Are these stats good for being staked by someone??? [MTT's ONLY]

Hey, sorry if this has been covered already but a quick search didn't return anything. If someone wants to get staked live by someone they only know over the internet, is there anyway (if you lose) of proving you lost the money as opposed to just stole it? Thanks.

dont stake scumbags

Need advice please:

i started staking some guys, went decent for now but i have a few problems:

1) According to this thread people seems to be really conservative with staking and i'm asking myself if i'm ******ed cause i'm staking some guys with 75/25 profit for them and 50/50 rakeback with no makeup, all risk is mine.
I'm going to cut this difference between profit and rakeback so, what should i ask for these guys that are good players and i know they're long time winners? 70/30 for them (with all risk mine) is way too high?

2) Let's say one of the guy you're staking is losing in the start and he's playing way less than he should. How can i motivate him for playing since he's prob thinking that if he wins he's recovering my money ?

I didn't sign anything btw so i can't legally force the players i'm staking to play, maybe that was ******ed but they are all friends and it's my first time with staking.
I also made a couple of hours of coaching (free obv) for each ones and i'm there if they need help with some hand histories but i don't know if this is relevant

Edit BF: I deleted your previous post because, as you would see if you read the title, this is a thread for questions, not seeking stakes.

Guys, what should I do if I really can not find a backer? I am here 6months< so I can not write my own topic. However the problem is that no one ever considered me yet, not even answered or PMed me. I posted several posts in staking thread and wrote several PMs but no results so far... I think I am pretty good

I've been thinking about selling part of my SNG action.
I want to do this to lower the variance.

But I'm not sure what kind of mark-up would be fair for both me and buyer.
For me I guess it depends on how much EV I'm willing to give up for lower variance.

Assuming I'm a 10% roi player, what would be fair? I guess anything under 10% is +ev for the buyer (if the 10% was my true roi), but 9,99% aint gonna attract a lot of buyers

And no, I'm not trying to attract buyers here, since my samplesize isn't sufficient for you guys

people dont usually use markup for sngs

they usually have a 50/50 type arrangement

But is there any difference between a number of SNG's and a number of MTT's?

I wanted to do the markup, as I'm delusional enough to beleive that I'm a winner, and want to get paid for my time, playing for others, if you know what I mean.

It is not a bankroll question.

This was originally posted by pokernubz in the 4L staking thread and moved here for a better audience.



Didn't know where to post,

hopefully i won't get yelled at here

I've noticed a lot of people selling shares at like 15-20% markup, and was thinking isn't that quite small?

Maybe they are just beginners, and are under rolled big time, in that case selling at a low markup would make sense i guess.


To me though, someone who is being put in a tournament is usually wanting to play for 20-40% freeroll with no make up or 40-60% with make up. Is this way too good of deals or standard. I did read the MTT staking sticky it just seemed to say the least surprising.

Are there any references i can find on the what %'s in a markup would equal the same deal for a no make up freeroll?

Let me try to break it down myself.( Saying my math isn't great is an understatement.. lol English grammar as well)

Lets say somone is selling up to 50% at as high he possibly can, Phil Ivey for entertainment purposes at the WSOP main event. Now Ivey could probably sell %'s of himself at 1000% markup because he's notorious for being one of the best players in the world, im sure there are tons of people out there who would of payed 1000$ just for 1 percent. ( this seems insane, but this year alone they would of pocketed 13k profit)

In this example, Phil ivey gets paid 50k, has to put up 5k.. so he profits 45k and keeps 50% of himself for the tournament.This is obviously better then a freeroll.

Now more realistically is, an online whiz kid, wants to sell 50% at 1.3 markup for the main event. He sells 5k at 1.3 which equals 6.5k and puts up the other 3.5k.

Thoughts MTT regular pro's? I'm finding myself more and more fascinated in MTT's and starting to pour more efforts into improving my tournament game, even though this is kinda out there in left field.

bump

.

BACKER SAYS.....
I have a staking deal 50/50 with makeup in soft live home games of my selection (in florida) and some super soft mtts (mainly in florida)
My stakee and I have made around $22k each in the past 18 months. While I do not have any documented coaching experience, I did take tons of time over the 18month stake to discuss hands and situations with the stakee after almost every session giving him advice, As I had alot more experience in these private games.

The stakee has asked me several times if I wanted to put Las Vegas cash games on the stake while he was out thier on vacation for short periods of time. Each time my ansewer was no beacuase I only wanted to stake him in things that were super soft.

