I'd rather not get into my motivation for backing this player, but rather get insight on our agreement (or lack of agreement) and how I can tighten it up.

Right now it works like this: 50/50 split w/ MU, he plays three nights a week at a game that I deal in. There is a high hand bonus and if he wins this, it goes completely towards his MU if he's down and we split it 50/50 if he's up.

His starting BI is $300, but he can rebuy if he's playing well and the table is good. I put him in for $500 in a game that was playing ridiculously high the other day (think 5/10 w/ 2k stacks) and that's what prompted this post. There are a few things I want to tighten up about our agreement before a potential problem arises, but I want to make sure nobody is getting the short end, including myself.

He text me about the game I referenced about (5/10 w/ 2k stacks) and said he wanted to play and that he was going to BI w/ his own $280 if I didn't put him in. He was out of MU at this point, but I felt like this put me in a bad spot. We don't/didn't have the BR for him to play this game--which was extremely high variance, but I also didn't want him to play on his own money in the same game that I always put him in. As his backer, can I say yes or no definitively? Better yet, should I be able to say yes/no? What about other games of similar stakes?

Also, regarding the high hand bonus. Should 100% of this bonus go towards his MU (if he has any)? Sometimes it's over $200 and I feel like I should be locking SOME of that money up, but maybe I'm thinking greedy--that's why I started this thread.

I may have left something out, but I'll check back in a few hours to see. Thanks in advance.

-Adam

EDIT: I may have made the question a lot more complicated than it actually is. Can the backed player play in any game he wants if I'm unwilling to put him in?

He should be able to do whatever he wants with his own money IMO.

I take it you don't have a written agreement. That's how you tighten it up. I'd go to this forum to get advice on how to set it up.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/135/staking/

However, does your employer know you are staking a player? What would happen to you if they found out? I suspect they wouldn't be pleased.

To answer your specific question, if you don't have a written or verbal agreement on the subject, he can do as he pleases. At the same time, you can stop backing him. As a stakee, you have an obligation in my mind to be maximizing your sponsor's earnings by playing on his behalf for as long as profitable as he directs. That said, Michael Craig pointed out in the Andy Beal book that staking is what poker players do until they learn better. If people will stiff Phil Ivey, have no doubt they'll stiff you too.

ur making a mistake, but i doubt anything i say will change that.

I'm not sure why the host would be upset if i was staking a player in the game. I've thought about it for several minutes and I can't think of a single reason--if anything it benefits him b/c that player will always lock a seat and play all night. This is a raked home game.

I will visit the other forum, thank you.

I mean, when you put it like that I agree, but I think you've oversimplifying it at least a little. I felt like he was backing me into a corner and I said something about this and he just kinda shrugged it off like it didn't matter. The stakes were the same, but $300 was going in preflop in this game CONSISTENTLY. $500 wasn't even enough for him to BI w/, he needed at least $1k which is obviously well out of our agreement and our roll.

That said, it's ridiculous IMO if he sits w/ his $280 and runs up a stack when he is always backed in this game when it's running. Then he can go back to being backed if he loses and when the game runs next time.

Again, maybe I'm being overly paranoid, which is what I'm trying to figure out.

Thanks for the feedback though.

he can do whatever he wants with his own money. he's not your slave. you can say you don't want to back him, but he can play in the game himself if he choses.

wait waahat? he was going to buy into a 5/10 game with 2k stacks with his last $280?

as far as the bonus you can make whatever deal you want. what's not fair is if he wins 200 in bonus and you pocket 50 and 150 goes towards makeup. you could just split the bonus and not have count towards makeup.

if he's a winning player none of this matters unless you negotiate a deal other than 50/50 to split the bonus. sounds like you're short on cash and taking a shot with the stakee anyway.

the tone of your post is frustrating. i'm not trying to make him my slave. i'm trying to solidify a fair agreement for ALL PARTIES! i am new to this (backing), he is new to this and we have no written agreement.

i am not short on cash and im not "taking a shot" w/ this stakee. he is a winning player.

just so im clear, when online players are backed for cash games, are they allowed to play the same stakes and decide on their own when they are and aren't backed? i know the obv response is "the backer will never say they can't play so this is a non-issue", but the game was playing MUCH MUCH higher than normal. so the consensus is that he can do whatever w/ his own money (btw, i never said or indicated anything otherwise) if i'm not backing him--regardless of what game/stakes it is, including the game that I ALWAYS put him in. excellent, thank you.

