What's hot- what's not

[Des]

Not all of us earn 1000 a week to afford to play 7 times a week jamo. I prefer last seasons rankings.

[BigPete33]

There isn't a good poker reason for the way it currently is.

Refer to Garths post about this, ( viewtopic.php?f=22&t=108&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=20 ) it's marketing plain and simple - and I can't say I blame them - but there seems to be an ever increasing number of players who are getting annoyed by it.

[Luke05(Jamo)]

Des u don't need to earn $1000 a week to play. so what people earn that much and choose to play??? i see that directed at me.???

[Des]

Yes I'm having a go at you.

You call me soft for not playing every night. Well sorry I dont live with my parents! I pay rent, car loan, other expenses.

At an average of $24 per night, I cant afford to play 5+ times a week.

[Luke05(Jamo)]

Yes I'm having a go at you.

You call me soft for not playing every night. Well sorry I dont live with my parents! I pay rent, car loan, other expenses.

At an average of $24 per night, I cant afford to play 5+ times a week.

ey when did i call u soft? just saying some peps like playing more why should they get penalised for playing more. like pete said 70% of people who play more than 4 times aweek won't even be in a top 5 any where, top 50 state give give the a chance to play in state.

[Grant Paynter]

I would rather it like last season.
If i got to game 25 and my avg was 33 and any bad games after that could bring it down.
That way i could do just 25 games and spread them out over 3 months and have a home life as well. LOL.
Not that i cant now, but with the way you can better your average without it going backward it is too easy if you play lots of games.
That way the top 50 is really the top 50.
Then you would be sitting on the edge of your seat on the last few days watching all the 24 gamers coming of age and puting you down the leader board.
More exciting also.

[BigPete33]

like pete said 70% of people who play more than 4 times aweek won't even be in a top 5 any where, top 50 state give give the a chance to play in state.

That's really not what I said but thanks for thinking of me anyway


Luke, not everyone a) has the spare time or b) can afford to just keep playing until they make the top 50. It's rewarding those who have the most spare time/money to spend, almost regardless of how good they actually are.

[Luke05(Jamo)]

like pete said 70% of people who play more than 4 times aweek won't even be in a top 5 any where, top 50 state give give the a chance to play in state.

That's really not what I said but thanks for thinking of me anyway


Luke, not everyone a) has the spare time or b) can afford to just keep playing until they make the top 50. It's rewarding those who have the most spare time/money to spend, almost regardless of how good they actually are.

I had no problem how it was last season. i am starting c what people are saying about the top 50 would be just full of the best players, just not full of people who have played the most games. but in saying that NPL is a Business and they are going to want people to keeping play at the pubs.

[Garth Kay]

This has already being discussed in a previous post, as Pete, has discussed.
1.) If you are a good player and only play 1 venue per week, don't you think that they should finish in the top 5 of that venue?
2.) The top 50 is a marketing tool, it is a way of rewarding those who do play continuously and through numerous venues. What you stated Cougar is exactly why we scrapped the old system, too many players stopped playing the last two weeks, as they had thought they had qualified and in that last 14 days there was plenty of movement on the leaderboard and all of a sudden those who thought they had qualified had found themselves out.
We also want people playing at the end of the season, irrespective of their ranking, to continue playing and trying to preserve if not improve their average with no impact if they do miss out on the points.
I have never once stated that the state leader board is a representation of the best poker players NPL has to offer.
I can count on my two hands the people I have played against that I would quantify as "good" players.
If anyone else would like to put forward a constructive idea on how to reward those players who do play 5 or 6 days a week, supporting the NPL and their locals, then please put forward that idea and we may then look to change the leader board system.
Next season will be ten weeks long and the minimum game criteria will be broken down to 15 games. It should be very interesting.
Also I have only received two emails in regards to the state leader board system and these two posts where there were about 10 people against. That equals 12 people who have written their criticism down and only 3 people who have spoken to me in person about it, no TD's have voiced any other disapproval. So that means of our 16,000 members, 15 people dislike it enough to voice their opinion:
That's 0.09% of our members. I'm sorry gentleman, I know we will never satisfy everybody's demands but the majority rule on this one.

[BiG ChRiS]

[quote="Garth Kay"]
I can count on my two hands the people I have played against that I would quantify as "good" players. [quote]

ME i hope