"First off, I think we should change how we view backee/backer relationships. It is a partnership, not employer/employee. The backee does not get a wage, is not guaranteed anything, and gets a 50% cut in most instances which is far more than any employee would get."

This is a really bad analogy imo. An employee generally receives a wage and other benefits and rights where as a backee receives a split of his/her profits which is a completely different scenario. Remember not all backees receive or benefit from coaching or other resources.

You have ignored my request for an alternative. When a backer puts up resources, times and money, and a backee steals money, what do you suggest we do?

And to your contract point, everyone knows this isn't legally enforceable. We're not taking anyone to court. It's an agreement that lays out exactly what is expected so that we can reference a signed document.

I do not want to derail this thread any further but I would just like to say that having been both backed and having backed players I do understand where you are coming from to a degree.

Thieves and scammers in the poker community should be outed and as long as these websites are reversible I don't actually have a problem of using them as a very last resort.

I am not actually arguing against your actions rather I am surprised that you (and perhaps other backers) include these sort of threats in your contracts. I would have thought that they would be counter productive.

In terms of my comments about how it would be positive to hear more feedback about backers, this was not personally directed towards you but having had dealings with a number of stables while there are some great professionally run stables I am sure there are also some poorly run stables which can be very exploitative of people and their dreams/lack of options.

Having more feedback about backers would help the well run stables and only hinder poor ones and I think would add some transparency to the process of which their is little at the moment.

Federman Centeno

Stars: federman88

We asked him to update his rail and he removed us on Skype and deleted/blocked his Facebook.

http://federmancentenoisathief.com/

first of all Alex from what i understand/have heard you run a very professional and organized stable. congratulations this is no small feat. i did not aim this post directly at you or anything (sorry for the lack of clarity.)

i personally find it laughable that horses send you pictures of themselves holding their passports. (glad u declined me for a stake after seeing this and the websites created.) however, this also serves as evidence that horses likely do not enter your staking deals with the intent of "rolling/scamming". unless they like seeing their face and personal info all over the internet and websites created about them.

through my backee career of about 1.75 years i can say that at my lowest point my makeup was about 15 000. i can honestly tell u that at one point amongst a full time university schedule/life problems etc that this was the NUT worst i have ever felt in my life. especially when pressured by backers etc. i made the stupid decision of signing into volume requirements which is basically another way of saying that one may not quit poker whilst in makeup. luckily i got my head back on my shoulders and grinded it out, however for some i could completely understand how this is not feasible.

very quickly "a partnership/encouraging/friendly business relationship" becomes an aggressive leveraged and one sided dictatorship. the contract does not tell the horse these negative consequences of big downswings it only advertises the glorious benefits.

when a horse signs an agreement they are not thinking of these horrendous pitfalls, they are thinking "WOW someone will pay for my grinding and i do not have to risk a cent of my own and they will move me up stakes rapidly etc." i think dropping horses in stakes lower than what they were originally signed for is glorified slavery. makeup is not debt. if we are referring to backing as a business which imo is a terrible analogy because this is not a business, it is investing in gamblers and turning it into debt when the gamble does not pay off. (essentially, one could argue it s not gambling etc..)

we can call a spade a spade here and say that you definitely do run one of the best stables online, and i am not knocking pocarr, or any stable for that matter. however, i just want some clear rules to be defined as to what is acceptable/unacceptable on behalf of backers, and perhaps some advanced warning for horses of the pitfalls and examples of deep makeup gone wrong/how to avoid this etc...

again this is more for backing in general, sorry for any inconvenience but i believe it is very important as i would like to protect and prevent future issues with this "industry"

also perhaps some sample contracts could be drafted up that are considered fair etc.. again, i apologize for any inconvenience.

i suppose an accurate analogy could be the backer is the business, and the horse is the commissioned sales person. where the sales person relies 100 percent on the income generated from their sales.

however, when the salesperson, instead of being fired, is told they must keep selling until they make up for their missed sales ?

