away from the sats coz they know/think that the only way they could win 1 is if they get VERY lucky.

[AndrewT]

I know on some nights it has looked like it was struggling to make the 9 and people (me included) have sat to make up the numbers but just MAYBE some of the smaller stake players are staying away from the sats coz they know/think that the only way they could win 1 is if they get VERY lucky.

Suzanne I'm sure that if you were to round up eight other small stakes players and ask that you get a sat to yourself then the higher-stakes players would gladly step aside for an evening. However at the moment the sats would struggle to start without the current regulars.

The skill level isn't that high anyway - me and Kev were in the last three with you last night.

[Royal Flush]

Can I please be banned from posting on a Saturday night 

Ok the point I was trying to make was that when this comp was first announced Kev said there would be sats for those who couldn't afford the buy-in so giving everyone a chance to play.

I dont play $50 games and would feel out of my depth playing them but I like the long structure on this one so would love to give it a go but my bankroll is not big enough.

I may be wrong but I think that most of the players in these sats play above the $5 STT level that I play at, certainly the quality of the players are much better than your average $5 game so I go into the game perhaps with a negative attitude.

I too play them in the Blonde spirit coz I love playing with you guys and it is, as I have said educational but obviously I would like to win 1.

If people who have already qualified keep playing them then obviously it is going to reduce mine and any other small stakes player a chance of winning into this game which I though was the reason for the sats in the first place.

I know on some nights it has looked like it was struggling to make the 9 and people (me included) have sat to make up the numbers but just MAYBE some of the smaller stake players are staying away from the sats coz they know/think that the only way they could win 1 is if they get VERY lucky.

Why don't you build up the $55 from playing normal $5 SNG's then? That way you avoid the good players and still get to play.

[suzanne]

Can I please be banned from posting on a Saturday night 

Ok the point I was trying to make was that when this comp was first announced Kev said there would be sats for those who couldn't afford the buy-in so giving everyone a chance to play.

I dont play $50 games and would feel out of my depth playing them but I like the long structure on this one so would love to give it a go but my bankroll is not big enough.

I may be wrong but I think that most of the players in these sats play above the $5 STT level that I play at, certainly the quality of the players are much better than your average $5 game so I go into the game perhaps with a negative attitude.

I too play them in the Blonde spirit coz I love playing with you guys and it is, as I have said educational but obviously I would like to win 1.

If people who have already qualified keep playing them then obviously it is going to reduce mine and any other small stakes player a chance of winning into this game which I though was the reason for the sats in the first place.

I know on some nights it has looked like it was struggling to make the 9 and people (me included) have sat to make up the numbers but just MAYBE some of the smaller stake players are staying away from the sats coz they know/think that the only way they could win 1 is if they get VERY lucky.

Why don't you build up the $55 from playing normal $5 SNG's then? That way you avoid the good players and still get to play.

Thats what I intend to do in future if my bankroll is healthy enough, but then it kind of takes away the whole purpose of the sats which was to give the smaller stake players a chance to play.

[Royal Flush]

Can I please be banned from posting on a Saturday night 

Ok the point I was trying to make was that when this comp was first announced Kev said there would be sats for those who couldn't afford the buy-in so giving everyone a chance to play.

I dont play $50 games and would feel out of my depth playing them but I like the long structure on this one so would love to give it a go but my bankroll is not big enough.

I may be wrong but I think that most of the players in these sats play above the $5 STT level that I play at, certainly the quality of the players are much better than your average $5 game so I go into the game perhaps with a negative attitude.

I too play them in the Blonde spirit coz I love playing with you guys and it is, as I have said educational but obviously I would like to win 1.

If people who have already qualified keep playing them then obviously it is going to reduce mine and any other small stakes player a chance of winning into this game which I though was the reason for the sats in the first place.

I know on some nights it has looked like it was struggling to make the 9 and people (me included) have sat to make up the numbers but just MAYBE some of the smaller stake players are staying away from the sats coz they know/think that the only way they could win 1 is if they get VERY lucky.

Why don't you build up the $55 from playing normal $5 SNG's then? That way you avoid the good players and still get to play.

Thats what I intend to do in future if my bankroll is healthy enough, but then it kind of takes away the whole purpose of the sats which was to give the smaller stake players a chance to play.

How does it take away the purpose? You can still play them.....it's another way of getting the $55

[suzanne]

I know on some nights it has looked like it was struggling to make the 9 and people (me included) have sat to make up the numbers but just MAYBE some of the smaller stake players are staying away from the sats coz they know/think that the only way they could win 1 is if they get VERY lucky.

Suzanne I'm sure that if you were to round up eight other small stakes players and ask that you get a sat to yourself then the higher-stakes players would gladly step aside for an evening. However at the moment the sats would struggle to start without the current regulars.

The skill level isn't that high anyway - me and Kev were in the last three with you last night.

 

Good idea...after Xmas I will put up a thread asking for just that.

[suzanne]

Flushy I probably would still play 1 or 2 for the same reason as everyone else...to play in a blonde game coz they are a good laugh but I dont expect to win 1 simply because the standard of players in these games are much higher than what im used to.

The same reason as I dont play high stake mtts...i know im not good enough.