No More Chop Chop Chop

caesars pal

With the greatest of respect to all our customers and anyone else who play our super sats to main events around the country I would like to say that for future events we will not be allowing cash deals when we are advertising for tickets to a bigger event.The reason for this is,we cannot use these events [ie] PP IRISH OPEN] [ IPC ] etc etc, as an excuse for buisiness. [eg],we had sats for the IPC and the PP IO and we have no players attending any of them.
This is not good for the club or the players who realy want to play in these events.In future the prize fund will be as advertised.That way people who want to play in these events will play the sats,regards
seamus.

Ace2007

wp, gg - about time some place did this

RoundTower

hear hear

LuckyLloyd

RoundTower wrote: »

hear hear

.

mdwexford

I agree with this.

connie147

I agree wholeheartly with you Seamus. We tell the players down here that the tickets are already paid for so theres no cash alternative.Seems to work.

PS: sorry to miss your event last weekend.Was away and didnt get back till Friday evening.

Connie

Flushdraw

Echo everyone's comments

bops

...but i've only got 3 BB's

Goodluck2me

isnt it the players money?

connie147

goodluck2me wrote: »

isnt it the players money?

Thats true Joe,but the tourney was advertised as a satt for the IO with 3 tickets guaranteed.Thats why people entered . I'm sure Seamus in Caesars Palace would be delighted to see 3 lads going up represting the club at the IO. When you play the IO satt on IPoker on Sunday night with 8 tickets, you cant deal with 12 players left where all 12 take money and no ticket.

Pre buy the tickets and give them out to the winners.(only exception being where someone has already won a ticket).

Connie

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

Fully agree, can never understand why people play these sats and then look for a cash alternative instead. If you do not want to play the IO then why the fck bother playing a sat into it

Ace2007

connie147 wrote: »

only exception being where someone has already won a ticket).

Connie

y play if u have a ticket?

connie147

[
Some peolpe do, as satt are a speciallity.I used to play them a lot on line for a monthly €200 tourney, once you win a ticket,the 200 goes to your account if you get in the tickets again. In a cheap buy in satt,its not difficult for a half decent player to make it to the top 10 approx.They're normally full of poor players.

RoundTower

goodluck2me wrote: »

isnt it the players money?

yes, and they have the choice to use that money to play a tournament with cash prizes, or to play a satellite.

Imagine a football club that qualified for the Champions League, this is worth €10million+ to most clubs. Would it be OK if they agreed to take the €10m in cash instead? Or maybe sell their seat to another team?

Flushdraw

RoundTower wrote: »

yes, and they have the choice to use that money to play a tournament with cash prizes, or to play a satellite.

Imagine a football club that qualified for the Champions League, this is worth €10million+ to most clubs. Would it be OK if they agreed to take the €10m in cash instead? Or maybe sell their seat to another team?

Requime4adream esq post

Goodluck2me

RoundTower wrote: »

yes, and they have the choice to use that money to play a tournament with cash prizes, or to play a satellite.

Imagine a football club that qualified for the Champions League, this is worth €10million+ to most clubs. Would it be OK if they agreed to take the €10m in cash instead? Or maybe sell their seat to another team?

ok so said team goes on to win the champions league and they recieve prize money, then UEFA say by the way that can only go to your youth team and grassroots football, we realise you won it, but they are the rules here. If you dont like it, just dont play in the Champions League.

Homer Simpson "You can prove anything with facts"

Im sure there are plently of metaphors and examples which could be used to illustrate the point.

I think the cash alternative should be there, as it means more people will play => potential for more tickets, you want a ticket then play on, if you don`t then take the cash.

I agree though that it would be nice for some clubs to have representatives, in which case, say that at least one ticket must be used from each satellite, therefore if they are heads up one player could maybe buy the other out as opposed to just chopping the prizepool.

bops

Paddypower requires 700+ runners this year to make the Prizepool - they rely heavily (as in 80/90%) on satt entries

clubs use the pull of the PP IO to attract players to their tournaments, the eg being that Caesars Palace wouldn't have 42 runners for a 330 game if it wasn't for the attraction of the IO

Therefore clubs are benefiting from PP without giving anything back to them (ie ticket sales)

it appears that the money/players has dried up considerably this year - there are less people playing the live satts and the people who play them are much more interested in the $$ than the tickets

i'd guess from the 42 runners in new ross, maybe 6/7 of them would have played in the IO if given the chance

Seamus, in fairness, guaranteed 3 tickets, if there was 45 runners, i think he would have insisted on a "no deal" policy, but as it happens, he saved himself €900 by the deal, who can blame him for that?

