My friend and I were invited to a potentially juicy cash game, a bit higher than what we usually play. I brought up the possibility of swapping some % of each other's action.

He proposed the following deal: During the session, we would swap 50% of each other's profit, but our losses would be 100% individual. This he claimed would still lower variance (If I lose and he wins I still get 50% of his profit) but wouldn't put the burden on the other if one of us starts to spew. It also allows us to have a fair and simple deal even with different buy-in amounts throughout the night.

I consider my friend and myself with similar skill levels, and both definitely +EV in that game. I also trust him 100%

Also this is a private game where some kinds of borderline collusion are frequent. Multiway pots are always played hard but if 2 'friends' are heads-up it's seen as super normal to agree to check it down. It's also well known that certain players have a shared bankroll. I don't like this but I'm not going to change it - and honestly it doesn't hurt the game very much.

Basically I don't think this deal is unethical in the context. But feel free to tell me otherwise, and why.

So what do posters think about this proposition? Have you heard of it/ done something similar? Is it smart or are there loopholes and potentially -EV situations? Is it fair? Does it favor a particular style (maybe tight)?
I was thinking for example of adding a clause that once one of us quits, the stacks are counted at that point and the deal is then off even if the other continues.

Keep losses individual but split gains? That leads to passing up high variance +EV situations when profit for the session is currently close to zero. Think about it this way: imagine we could flip a coin, and if it comes up heads, we win $1000, tails we lose $700. Normally we'd be thrilled to take this gamble; it's +$150 EV. But now let's incorporate the deal your friend proposed. When we win $1000, we give him $500 of it. When we lose, we still lose the full $700. Now the gamble is -$100 EV.

So, while this deal will certainly reduce your variance and avoid having to cover someone else's large losses, it's lower EV than simply sharing action. It seems like you could achieve the intended goal of reducing exposure to others' losses simply by enforcing a stop loss; once you lose X buyins, you have to stop playing.

Sounds like a bad idea. Either play on the same bankroll and split everything or play separately.

If you do decide to figure something out make sure everything is agreed upon before hand and you cover all scenarios.

If I was your opponent and found out you were splitting action in the same home game, neither of you would be invited back.

This sounds like nerdy **** by someone who is under rolled and bad.

I agree with that example, but the big -EV spot of me taking a flip when in profit (or playing any hand with less than 75% equity actually) is very much brought back to neutral when my friend gets it in a similar spot. So as long as we both take these spots doesn't it cancel out?

It sounds like a fantastic way for me to play like a super nit and free roll you for half your profits...

Maybe bad at swap deals, but good or bad at poker is largely irrelevant to my question. I'm definitely a nerd!

It's not quite a friendly home game. It's an underground (raked) game and it's no secret that we have some kind of swap, at least amongst the regs. I don't love it ethically, but in this game it seems that everybody except the whales have some kind of swap, so I have no shame.

Then again, think of these super high rollers where every single final table has a few germans. It's pretty obvious they have a shared bankroll, and nobody seems to complain!

I have done this before, but for less % so maybe not taking a +EV line flip wouldn't apply to me as much. I played a home game and my friend played at the casino. I think swapping profits is legit, but it depends if you trust your friend. I trusted mine and he trusted me, I think in game you're not really thinking about it and you try to just maximize your total win. If you do think about it and change styles then it's probably a bad idea