UKIPT Season 3 Feedback

[NigDawG]

The demographic of people who play poker in the UK is a lot different to that of those who play in the continent, especially on the Riviera

ofc. it was an extreme example. stars are running the national tours during the ept's now tho. ukipt london could definitely be a bit more adventurous than £700 don't u think?

[action man]

Agree about making the main events £1k but for me personally, would very rarely play on that meant missing a sunday online, the midweek days, esp weds/thurs are so small and sundays are so lucrative.
Im sure a lot of people are in the same boat. I dont think they should change it to account for us though.

[NigDawG]

Agree about making the main events £1k but for me personally, would very rarely play on that meant missing a sunday online, the midweek days, esp weds/thurs are so small and sundays are so lucrative.
Im sure a lot of people are in the same boat. I dont think they should change it to account for us though.

the main events will always either conclude or run through sundays for sure. no1 is suggesting they avoid that. i was talking about the high rollers, which have a niche market probably made up a lot by people in our boat, so would carry more weight.

[AndrewT]

Why should people in London be denied the chance of a local £700 tourney when the rest of the country gets one?

It always irks me when the London leg of a poker tour is more expensive than all the other legs - GUKPT and GPS do this - which is why it was refreshing that Stars didn't for the UKIPT this year.

[skolsuper]

and why are we talking about 500 to 1k. this season the buy ins were 700, people complained about it when they were told it was happening, saying 500 was perfect. yet turn out was better than ever?

Just for simplicity, couldn't be arsed to work out the numbers.

They could double the amount of sats, but they wouldn't get double the qualifiers.

People have a set amount they are willing to spend of sats, it isn't a never ending pool.

Stars pull $15m out of that pool twice a year for the PCA and WSOP main. As far as the UKIPT is concerned, yes it is.

Then why aren't all the UKIPTs sold out?

Certainly the 2 I played (Nottingham and Newcastle) were at venue capacity. I would be very surprised if stars were bringing as many qualifiers as they feasibly could do. Are you seriously suggesting that stars can qualify 1500+ players for a $10k in the caribbean but couldn't bring 300 players to a £1k in England? IMO the UKIPT is a long way off from being as big as it could be, and at the minute it will be taking players from other medium buyin comps. Rather than being concerned about keeping the UKIPTs cheap enough for a certain level of recreational player, they could make the whole pie bigger. You have to look at the whole pie.

Quite clearly qualifying 1500 people from around the globe to the 2nd biggest $10k of the year that has a history and also happens to be in the Caribbean in January is obviously going to be a lot easier than qualifying 300 people to a £1k in some rain drenched corner of this nation.

You show a surprising lack of imagination for someone who imagined that full tilt was "if anything safer than stars". What would happen if stars said "the PCA is in Bristol this year, deal with it." and ran all the same satellites with the same guarantees? It'd still get 2000 runners IMO. Look at deauville EPT, which stars created from thin air in the French version of Weston-Super-Mare, no "history" there but it was big enough that Jake won €800k iirc. And the IPT is a great example of one of the possible futures for the UKIPT, if you look at the flags from that €2k they aren't pulling most of the field from Monte Carlo, they're nearly all Italian, and Italy is not in the midst of an economic boom right now. I don't know if they even qualify people from stars.com, which the UKIPT would be able to do.

@Aaron: Check the bolded part of my post quoted above for the same point made by lildave (made better by him admittedly) which you missed. And seriously no improvement in numbers or pot "for sure"? I don't know how you can both be so unambitious. What if stars put up banners in the client, ran some 20seat gtd sats on a Sunday, ran some of their 1r 3x turbo sats with seats guaranteed? They have probably 300k active players on any given Sunday, which is at least 50x as many as gcasino have on their skin, and probably 300x as many as DTD who fill up a 300 runner £500 buyin tourn every month through their satellite program. All numbers are off the top of my head but you get the jist, the possibilities are there.

[NigDawG]

Why should people in London be denied the chance of a local £700 tourney when the rest of the country gets one?

It always irks me when the London leg of a poker tour is more expensive than all the other legs - GUKPT and GPS do this - which is why it was refreshing that Stars didn't for the UKIPT this year.

ept in town/higher demand/usually the grand final

didn't gukpt have 2 london stops each year? a normal one and a grand final in nov/dec?

[AndrewT]

Why should people in London be denied the chance of a local £700 tourney when the rest of the country gets one?

