SHIPS

Old threads that are still useful, but take up space!
User avatar
Garth Kay
Posts: 7526
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:10 pm
State: VIC
888PL Name: suckoutmgnet
Location: Quite often in front of my laptop
Contact:

Re: CENSORSHIP

Postby Garth Kay » Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:25 pm

To Hans,
I have to agree with what Brett has already stated. How do we possibly try and attract more the once per week players to play even more.
If regional and state leaderboards are not enough to get more players to play, what exactly do we do?
With the new leader board system we have seen an more than 10% of regular game players increase their regular games by one more event. That equates to almost 1200 players that are now playing at least one more game per week that they did previous seasons. I know Cougar doesn't like my use of stats but unfortunately it is a factual concept.
That is a huge increase in such a short time and exactly what we were aiming for, as a business.
Of course we would like to see more increase in repeat business, the issue is; how do we go about this, what are our goals and what is the ideal system or promotion without damaging the integrity of the competition.

To Gundog,
There will always be an advantage to Metro players. There is no way around this and it will always cause problems for regional players when we run promotional leaderboards.
But regional players have an added advantage of playing for cash regional finals and/or regional leaderboards, no metro region has this option or return to players.
As to your suggestion of qualification to finals: we will not restructure the qualification process until it needs to be reviewed. State Finals are very popular with players, not just for the prize money on offer, but for the experience in playing a 600+ runner tournament. It is a big day and the showpiece of our season. I have previously asked player's opinion on a large tournament for state finals or a smaller field (harder to qualify) deepstack State Finals. The resounding response was for the former.
Something I am contemplating is making our state finals a two day deepsatck extravaganza, but again this might be a long ways off and even more of a detriment to regional players as it may become fiscally disadvantageous.
Out of our 140 events we run per week, 100 of them are located in the metro regions, we average 52 players per metro event. That leaves 40 events in the rest of regional SA that average 32 players. You can obviously see where we make the majority of our income so we definitely will continue to promote multi game playing quite heavily and we will not put any promotions into place that may see numbers in the metro regions decrease, no matter how slight a possibility this is.
But on another note we are looking to hold one "novelty" event per season in a regional area and a metro area, so at least once per year you will some different format or large tournament in the Riverland, Mid North, South East or Yorke Peninsula. Maybe Barossa Gawler if they behave themselves!!!! ;)

I am open to feedback on the above comments please.
Garth Kay

General Manager – Poker Operations
Full House Group


Mobile: 0438 234 816
Email: garth@fullhousegroup.com.au

User avatar
Matty Norwood
Posts: 1138
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:02 pm
State: SA
888PL Name: 24gunhand
Contact:

Re: CENSORSHIP

Postby Matty Norwood » Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:39 am

Barossa / Gawler allways well behaved :D :D

User avatar
AceLosesKing
Posts: 9557
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 10:26 pm
State: SA
888PL Name: Aces2Kings
Location: Updating my status.
Contact:

Re: CENSORSHIP

Postby AceLosesKing » Tue Mar 18, 2008 12:44 am

Garth Kay wrote:To Gundog,
There will always be an advantage to Metro players. There is no way around this and it will always cause problems for regional players when we run promotional leaderboards.
But regional players have an added advantage of playing for cash regional finals and/or regional leaderboards, no metro region has this option or return to players.


Yeah, exactly. There are a ton of more venues to play at in the city, being the CBD and all. The country is obviously going to have a lot less, and depending on where you live, that's just how it is.

Garth Kay wrote:But on another note we are looking to hold one "novelty" event per season in a regional area and a metro area, so at least once per year you will some different format or large tournament in the Riverland, Mid North, South East or Yorke Peninsula. Maybe Barossa Gawler if they behave themselves!!!! ;)


Hmm... details? Bit vague to get excited about anything from that.
Scott wrote:Seriously, how hard is it to get his name right.

Aaron Coleman.

User avatar
Origami
Posts: 1463
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:12 am
State: SA
888PL Name: .AAABK.
Location: NURIOOTPA in the BAROSSA VALLEY
Contact:

Re: CENSORSHIP

Postby Origami » Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:11 am

Garth Kay wrote:But on another note we are looking to hold one "novelty" event per season in a regional area and a metro area, so at least once per year you will some different format or large tournament in the Riverland, Mid North, South East or Yorke Peninsula. Maybe Barossa Gawler if they behave themselves!!!! ;)

I am open to feedback on the above comments please.



ohh them's fighting words :o

with Darren B and Matty N as the TH/TA in the Barossa Gawler region we have arguably the best and most expierenced
venue hosts in the State. Barossa and Gawler Region have proabably the most passionate and dedicated players in the State and arguably some of the best and deserve more consideration[ monies]
. I personally think the muted formation of City regional leader Boards as a step forward. This would only enhance the a fore mentioned statements.. Using Regional playoffs and the winners qualifying toward State Final entry...Having 700-800 runners I think takes away the prestige of playing in the 'lottery 'of the State Finals.

