APAT Issues: Rules/Payouts/deals

[The Camel]

Why on earth are APAT opposed to deals?

It's the players money, what they do with it is their choice surely and by helping to facilitate deals (working out chip count deals, paying out deal money not leaving it to players to pay the difference etc etc) it will make sure noone gets ripped off.

it's not just refusing to facilitate - any form of deal making in amateur events is very strongly discouraged.  the thinking behind it is that players should be playing for the medals and titles, over and above the prize money.  The top heavy payout structure is also supposed to encourage that mindset, but seems contradictory to me.  When APAT first launched, everyone knew in advance what the payout structures were and that there were no deals before taking part.  When it really started to get my goat though was when 'open' and 'pro' events were introduced and deals were allowed.  the reasons for that have been justified by APAT before, and I can't remember exactly what they were, but something along the lines of pros are reliant on poker winnings for income so are entitled to do what they want with the prize money to ensure the best return for their buck.  Not allowing amateur players the same level of autonomy over the prizepool they have contributed to just doesn't sit comfortably with me and feels more than a tad patronising.

That line, right there.

[TightEnd]

Keith its flatter than a normal casino payout, in percentages paid out, by design. Except that there is considerable added value to the winner

[TightEnd]

apat forum is very similar to the sky forum in that both are tend to be a bit of a love in

look at the views on here where people will talk openly about apat and most apat members seem to not like the payout/deal situation

all the apat organisers work for sky don't they?

Two do, one doesn't. I'm freelance but do some work for them. So the answer is most.

[The Camel]

Keith its flatter than a normal casino payout, in percentages paid out, by design. Except that there is considerable added value to the winner

Well, as I said earlier, if there's added value, you have every right to stop dealing making.

Out of interest, what is the added value?

[gatso]

keith, typical payout

1st £3.5k+champion of champions seat
2nd £2.25k
3rd £1.25k
4th to 9th £600
10th to 20th £400

It`s more odd than either flat or topheavy

[TightEnd]

Keith its flatter than a normal casino payout, in percentages paid out, by design. Except that there is considerable added value to the winner

Well, as I said earlier, if there's added value, you have every right to stop dealing making.

Out of interest, what is the added value?

gukpt main event seat, or gukpt grand final seat, to the winner. £1k plus minimum

[Claw75]

Why on earth are APAT opposed to deals?

It's the players money, what they do with it is their choice surely and by helping to facilitate deals (working out chip count deals, paying out deal money not leaving it to players to pay the difference etc etc) it will make sure noone gets ripped off.

it's not just refusing to facilitate - any form of deal making in amateur events is very strongly discouraged.  the thinking behind it is that players should be playing for the medals and titles, over and above the prize money.  The top heavy payout structure is also supposed to encourage that mindset, but seems contradictory to me.  When APAT first launched, everyone knew in advance what the payout structures were and that there were no deals before taking part.  When it really started to get my goat though was when 'open' and 'pro' events were introduced and deals were allowed.  the reasons for that have been justified by APAT before, and I can't remember exactly what they were, but something along the lines of pros are reliant on poker winnings for income so are entitled to do what they want with the prize money to ensure the best return for their buck.  Not allowing amateur players the same level of autonomy over the prizepool they have contributed to just doesn't sit comfortably with me and feels more than a tad patronising.

That line, right there.

top heavy in that the first three prizes are considerably higher than the others, with the rest of the final table receiving a flat payout.  Example pay out structure:


Prize Pool   
First Position – 23% of Stakes   
£3,500.00 Cup, Gold Medal PLUS
Additional Prize: 1 x GUKPT Package
Estimated – $3,000

Second Position – 17% of Stakes   
£2,500.00
Silver Medal

Third Position – 10% of Stakes   
£1,500.00
Bronze Medal

Fourth to Ninth Positions – 5% of Stakes   
Each – £700.00

Tenth to Twentieth Positions – 2% of Stakes   
Each – £300.00

Total Value of Prizes Awarded   
£15,000.00

[Cf]

I don't think APATs payout structure is flat at all.

Imagine plotting the prizes as a graph.

APATs will have a straight line from 9th-4th then suddenly jumps massively for the top 3 positions. That's a top heavy structure. The sample on their site is:

1st: 3500
2nd: 2500
3rd: 1500
4th-9th: 700

1st place gets 5 times what 4th place gets. Even DTD (who i think are maybe too top heavy at times) isn't that harsh. 3rd gets more than twice as much as 3rd!

I've just off the top of my head made up what I think would be a flatter payout structure using the same amounts of money:

1st: 2700
2nd: 2000
3rd: 1500
4th: 1200
5th: 900
6th: 800
7th: 750
8th: 700
9th: 650

For me that's much better. Obviously first isn't as much but you say it's not all about the money in these events. Using such a structure I think people would be more likely to play for the win and there probably wouldn't be much talk of deals.

And also: I don't see why added value should stop deal making. It's been put in the prizepool. It's the players playing for it. It's up to them what to do with it.

[Rod]

Why on earth are APAT opposed to deals?

It's the players money, what they do with it is their choice surely and by helping to facilitate deals (working out chip count deals, paying out deal money not leaving it to players to pay the difference etc etc) it will make sure noone gets ripped off.

it's not just refusing to facilitate - any form of deal making in amateur events is very strongly discouraged.  the thinking behind it is that players should be playing for the medals and titles, over and above the prize money.  The top heavy payout structure is also supposed to encourage that mindset, but seems contradictory to me.  When APAT first launched, everyone knew in advance what the payout structures were and that there were no deals before taking part.  When it really started to get my goat though was when 'open' and 'pro' events were introduced and deals were allowed.  the reasons for that have been justified by APAT before, and I can't remember exactly what they were, but something along the lines of pros are reliant on poker winnings for income so are entitled to do what they want with the prize money to ensure the best return for their buck.  Not allowing amateur players the same level of autonomy over the prizepool they have contributed to just doesn't sit comfortably with me and feels more than a tad patronising.

That line, right there.

top heavy in that the first three prizes are considerably higher than the others, with the rest of the final table receiving a flat payout.  Example pay out structure:


Prize Pool   
First Position – 23% of Stakes   
£3,500.00 Cup, Gold Medal PLUS
Additional Prize: 1 x GUKPT Package
Estimated – $3,000

Second Position – 17% of Stakes   
£2,500.00
Silver Medal

Third Position – 10% of Stakes   
£1,500.00
Bronze Medal

Fourth to Ninth Positions – 5% of Stakes   
Each – £700.00

Tenth to Twentieth Positions – 2% of Stakes   
Each – £300.00

Total Value of Prizes Awarded   
£15,000.00

The winner would also get the Champion of Champions seat which is entry into a tournament where the first prize is a $20,000 package for next year.

I assume it is OK to link to Blonde from the APAT forums?

[The Camel]

Thanks for clarifying.

What is the point of the strange payout structure?

Why not just have normal payouts (like cf's example), and then add the extra prize to the top?

I wouldn't be happy coming 4th in a tournie and getting the same money as 9th.

[TightEnd]

APAT Champion of Champions seat, just to clarify. APAT winners play it.

Winner gets $20k sponsorship from Betfair next year

[gatso]

it`s both flat and topheavy tbh which is pretty impressive

[TightEnd]

it`s both flat and topheavy tbh which is pretty impressive

cheers!

keep it coming though, I like the feedback

[Sheriff Fatman]

Sigh at the APAT hijack.  I guess we forget all about the ruling issue now then?

[Claw75]

Sigh at the APAT hijack.  I guess we forget all about the ruling issue now then?

yes, sorry. can we split this into a separate thread maybe?