I would be interested in hearing what BCB/PPP have to say on the matter

RoundTower

goodluck2me wrote: »

ok so said team goes on to win the champions league and they recieve prize money, then UEFA say by the way that can only go to your youth team and grassroots football, we realise you won it, but they are the rules here. If you dont like it, just dont play in the Champions League.

Homer Simpson "You can prove anything with facts"

Im sure there are plently of metaphors and examples which could be used to illustrate the point.

I think the cash alternative should be there, as it means more people will play => potential for more tickets, you want a ticket then play on, if you don`t then take the cash.

I agree though that it would be nice for some clubs to have representatives, in which case, say that at least one ticket must be used from each satellite, therefore if they are heads up one player could maybe buy the other out as opposed to just chopping the prizepool.

why not just have cash tournaments then, why bother calling them satellites? First second and third prize $5500, you can buy absolutely anything you want with it. Here's the number for Paddy Power. The fact is there are cash tournaments all the time, sometimes for whatever reason people want to play a tourney where the only prizes are tickets to another tourney. And it's in everyone's interest to have more satellite qualifiers in the big tournaments.

Goodluck2me

RoundTower wrote: »

why not just have cash tournaments then, why bother calling them satellites? First second and third prize $5500, you can buy absolutely anything you want with it. Here's the number for Paddy Power. The fact is there are cash tournaments all the time, sometimes for whatever reason people want to play a tourney where the only prizes are tickets to another tourney. And it's in everyone's interest to have more satellite qualifiers in the big tournaments.

the tournament may have a better structure than theiir normal game, it may be a buy-in that they prefer?
Surely it is better for the average guy who wants to qualify to the IO or any big tournament that more runners participate, and whatever the winners do with the ticket/money shouldnt concern them.
If they win a "ticket" there is no reason why they shouldnt be allowed to take the cash value.

dannydiamond

goodluck2me wrote: »

the tournament may have a better structure than theiir normal game, it may be a buy-in that they prefer?
Surely it is better for the average guy who wants to qualify to the IO or any big tournament that more runners participate, and whatever the winners do with the ticket/money shouldnt concern them.
If they win a "ticket" there is no reason why they shouldnt be allowed to take the cash value.

I fully understand why these deals come about deep in these sats,but as has been said already if you want to play for cash,play a tournie with cash prizes and if you can't find a game with a better structure than a satellite then you aint looking very hard,same goes for concerns on buyin.
Fair play to Seamus for taking this stand.Coincidentally,today I had a conversation with another boardsie and the upshot was that if this trend of deals in satellites continues,then soon the numbers attending will dwindle across the country,in fact as Bops has already pointed out this decline is already prevalent.Then where would we be?Qualify online or not at all?Many players will not play live sats as more often than not no ticket is given out.Personally i'd like to have a choice. If this"satelite but not a satelite" trend continues eventually there will be no choice.
Well done Seamus and Connie who have already made clear their stance on future satellites,i'm sure this will have a knock on effect in card rooms across the country and as you can see from the positive response already this is clearly what the majority of players want,and isn't this what card rooms supposedly strive towards

RoundTower

If what the players really want is cash tournaments with a "better structure", it will happen. Instead it seems that some of them want to play satellites.

THEIRISHMOB

caesars pal wrote: »

With the greatest of respect to all our customers and anyone else who play our super sats to main events around the country I would like to say that for future events we will not be allowing cash deals when we are advertising for tickets to a bigger event.The reason for this is,we cannot use these events [ie] PP IRISH OPEN] [ IPC ] etc etc, as an excuse for buisiness. [eg],we had sats for the IPC and the PP IO and we have no players attending any of them.
This is not good for the club or the players who realy want to play in these events.In future the prize fund will be as advertised.That way people who want to play in these events will play the sats,regards
seamus.