Here is the dispute.... The make up figure is currantly $30,000. The stakee is moving to vegas for a good job opportunity (full time). He says that he wants to do whats right but isnt sure what that is. He has offered to continue the stake in vegas part time. My immediate response to vegas was no as it has been in the past. I feel that the stakee is walking away from the stake and that the right thing for him to do is buy out from the make up ($30,000). I told him that the only time I expect to lose on a stake is if i drop the stakee for bankroll reasons or bad performance. As I only stake people that I trust and would never expect them to not pay winnings or walk away from a makeupe figure. I have told him that I would be very reasonable with amount of time needed to pay it out.

all feed back is apreciated

STAKEE SAYS.....
I have a stacking deal, 50/50 with make up
After 18 months of wins and losses, our current make up is at -30k.
I am moving to las vegas from florida, i gave my backer a chance to continue to stake me in vegas part time.
He did not want to continue because he would not have game selection in vegas. My backer feels like im walking away, and wants me to pay him the make up figure with a small discount.

What do you think?

In response to the above staking agreement, I don't feel the stakee should be required to buy out. If a buy out is necessary when stuck, accepting the stake in the first place doesn't make much sense to me. I fail to see the advantages of the stake if you would be required to reimburse the staker.

horse shouldnt have to buy out. he has given the staker a chance to keep staking.

This is about as clear cut as it can be, and I find it to be a pretty "funny" question to ask.

1.) Player was BACKED...by definition, means if he loses, his backer pays it. That's the whole point of it all, isn't it? Backer absorbs losses in hopes of taking half the winnings when player wins..lol. The stake is at a negative figure as of now....backer needs to get over that fact, and accept the reality of the situation....that he took on a player he believed in, player played as instructed, won some lost some. If backer doesn't like the outcome, he should never have entered into backing deal.

2.) If I'm reading this correctly, the player is TRYING to do the RIGHT thing by offering to continue stake in Vegas....something he doesn't have to do seems how the backer here seems to want to have control over and selection of the games he backs him in. Offering the stake in Vegas was a gracious offer, and if the backer does not like the figure, and believes in his player as he should in a backing arrangement, should take up the offer.

3.) I have NEVER heard of any player in a std 50/50 makeup deal having to PAY BACK the makeup figure..lol. That's just ludicrous and I doubt anyone will ever disagree w that...in here or any other forum.

Like I said, this is about as clear cut as can be....not even a question about what is right. If backer chooses not to back his horse anymore, the stake is over, and the makeup is not to be paid back. However, if player chooses to ever play under backer again, the makeup should stand, and he is responsible to make that figure up before netting any personal profits.

It sounds like a simple case of backer not trusting the player enough and is somewhat of a control freak. I mean, why ever back a player if you don't trust them enough to select the proper games? Are you planning on sweating every table and hand they sit at?

Bottom line, player is free to go, offered to try and make up the figure w continuing to play in Vegas, backer declined offer....stake is over and no one owes anything to anyone unless player were to play later w backer. Pretty simple..lol

I hope backer learns to trust his players more in the future...or it will never work.

This post being in the *Sticky* Guide* section is absurd to me. People reading and responding to this post are not going to be the ones you want reading it.

Back to what was said though I believe the stake should continue.

There should be no forced buyout unless the person being staked wants to stop and isn't willing to work with the backer. I think the person being staked should play multis and travel like he used too on the stake, as well as play cash games when they visit florida or other "approved" locations like they agreed on.

Just because a stake may have to be on hold for a small period of time is no reason for it to just end and defiantly not one where there should be a forced buyout.

Also if a buyout is agreed on then its half the makeup not all of it so It would be 15,000 in this case.

stopped reading after bolded.

you are wrong. there are buyouts in staking deals all the time

....

I basically see a staking agreement as a job contract. Its whatever u guys said in the beginning. If stakee agreed to play x games then he has to keep doing so, cant just move across the country and stop doing the work he agreed to do. Whatever guy said hes never heard of stakee paying a buy out is an idiot there are buy out agreements in stakes all the time.

I was in a situation this year before the WSOP where my makeup was rather high with my backers. They agreed to send me out this year with 10 k to take a shot at the events. My backers and I knew that this would pretty much be the only money we would be playing together out there since my number was high/ running cold etc. I believed I would def win this summer at some point and asked my backer what would be appropriate if our money had ran out and I made a major score for another investor (+100k). I have a really good relationship with my backers (3yrs) and asked if I were to pay 40% of the number if that would be sufficient. My backers basically told me that was more than enough and that they did not expect anything considering that the reason they were backing me in the first place is because I did not have money to play poker on my own.

Which leads me to my point, if someone does not have money to play in games in the beginning of the stake, how will they ever have money to pay it down after the agreement or games targeted runs out?

You're right but he's probably referring to a forced buyout which you must admit would be unusual.

yes, i believe you are correct... thx for all the input.

A player I am staking no longer replies to e-mails that I send him and I believe that he is not going to return the money I used to stake him. Is it possible to take any sort of legal action? What is the best way to recover my money?

Do you have any other forms of contact? Do they post here on any other forums??