It always irks me when the London leg of a poker tour is more expensive than all the other legs - GUKPT and GPS do this - which is why it was refreshing that Stars didn't for the UKIPT this year.

ept in town/higher demand/usually the grand final

didn't gukpt have 2 london stops each year? a normal one and a grand final in nov/dec?

You're right, it seems they did this year - there was a £1k in Sept.

And also it seems the GPS did this as well - had a normal priced tourney and a grand final in London.

I really should have known this, seeing as I played in the £400...

Ignore my rant earlier.

[aaron1867]

and why are we talking about 500 to 1k. this season the buy ins were 700, people complained about it when they were told it was happening, saying 500 was perfect. yet turn out was better than ever?

Just for simplicity, couldn't be arsed to work out the numbers.

They could double the amount of sats, but they wouldn't get double the qualifiers.

People have a set amount they are willing to spend of sats, it isn't a never ending pool.

Stars pull $15m out of that pool twice a year for the PCA and WSOP main. As far as the UKIPT is concerned, yes it is.

Then why aren't all the UKIPTs sold out?

Certainly the 2 I played (Nottingham and Newcastle) were at venue capacity. I would be very surprised if stars were bringing as many qualifiers as they feasibly could do. Are you seriously suggesting that stars can qualify 1500+ players for a $10k in the caribbean but couldn't bring 300 players to a £1k in England? IMO the UKIPT is a long way off from being as big as it could be, and at the minute it will be taking players from other medium buyin comps. Rather than being concerned about keeping the UKIPTs cheap enough for a certain level of recreational player, they could make the whole pie bigger. You have to look at the whole pie.

Quite clearly qualifying 1500 people from around the globe to the 2nd biggest $10k of the year that has a history and also happens to be in the Caribbean in January is obviously going to be a lot easier than qualifying 300 people to a £1k in some rain drenched corner of this nation.

@Aaron: Check the bolded part of my post quoted above for the same point made by lildave (made better by him admittedly) which you missed. And seriously no improvement in numbers or pot "for sure"? I don't know how you can both be so unambitious. What if stars put up banners in the client, ran some 20seat gtd sats on a Sunday, ran some of their 1r 3x turbo sats with seats guaranteed? They have probably 300k active players on any given Sunday, which is at least 50x as many as gcasino have on their skin, and probably 300x as many as DTD who fill up a 300 runner £500 buyin tourn every month through their satellite program. All numbers are off the top of my head but you get the jist, the possibilities are there.

My point still stands at why they want to change the buyin, when all is going fine and is only their third season.

I can appreciate that Stars could get more people into the tourney doing such sat programs like DTD, but you have to remember that UKIPT and pokerstars are running at a loss to run these events. There is perhaps lots of things they can do, but appreciate that they still havr to focus on other dynamic parts of their business is a must. Would you prefer 200+ runners at £700 buyin or just playing it as a £1k event? Furthermore, you have just said that DTD fill their tournaments eahc month, they don't. The last 500 got something like 180 runners. It's a prime example of why the buyin should not go up, comparing the old £336 to the new £560. The £560 making a overlay this month of around £10k.

Also perhaps a sat like you mentioned with a 1k buyin... You might make more runners, but the direct buyins will not improve. The £770 is just too much for some people, but I know numerous people who put themsevles out to play this (regs of the old £336) who are already at max buyin, but desperately wanted to play it. A 40% increase for sure would make a squeeze impossible.

Also, yet people mention increases in buyin, but why not put an increase on buyin of 40% to EPT's and WSOP's? Seems valid arguement to others, with a counter point.

What happens if it turns into a £1k buyin next season (it won't) and this topic arises this time next year, maybe we would increase to £1.5k? and the year after? Or maybe it would have a effect where they have to go back to £700, which would be a massive fail.

[skolsuper]

Ok fair enough, some good points there. I do think that EPTs are probably close to optimally priced at the minute, they have been bigger, e.g. Barcelona EPT was €8k in '08 when I played it and is now €5k, so I think stars have probably given it a lot of thought and chosen what they think is the highest point on the demand curve. I think we're still some way off that point with the UKIPTs though.

Re: the DTD 500 the dip in numbers last month I think would have had a lot to do with them running a big 150 starting on the same day as more of a double A-side than a traditional side event. Also maybe some hangover from the big £500k gtd the month before. When they initially upped the buyin way back at the beginning of the year, the numbers actually went up and the prize pool through the roof.

