Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
**RuseDawg Rosarito SNE Hyper Grind** **RuseDawg Rosarito SNE Hyper Grind**

08-30-2013 , 12:36 PM
Saw Ruse in one of my $15 18 man the other day, WTF is going on here? stay away yeah?....
08-30-2013 , 12:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by belthazorrrrr
Do you still use tn1? Shortcuts stopped working for me. Can you suggest me something else for shortcuts?
im scared to play now
08-30-2013 , 02:50 PM
They worked again after 5 hours. Dunno why
08-30-2013 , 03:52 PM
Chilled Im just gonna do 15-30s for a couple weeks to learn 18ms and then 30+.

Was doing the numbers and even if i crush 18s, 15/9 is better use of table space than 15/18; and 30/6 hyp and prob 15/6s too being better. But gonna bite the EV bullet while I learn. Was talking to Jdawg the other night about how weird it is Ive taken so long to play them. Loving them so far even tho meh results. Theyre perfect to mix in w 9m turbos and spend a ton of time in pushfold spots w weird ICM forces at play, which is my comfort zone. Not mixing them in a ton because VPPs are still my main goal, but regging them to fill in instead of MTTs mon-sat seems like a good change to my grind.
08-30-2013 , 05:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusemandingo
Chilled Im just gonna do 15-30s for a couple weeks to learn 18ms and then 30+.

Was doing the numbers and even if i crush 18s, 15/9 is better use of table space than 15/18; and 30/6 hyp and prob 15/6s too being better. But gonna bite the EV bullet while I learn. Was talking to Jdawg the other night about how weird it is Ive taken so long to play them. Loving them so far even tho meh results. Theyre perfect to mix in w 9m turbos and spend a ton of time in pushfold spots w weird ICM forces at play, which is my comfort zone. Not mixing them in a ton because VPPs are still my main goal, but regging them to fill in instead of MTTs mon-sat seems like a good change to my grind.
Yeah i've seen you in the games a bit recently. Haven't played any late game with you yet though. Maybe we both suck? Ha. GL in the new format.

P.S There's a sick study group for 18's, you should join. Josh can vouch for this. *sarcasm*
08-30-2013 , 07:50 PM
Hey, my name is Matt, im Jdawgs roommate. Im currently in a staking situation which started in 2011 and was put on hold when i got arrested in the states for weed and had to spend all of 2012 in south florida on probation. When that happened i was about 12k in makeup and my backer had been taking all of my online action at that time. After probation was over in march of 2013, I moved to mexico to start grinding.

My backer now has a staking partner and my backer has 25% of the stake and the new guy has 75%. I continue with the original makeup amount and my schedule includes everything except 100r, 215 turbos, Sunday500 and 1k tuesdays. So I got out of makeup early and made a few bucks but currently I'm on a 60k downer. FWIW, my backers new partner has tons of money and rarely ever plays poker anymore.

So as i got deeper in make up i would start cutting out things slowly, such as 320 ko on sat, 320 on wed, 109 2x turbo..... at this point they have me play only up to the big 109 and turbos under $27. There aren't many tournaments for me to play anymore during peak 180man hours, which btw they are giving me 30% of my profit in those 180s every 2 weeks. But my makeup on 180s dont reset bi weekly so could be a while before I'm up money during a 2 week chop.

Anyway my question is, do u think this is a fair schedule/good plan for me to get out of make up and still potentially make a profit from 180s so i can have cash in my pocket (since I'm currently busto obv), or do i have right to play more since my initial deal never discussed drastically changing schedule if deep in make up.
08-30-2013 , 08:30 PM
^legit. Interested in ppl's opinions.
08-30-2013 , 08:41 PM
brothas gotta eat imo

if initial deal didn't say anything about drastically changing schedule in event of ds, play more imo
08-30-2013 , 08:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apborrer
Yeah i've seen you in the games a bit recently. Haven't played any late game with you yet though. Maybe we both suck? Ha. GL in the new format.