Using only the Top three from each venue 140 x 3 = 420 runners plus Regional top three winners 15 X 3 45 gives 460 runner to win the monies.

I know its only tweaking the edges of the existing structure but being one of the State final masses dont quite feel as good as qualifying against others.

second food for thought '' have 3 x15 wk seasons or even 4 x 12 weeks seasons --- ( I know 50 weeks a year maximizes 'take' but a week respite for finals/ novelty events may be more desirable to the runners.
..ImageImage..Image

User avatar
Garth Kay
Posts: 7526
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:10 pm
State: VIC
888PL Name: suckoutmgnet
Location: Quite often in front of my laptop
Contact:

Re: CENSORSHIP

Postby Garth Kay » Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:33 am

Ten weeks is here to stay Brucie.
We have been running poker for almost three years now in Vic and even longer in NSW, many things have been trialled and the ten week season is the best in terms of the market and what the majority of players want.
So who else is for a smaller state final, I know the majority of poker players on this site would be, but realistically?

Ok so next season we will trial top 3 from each venue and top 20 from the State Leaderboard.
140 x 3= 420 + 20 = 440
Top 5 from each regional (either via leaderboard or final) = 5 x 12 = 60

500 qualifiers means about 400 players on the day.
Seriously, who is happy with this?
It probably will never happen until I can get Vic to agree with it, but there Finals only attract 400 max as it is now.
Garth Kay

General Manager – Poker Operations
Full House Group


Mobile: 0438 234 816
Email: garth@fullhousegroup.com.au

User avatar
AceLosesKing
Posts: 9557
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 10:26 pm
State: SA
888PL Name: Aces2Kings
Location: Updating my status.
Contact:

Re: CENSORSHIP

Postby AceLosesKing » Tue Mar 18, 2008 2:17 am

Garth Kay wrote:Ok so next season we will trial top 3 from each venue and top 20 from the State Leaderboard.
140 x 3= 420 + 20 = 440
Top 5 from each regional (either via leaderboard or final) = 5 x 12 = 60


I like top 5 from each venue. Take that away and you're going to get complaints. State leaderboard, doesn't affect me but I can see the same thing, getting complaints. I like the idea of top 5 from each region going through.

Garth Kay wrote:500 qualifiers means about 400 players on the day.
Seriously, who is happy with this?
It probably will never happen until I can get Vic to agree with it, but there Finals only attract 400 max as it is now.


Really? Vic only get 400? Is that because of your proposed system above, or do they just not get the numbers?
Scott wrote:Seriously, how hard is it to get his name right.

Aaron Coleman.

User avatar
bennymacca
Moderator
Posts: 16623
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:30 am
State: SA
888PL Name: bennyjams
Location: In your poker Nightmares
Contact:

Re: CENSORSHIP

Postby bennymacca » Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:48 am

all i can say is, why change a good thing?

the NPL is obviously going great guns, (especially compared to other unknamed leagues), so why keep tinkering with the format?

it will end up like the AFL where everyone gets pissed because they keep changing things every week.

i love it the way it is now - but a special/novelty event per season would be a welcome addition.

Garth Kay wrote:Maybe Barossa Gawler if they behave themselves!!!! ;)


we are the most passionate region in the state, and u know it :D
Check out The Rail, the only podcast dedicated to Australian Pub Poker! http://www.therail.com.au.
Once you have done that, follow the Rail Podcast on Twitter, Facebook!, and iTunes!

Follow Me on Twitter

User avatar
BigPete33
Moderator
Posts: 5915
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 6:08 pm
State: SA
888PL Name: FarmAnimal
Contact:

Re: CENSORSHIP

Postby BigPete33 » Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:19 am

I quite like the top 5.

If you reduced it to top 3 I think that might affect numbers at the end of each season, and I'm pretty sure that's something you'd want to avoid.
Pardon me, but I think you'll find that's a shovel. See you next Tuesday!

Luke05(Jamo)
Posts: 1096
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:40 pm
State: SA
888PL Name: baseballjamo
Location: at your mum's house
Contact:

Re: CENSORSHIP

Postby Luke05(Jamo) » Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:27 am

i will stop playing as much if it goes to top 3
What do you mean, thats unrelated!

shark
Posts: 113
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:47 pm
Contact:

Re: CENSORSHIP

Postby shark » Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:32 am

If it meant a proper deep stack tournament (ie 10,000 start bank) then I would be all for a "top 3 qualify" system.


Return to “Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests