The annual State of Origin event is back with The Star hosting the event for the first time from Dec 4-5.
More information can be found here: http://www.pokerasiapacific.com/state-o ... 41257.html

Team announcements, discussion of the event and sledging of other teams can be posted here...

What do people think of the heads-up format for this event?

Had a discussion with someone the other day about the edge that an experienced professional has over a pub poker player in a HU format.

Assuming the structures are good, what % of the time do you think someone like, say, Jono Karamalikis will win a HU match against an above-average pub poker player.

I personally like the HU format, but it does take away the fun aspect of the Shootout tables, and imo makes it extremely hard to hide any weaknesses in a team.

HU format is great for the first round, final table is played out normally anyway and this means everyone in the team has to carry their weight in round one, weak players can't fold their way up the payscale etc.

A pro will have an edge over an amateur in any format and in any case, the state of origin is supposed to be the best players from each state going up against each other, no team is supposed to have any major weaknesses (and if they do, that's the selector/captain for that state's fault)

Generally speaking the % a pro will beat a pub player will depends on a) how bad the pub player is and b) how good the HU structure is but it'd range from 56-70% probably depending in favour of the pro (the easiest players to beat are the ones who play far far too passively and fold their stacks away, aggressive fish will still lose the majority of their games but their win % will be higher due to their higher variance style as opposed to the low risk grind down the tight passive fish 1bb at a time)

Assuming the pub player is remotely competent but with bad-ish fundamentals Jono or any good reg would probably win 60-65% of the games if the structure is 'average' - the top online HUSNG pros generally win 53-59% of their games but that's against a mixture of regs, semiregs and fish

Can't wait to crush NSW tomorrow. Should be fun.

This comment is pretty naive. Tasmania had 5 players from last year's team unavailable that are basically irreplaceable. We don't have the depth of other states, so weaknesses are inevitable. That's not my fault, or anyone's fault. It's just how it is, especially on three weeks notice.

Maybe we could've filled the gaps with pub poker players. As you pointed out, those weak players would have no where to hide in heads-up. They couldn't be carried or fold their way up the points scale. So the gap between strong teams and weak teams is even greater - is that a good thing for the event when you consider we had to withdraw?

This year was incredibly badly organised - for example, I thought the event was in Melbourne until literally a week before the tournament even after i'd been picked for my state, no one thought to mention to me that the event was in Sydney, luckily I hadn't booked flights.

As long as next year's event is organised with suitable notice I really liked the structure

For what it's worth this year's event was a lot more fun than last years, the format and atmosphere was great.

It's a shame it got turned from a 2 day planned event into a 1 day event making average stacks 8bb with 4 players left at the final table due to the crapshoot structure, that alone really hurt on the skill vs luck side of things, making additional changes to help 'randomise' the winner would hurt the event further.

I feel like yes, making skill more important than luck is a good thing, a team of pub poker players should not be able to compete with a team of the best a state has to offer in an event of this caliber. This is an invitation only event, not a public event. Catering to weak/casual players should not be a consideration. If a state can't get organised that's the state captain's fault. This year, it was the organisers fault for short notice but assuming we have 2mths+ notice next year every state should be able to put together a competitive team.

For what it's worth no state did better than 14-7 or worse than 5-16 in the HU phase (the latter was a team of pub poker players basically in team star who were there to make up the numbers after tas pulled out, the former being QLD and NSW who on paper were two of the strongest teams). Even with winning the fewest HU games, Team Star still outlasted a couple of teams at the final table. There's plenty of variance involved already just ask Team NSW (who got sucked out on then coolered to finish last despite coming into the FT as equal chipleaders under the existing format) - and I doubt anybody could argue that the WA team was one of the strongest four teams on paper in an eight team comp, yet they pulled through and won it all.