"PP IO and we have no players attending any of them."

If your stuck for a player to play in the clubs name, Ill be more than happy seamus.

kakak1

dannydiamond wrote: »

as you can see from the positive response already this is clearly what the majority of players want

Personally when I play in a satellite it's a ticket I want.

However it would be wrong to assume "the majority" want tickets, maybe the majority of boardsies but no way do they make up the "majority"

A lot of these players want to play in an "expensive" well structured tournament & it's wrong to say there are plenty of these around, possibly in Dublin but not in the south east & many players do not want the hassle of travelling & possibly booking overnight accommodation thus adding to their outlay.

I still don't really get the argument here. If for example in New Ross the other night there was a guarantee of 3 tickets,any player who's there to win a ticket can simply refuse to do a deal & no deal can then be done. (I'm always on to do a deal in a cash tournament but might not be in a satellite).

By doing this the first 3 will get their prize of 3 x €4500 whether that be in cash or a ticket there's no difference.

It's wrong to assume players entered because they wanted a ticket to the IO. Many entered because they wanted to play a good structured tournament with a decent payout. (This was evidenced by the 5 way chop).

I really think you will limit your numbers if you offer the tickets only option. This is OK in Dublin maybe Cork where they will have sufficient numbers, don't think it's going to work in New Ross or Waterford. Be lucky to have 1 ticket on the night.

Anyway next time I play in a "Ticket Satellite" & if I reach the final table ( I know most unlikely) I will be announcing "No Deal" I'm here for a ticket.

bops

kakak1 wrote: »

Personally when I play in a satellite it's a ticket I want.

However it would be wrong to assume "the majority" want tickets, maybe the majority of boardsies but no way do they make up the "majority"

A lot of these players want to play in an "expensive" well structured tournament & it's wrong to say there are plenty of these around, possibly in Dublin but not in the south east & many players do not want the hassle of travelling & possibly booking overnight accommodation thus adding to their outlay.

I still don't really get the argument here. If for example in New Ross the other night there was a guarantee of 3 tickets,any player who's there to win a ticket can simply refuse to do a deal & no deal can then be done. (I'm always on to do a deal in a cash tournament but might not be in a satellite).

By doing this the first 3 will get their prize of 3 x €4500 whether that be in cash or a ticket there's no difference.

It's wrong to assume players entered because they wanted a ticket to the IO. Many entered because they wanted to play a good structured tournament with a decent payout. (This was evidenced by the 5 way chop).

I really think you will limit your numbers if you offer the tickets only option. This is OK in Dublin maybe Cork where they will have sufficient numbers, don't think it's going to work in New Ross or Waterford. Be lucky to have 1 ticket on the night.

Anyway next time I play in a "Ticket Satellite" & if I reach the final table ( I know most unlikely) I will be announcing "No Deal" I'm here for a ticket.

nice post - it all makes perfect sense to me

kakak1

bops wrote: »

nice post - it all makes perfect sense to me

Oh !! thought it might be beyond your comprehension

bops

kakak1 wrote: »

Oh !! thought it might be beyond your comprehension

at least you're not licking BigSlicks/BlazinAces asses for once - do you have shares??

kakak1

bops wrote: »

at least you're not licking BigSlicks/BlazinAces asses for once - do you have shares??

licking kellys ass :eek::eek::eek:

bops

kakak1 wrote: »

licking kellys ass :eek::eek::eek:

he might let you off with the reg fee if you did?

LuckyLloyd

The problem concerns the fact that one player then has to actively refuse a deal in order to play on for the prize appropriate to the competition. This shouldn't be neccesary, and it is unfair to place that pressure on someone's shoulders.

Finally, and we all know it shouldn't happen, if you have 4 players remaining and only one of them is against a cash deal it can create a dynamic that puts that player at a significant disadvatage.