The system sucks for horses but horses usually get staked because they don't actually have the funds to play and something is better than nothing..
I think the horse should always be able to make money , no matter the mu figure . This would probably require stricter selection of horses and stricter game selection . Its so demoralising to grind everyday when deep in mu and knowing its going to take a long time to ever get out of . Some system where the horse still gets a % of weekly/monthly winnings even when in mu is way better for horses morale and most likely he'll perform better too .

I am just going to address several points that have been brought up (may be a little lengthy). Ill preface my post with this...I am one of 4 partners in a staking business where we currently stake about 70 players, and over the past 5+ years, we have staked over 1000 players in total. We have been in business this long because we offer fair contracts and always try to do what is right for both the player and our business, which is why players stay with us, on average, for over 8 months, which is a stat that I am most proud of. Has every stake worked out perfectly? Absolutely not. And unfortunately, we have posted plenty of times in this thread as well. But with that being said, here we go:

1. Staking is absolutely a business. Staking is also a necessary service in the poker industry for players. However, like most small businesses, most stakers fail. They fail for a variety of reasons, one of which can be poorly managing players, and accordingly, they fail to get referrals or have players stay around for an extended period of time, etc...This is the free market system. If a staker manages his stable poorly, they will not be in business long.

2. There are standard staking rules that most stakers/players understand and abide by. However, a staker can create any contract they want. I can create a contract that says the player will get 10% of profits, and I will get 90% and that player must stay with me for 2 years. Obviously that is insane and no player will play for me, but again, that is the free market system (you will notice a common theme here). If a staker's guidelines/contract are not satisfactory to you, then don't sign the contract.

3. Makeup is a necessary part of the business to protect stakers from getting freerolled. No one likes when a player gets deep into makeup. The player obviously doesn't like it, and the staker does not like it either. If a player gets deep into makeup, it is up to the staker to manage that situation properly, which can mean using a variety of strategies and management techniques. Some stakers handle this situation better than others, and accordingly, the ones who don't, often times are the ones who fail, because again, that stable will not get referrals, long term horses, returning horses, or they just run out of money. The free market system in action! But also, it was mentioned that players are unaware of the pitfalls of makeup. Actually, it's something that is very straightforward and clear. If you are in makeup, you must clear it before receiving profits. So, if you are $100 in makeup or $10000, the same math applies. Yes, with 10k of makeup, other variables may come into play, such as life expenses, eating, and general financial pressures, and that is the job of the staker to manage that situation properly. But it is not a fault of the system. it is a fault of the staker and/or player.

4. The responsibility of entering into a good working relationship with a backer also falls on the shoulders of the player. It is your job to find the best deal for you. There are some really good staking operations out there, and there are some poor ones. Do your research before entering into a contract. Furthermore, if players do not read contracts, or abide by the rules, then they complain 2 months later...whose fault is that? If I write up my 90/10 contract in my favor, a player signs it, then asks why he is only getting 10%, again, whose fault is that? Again this is extreme, but that same example can be applied to players complaining about how things such as coaching, makeup, and any volume requirements are handled. As a staker, I do as much research as possible before signing a player to make sure they are not a potential scammer or have any past issues. As players, you should do the same research before signing on with a stable. As one more example, players come to us all the time asking for a stake for limits that they simply do not beat. You should see some of the applications I receive, from winning and losing players alike. Guys who may beat MTTs up to the $22s all of a sudden want a stake for the 109s. The funny thing is, there are some stables who will actually give the player that deal. Then when that player hits 20k of makeup, whose fault is it? I would say the fault is with both the player and the staker, not just the staker.

In regards to the websites that Alex has created for scammers, As far as I know, those websites have only be used for players who outright stole money, as you are not finding many players on the forums disputing what has been written. If Alex, or any other staker, get's out of line with those sort of tactics, then word will get out on this forum, players will stop playing for them, and their business will most likely not exist (hint: free market).

So I do not agree that there are an abundance of stakers out there abusing players. Sure, there are some badly run staking operations that will pop up, but for the most part, they are short lived and will fail. If a staking operation did exist where the staker ran an awful business and abused his players, then by all means, post it here. There is no union of staking groups that are colluding against players who speak up against stakers. I am a part of a Skype group with other stakers, and trust me, if a staker is screwing up, not handling a situation properly, or doing things wrong in general, he will be told as such. As stakers, we want to provide the best environment possible for players because that typically provides the greatest potential for profits and sustainability. Some provide a better environment than others, and ultimately, the ones who do it best survive, and the rest fail.

