How deep can you go into make up before you get cut off?

What is the max buy in at your game?

does the stake allow you to play higher than 1/2?

Expect to be out before I need t move up. Stake is $2100. ROR relatively small. Max BI $300 usually.

I will vouch for spikeraw and say that he plays in a pretty loose $1/2 game regularly (The Roundtree), and if he plays at peak times (at night, which this room generally is open regularly then), he should be able to get a $25/hour return with little/no risk. Also, from his strategy posts and the couple times I have met up with him, he has a good head under his shoulders and appears as a trustworthy individual.

Also, in Michigan poker is really active/busy during November - March, meaning the games are softer than come summertime.

Sorry Spike, what does ROR stand for? It's definitely a fair deal to me, but make sure you consider everything.

If you lose the entire roll, is there going to be any bad blood? Is the backer aware of the risks? Are they a poker play themselves? Can they afford to lose the money and be OK with it?

Honestly answering these questions will help you determine if it's the right deal for you or not.

Aside from staking being ******ed which others have touched on, financially this does not seem reasonable at all. Especially if you have any decent sample you are pulling the hourly figures from.

I know nothing about staking but I would never do a 60/40 and 100% makeup. That just sounds nuts.

Wait tables for 2 months ffs

What Avaritia said.

Do the math, not the best way to build a roll.

Why would anyone who beats the game at 10bb/hr need staking?

Just doesn't make any sense.

Plus if you're crushing that hard, why not get a loan?

Ive been in his shoes before. A few years ago I got laid off, had a break-even month followed by a losing month then had bills to pay requiring me to bust my roll. I had a lot of catch up to do and a stake helped me build a roll from scratch. Your deal seems fair if youre willing to put in the time.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using 2+2 Forums

You would be better off taking a cash advance on a CC or something than taking that deal.

Job for 2-3 months >> loan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>stake

Clarification: I have a 6 figure job. So, that's not the issue. The issue is that I won't have any spending money for poker for a couple months unless I stake. I had a sizable roll last year but had to stop playing and working due to school which had been my plan all along. So, now I've started over.

Friend is a poker player who I have staked in the past. He also has a 6 figure job and while he won't like losing the money, won't really be affected much.

This is a no risk situation for me. If I lose, it's not my money. If I win, I win. It's just a temporary thing. I was just wondering about the terms. The stake itself is really no big deal. It's just a way for me to play and earn a bit for my roll and my friend has fun tracking it. I also like the idea of playing with 100% poker money. I'll likely be able to quit the stake and get out on my own after a few cycles.

Pay4myschool- I hope my head is above my shoulders. We need to arrange an outing to MCC. I've found the game to be similarly soft to my regular games around town.

Why does this sound nuts? He is getting 60% with no financial risk. Maybe he likes playing and would rather make less hourly and play when he wants over waiting tables.


Bc life happens? Maybe he has poor money management or something happened and he needed to pull from his BR. Maybe his sample size is small.

How's going on a stake going to change your bad run?

If anything, having someone stake you would just add more stress to you playing the game.

First of all, life events and having bad money management are two completely different things.

And sample is small just means that you are not a 10bb/hr winner.

None of the above would be solved by having someone staking you.

Sure buddy.

6 figure job = easy access to loan.

Loan > stake.

RP- Answered above. I have pretty good money management. I'm a very responsible guy which is actually why I'm looking at the stake and not just going out on my own. With a small stake I can play normally and withstand a little variance whereas I would likely feel the beats if on 100% of my own money. As I said, it's a way for me to play in the next couple months where I wouldn't be able to otherwise. It has nothing to do with mismanagement or degen tendencies. I'm the least degen poker player ever. I don't even like craps.

I'm done with the loan world. Loans have interest. This has none. As I said, I'm jsut looking for advice on the terms. Not on whether I should or not.

Come on...seriously, I expect some very basic common sense from you.

$3000 cash advance from your credit card even at 20% interest = $600 divided by 12 months, or $50 a month in interest.

That's as much as you would give to your "partner" if you net $125 in winning, and $50 is the very most you'll be giving up.

I am done with this subject because this must be a joke.

I never said life events and poor money management were the same thing, so thanks for taking what I said and turning it into what you wanted to read.

Actually, a 10bb/hr winner over a small sample just means exactly that. There is not enough information to determine whether the bb/hr is true or not. We don't know how many hours Spike's played because he left that out.

