4king Teams - Aug season and onward

[scrawnybob]

hi all


as announced we will be holding the 4KSOP events over May / June / July so there wont be any team / individual leagues over that time

however the regular team / individual league seasons will start back shortly after the end of the 4KSOP - probably in August ...

however I really want to get more teams in the mix and more competitive leagues going with this.

Ive had a few suggestions on ideas for improving the team angle and also with best part of 203 months off from team games for the 4KSOP this is the perfect opportunity to make some more +ive changes ready for a new season

I've already considered things like scoring 30 places in each game instead of current 20 as this would help smaller active teams actually get scores for all / most players (in the same way that increasing from 10 places to 20 places helped)

Ideally I would really really like to get maybe 20 teams active even if that means possibly starting out with teams of 3 for a season or two ...

this would mean that we could have much much more hard fought leagues as most teams would be scoring something

then over time we could say allow all teams to add one NEW player or 3 new players to then get back up to 6 strong teams a couple of seasons later

basically I can see from a couple of leagues that once the team scoring side of a league becomes a forgone conclusion the entry numbers drop by a fair bit ... in the case of PKR league so much so that we dont get enough to run

I know we made changes season before last (positive ones IMHO) and many wont be keen (again) to make changes but looking at other sites team leagues ... we're just not getting the kind of involvement and numbers we should have from a forum of 9,000

IF we went for example to a 3 member team structure for at least one season this would have several upsides ... lets ignore the big increase in admin for me ;-)

it would mean more teams and more close scoring as most teams have 3 active members but most dont have 5-6 (this is really the root of the problem)

we could then either have a setup where new / newly active members would feel it possible to setup a 3 member team and be competitive ... whereas 6 is too many

this is exactly the same rational that we proved helped when dropping from 10 member teams to 6

my preferred goal would be to then build back up to 6 member teams for the next season BUT with a big caveat that the additional 3 members have to come from previously inactive members / members who didnt take part in the league season before ... this would encourage members / captains to make more effort to involve other members

and would also encourage previously inactive members to get involved as they would be able to join an active team and be competitive straight away

In short this is the kind of changes I originally wanted to make - root and branch overhaul but I accept that we had to do things in stages ... however I do thing this is worth doing / looking at

and NOW is the best time to do it with 2-3 month break over the 4KSOP being perfect time to do it

this way I really think in a seasons or twos time we could have achieved 120 member games at least at our more popular site leagues like Fulltilt & Bodog

basically my suggestion is we currently get around 35 entries to the Fulltilt games
and have 17 teams that are active to one degree or another - most are full but clearly not everyone plays otherwise we would have close to 90-100 in each game

if we had 30 teams of 3 that would be the same 90 but with probably half of those teams realistically not active ...

so you see what I mean at the moment we have some really active strong 6 man teams and alot of semi active teams where at best 3 play ... those teams need to feel like they can actually be competive with 3 scoring members, but at the moment they dont

if we theoretically ended up with 30-40 teams of 3 I would be suprised but I think this woudl make a big difference for the long term aiming to get to lots of active 6 strong teams in a couple of seasons

otherwise what will naturally occur without any changes is we will end up with 3 (maybe 4) strong teams again all making themsleves that bit better to try and beat the other 2-3 teams ... with the rest giving up before even starting

all suggestions appreciated

cheers scrawnybob

[pirates831]

i would like to see you have different teams for each poker site.

i play almost exclusively in the bodog tournaments. they fit my life's schedule. its kind of unfair to have a team of 6 and have 1 guy who only plays in 1 tournament a week.

probably dropping down to 3, i would isolate my team to simply 2 other players who commit to playing the bodog tournaments.

idk. just a thought.

[hojediade]

Hey Bob.

I'm not that much invest into the team contest but IMO, you should probably stop running it the way it used to.
If i was to manage it, i'll probably choose an overall team contest and not several contests.
Now you keep a full 6 players team and you only reward top 10 players in each tournament (21; 17; 14; 12 and so on...) Then you only keep best 10 perfs (less or more?) for each players, no matter what the room he played at. At the end of the season, you "only" (a huge work i guess) have to collect best 10 results for each of us and establish the final LB.
The only trouble is that we won't be able to know about standings during the season which might good for suspense.
This could run without annoying the individual LB dedicated to each room and permit to teammates to be playing on different rooms. Maybe something easier could be done as some nice tools already exist to manage leagues on web or if you're able to collect/track results into a .xls format.
Hope you'll be able to manage it a way that create a bigger emulation.

Hoje.

[Dan Abnormal]

Id like to get into your games, I watched the game last night at BODOG and very much wanted to get in.

When I get paid Im gonna put some money into my BOdog account for the first time and play with ya'll and hopefully inprove my game 10 fold.

[Logan]

Yep, i think that is the problem Bob.



i agree with teams of 3, but only if can have different teams in leagues, if we only can have same team in all leagues then is not fair for a team have me if can´t play all leagues because they only will have 2 active players in a league and again teams that will win are the ones that can play all 3 players in all leagues, pretty much like right now with 6 players, so the change to 3 will not fix much.