Re: Your point about the tournaments running at a loss, by increasing the buyin they can increase the rake while their fixed costs stay the same. They also have the profit from their satellites which would go up with increased rake at every level. Finally, if they treat it as a marketing expense, I would imagine that marketing gets more effective in line with an increasing first prize.

Re: Direct buyins, maybe they would fall slightly but if that shortfall is made up by satellite qualifiers then I don't see a problem. Besides, a bigger buyin would cast the net wider geographically, so any drop in local players could well be mitigated by direct buyins from further afield. Most people seem to find it offensive that they could be priced out of buying into their local UKIPT direct, but as lildave said, it's not like they aren't spoiled for choice at that level already (for most of the UK), and by satelliting in they might even get in cheaper and have a shot at a bigger first prize in a more prestigious tournament. I just think there's room for a bigger tour in the UK as well as all the small local tours, and really if stars aren't going to run it then nobody will.

[action man]

Ok fair enough, some good points there. I do think that EPTs are probably close to optimally priced at the minute, they have been bigger, e.g. Barcelona EPT was €8k in '08 when I played it and is now €5k, so I think stars have probably given it a lot of thought and chosen what they think is the highest point on the demand curve. I think we're still some way off that point with the UKIPTs though.

Re: the DTD 500 the dip in numbers last month I think would have had a lot to do with them running a big 150 starting on the same day as more of a double A-side than a traditional side event. Also maybe some hangover from the big £500k gtd the month before. When they initially upped the buyin way back at the beginning of the year, the numbers actually went up and the prize pool through the roof.

Re: Your point about the tournaments running at a loss, by increasing the buyin they can increase the rake while their fixed costs stay the same. They also have the profit from their satellites which would go up with increased rake at every level. Finally, if they treat it as a marketing expense, I would imagine that marketing gets more effective in line with an increasing first prize.

Re: Direct buyins, maybe they would fall slightly but if that shortfall is made up by satellite qualifiers then I don't see a problem. Besides, a bigger buyin would cast the net wider geographically, so any drop in local players could well be mitigated by direct buyins from further afield. Most people seem to find it offensive that they could be priced out of buying into their local UKIPT direct, but as lildave said, it's not like they aren't spoiled for choice at that level already (for most of the UK), and by satelliting in they might even get in cheaper and have a shot at a bigger first prize in a more prestigious tournament. I just think there's room for a bigger tour in the UK as well as all the small local tours, and really if stars aren't going to run it then nobody will.

great post totally agree.

[smashedagain]

Ok fair enough, some good points there. I do think that EPTs are probably close to optimally priced at the minute, they have been bigger, e.g. Barcelona EPT was €8k in '08 when I played it and is now €5k, so I think stars have probably given it a lot of thought and chosen what they think is the highest point on the demand curve. I think we're still some way off that point with the UKIPTs though.

Re: the DTD 500 the dip in numbers last month I think would have had a lot to do with them running a big 150 starting on the same day as more of a double A-side than a traditional side event. Also maybe some hangover from the big £500k gtd the month before. When they initially upped the buyin way back at the beginning of the year, the numbers actually went up and the prize pool through the roof.

Re: Your point about the tournaments running at a loss, by increasing the buyin they can increase the rake while their fixed costs stay the same. They also have the profit from their satellites which would go up with increased rake at every level. Finally, if they treat it as a marketing expense, I would imagine that marketing gets more effective in line with an increasing first prize.

Re: Direct buyins, maybe they would fall slightly but if that shortfall is made up by satellite qualifiers then I don't see a problem. Besides, a bigger buyin would cast the net wider geographically, so any drop in local players could well be mitigated by direct buyins from further afield. Most people seem to find it offensive that they could be priced out of buying into their local UKIPT direct, but as lildave said, it's not like they aren't spoiled for choice at that level already (for most of the UK), and by satelliting in they might even get in cheaper and have a shot at a bigger first prize in a more prestigious tournament. I just think there's room for a bigger tour in the UK as well as all the small local tours, and really if stars aren't going to run it then nobody will.

great post totally agree.

yeah good stuff as always. Which leg is likely to have most runners next year if there is not one at Dtd?

