UKIPT Season 3 Feedback

[NigDawG]

don't think the jump from £700 to £1k is going to make all that much difference to field numbers tbh. stars can and will satellite as many players as they want. which is what makes it completely different to the gukpt

[The Camel]

don't think the jump from £700 to £1k is going to make all that much difference to field numbers tbh. stars can and will satellite as many players as they want. which is what makes it completely different to the gukpt

This simply is not true.

Either they have to double the cost of sats or halve the the number of qualifiers. (talking about going from 500 to 1000 obviously).

The higher the entry fee the tougher the field.

[NigDawG]

lol why can't they double the number of satellites?

[NigDawG]

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?

[The Camel]

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.

[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.

[NigDawG]

yeh i didn't mean that would double the qualifiers. stars have the platform in place to qualify as many players as they basically want to was my point.

[The Camel]

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?

Stars obviously spend alot of time working out the best buyin.

I would prefer £500 myself.

[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.

[aaron1867]

Lol.

Making the buyin bigger doesn't make the comp bigger, it's not even set in stone that it would make more money. The UKIPT is doing great, so why change buyin. As for what's difference between 700 and 1000 is just LOL.

I would be highly disappointed to see the buyin change. Just greed, for sure.

[The Camel]

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.

The qualifiers they have now just don't generate the action!

They have only 160 qualifiers for Bristol next week. And that is with sats running every day for a month.

Many of the sats to the qualifiers have 1 or 2 tables.

[MC]

Lol.

Making the buyin bigger doesn't make the comp bigger, it's not even set in stone that it would make more money. The UKIPT is doing great, so why change buyin. As for what's difference between 700 and 1000 is just LOL.

I would be highly disappointed to see the buyin change. Just greed, for sure.

Just because it suits you personally doesn't mean there isn't a viable argument for increasing the buy-in besides ''greed".

(triple quote was an iPhone misclick, my bad)

[aaron1867]

Lol.

Making the buyin bigger doesn't make the comp bigger, it's not even set in stone that it would make more money. The UKIPT is doing great, so why change buyin. As for what's difference between 700 and 1000 is just LOL.

I would be highly disappointed to see the buyin change. Just greed, for sure.

Lol.

Making the buyin bigger doesn't make the comp bigger, it's not even set in stone that it would make more money. The UKIPT is doing great, so why change buyin. As for what's difference between 700 and 1000 is just LOL.

I would be highly disappointed to see the buyin change. Just greed, for sure.

Lol.

Making the buyin bigger doesn't make the comp bigger, it's not even set in stone that it would make more money. The UKIPT is doing great, so why change buyin. As for what's difference between 700 and 1000 is just LOL.

I would be highly disappointed to see the buyin change. Just greed, for sure.

Just because it suits you personally doesn't mean there isn't a viable argument for increasing the buy-in besides ''greed".

It does neither. I can still play it either way, but I would choose not to if it happened.

It just doesn't need to happen and doesn't make the tourney bigger because of increased buyin.

[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.

The qualifiers they have now just don't generate the action!

They have only 160 qualifiers for Bristol next week. And that is with sats running every day for a month.

Many of the sats to the qualifiers have 1 or 2 tables.

If stars engaged their hype machine, the evidence suggests that they would be able to fill a bigger tournament many times over. Maybe Bristol as a venue is so repulsive that they genuinely can't, however I very much doubt it.

[NigDawG]

Lol.

Making the buyin bigger doesn't make the comp bigger, it's not even set in stone that it would make more money. The UKIPT is doing great, so why change buyin. As for what's difference between 700 and 1000 is just LOL.

I would be highly disappointed to see the buyin change. Just greed, for sure.

it's cool that you are happy with it, but i'm not. i spoke up and gave my feedback.

italian poker tour ran €2k with re-entry main event and had €200k ftw and I'm asking myself well why can't stars offer me this on the ukipt. (obviously they won't just fire away with that here but we are now season 3 of ukipt and it's a little underwhelming)