P.S There's a sick study group for 18's, you should join. Josh can vouch for this. *sarcasm*
yeah these bros sure all know how to fold preflop. gotta teach ruse that shyt
08-30-2013 , 10:14 PM
pretty confused by your deal ufgators.
08-30-2013 , 11:00 PM
The gist is that ufgators was backed for everything except like tuesday 1k/sunday 500/100rs/etc and now his backers have forced him to play lower stakes while hes buried in MU which was accrued mostly at the higher stake games he was playing (obv).

I think the backers either need to cut some of the MU or let him play what the deal originally was....maybe sell action to some of the toughest tourneys he plays to reduce variance while making the $'s back. Other option obv being to drop him/sell him.

It kinda sucks because once ufgators agreed to this 180man deal (he gets 30% of his 180 profit every 2 weeks i think is what I understand it as), its sort of like the deal was changed/ufgators agreed to a resolution. The main problem imo was not stopping this cutting of tournaments/bi's he's allowed to play before it started/escalated, if my backer was telling me to drop games because I was DSing, I would say no, unless he's willing to cut the MU that was accrued at those games.
08-30-2013 , 11:09 PM
hopefully jdawgs elaboration help zima... i value your opinion on this topic obviously.
08-30-2013 , 11:17 PM
gonna be pretty hard to get out of 60k of makeup playing only up to the big109 and 27 turbos...
08-31-2013 , 01:39 AM
ah, ok


so, here are my thoughts (will be a bit rambly/probably not entirely answering your question as its hard to know the nuances of your situation 100%)...

So, this exact situation happens a lot in the MTT staking world. horses start a new deal, they crush and then want to add more things. stakers just agree cause "why not, he is crushing!!!". games are added and the inevitable downswing starts and then the staker gets a bit worried when the downswing gets "big". the horses avg buyin goes up and he then gets used to playing this bigger schedule and doesnt want to take anything out.

Its a weird spot. games change constantly and most backers just close their eyes and hope to run good. Elio and I have had many horses who do this exact thing. they win some at the start, we add a few games and then they downswing and we take them away. is that fair? i think it is. a lot of the time we tell them we might take them away quickly which i suppose is why its "fair". a lot of backers dont say this when they add games which is an oversight.

Backers ultimately have the right to do what they think is best for everyone (as long as they can be objective). can they let you play a 80 avg buyin then just drop you down to a 20 avg buyin? most likely not. what if all the sudden the horse sucks and all they can beat is a 20 avg buyin schedule? it doesnt make sense to keep putting a horse in games in which they are a long term loser in. Can a backer take out some of the bigger buyins which they think you are no longer winning in/the variance is too high, of course. backers just cant put their horses into slave labor to grind off the MU though.

Its hard to say what an actual solution is to ufgators problem with his backers. it depends how good he is (HH review by the backer is needed). if a backer just sees a 50k downswing and insta takes things out (without looking at a HH or anything) thats obviously wrong as well.

We had a horse who was playing everything up to early 100rs, sunday 500 etc, and he got into a lot of MU (100+). we were constantly looking at his HHs and he seemed to be playing well and just not running well deep which can happen at times. we let him keep firing and things just didnt turn around. he got into a decent amount more MU, and at some point, we noticed his HHs just not looking as good so we decided to take some of the bigger stuff out. he understood and thought it was fair (as elio explained the reasons why etc). if i had to estimate, he went from playing a 80-90 avg buyin to maybe a 40-50 avg buyin. did he like it, i would assume no, but he understood why we were doing this and we had plenty of conversations explaining why.


there is no exact science to many things when it comes to staking. as long as their is good communication, then surely anything can be worked through as long as both sides are reasonable.


not sure if that answered anything, but can answer some specific questions if needed.

gl
08-31-2013 , 01:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by z0fman
gonna be pretty hard to get out of 60k of makeup playing only up to the big109 and 27 turbos...
this is really the wrong way to look at things. what if the horse (not actually commenting on ufgators) isnt a winner in the bigger things anymore? the 60k MU quickly can spiral and then he wont be getting out of any MU regardless of the avg buyin.

just gotta put the horse in the best possible schedule that gives him the best chance to make some money. if taking some of the bigger stuff out is needed, then its what should happen.
08-31-2013 , 01:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdawg91
The gist is that ufgators was backed for everything except like tuesday 1k/sunday 500/100rs/etc and now his backers have forced him to play lower stakes while hes buried in MU which was accrued mostly at the higher stake games he was playing (obv).