With 6 players at least if some don´t play in all leagues you can have 3-4 actives in games, but with 3 players only, if we can´t play in all leagues most teams don´t going to want players that only can play 1 site or 2, and at the end means less players in games, i know players that are free with out teams because can´t play all leagues.

But if you let players can have different teams means that my team can bring another player for a league i can´t play, they will have a full team, have more chance to fight with 3 actives and that player that you let play with them will be more active in games because now is part of a team, even if only play 1 league. If before you see that player in random games because don´t have a team and no team want him because can´t play all leagues, now can be active at least in there and play all games if feel compromise because now is in a team

I think you mention before that this will be very hard to acomplish because with mix teams will confuse you in leaderboards, etc. I don´t think should be that way. set a list where every one post his screen names in every league and team (like every season), but make it for league no for season. Post a bodog list and you will have all teams for bodog, same with other leagues, then you copy this list and paste in the leaderboard page of that league, this way you have who is with what team in all leagues, and at the time you have to made the score have in hand in the same topic of that league wich player is in what team.

I don´t see it very complicated, and now we have only 4 teams maybe 5 that are really full active, this way we can have more active players, more active teams and more competition in every league because all teams will be full in every league with really active players. If we can´t do this then teams of 3 will have only 1 or 2 actives on some leagues, and again if can´t play all leagues no one will want you.

If right now with 6 players you see results on the leagues, you also can see that if mix points from bottom teams (teams behind top4) and let then mix players for some leagues you will have other 4 or 5 strong teams wich will make top 8-10 strong teams all fighting for top 3. If brake the teams to 3 then you could have 16-20 strong teams but if we let can be mix in different leagues.

If stay the same with only one team in all leagues no matter the 30 places, this will only generate more sit outs because can get points with just registering, and yes maybe more teams get more points, but top teams that have 1 player or 2 that not play will be registering with out play because that will ganerate points, so don´t improve much.

Best will be let everyone play where they can. At least i see it that way, and from this point of view

probably dropping down to 3, i would isolate my team to simply 2 other players who commit to playing the bodog tournaments.

Pefect example.

Pirates can play mostly Bodog and going to focus only in that, but the 2 other players that will be with him then can´t fight in other leagues because with 2 won´t have a chance. But if we let the other 2 players be with other team also then you have 2 more players in other leagues=more numbers, wich means pirates and his team will be full 3 player active in bodog and also the other 2 players can have other player and be 3 player full active too in other leagues. Same with me and a lot of more players, wich wil make more strong teams in all leagues, more competition and more numbers.

If we let players have different teams i compromise to make a new team for next season, and my team could have 3 active players for any league (even if i not there in all leagues), if teams stay the same for all leagues but with only 3 players, then i can´t because is not fair to a team have me, that will only left them with 2 active players for some leagues.

[scrawnybob]

blimey you dont let up do you ;-)

you want half a pound of flesh and some ;-)

I half expected someone to point out that maybe some people dont play Fulltilt ...

simple answer on that one ... signup ;-)

but seriously I'd sort of seen this coming and I may try to fund some additional games at bodog maybe following the WSOP $1500 buyin non bracelet games and put on some $1 games there ... thursdays I guess would be a good choice

on the teams having members that only play in one league as they dont play other sites bur would if they could be in multiple teams - I kind of see the logic but it doesnt totally make sense

as there is already plenty of incentive to play in any of the leagues as an individual (the added money+ the top 3 places prizes ... amount to alot more than the team prizes) ... yet I dont have very many non teamed scores in any of the leagues ...

that sort of suggests the forum members are pretty set in their ways and will only play at site they already play

I accept the suggestion of lists / screen name posts etc - accept for the fact that we've been working along those lines for ages ... and amazingly still its hard to find alot of members screen names on sites etc ...

so more teams / multiple teams would be a total pain as people simply DONT update their team status as it is

I ve probably made a rod for my own back spoiling the forum with too much choice of sites already ;-)

I know other team leagues literally choose the site THEY can get the best deal with for themselves then dictate to the forum ... this is where the all new best in the world team league will be, signup to xyz poker room via our links etc etc

thats really what I should do but instead I fund games at 3 or 4 sites most people have accounts at already ... we could always restrict the team league back to a team only league at one site ??? or one league that is mixed but have other leagues as non team leagues ??

I think in that sense within the current leagues either you have to encourage you team members to signup to new sites and play more rooms & leagues OR teams need to target one league that they want to dominate

reall the only thing stopping a team playing all the leagues is US player restrictions + problems playing on particular days or commitments

again keep the suggestions coming

cheers scrawnybob

[Logan]

either you have to encourage you team members to signup to new sites and play more rooms & leagues OR teams need to target one league that they want to dominate

Exactly what is happening, we see full teams for some league but 2 or 3 only for other league, then you only have 3 or 5 full teams in each league that only fight versus rest of teams with only 2 or 3 players because they need to focus only in one league.