[Boba Fett]

Ok fair enough, some good points there. I do think that EPTs are probably close to optimally priced at the minute, they have been bigger, e.g. Barcelona EPT was €8k in '08 when I played it and is now €5k, so I think stars have probably given it a lot of thought and chosen what they think is the highest point on the demand curve. I think we're still some way off that point with the UKIPTs though.

Re: the DTD 500 the dip in numbers last month I think would have had a lot to do with them running a big 150 starting on the same day as more of a double A-side than a traditional side event. Also maybe some hangover from the big £500k gtd the month before. When they initially upped the buyin way back at the beginning of the year, the numbers actually went up and the prize pool through the roof.

Re: Your point about the tournaments running at a loss, by increasing the buyin they can increase the rake while their fixed costs stay the same. They also have the profit from their satellites which would go up with increased rake at every level. Finally, if they treat it as a marketing expense, I would imagine that marketing gets more effective in line with an increasing first prize.

Re: Direct buyins, maybe they would fall slightly but if that shortfall is made up by satellite qualifiers then I don't see a problem. Besides, a bigger buyin would cast the net wider geographically, so any drop in local players could well be mitigated by direct buyins from further afield. Most people seem to find it offensive that they could be priced out of buying into their local UKIPT direct, but as lildave said, it's not like they aren't spoiled for choice at that level already (for most of the UK), and by satelliting in they might even get in cheaper and have a shot at a bigger first prize in a more prestigious tournament. I just think there's room for a bigger tour in the UK as well as all the small local tours, and really if stars aren't going to run it then nobody will.

great post totally agree.

yeah good stuff as always. Which leg is likely to have most runners next year if there is not one at Dtd?

Is there a chance of there not being one at DTD?

[Doobs]

and why are we talking about 500 to 1k. this season the buy ins were 700, people complained about it when they were told it was happening, saying 500 was perfect. yet turn out was better than ever?

Just for simplicity, couldn't be arsed to work out the numbers.

They could double the amount of sats, but they wouldn't get double the qualifiers.

People have a set amount they are willing to spend of sats, it isn't a never ending pool.

Stars pull $15m out of that pool twice a year for the PCA and WSOP main. As far as the UKIPT is concerned, yes it is.

Then why aren't all the UKIPTs sold out?

Certainly the 2 I played (Nottingham and Newcastle) were at venue capacity. I would be very surprised if stars were bringing as many qualifiers as they feasibly could do. Are you seriously suggesting that stars can qualify 1500+ players for a $10k in the caribbean but couldn't bring 300 players to a £1k in England? IMO the UKIPT is a long way off from being as big as it could be, and at the minute it will be taking players from other medium buyin comps. Rather than being concerned about keeping the UKIPTs cheap enough for a certain level of recreational player, they could make the whole pie bigger. You have to look at the whole pie.

Quite clearly qualifying 1500 people from around the globe to the 2nd biggest $10k of the year that has a history and also happens to be in the Caribbean in January is obviously going to be a lot easier than qualifying 300 people to a £1k in some rain drenched corner of this nation.

@Aaron: Check the bolded part of my post quoted above for the same point made by lildave (made better by him admittedly) which you missed. And seriously no improvement in numbers or pot "for sure"? I don't know how you can both be so unambitious. What if stars put up banners in the client, ran some 20seat gtd sats on a Sunday, ran some of their 1r 3x turbo sats with seats guaranteed? They have probably 300k active players on any given Sunday, which is at least 50x as many as gcasino have on their skin, and probably 300x as many as DTD who fill up a 300 runner £500 buyin tourn every month through their satellite program. All numbers are off the top of my head but you get the jist, the possibilities are there.

My point still stands at why they want to change the buyin, when all is going fine and is only their third season.

I can appreciate that Stars could get more people into the tourney doing such sat programs like DTD, but you have to remember that UKIPT and pokerstars are running at a loss to run these events. There is perhaps lots of things they can do, but appreciate that they still havr to focus on other dynamic parts of their business is a must. Would you prefer 200+ runners at £700 buyin or just playing it as a £1k event? Furthermore, you have just said that DTD fill their tournaments eahc month, they don't. The last 500 got something like 180 runners. It's a prime example of why the buyin should not go up, comparing the old £336 to the new £560. The £560 making a overlay this month of around £10k.

