APAT Issues: Rules/Payouts/deals

[Rod]

but some APAT rules aren't even consistently applied in their own events 

They are. Or should be, applied consistently across all events.

To be fair there have been a few small inconsistency's across some of the events. For example in Scotland it was that if it was checked down at the river both players had to show whereas in Ireland it was OK for a player to muck if they had a hand that could not win the showdown. I have to agree with Tighty that this is sometimes unavoidable if the players want the tour to grow (which we do).

I think this shows how hard it is to get a standard set of rules to work across the game. I think it will always be subject to rulings like the one in this thread as there are always going to be situations that the "rules" can't cover 100%

I still think DTD's ruling here was harsh and a little lacking in common sense, although not altogether incorrect.

[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.

[Claw75]

ok, but different issue. Thanks for raising it though 

it's listed in the rules though   you're welcome!

It is, but as you mention it its not as simple as that. APAT has run two European events this year, successfully, where the priority has been to spread the word first, and not be totally rigid as to our principles with Poker cultures different than our own.

wasn't really talking about the European events, more the one rule for amateur events and another for open events.

its consistent. the Amateur only events are different from those open to Pros too.

Seems like a bit of a contradiction, but meh.

Don't want to hijack this thread too much, but, out of interest..... APAT has been going for a few years now, and as part of it's inception was about bringing the voice of the players to the powers that be re standardised rules etc, are there any plans at any stage to discuss/review some of those issues that have been unpopular among a number of players (i.e. payout structures, rules against deal making)?

[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.

[TightEnd]

I don't think the APAT ethos is unpopular with its players at all Claire. Yes there are occasional comments but they have been very much in a minority

The issues are often discussed by us running APAT, and can be raised at any time on the APAT forum, and will be considered every time by the team.

[George2Loose]

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.

Don't get me started on the payout structure lol

[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.

Poker is about money, not titles, medals and cups.

The organisers of poker tournaments should not be able to tell players what they do with prizepool UNLESS there is added money.

[Claw75]

I don't think the APAT ethos is unpopular with its players at all Claire. Yes there are occasional comments but they have been very much in a minority

possibly because people have seen APAT dig their heels in over the issue and don't think it's worth discussion.  Or maybe you're right.  I could start a thread on the forum, but it would be probably just be seen as stirring and people might not express a view for fear of 'going against the grain'.  The only way we'll get a full and open discussion with everyone expressing their views in a candid manner, imho, is if the discussion is opened and facilitated by an APAT official, and if people thought their views would be fully considered rather than just batted off.  Any chance of this?

[Jon MW]

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.

Poker is about money, not titles, medals and cups.

The organisers of poker tournaments should not be able to tell players what they do with prizepool UNLESS there is added money.

I agree

[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.

Poker is about money, not titles, medals and cups.

The organisers of poker tournaments should not be able to tell players what they do with prizepool UNLESS there is added money.

Well, to a large extent the APAT events are about the medals, cups etc (and the added value seat for first).  But even more of a reason why people would continue to play for the win whatever they've done to divvy up the prize money imo.

[TightEnd]

The concept behind APAT is different, it has been a great success, continues to be so and its players, many of whom were new to Live Poker via APAT, embrace it

Yes, over time the concept may change and adapt. There are always new initiativesa, mostly successful

It would be wrong to say there is anything other than minority calls for changes in the concepts on payout, dealmaking etc. If that changes, no doubt APAT will respond


p.s Poker is now in the Mindsports Olympics.

[TightEnd]

I don't think the APAT ethos is unpopular with its players at all Claire. Yes there are occasional comments but they have been very much in a minority

possibly because people have seen APAT dig their heels in over the issue and don't think it's worth discussion.  Or maybe you're right.  I could start a thread on the forum, but it would be probably just be seen as stirring and people might not express a view for fear of 'going against the grain'.  The only way we'll get a full and open discussion with everyone expressing their views in a candid manner, imho, is if the discussion is opened and facilitated by an APAT official, and if people thought their views would be fully considered rather than just batted off.  Any chance of this?

Batted off? Don't think that has ever happened. Not our style. My back is raked with the scratches of previous debates!

Start a thread, you'll get a range of views and no APAT official will be preventing that.

[George2Loose]

Thing is Tighty is right and is Claw- most of the members are happy with the way things are so APAT will continue to run things the way they are for now with minor tweaks and if a debate was started most members would just go with the status quo so there's probably no point in doing so.

[Claw75]

I don't think the APAT ethos is unpopular with its players at all Claire. Yes there are occasional comments but they have been very much in a minority

possibly because people have seen APAT dig their heels in over the issue and don't think it's worth discussion.  Or maybe you're right.  I could start a thread on the forum, but it would be probably just be seen as stirring and people might not express a view for fear of 'going against the grain'.  The only way we'll get a full and open discussion with everyone expressing their views in a candid manner, imho, is if the discussion is opened and facilitated by an APAT official, and if people thought their views would be fully considered rather than just batted off.  Any chance of this?

Batted off? Don't think that has ever happened. Not our style. My back is raked with the scratches of previous debates!

Start a thread, you'll get a range of views and no APAT official will be preventing that.

I think you've missed the point of my post   A lot of APAT supporters are, rightly so, very loyal to APAT and won't express a view that goes against something APAT have dug their heels in on when the discussion has been raised before.  You say it's a minority that would like to see a change in payouts, dealmaking etc, but the point is we don't really know unless the proper conditions for people to express their views openly without fear of being seen to be critical of APAT as a whole are put in place.

[George2Loose]

There are a few reg members- name no names, who jump on any person or point that is deemed to be disloyal to APAT. Good points Claire