That's partly why I was so perplexed / disappointed by his response. He has a massive staking thread in the marketplace and could probably offer a lot in the way of advice.

My best guess is that since he stakes an enormous amount of people, he can't possibly do all/most of the things mentioned in my OP. He forgoes the extra safety and takes on some additional risk for the sake of spending less time on each deal and probably increasing his overall hourly.

If he ever staked someone where the losses could get into 6 figures though I would hope he would consider most if not all the things I talked about.

will go over a few things from your post i was "laughing" about. granted, i was pretty drunk when i made my "lol" post.


big weekend/very busy, so come back to thread a bit later

re-read whole thread (longgggggg OP) and I found what i was laughing about

the one section that was a bit perplexing was the MU section:
------
Speaking of makeup, let's discuss that in relation to cash game stakes. Make up is a system used more for tournament backing that cash game backing in my experience.

Make-up is used for all backing. Its just a way to keep track of how much you send people and how much they need to make themselves a winner on the stake. I have staked maybe 10 cash guys in my staking career, and all of them have the same exact deal as all my mtt guys.

It means that if a player busts out of a $10k tournament and then cashes for $50k in another one, that the $10k is paid out 100% back to the staker and then any profits after that are split as per the agreement. If the player had not cashed in 20 tournaments and the number was bigger than the entire amount may have to be paid to the staker before the stakee sees a cent.
There is a dif term for this to make it less confusing. If i send someone 5k, they bust it, send them 5k, they bust it, 5k again and they start playing. He has 15k stakeback and 10k in make-up (since he has 5k in his account still). just an easier way to say it and keep track.

Basically being "in makeup" means that you are down $x amount and $x amount of your winnings must be paid back 100% to the staker before any profits are split.

This is different in cash games. By running a stake for a certain amount of hands there is an inherent method of makeup already in place. If someoen is down 5k after 50k hands and then up 10k after 100k hands, all that matter is that he's up 10k after the 100k hands. In essence he was "in makeup" for 5k but it isn't looked at in the same light as tournament, imo, as there is an end point in sight where net result will be looked at.

This part is just confusing to me. If i sign someone to a stake for cash games for 100k hands, and we do cashouts at every 25k hands (have 1 cash guy atm, and he isnt a huge volume guy, so this is actually the deal i have in place right now) if when he gets to 25k hands and is down money, he just keeps gridning until the 50k hand mark. if i sent him 10k and he was down 3k (7k in account), you just keep it going with those same numbers. You should always be having your stakeback/MU roll over to the next 25k hands. cash game staking should work the same exact way basically as MTT staking in this regard.

Occasionally you can put in a clause where after the stake is completed, if the stakee is down money, that that money or a percentage of it becomes make-up for future staking deal or even turns into personal debt.

MU never goes away. if he is down after 100k hands, he should still grind for you. All staking deals should be indefinite in terms of a time frame. saying "100k hands" just doesnt make any sense. It will protect you vs idiots who will just leave at the end no matter what. leaving backers with MU is about the worst thing a horse can do (besides stealing). I know people want to get a solid time frame, but it just doesnt really make sense i dont think. i suppose it can in certain circumstances, and i can see why it would for cash games a lot more than mtts, but yeah. If you put "100k hands" in there, you need to make it clear he cant just leave no matter what after 100k hands, they need to grind out whatever make-up there is before he can leave.

Depending on other factors you may or may not want to include something like this (doing so is obviously of huge benefit to the staker) but as a standard rule once a cash game stake is completed there is no makeup or debt.

Touched on it above, but this is just retarded. you are burning money as a backer and will get angled all over the place if the MU just disappears after 100k hands. it will make the horse just not give a **** if he is in 10k MU at 90k hands. why would he want to get out? he could just mindlessly grind out the 10k hands left and leave with whatever MU and get another deal


Can answer questions as well if people wanna ask

Your first three points (will refer to points as the bolded sections) seem to be agreeing with me in the overall sentiment of the issue and just arguing over semantics. I don't disagree with what you said but it doesn't sound like you disagreed with me either.