I think the backers either need to cut some of the MU or let him play what the deal originally was....maybe sell action to some of the toughest tourneys he plays to reduce variance while making the $'s back. Other option obv being to drop him/sell him.

It kinda sucks because once ufgators agreed to this 180man deal (he gets 30% of his 180 profit every 2 weeks i think is what I understand it as), its sort of like the deal was changed/ufgators agreed to a resolution. The main problem imo was not stopping this cutting of tournaments/bi's he's allowed to play before it started/escalated, if my backer was telling me to drop games because I was DSing, I would say no, unless he's willing to cut the MU that was accrued at those games.
skipped over this, but wanted to touch base on it.

cutting the schedule some is normal (as long as all the right things are done leading up to it). if backers want to cut the schedule and its justified, then there is no chance any MU should be taken off. i really cant think of a situation where any MU should be cut tbh (*unless someone is being sold to another group, but thats another discussion)

If the horse really wants to play the bigger stuff, maybe he can set something up where he can sell 50% off to it in the MP/friends. the backer can take some on the deal and the horse gets to play the MTT. this opens up all kinds of other accounting/auditing problems which suck, but yeah.


as far as your last paragraph...what if you arent a winner in the games anymore? you want your backer to keep putting you in them over and over? you gotta trust your backer enough to let him make that decision, but its insane to think that a horse can just keep firing money into games he isnt a winner in because "hey, he let me play them for a little while". if this was 2007, i think i would put my whole stable in all the 100rs and pretty much everything online, but its not 2007. games change (and they change very fast these days) both sides need to have an open mind about the scheduling.
08-31-2013 , 01:56 AM
hey thanks alot. def answer most of what i was wondering... bu at this point do u think its a good idea to remove the hot 75 and hot 55 and big 162..... or do they have to much value at this point if im a winning player it would be dumb to cut those?
08-31-2013 , 02:03 AM
It all depends on the HH. Your backer needs to look at a HH of yours and see how good you are and make a decision if you are + in those mtts.

those mtts do have value, but it just depends who is playing them and how good they are.
08-31-2013 , 02:05 AM
Zima, you really think its cool to let a horse run up MU playing an agreed to X abi, and then expect the horse to grind out of that MU at .5 to .75x abi? I see the backer's one job as keeping the horse rolled at the buyins the stake was created for and if he cant do that he needs to either drop or create a new contract. If your horse cant beat teh games youre backing him for than that's on the backer.

The only issue I see in this deal is that the backer tried to work something out by offering a "side" 180 deal. Once the horse agrees to that theyve lost a bit of their ground on the " you need to keep me in the games this deal was created for" position.
08-31-2013 , 02:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zima421
It all depends on the HH. Your backer needs to look at a HH of yours and see how good you are and make a decision if you are + in those mtts.
WTF no. If somehow the spirit of the deal was putting the horse in +EV tourneys then youd need an independent arbitrator to decide what tourneys fit this. Not the subjective opinion of the backer.

Im sorry but you cant let someone run up a few hundo buyins at midstakes and then get cold feet and expect them to spend the next 1.5 years grinding out of it at lowstakes.

Am I missing something?
08-31-2013 , 02:13 AM
I suppose i am just talking about my own situation, as the opening section in my contact has the following line under the agreed upon stakes the horse can play:

What games you are able to play will be up for discussion as time goes. We reserve the right to change these limits at our discretion.

Even if this excerpt wasnt in the contract, i still think its ok for the backer to decide to change the schedule as long as its clear that the horse is no longer + in that schedule. I think its hard to explain, but i know when Elio and i make decisions we really make them with the best interest of both sides in mind. We do things that arent just the best thing in terms of money all the time, we try and do whats "right" (we have made mistakes and i would assume some past horses might disagree with what i just said, ha ha)


I disagree who heartedly with your last sentence in your first paragraph "If your horse cant beat teh games youre backing him for than that's on the backer." this would open up all kinds of ridic angles and what not as well. what if the games change? what if the horse cant put as much time towards poker and his game "slips" a bit? there has to be ways to change the schedule at times as the games change or as the skill level of the horse changes.
08-31-2013 , 02:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusemandingo
WTF no. If somehow the spirit of the deal was putting the horse in +EV tourneys then youd need an independent arbitrator to decide what tourneys fit this. Not the subjective opinion of the backer.

