NAPC Satellite Interest

North American Poker Championship Fallsview Resort Casino
Niagara Falls, Canada October 10 – 16, 2008

Hopefully I'm starting this thread early enough to get enough people. I think it came up last year but it didn't go.

I am just wondering if there is enough forumers who would be willing to play in a 20-40 player rake-free home game type satellite to this years NAPC. I don't want to figure out any logistics such as date, format, host, money handling, and distribution.

I just want to know who's willing to to fork out $300-$500 for a satellite.

I would be interested. Anyone else?
«1

Comments

  • Probably do better with some lower sats of $100-$150 to a bigger sat IMO.
  • I definitely plan on trying to qualify for this year's event. But if you are doing a homegame sat with 20 players for $500, you can just go to the casino and play in their $650 x 20, which run at the casino on Saturdays I believe, once the sats start running. The levels aren't too bad, and the quality of play isn't too great.

    I would be interested in any home-game stats that give spots into the $1,200 qualifying games at FV. For those, all you need is 10 guys willing to put in $120... and then you can have cash games afterwards. I think the forum member The Game held a bunch of these last year, and I would be into going to them if he does again...

    AK
  • what he said would interest me
  • GTA Poker wrote: »
    what he said would interest me

    +1. I rather sat into the $1200 at FV to play against players that aren't as good as oppose to paying $500 or so to play against forum members (all who we assume to be at least semi-decent)
  • westside8 wrote: »
    +1. I rather sat into the $1200 at FV to play against players that aren't as good as oppose to paying $500 or so to play against forum members (all who we assume to be at least semi-decent)

    Good point.

    My intent was to have one person guaranteed to play in the event rather than into another satellite.
  • What about having a single table once a week/twice a month/once a month for the $1200. $150x10 = $1500 -- 1st seat. 2nd/3rd money back?
  • I would be interested.
    Beats playing bingo in the lower sats at FV.
  • We could run a few satellites to get $1200 prizes.

    What do you guys think of multiple forumers playing the same $1200 satellite? I could see how some people might be worried about collusion/chip dumping etc, but it increases the chances of one of us getting to play in the event.
  • I like this idea. I'd even be willing to host one or two of them at my place.
  • Quimby wrote: »
    We could run a few satellites to get $1200 prizes.

    What do you guys think of multiple forumers playing the same $1200 satellite? I could see how some people might be worried about collusion/chip dumping etc, but it increases the chances of one of us getting to play in the event.

    Just run a SnG with $1200 as first prize and the winner must use it for a $1200 satellite. When the winner plays it is up to that individual. Why must we force decent players to play in the same table? If you really want to emphasis that one of "us" is playing in the event, I can guarantee you there will be players from this forum that will be playing in the event.
  • I am interested in both playing and helping organize WPT/WSOP satellites. Having played in a a lot of big-event satellites, including at AcidJoe, Zithal, The_Game, clubs and the three Niagara casinos, below are my suggestions:

    1) Any rake-free satellite that has a decent amount of play is obviously much better than any raked casino or club satellite. All the raked clubs I know that tried to have a WPT seat satellite have had one big problem or another.
    2) Simulate the tournament in which the winner will be playing as much as possible, e.g., have the same blind structure and starting chips.
    3) If many of the participants know each other, it is a good idea to have a shared percentage of any eventual winnings. The player that is good enough to win against forum sharks has a good chance at Fallsview.
    4) In case there is enough interest, I am personally interested in $500-$1200 satellites. Instead of 10-20 forumers playing the ~$640/$1200 satellite at the casino with a total rake of $500/$660, it makes a lot more sense to have a rake-free home game with an extra $500-$660 in prizes.
  • BlondeFish wrote: »
    3) If many of the participants know each other, it is a good idea to have a shared percentage of any eventual winnings. The player that is good enough to win against forum sharks has a good chance at Fallsview.

    Never been a big fan of this. Do each player in the online satellites share the winnings of the eventual satellite winner? Allow the player who wins the satellite to decide what he wants to do in terms of his/her "shares". Just my opinion though.
  • Never been a big fan of this. Do each player in the online satellites share the winnings of the eventual satellite winner? Allow the player who wins the satellite to decide what he wants to do in terms of his/her "shares". Just my opinion though.

