Feedback regarding the Westies FC Megastack held 26/07/2011

[wabbit999]

Hey

I just wanted to take a few moments to provide some feedback regarding this freeroll I played last night.

Firstly I thought the overall concept was great, longer deeper tournament excellent Idea, and I certainely appreciate 888 trying new structures. The prize for winning 2 tournaments at westies in a week fantastic (and suitablly pretty hard to do).

I'm sure Grant, Tara or whoever will sort out the blind structures in the next few weeks.

However, I also felt playing for voucher and/or $100 for up to what is intended to be a 5 - 6 hour tournament wasn't a great investment I my time. I would prefer it to be a buy in (say somewhere between $10 - $20) tournament if it is continue with 1 card for the first game and keep the second game a free roll with 1 card for that as well.

If i'm gonna be there for that period of time i'm gonna drink/eat but stamping up 4 cards to play both games (if you get knocked out early) is boarding on expensive and socially dangerous.

I play in one other venue with a deepstack structure, they have cards but you don't get extra chips for them, and part of the weekly buy-in is put towards the quarterly prize. It is I reckon one of the best places to play. I rock up pay my entry fee and I don't feel obligated to eat or drink but I do it anyway.

Something similiar could be looked at for westies.

I still stamp up 1 or 2 cards each week, if your card is drawn out u might win a free meal the next week or a bottle of wine, the other prize is into another free roll where the top few would be entered into the final.

There know would be those who don't get any stamps, the point is I go there to play poker and while i'm there I will eat/drink.

I generally believe that for a night out, it needs to be worth my while.

Although I'll continue to go to westies each week like I have for the past 2 years, I know i've been strongly considering simply getting my 8 away games and paying the entry fee for the Semi's. (i'm aware of others who also feel the same)

With the 60 odd runners that were there it was a good night. i don't think I can do it 2 nights in a row tho.

Anyway theres my thoughts on idea of a megastack game.... I hope its useful.

(Nanna nap time now)

[David]

On the bus so replying more later.

Agree with direct buyin to SFs though. To be it devalues the hard work in finishing top 5 (or 4) at a venue when you can just pay $50 to get in anyway.

Last night was good (despite the wabbit-heckling I received at the FT haha) and I had a great time. Could be improved but still has potential.

[BigPete33]

Let me know when it's hard work to finish top 4 or 5 please

Show up every week and don't play like a muppet and I think you'll find it's a doddle.


Not wanting to get too off-topic but if given the choice between sitting in a pub full of absolute smacktards or just paying $50 I know which one I'm taking.

[Garth Kay]

Thanks for the feedback gents.

First off, what was wrong with the structure? Was it not a 5/6 hour tournament? The structure needs to be fixed by me and not our TC's.

Secondly would all players prefer a buy in component (Please see HARPS' thread)?

Thirdly, how much does it cost to stamp up at this venue?

Finally, the finals process was implemented as a way of future proofing our competition and developing longevity of our leagues and maintaining prize pools. It was also decided that the game should be made accessible to the masses.

We are concerned with any development of the league, as the majority of them have some potential negative impact, but at the time of writing this our January numbers for SA and VIC have been the strongest they have ever been (in comparison to past years).

I will continue to listen to players thoughts and take notes, but I will not reach a conclusion until after the Season 1 Vic/SA semi finals and speak to players and staff and review all the numbers.

I personally would love to see a 600 person $50 buy in, generating a prize pool of $30,000. Who knows, we might need to make it a $100 or $200 buy in further down the track and make the game scoreboards more exclusive by just rewarding the top 1 or 2.

Food for thought.

[David]

Let me know when it's hard work to finish top 4 or 5 please

Show up every week and don't play like a muppet and I think you'll find it's a doddle.


Not wanting to get too off-topic but if given the choice between sitting in a pub full of absolute smacktards or just paying $50 I know which one I'm taking.

There are always decent players who miss out Pete. Happens everywhere (despite your view on the general player population!)

And I agree - it's an easy option. I just think it's too easy.

[David]

Thanks for the feedback gents.

First off, what was wrong with the structure? Was it not a 5/6 hour tournament? The structure needs to be fixed by me and not our TC's.

Secondly would all players prefer a buy in component (Please see HARPS' thread)?