Ok I am done...

I believe you can accredit your high retention rate mostly to the fact that you treat horses relatively well. Perhaps maybe one day if other backers started taking into consideration the well being of their "employees" they would be able to realize this as well as the direct impact on the probability of their "business". However, I believe for the most part they will continue to worry about one thing: money.

I have not even began to talk about the actual things that I believe are wrong with staking but I will likely not bother mostly because cba. Perhaps others will do the work for me as I have been told several horror stories and other horses are likely just as aware as myself. (or so the skype logs would suggest.) At no point did I want to turn this into a berating of backers thread, more so to just outline some of the precautions horses should take when considering signing with certain backers. As well as some possible suggestions to help make backing/being backed more profitable and pleasurable. I believe if well thought and understood being staked can be the nut best option for a horse getting their feet wet in poker. However, if the suggested steps are ignored it can easily be the nut worst. In many cases I have seen the latter.

1. Ok, I was harsh I will agree that it is indefinitely a business. I also agree with why backers fail. However, backing is one of the things that has killed much of the profitability in poker. By allowing mass training and rapid spread of knowledge whilst providing the bankroll for those players that may have not possessed it in the first place. They may leave stake, coach their friends etc... (Besides the point.)

2. I agree as well. However, it is generally human nature to overweight the positive sides of a contract and underestimate the negatives. As well, people's lives may change without prior expectation. For example a horse may be a full time reg playing 1k games/month, and then have a family member get sick. All of a sudden 1k games is not feasible anymore.

A horse may also not anticipate the trauma of a big downswing upon signing a contract. For example they are not used to big swings. Or they may fail to anticipate unknown future large bills. Generally having a very epicurean approach as to enjoy now, worry later. Never in my worst nightmares did I think I could pile on 15k makeup at 33 and under tournaments. Add in the fact that quitting poker was not an option and I was extremely busy with life problems.

There is something seriously wrong when a close poker friend is contacting me with ~15k makeup and telling me that continuing with life upon clearing MU is a question.

3. I agree with you in whole. However, backers often fail to realize that this is their fault as well. If backers were able to critically analyze their staking abilities I think it would positively impact their bottom line immensely. For example thinking "this makeup was piled on because I had a guy backed for far too high of stakes when he was not ready and I did not give him the support needed to get him through the negative variance. Many backers think something along the lines of "horse is lazy, horse plays bad, horse doesn't play enough variance reducing games, horse plays too high." (Many may be true.)

4. I agree with you as well. However, stakers back hundreds of players. Players probably experience about 2-4 backers on average each. It is likely unknown by the player that they must research this before signing. (Another thing I believe should be more advertised.) It is also likely that the horse does not even consider that things can get "greasy" because they are the ones being given money. It is not possible to get scammed etc.. I am sure in most cases backers did not commit extensive research on horses when first starting out. This is a learning experience.

The natural instinct is for horses to argue for higher stakes, and backers to argue for the higher profitability/less variance games. It is also human nature for horses to believe they are better than they are. My first stake I was allowed to play 33 and under MTTs, after being a consistent reg in 2 dollar 180 mans. Looking back now there was no way in hell I was good enough for those games at the time. (At the time I thought I was more than adequate.)

The websites are used as a method of leverage to collect debt. There is no hiding this fact. I agree with this method in the instance that a horse is cashing money out of the bankroll and outright stealing. However, I do not think it to be fair if the horse is quitting poker to pursue other ventures. The makeup should be void at this point imo, and the horse should offer his or her action to their backer if ever choosing to return to poker. I also do not think it is fair to include images of their friends/family etc in the photos. (They had nothing to do with the stealing.)