Im sorry but you cant let someone run up a few hundo buyins at midstakes and then get cold feet and expect them to spend the next 1.5 years grinding out of it at lowstakes.

Am I missing something?
When you go into staking someone, the "spirit of the deal" is to put them in +EV things, yes. when they come to us, they basically agree that we are the people deciding this (and when i say we, i mean Elio). We decide what to do with our money so they have to comply to our rules. If they dont want to take a deal from us (afer reading the contract or hearing how we do business), than thats fine. they can get a deal elsewhere (happened numerous times).

yeah, i think you are missing something. not everyone is an idiot and some people can look at things objectively. some people can do things thats best for both sides, and not just selfishly make decisions. (talking about backers)

and, i wouldnt trust anyone but Elio to tell me what horse is +EV in which mtts. its a work in progress, but after looking at HHs for years and doing this, he has gotten pretty good at the evaluation portion of things.

also, "getting cold feet" and no longer putting them in things they arent winners in is completely different. Not once have we ever tried to cut someones buyins because we were worried about bankroll stuff. not once have we ever ask someone to grind lower so we could recover MU in a less variance fashion. every time we ask people to move down is because we think its best for both sides and the person is no longer a winner in the games we are asking them to take out.

a lot of backers just get worried about downswings too much and start actually getting "cold feet" and it effects things way too much. downswings can do weird things to peoples minds. its hard to stay objective when 10-100k+ is on the line. if you dont trust your backer, dont go into business with him/her.

Last edited by Zima421; 08-31-2013 at 02:37 AM. Reason: lots of edits...
08-31-2013 , 02:57 AM
Ok yeah obv it all comes down to contract and if they agree to that then they need to nut up and grind off MU whereever you put them. But wo specific language to that giving one party the ability to change the terms of the deal at a moments notice is ridiculous.

Quote:
what if the games change? what if the horse cant put as much time towards poker and his game "slips" a bit? there has to be ways to change the schedule at times as the games change or as the skill level of the horse changes.
Then your investment is gonna under perform and we have a perfect example of why makeup is worth less than 100%. I mean where does it end. You back a guy to play 60 6m hypers and he loses a bunch. You really just gonna keep moving him down and if he settles at beating 7s he has to grind those for months at no profit for himself to clear MU because you were too aggressive?

And I use you in a broad sense because you and Elio know what youre doing and arent gonna need to move someone down multiple levels to be able to win. But not all backers can say the same and a lot dont have solid contracts. And the ones that arent smart enough to have a deal in place that will cover standard occurences are the last ones you should trust to objectively decide what buyins someone should be playing.
08-31-2013 , 03:02 AM
There is a huge difference for a backer when horse is on a downswing and still makes money and be on a downswing and loose a good chunk

Imo it is really unfair for the backer to drop the horse when on downswing. Visa versa, does the horse has the right to leave when be on upswing?
08-31-2013 , 03:07 AM
dont think MU being under 100% was ever a question. people vastly over estimate what MU is worth (always funny when other backers try to sell MU).

Also, there are other ways to structure deals so the horse sees "profit" even if they are buried in MU. i think every time we have asked someone to move down we have also done a couple other things for the horse so they would be able to make a little money on the side (loans/getting pre cashouts as they clear MU etc).

its all just a big compromise tbh. as long as both sides arent idiots and come into it with an open mind and have the same goal in mind, it should be able to be worked out.


We would never ask someone who was playing 80-90 avg buyin grind a 10-20 avg buyin schedule. one of the guys who we recently dropped in big MU we tried everything with him. changed schedule, incentives, coaching, HH works etc. was he + in a 20 avg schedule, for sure. is it fair to ask him to grind at that level, no, probably not. We let him go and all his MU went away as well. He owes us some money for loans we gave, but thats it.

      
m