Point 4 and 5 are you saying that MU should rollover after a cash game stake ends. This is a difference of opinion to what I posted as the way that I worded it suggested that it is an optional clause and is not/should not be considered standard. You've convinced me to change my mind on this issue and I agree that it should be standard for the results of one cash game stake to roll over to the next similar to the way it does for tournament staking in most cases, and have the exception be where it does not.

"If you put "100k hands" in there, you need to make it clear he cant just leave no matter what after 100k hands, they need to grind out whatever make-up there is before he can leave."

What now? Okay so the horse is in 10k makeup and "wants to leave" or play on his own, after the stake has ended. What are your options? a) let him leave or b) force him to grind more hands under the stake to get you your money back. If you do a) he is happy. If you do b) he might not be happy and for whatever reasons play ****ty and lose you more and more money until you decide to drop him and he gets to leave anyway and play on his own.

Or do you expect him to pay the MU back by his own play? That is just personal debt then -- and totally fine and reasonable, but it's different to make up.

Hmm i'm getting confused in semantics now too.

"Makeup never goes away"

What are the differences between MU and personal debt (IYO)?

Yeah, i suppose a lot of what we are "arguing" about is semantics.

I mean, if horses can just leave when in make-up, you will lose a ton of money in staking. I dont expect a horse to ever pay me the make-up back if we drop him, but i do expect them to keep being staked by us if we want to continue to invest in them to at least make us even on the stake.

if you say the stake is for 100k hands and they can leave at the end no matter what, you are pretty much lighting money on fire. people will just get deep and not care about results and just auto-pilot through the end of the deal. its not good for you as the staker, and its really really good for the horse to do this.

Make-up never goes away as long as i still wish to invest in them. here is a piece of my contract i send to all horses:

Duration of staking:

----If you play MTTs

Stake will go on indefinitely.

-You may leave whenever you are not in make-up

-You may not leave, under any circumstances, while you are in make-up

----If you play SNG’s (180’s and below being your main game)

Stake length will be decided on in an AIM conversation with Zima421.

-You may not leave, under any circumstances, while you are in make-up


Not really sure what you are asking in terms of personal debt and make-up. can you ask a specific question in regards to this?

In terms of cash games, let's say you have a stake for a duration of 100k hands where if they are down at the end they are in makeup however much they are down. At the end of the deal the player is down 10k. If the player ever wants to play poker again then they must first give you the option to stake them under which circumstance they will first have to pay back the 10k before seeing any of the profits -- is this what you are saying?

If they never play poker again do they still "owe" you $10k or not?

The former is what I would consider makeup. The latter, if you expect them to owe you 10k even if they never play again, would be personal debt.

if they quit poker for good, they dont owe me anything. if they decide to play poker again, they must give me first dibs on their action.

Sorry for the bump, was linked here from ssplo.

Is 30BI MU regluar for a PLO stakee? If his losses can be backed with HH or w/e.

Like advice on how to solve this in a good manner for both backer and stakee?

All this was over a 75k hands volume

Is the stake done, or is there volume yet to be played?

Responded in the ssplo lc thread also, but it's not unusual in terms of plo variance over that sample size, except for the fact it was all played at 5 cent 10 cent, where barring the huge effect of the rake, I would expect a competent player to not have much variance and crush and move up stakes quickly and not get in such a hole. PLO can be a sick game though, and if he had to be staked at .05/.1 he might not have the skills to beat the huge bb/100 rake down there if running bad even playing against unskilled opposition.

If everything checks out w/ his cashier and hand histories directly from the site though, there's nothing you can really do, except choose whether you want to continue the stake or not (assuming stake is still going on or he has to keep playing in MU as specified in the agreement). If he's that far in makeup and he's still going to play nickel and dime, I don't think he'll have much motivation to put in hands and dig himself out, so I'd probably just write off the loss, esp. if you can't definitively rule out him having done something fishy.