Also perhaps a sat like you mentioned with a 1k buyin... You might make more runners, but the direct buyins will not improve. The £770 is just too much for some people, but I know numerous people who put themsevles out to play this (regs of the old £336) who are already at max buyin, but desperately wanted to play it. A 40% increase for sure would make a squeeze impossible.

Also, yet people mention increases in buyin, but why not put an increase on buyin of 40% to EPT's and WSOP's? Seems valid arguement to others, with a counter point.

What happens if it turns into a £1k buyin next season (it won't) and this topic arises this time next year, maybe we would increase to £1.5k? and the year after? Or maybe it would have a effect where they have to go back to £700, which would be a massive fail.

The 500 at DTD started on a Friday and not a Saturday.  That alone would account for the drop in numbers. 

[aaron1867]

Ok fair enough, some good points there. I do think that EPTs are probably close to optimally priced at the minute, they have been bigger, e.g. Barcelona EPT was €8k in '08 when I played it and is now €5k, so I think stars have probably given it a lot of thought and chosen what they think is the highest point on the demand curve. I think we're still some way off that point with the UKIPTs though.

Re: the DTD 500 the dip in numbers last month I think would have had a lot to do with them running a big 150 starting on the same day as more of a double A-side than a traditional side event. Also maybe some hangover from the big £500k gtd the month before. When they initially upped the buyin way back at the beginning of the year, the numbers actually went up and the prize pool through the roof.

Re: Your point about the tournaments running at a loss, by increasing the buyin they can increase the rake while their fixed costs stay the same. They also have the profit from their satellites which would go up with increased rake at every level. Finally, if they treat it as a marketing expense, I would imagine that marketing gets more effective in line with an increasing first prize.

Re: Direct buyins, maybe they would fall slightly but if that shortfall is made up by satellite qualifiers then I don't see a problem. Besides, a bigger buyin would cast the net wider geographically, so any drop in local players could well be mitigated by direct buyins from further afield. Most people seem to find it offensive that they could be priced out of buying into their local UKIPT direct, but as lildave said, it's not like they aren't spoiled for choice at that level already (for most of the UK), and by satelliting in they might even get in cheaper and have a shot at a bigger first prize in a more prestigious tournament. I just think there's room for a bigger tour in the UK as well as all the small local tours, and really if stars aren't going to run it then nobody will.

Points well made for sure.

Rake - I'd imagine venue would want more money with regards to higher buyin?

But really, do we need another tour? GUKPT/UKIPT/GPS/DTD/APAT & more.

[skolsuper]

Ok fair enough, some good points there. I do think that EPTs are probably close to optimally priced at the minute, they have been bigger, e.g. Barcelona EPT was €8k in '08 when I played it and is now €5k, so I think stars have probably given it a lot of thought and chosen what they think is the highest point on the demand curve. I think we're still some way off that point with the UKIPTs though.

Re: the DTD 500 the dip in numbers last month I think would have had a lot to do with them running a big 150 starting on the same day as more of a double A-side than a traditional side event. Also maybe some hangover from the big £500k gtd the month before. When they initially upped the buyin way back at the beginning of the year, the numbers actually went up and the prize pool through the roof.

Re: Your point about the tournaments running at a loss, by increasing the buyin they can increase the rake while their fixed costs stay the same. They also have the profit from their satellites which would go up with increased rake at every level. Finally, if they treat it as a marketing expense, I would imagine that marketing gets more effective in line with an increasing first prize.

Re: Direct buyins, maybe they would fall slightly but if that shortfall is made up by satellite qualifiers then I don't see a problem. Besides, a bigger buyin would cast the net wider geographically, so any drop in local players could well be mitigated by direct buyins from further afield. Most people seem to find it offensive that they could be priced out of buying into their local UKIPT direct, but as lildave said, it's not like they aren't spoiled for choice at that level already (for most of the UK), and by satelliting in they might even get in cheaper and have a shot at a bigger first prize in a more prestigious tournament. I just think there's room for a bigger tour in the UK as well as all the small local tours, and really if stars aren't going to run it then nobody will.

Points well made for sure.

Rake - I'd imagine venue would want more money with regards to higher buyin?

But really, do we need another tour? GUKPT/UKIPT/GPS/DTD/APAT & more.

Exactly, the UKIPT can step out of and above that bracket and fill another niche without leaving a big hole in the schedule.

Wrt venue cost, I don't know for sure but I think the venues pay for stars to bring their tour rather than the other way round.