In real life things such as unions exist to ensure workers rights. Without these employers would abuse employees etc... There is no such thing in the staking world so I believe some type of "charter" should exist. Again, I am not writing in this thread to take jabs at backers. Many backers do a great job including yourself losched (S/O to Global Staking.) I will not criticize backers but horses may feel free to ask for stable recommendations and I would be happy to give mine on the stables that I believe operate fairly. There are many positive aspects of being backed and I would be happy to shed light on those as well if need be. Although there are several other things that could use work in backing that I have not addressed but I think if other horses think they should add in here. I am as done with being backed as I am with this thread. (See ya'll at the 2 dollar 180s.) Especially as this thread is turning into a roast of backing. Thank you for your considerations and hopefully some advancements can be made in the industry to ensure that some of the horror stories remain just a figment of the past.

Start with good people, lay out the rules, communicate with your employees, motivate them and reward them. If you do all those things effectively, you can't miss.

-Lee Iacocca

[9:37:53 AM] Manhat10ite: Hi Germany sng Staking, I'd like to add you as a contact. Someone just told me about you guys, are you staking players?
[9:42:42 AM] *** Germany sng Staking has shared contact details with Manhat10ite. ***
[9:42:45 AM] Germany sng Staking: hi
[9:44:20 AM] Manhat10ite: What do you stake in
[9:44:37 AM] Germany sng Staking: mtt sng cash'\
[9:44:58 AM] Manhat10ite: do you have a website where I can apply?
[9:45:11 AM] Germany sng Staking: sngmentors.com
[9:45:57 AM] Manhat10ite: Hmmmm, who are you?
[9:46:19 AM] Germany sng Staking (bertulsons): [9:44 AM] Germany sng Staking (bertulsons):

<<< sngmentors.com
[9:46:43 AM] Manhat10ite: Why are you promoting this site?
[9:47:00 AM] Germany sng Staking (bertulsons): what u need from me?
[9:48:23 AM] Manhat10ite: Well considering I own SNGmentors and have no clue who you are, what are you up to?
[9:49:29 AM] Germany sng Staking (bertulsons): not undarstand
[9:49:34 AM] Manhat10ite: Yes you do
[9:49:53 AM] Manhat10ite: Why are you pretending to be SNGmentors?
[9:49:54 AM] Germany sng Staking (bertulsons): i more woed and i block u
[9:50:17 AM] Germany sng Staking (bertulsons): becouse my frend aske me to do this
[9:50:22 AM] Germany sng Staking (bertulsons): he pay me for that
[9:50:26 AM] Manhat10ite: funny how bertulsons, is a big latvian staker, are you scamming him also?
[9:50:36 AM] Manhat10ite: Who is your friend?
[9:50:38 AM] Germany sng Staking (bertulsons): jajajaj
[9:53:01 AM] Manhat10ite: Who is your friend?

Not going to jump into the full debate, but I will point out that change happens in all industries all the time, and trying to prevent change is like trying to prevent time from passing. Every activity gets tougher as more people participate and know about it whether it is poker, any physical activity, even reality TV shows. That is simply a function of human behavior.

The bonus whoring days of old were an entertaining time that many fully accepted could not last even when many of us would post about how rigged the sites were to discourage others from doing what we were doing. Did that help? Who knows, though posting as we did to slow the change made us chuckle at the time, but in the end people learn and get better at just about everything over time.

Staking may contribute to the change, but at best it is a small factor overall.

Neg. Feedbacking this backer for angleshooting a deal.

His name is Rolando Serquen and he came to us wanting to buy out horse's makeup (protecting his name so it won't appear in neg. feedback searches). He had $278 at the time and we were selling him for $150. First Rolando offered $100 and we refused. Then this happened:

[05/07/2014 21:38:35] Nichlas Kruse Jensen: [02-07-2014 01:31:18] rolando serquen: hey
[02-07-2014 01:31:34] rolando serquen: i decided to buy HORSE MU
[02-07-2014 01:31:44] Nichlas Kruse Jensen: ok
[02-07-2014 01:32:02] rolando serquen: transfer via pokerstars is ok?
[02-07-2014 01:32:46] Nichlas Kruse Jensen: yes, that's fine
[02-07-2014 01:32:51] rolando serquen: ok
[02-07-2014 01:32:54] rolando serquen: which account
[02-07-2014 01:33:00] Nichlas Kruse Jensen: 150 to PLAYER from Brazil
[02-07-2014 01:33:04] rolando serquen: ok
[02-07-2014 01:33:21] rolando serquen: will send you in the next hours
[02-07-2014 01:33:21] rolando serquen: ty
[02-07-2014 01:33:24] Nichlas Kruse Jensen: np

Now we talk to the horse and end the deal. Moments later the horse tells us the backer is not buying him anymore, but at this point he had returned the bankroll and the situation between him and stable worsened by us wanting to sell him.