    I agree.
  • yeah, agreed -- i won't play any sats that involve the winner having to give up %age to other participants
  • I agree with the above.

    I might be the only one here with this view, but I definately would not want to play a satellite to a $1200 seat, which takes as long as the actual $1200 seat satellite.
  • i have no clue how long that would be but you make it sound longggg
  • This is a great idea, but there has never been enough interest in this forum for regular satellites or WPT leagues. The last rake-free home game satellite posted by The_Game on the forum last month only had two members sign up and it ended up being held in a club in order to get enough players; a non-forumer won and he will be using the money for Fallsview's WPT satellite and there is a shared percentage.

    There will probably be hundreds of players again at the casino that will keep playing the satellites just like the past two years, but very few of them ever seem to go on this forum. ??? I played in a WSOP league that had sent a dozen players to the WSOP/WPT over many seasons, but of the 60-70 regular players, I think I was the only member of this forum.
    GTA Poker wrote: »
    What about having a single table once a week/twice a month/once a month for the $1200. $150x10 = $1500 -- 1st seat. 2nd/3rd money back?
  • MarcoGD wrote: »
    I like this idea.

    The collusion or the chip dumping?




    I'd be up for a 150-200 sat.
  • I believe the $1,200 satellites at Fallsview usually finished by level 9 or 10 for an actual playing time of 4-5.5 hours (excluding the long waiting time of having a table available and having the first hand dealt, plus one or two breaks). Are you saying that you don't want a tournament with a $1,200 first prize to offer more than four hours of play for the final two players? Players who bust out early can play in a side game or leave immediately if they want.
    actyper wrote: »
    I might be the only one here with this view, but I definately would not want to play a satellite to a $1200 seat, which takes as long as the actual $1200 seat satellite.
  • I would be interested in playing either a direct satellite to the main event or to FV satellites.

    I don't mind paying a percentage to the eventual winner, since they probably wouldn't be going without everyones donation.

    I just wanted to bring this up now so that people had a few months to save up some $$$ if we could organize a game with enough people.
  • 800OVER wrote: »
    The collusion or the chip dumping?




    I'd be up for a 150-200 sat.

    The home game satellite idea.
  • I am also willing to be flexible. Getting enough players for any rake-free satellite last year was hard enough so if people have inflexible conditions on what kind of forum satellite they will show up for, then we will all be stuck driving to Fallsview spending hundreds of dollars extra in rake. I would be much more worried about what the new Fallsview format will be than the format of a rake-free satellite.
    Quimby wrote: »
    I would be interested in playing either a direct satellite to the main event or to FV satellites.
    I don't mind paying a percentage to the eventual winner, since they probably wouldn't be going without everyones donation.
  • count me in Quimby
  • i am definitely interested in a 100-150 sat into a 640 or 1200 sat.

    i'd much rather play for 3-4 hours to win this than some kind of bingofest.

    i don't mind giving up some small % to those who put up the money for the seat.

    i would play in something like this every couple weeks. especially if there was a cash game along with it...
  • Deleted
  • 13CARDS wrote: »
    Still seems to be a lot of assumption of either a $640 or $1,200 satellite....

    This thread is for interest only. People are indicating what buy-ins they can play.

    We'll figure out what satellites we'll play by ourselves once you finalize them.
  • I think it's a good idea to organize this early. I find that a lot of the home tournaments are held within a week and a few days. Personally, I check this forum infrequently and a lot of times I would've joined but didn't see it till the night before or even afterwards.

    Having some concrete dates (well in advance), location, buy-ins, structure, and any stipulations for the winner would definitely garner more participation in my opinion. All this information would ideally be in the opening post of the thread (updated as needed) and the thread would be bumped regularly for all to see.

    Actually to be more proactive, I say for all who are interested post their preferences to get this started:

    Availability - Friday nights and weekends
    Location - Oakville (~50 km radius from there)
    Max buy-in - ~$200
    Have a percentage of winner - neutral (but leaning towards none)

    This info can then be used by the organizer(s) to set up a tournament.
  • 13CARDS wrote: »
    Still seems to be a lot of assumption of either a $640 or $1,200 satellite....

    Has Fallsview decided anything on the their satellite structure yet? Just curious...
  • Deleted
Sign In or Register to comment.