I was broke/jobless then and couldnt play/put any money in my roll. Now after reading his situation about his job, I think hes nuts to get a stake. Lol

i think its pretty silly to be looking to get staked if you do in fact make 6 figures a year

ok, maybe if you wanted to reduce variance in a 5/10 or 10/25 plo game, but thats selling action...

but for 1/2 nl?

lol?

if i was certain i could beat 1/2 nl for 10bb/hour, and my friend was certain of this. i'd just ask my friend for 500 dollars and pay him back in a week.

fwiw, i was in a position of no liquid funds after returning from 2y in europe. despite having very little live experience for the past few years, i was certain id beat LLSNL games for much more than 10bb/hour and was able to secure a quick loan of 1000 dollars from a friend without any hassle.

if for some reason i bustoed everything, needed to start from scratch and had to take a staking offer. i probably would want a 70/30 split on a stake.

i have also borrowed money from friends because i didnt want to pay the 3.50 service charge at the ATM.

x3

Should we start the next Kydd-Dhgc type thread now?

GI'mnotreadingitunlessthere'sheadrubbingG

Anyone in their right mind making $25/hr at 1/2 over a reasonable sample would not want a stake, especially making 6figs a year. Completely ridiculous

Regarding staking: this is another area that I likely won't be able to sway someone who already has his or her mind made up, but I'll give it a shot - if nothing else, maybe it'll help sway the undecided lurkers. Staking seems extremely shady and unnecessary to me. The idea of staking is based on a flawed premise: a poker player who doesn't have enough money NOR enough patience to earn the money wants to convince someone else to let them play with their money. Good, successful poker players have at least two things in common: they are very good at making money at poker and have good patience - poker is a long run game, not a short term game. So, if a player is good at beating the games and making money, why would a good, successful poker player NEED money? That very admission alone wipes out any other possible justification that he or she is a good player. Good players don't NEED money. Good players MAKE money at the poker table.

If you are indeed a good poker player and making money, the ONLY possible justification for wanting to be staked is that you lack the patience and/or bankroll management to make the money to move up on your own. Lacking patience and/or bankroll management is NOT a good quality and you are trying to bypass a very good natural system in place in poker - moving up the stakes. If you're beating $1/$2, there is no guarantee that you will beat $5/$10, but there is a good intermediate step to test the waters while exercising good bankroll management: $2/$5. If you WILL be a winner at $5/$10, then you should basically crush $2/$5 and have enough money for $5/$10 in no time. If you CAN'T beat $2/$5, then you certainly can't beat $5/$10 and it's MUCH better to figure that out at $2/$5 with your OWN money rather than at $5/$10 with someone else's money.

If all of that still doesn't convince you, consider this: I've pretty much never heard of staking deals that have gone great for both parties. 9 times out of 10, either the backer is getting screwed or the horse is getting screwed and there are hurt feelings and broken relationships in the end. It's very difficult for it to work out well for both because either (1) the horse is not prepared to win at those stakes and the backer is screwed or (2) the horse is winning but the distribution is not equitable to the horse or the backer. Just don't complicate things: (1) save your own money at a job to play at the lowest stakes you can afford and then (2) win $ at the table and move up with THAT money. It's just that simple. You're not practicing good bankroll management or patience if you can't do #1 and you aren't a good poker player if you can't do #2.

This is what I was saying but too lazy to type...although the example is way off bc of compounding interest, but w/e.

It has nothing to do with "life events or "really I make this" or whatever.

You asked if that was financially the best solution and it clearly is not and as RP has shown is actually terrible financially speaking.

God are people really this ignorant when it comes to basic finance?

This reminds me of friends/family constantly asking me for stock picks. My first question is how much credit card debt? "Meh, about $5k, but why does that matter? Tell me a stock to buy!"

It is quite easy to compare several available financial options and your staking deal is not optimal.

Put another way, your staking deal makes loan sharks look like the Salvation Army.

Again it has nothing to do with my actual opinion on stakes. It is just a financial perspective on the deal being offered.

The only staking that makes sense is selling action in higher stakes games and mtts at a markup.

FWIW, I was focusing on the short term...

And that's because you're a self proclaimed (nothing wrong with that btw) 10bb/hr winner.

So you're pretty much guaranteed to win, and therefore guaranteed to give up 40% interest, rake, split, and whatever else you want to call it, and worst of all, it is uncapped.