Thirdly, how much does it cost to stamp up at this venue?

Finally, the finals process was implemented as a way of future proofing our competition and developing longevity of our leagues and maintaining prize pools. It was also decided that the game should be made accessible to the masses.

We are concerned with any development of the league, as the majority of them have some potential negative impact, but at the time of writing this our January numbers for SA and VIC have been the strongest they have ever been (in comparison to past years).

I will continue to listen to players thoughts and take notes, but I will not reach a conclusion until after the Season 1 Vic/SA semi finals and speak to players and staff and review all the numbers.

I personally would love to see a 600 person $50 buy in, generating a prize pool of $30,000. Who knows, we might need to make it a $100 or $200 buy in further down the track and make the game scoreboards more exclusive by just rewarding the top 1 or 2.

Food for thought.

Definitely would have preferred a buy in last night. I worked very hard and in the end finished 6th.. first got $100? or $50? Second was a 6 pack.

Greens probably stayed in longer than they needed to be, courtesty of the ante amounts.

I would have suggested a 10k start and 5k for each card - but as it was, the chip leader had 30 BB on the final table.

[David]

I personally would love to see a 600 person $50 buy in, generating a prize pool of $30,000. Who knows, we might need to make it a $100 or $200 buy in further down the track and make the game scoreboards more exclusive by just rewarding the top 1 or 2.

That's better already! Well the amount anyway


Many venues do have a real competition amongst their players though, so many places I've been to for the first time, there's a list printed out, there's talk of "is so and so still in" etc, because they want to finish top 5. Taking that away and rewarding just one or two takes that aspect out of it. The whole idea of a top 5 (from what I remember) was to make people come back to the same venues each week and play consistently. I don't see a need to reverse that.

[Garth Kay]

Many venues do have a real competition amongst their players though, so many places I've been to for the first time, there's a list printed out, there's talk of "is so and so still in" etc, because they want to finish top 5. Taking that away and rewarding just one or two takes that aspect out of it. The whole idea of a top 5 (from what I remember) was to make people come back to the same venues each week and play consistently. I don't see a need to reverse that.

You may not, but in a contracting market with price pressure (thanks to idiots who think that offering a cheaper product is the best way to run a business), budgets dictate otherwise.

I understand completely what you are saying, and it is a system that had to be implemented considering we wanted to maintain some sembelance of a large state final (Semi Final), offer regional finals (Quarter finals) all at the same time as reducing our overheads and prize pool liabilities.

I will always be upfront with why we do things, and in this case it is with a view to offer accessibility to all players, open up regional finals again (and to a greater audience) and create player funded prize pools.

I would love to give the top 5 tickets to a $100 final; but that would mean we are guaranteeing a spend of $45,000 per quarter on finals prize pools, in SA alone. It is unsustainable.

I have some long term plans, and this direction we are taking has a final destination in my mind. At this time I like to keep my cards close to my chest as I am talking two year visions with a serious goal in mind.

In terms of repeat custom and loyalty; it is a loss but I am hoping to implement a full plethora of regular products that will increase the positive experience of playing 888PL.

[gundog]

I personally would love to see a 600 person $50 buy in, generating a prize pool of $30,000. Who knows, we might need to make it a $100 or $200 buy in further down the track and make the game scoreboards more exclusive by just rewarding the top 1 or 2.

That's better already! Well the amount anyway


Many venues do have a real competition amongst their players though, so many places I've been to for the first time, there's a list printed out, there's talk of "is so and so still in" etc, because they want to finish top 5. Taking that away and rewarding just one or two takes that aspect out of it. The whole idea of a top 5 (from what I remember) was to make people come back to the same venues each week and play consistently. I don't see a need to reverse that.

+1

However what the point now we can just play 8 games and buyin to the semi, so there's no reason to go back to the same venue week after week, unless you are a 1 venue town then you need to support it or loose it.

[Garth Kay]

However Gundog, there has not being a downward trend in any of your regional games?

Venues are continuing to be supported as much as they were previously.

Once again I understand the concern behind it all, but the truth is that you can poke holes in any proposed league or competition change, but only time will tell whether it was a positive move forward or detrimental to players, venues or the FullHouse group.