One of the greatest poker movies of all time is The Cincinnati Kid. I highly recommend it.

That you're dealing in.

If he has watched this video, he might have a different idea.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/78...-games-776285/

Just because you aren't doesn't mean you and some buddies can't.

hmmmm

Let me get this straight.

After 3 individual days, and you split wins 50/50 on a daily basis.

win 200 split 100 each
lose 200 backer loses 200
win 200 split 100 each

For giggles, this player is good enough to do this week in week out.
Player walks off with $200 in his pocket with no risk financially ever.
Backer walks off even at the end of week.

This plan is doomed to failure even with a good horse.

No he said there is makeup. In that scenario it would be split $200, backer loses $200, and then backer makes back $200. The horse only gets money if he is up. If he loses he goes into makeup and makes nothing until he profits.

ok, thats a little better, but still a loser unless the player is a winning player AND the the end all split would be like at end of year. IOW, each month would be like that day 1 2 3 that i spoke of. Somewhere there has to be a settle up and if settled up even every 3 months it would be losing proposition. Plus the player needs to be real solid winning player, otherwise its going down the drain super fast. Anyone trying to slip into a 5/10 game with 289 is not the guy i wanna stake. Then again, i wouldnt stake anyone. Anyone good enough wont take a stake. I played 40/80 stud at Mirage and killed the game. Rich guy from Indiana wanted to stake me in the 75/150 which was a tremendously volatile game at the time. I refused. I refused because i knew i would end up throwing his cash back at him because i have seen how most non pro stakers think and act. They dont get it, and thats why they are not pro.


REALLY IMPORTANT FOR OP
Since i see stake posts from time to time on here, please keep records of your staking. Come back maybe 6mo or 1 year and post results. Might be good for people to see raw data.

I agree about longer settle up times, but why does it matter math wise? Doesn't it just change the percentage of time he is in makeup?

Well, if you settle up, then the MU is over. Back to level play field again. It has to be or you couldnt settle up.

So, you settle up after 6 months. Player is winner but only by say 10k. Both walk away with 5k and now we reset and start over. Player loses the next 6 months. Player loses nothing, staker takes it up the arse. Now, we dont have to settle again after 6 months, sure. But what if player never gets back up over the MU?

Also, when players get buried and they are playing MU, forget about it, roflol. They are gonna figure out any way on earth to forget aout the whole deal.

I mean, this is a home game and prolly no big deal and wont last 2 weeks. Thats fine. But if the real answer is wanted here, there it is.

That's the risk the backer takes with staking though. It's kind of like chasing your loses. You can either continue letting the horse play or end the deal and cut your loses. The scenario would be the same if the horse started off losing.

When you accept half the win and all the loss, it isnt good. Thats why staking in poker rooms really doesnt exist except at the railbird levels. It may happen some, but honestly i have not known one single stake scenario that worked out for both sides in my entire poker career. (that extends from Stardust days, to Golden Nugget, on to Mirage, then to Bellagio, then to California, back to Vegas.)

I hear you on the things not working out part, was just commenting on the 50/50 split with makeup deal being a pretty standard staking deal. I mean it should work out in theory if you stake a good winning player, but things usually go south.

As for the actual topic at hand. You really can't tell him what to do with his own money, but it is kind of a freeroll unintentional none the less. Either he wins and plays his own money from now on or loses and continues to be staked. That's why you need to draw up an agreement before hand.

have we decided this was a bad idea if we advertise this?

yea sorry about that. can't help it sometimes. either way, if u chose not to back him in a game, and he wins big, you should be happy for him. not feel regret that half could have been yours. even with a "big" win, seems like you'll still need to back him. if he runs his 280 into 3k he'll probably want to stick it in the bank or mattress.

players that get deep in makeup end up playing v badly bc there seems to be no hope. one way around this is allowing them to buy small pieces of themselves so they're not playing for anything.

say after 6 months he's stuck 10k now. instead of having to play 6 months for free just waiting to get back to even, he could put up 10% of the buy in and get 10% of the profits. totally separate from everything. can keep you from killing the horse.

i'll bet they settle up nightly and not weekly/monthly anyway

The only problem with that is like ANL said you get into the make up / profit thing quicker. If at the beginning he wins then he gets the profit, but the backer has to keep putting up money.