Not sure if you see it but this is the problem every season, and why we have same teams in top 3 or 4. If cut teams to 3, then we will have same 4 or 5 teams with 3 full players and rest only with 1 or 2 actives will be free because can´t play in all leagues. In other words, if you break again teams now in 3 with the thinking of teams of 6 making 2 teams of 3 (in teory having more teams), probably we will not see that, uk team will have a team of 3, bullets will have a team of 3 and all big teams will have a team of 3, but i don´t think we will see new Bullets team2, uk team2, vixens team2, Dk team 2, disturbed team2, etc, the other 3 or 2 players left in every team of 6 will be trow away (like we see in past season from 10 to 6, only Rounders make 2 teams (bullets and zero tolerance) the rest just cut players and leave 1 team) because no one want to make his own team. But i most clear that this is from a forum point of view.

From my personal point of view of course will be the best to break it in 3, because i can open a new team and "steal" 1 player from bullets, or UK, or any team and make a great team.

Question:the 3 by team is a idea, or is a fact?.

Can i start looking for my 2 players? LOL

[scrawnybob]

hi Logan

thanks for all the feedback - great that you and others are getting the ball rolling discussing this

yep these are just ideas at the moment - Im obviously interesting in getting the best decisions for the good of the forum within the bounds of what I can organise

ie I cant do games 7 days a week, at 7 sites all with $100 added ;-)

from memory when we had the 10 member teams it was at best a two horse race ... and meant a whitewash of one team winning most of the leagues with another team maybe winning one league

most significantly the other teams were miles and miles behind on scores

when we moved to 6 max things got a bit better and in the last couple of seasons we've ended up with maybe 3 different teams winning something

or if maybe one team wins two leagues ... they have become much tighter leagues and also there isnt a strangle hold on the same league from one season to the next ...

most significantly the scores across most leagues has ended up much much tighter with more teams actually genuinely in contention

maybe I am not seeing this correctly but thats what things seemed to be looking like to me

following that logic a move from 10 to 6 helped ... therefore a move to 3-4 would help again ??

I very much agree with you on the team restructuring - we DO need more people to step and be active as captains ... and active captains at that ...

I have been (positively) amazed at some of the members / captains etc moviativing team members and even having some sorts of side pots on best results within their own teams etc .... which is briliant

now that in itself means those teams are much stronger ... but I'm still not convinced that dropping to 3-4 team members (on a tempory or permanent basis wouldnt help)

yes ok so most teams will realistically cut out the "dead wood" (again) ...

but that WILL mean that say the stongest 2 teams who put out 5-6 players in two leagues will now only have 3-4 scoring and that those other four or five teams that had 2,3 or 4 active members (cutting out say 2 or 3 players) will then be scoring much more equitably ... afiaks that stands to reason

yes I accept we will end up "losing" players ... but they reorganise and setup / join new teams or they werent active in the first place ... I dont think we will lose active players only non active members

with smaller teams its fair easier for newly "ophaned" members to setup or join a team

for example (this post was half done and pirates as since posted see blow) Pirates is a perfect example having a very busy work schedule so would probably be looking to build that 3-4 strong team that can play Bodog games on Thursday or Sunday

so there you go there is a team that is specific but will be strong in that league

and there would be others doing team for other leagues and some doing teams who can do all events

I dont see motivated teams building a team where only 1 player can do league a, 1 league b and 1 in league c ... I know this is what you are suggesting could happen but I dont think it will

the other alternative would be to only score the top 3 results for each team - but thats really negative way of doing it ... I would much rather spend a bit more time to score ALL results or top 30 or top 40 results for all leagues

I think other forums team leagues are really strong becuase they have focus on ONE site and massive annual prizes with somesort of monthly qualifiers to a big annual (or bi-annual) final ... this is run at a perfectly good skin on merge ... but clearly they can do this from getting very very very high signups via them to fund these big prizes

I know they also have several individual player leagues at other sites ... which makes the admin easier .. as they effectively have only one set of teams to admin the same as us currently

I guess I am saying is

either we run multiple team leagues but with same teams

OR one single team league with one set of teams + separate individual leagues (no team)

I kind of like the fun of having team scoring in all leagues - but thats maybe just me ?

the key issue is handicapping (sorry bad choice of words) the very active 5-6 scoring member teams to enable others to catch up - if that means creating 3-4 member teams permanently or tempory for a season or two then I think that its worth it

I really am open to suggestions on this - but some ideas I can rule out straight away rather than letting the direction of ideas go in a direction that isnt likely to happen ;-)

cheers scrawnybob

[pirates831]

Bob

I'm going to respond to something you stated up a few posts about keeping the teams in all leagues and not isolated to one.

You say you think it is because we are comfortable and only like to play at one site. I will state my reason: I work 5 nights a week. That means when you hold a tournament at 5 p.m. Saturday at Full Tilt, I'm at work. I am off Thursdays and Sundays. That left me with Aced, which I had trouble depositing at, and Bodog, where I played regularly in the tournaments. So I'd like to have a 3-player team that can regularly show up at Bodog and actually have a chance to take down a title.

Its not that I won't play at other sites - and in fact, I do.

Plus, you can play in these tournaments without being on a team.

A 3-person team to me would be ideal.

[tking888]

i appreciate how your looking out for everyone. with all the complexities involved and bob doing most of the work and all of the funding....i say cheers to you and i will try my best at whatever way is decided on.