EXAMPLE:

I travel to New Ross for a sat. I get down to the final four and the other three are locals who have no interest in the two tickets on offer but wish to cut up the cash. I refuse and insist on playing on for a ticket. There now is a non - zero percentage chance that I don't get a fully fair game until the completion of the tournament wouldn't you agree?

bops

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The problem concerns the fact that one player then has to actively refuse a deal in order to play on for the prize appropriate to the competition. This shouldn't be neccesary, and it is unfair to place that pressure on someone's shoulders.

Finally, and we all know it shouldn't happen, if you have 4 players remaining and only one of them is against a cash deal it can create a dynamic that puts that player at a significant disadvatage.

EXAMPLE:

I travel to New Ross for a sat. I get down to the final four and the other three are locals who have no interest in the two tickets on offer but wish to cut up the cash. I refuse and insist on playing on for a ticket. There now is a non - zero percentage chance that I don't get a fully fair game until the completion of the tournament wouldn't you agree?

very true Lloyd, that is why these matters should be addressed and agreed prior to the tournament commencing

doke

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The problem concerns the fact that one player then has to actively refuse a deal in order to play on for the prize appropriate to the competition. This shouldn't be neccesary, and it is unfair to place that pressure on someone's shoulders.

Finally, and we all know it shouldn't happen, if you have 4 players remaining and only one of them is against a cash deal it can create a dynamic that puts that player at a significant disadvatage.

EXAMPLE:

I travel to New Ross for a sat. I get down to the final four and the other three are locals who have no interest in the two tickets on offer but wish to cut up the cash. I refuse and insist on playing on for a ticket. There now is a non - zero percentage chance that I don't get a fully fair game until the completion of the tournament wouldn't you agree?

Where non-zero approaches 100 in my experience.

Agree completely with you on this point.

THEIRISHMOB

Hey Bops..........

U goin to New Ross tonight for a cash game?

bops

THEIRISHMOB wrote: »

Hey Bops..........

U goin to New Ross tonight for a cash game?

have a look at the top righthand corner of your screen - Private Messages!

anyways i'll be down at 10

eidt - don't forget tesco receipt

TheRock

kakak1 wrote: »

Personally when I play in a satellite it's a ticket I want.

However it would be wrong to assume "the majority" want tickets, maybe the majority of boardsies but no way do they make up the "majority"

A lot of these players want to play in an "expensive" well structured tournament & it's wrong to say there are plenty of these around, possibly in Dublin but not in the south east & many players do not want the hassle of travelling & possibly booking overnight accommodation thus adding to their outlay.

I still don't really get the argument here. If for example in New Ross the other night there was a guarantee of 3 tickets,any player who's there to win a ticket can simply refuse to do a deal & no deal can then be done. (I'm always on to do a deal in a cash tournament but might not be in a satellite).

By doing this the first 3 will get their prize of 3 x €4500 whether that be in cash or a ticket there's no difference.

It's wrong to assume players entered because they wanted a ticket to the IO. Many entered because they wanted to play a good structured tournament with a decent payout. (This was evidenced by the 5 way chop).

I really think you will limit your numbers if you offer the tickets only option. This is OK in Dublin maybe Cork where they will have sufficient numbers, don't think it's going to work in New Ross or Waterford. Be lucky to have 1 ticket on the night.

Anyway next time I play in a "Ticket Satellite" & if I reach the final table ( I know most unlikely) I will be announcing "No Deal" I'm here for a ticket.

Perfect sense Dave.
I dont see the issue here really, the players involved should be able (allowed) to decide amoungst themselves.
If you say ticket only you will (IMO) definitely reduce numbers.
If a player wants a ticket he could offer to buy out the others.

Also you might enter the tournie hoping to win a ticket, but your priorities might change, as because due to either low stack, tiredness, sickness, fedup, need to be home for work in 2 hours, or whatever, your now more than happy to take a split.

I'm Pro-Choice (the players involved should be deciding).

THEIRISHMOB

bops wrote: »

have a look at the top righthand corner of your screen - Private Messages!

anyways i'll be down at 10

eidt - don't forget tesco receipt

have a look at the top righthand corner of your screen - Private Messages!

Dont have any messages........!!!

bops

THEIRISHMOB wrote: »

have a look at the top righthand corner of your screen - Private Messages!

Dont have any messages........!!!

lol you are some muppet