[02-07-2014 16:46:24] Nichlas Kruse Jensen: gus told me you're not buying him afterall ?
[05-07-2014 03:23:48] rolando serquen: i didnt sorry
[05-07-2014 03:24:02] rolando serquen: i regret about add someone with MU
[05-07-2014 13:12:16 | Redigerede 13:12:33] Nichlas Kruse Jensen: Yah, well
[05-07-2014 13:12:21] Nichlas Kruse Jensen: you can't do that.
[05-07-2014 13:12:34] Nichlas Kruse Jensen: We were already letting him go
[05-07-2014 13:12:39] Nichlas Kruse Jensen: so you cost me money now

Now there's no mood anymore for us to stake the unhappy horse. The horse offers us $50 to buy himself out and go to anyone he wants, to which we accept. But rolando promised to buy the horse and made us lose money, since we could just continue staking him until a legitimate offer appeared. As far as I'm concerned, rolando owes our stable $100.

sounds like you should have waited to receive the transfer before you had horse send back $$ to you and tell him he has new backer.

why trust someone you havent done business with in the past? both parties are in the wrong here but it's not a scam of any sort. you just mishandled your business.

wrong thread

Name: Mikolaj Kojder
Stars: Mike Beast78

Lowstakes hyperturbo player who began the stake, then fell out of contact and ran with the stake funds. Do not stake.

Who makes the isathief websites? Would like to get in touch with the person who runs it to create one for someone not involved in 2p2 if possible.

ask msusyr24 he seems to be in frequent contact with him

Mego continues:


[11:01:55 AM] megoo11111..: Hello! We are from staking group sng Mentors, We yust now look for new player ins as team. We can offer u mtt,sng and cash in pokerstars, and fulltilt with fixed salary, coaching,all oficial. if u are intrested, yust write me beck King Regards invetsgropu

It would probably be helpful to reference the post that I assume this relates to/continues from :

As for the person who reported the post with this reason:

Only mods see your post report, and there's not a lot we can do about people on Skype. If you have info to share, post it in here.

Thanks for the feedback guys, keep up the good work.

While there might be one person who has done a few of these (pretty sure Admo has done at least one), it's not like there's some "isathief" business or someone who owns the right to all "isathief" domain names. Anyone can start one.

ps: raveyou
skype: qoodbeep

ps: [removed by OP request]
skype: kuafas.group


Imitating players on Skype that he currently stakes to apply for different staking arrangements. Uses photos, screenshots etc. Then gets stakee to send the funds to him.

--

Please use extra security steps when signing players

Pokerstars = STELA_POKER
Winamax.fr = Fishulescu

Name = Muntean Claudiu

I staked Muntean for a short period of time late last year, he was pretty busto so had to give him a life loan of 1k. Anyway the stake went pretty bad he was losing alot and not fulfilling his contract obligations (Volume requirements for 3.5rs 180s mostly) so we ended the stake in makeup he was down about 7.5k and he agreed to pay back the 1k loan as soon as he could. Hes up over 10k on winamax (own diming) since the deal ended and has made no attempt to pay anything back in almost one year. Do not stake Muntean he is very hard to deal with and not trustworthy.

Just told Muntean about this post and he promptly removed me from Skype stating this

[03:13:42 p.m.] Charles Horrocks: hi muntean
[03:14:04 p.m.] Charles Horrocks: uv made no attempt to pay me back that 1k
[03:14:23 p.m.] Charles Horrocks: im calling you out on 2+2
[03:14:45 p.m.] Charles Horrocks: ill take it down wen u start making repayments
[03:15:03 p.m.] muntean claudiu: if you do that i will never give the loan
[03:15:10 p.m.] muntean claudiu: ever
[03:15:22 p.m.] Charles Horrocks: its already done