The backer is offering such terms because he knows the horse is very good/good at poker and will win money in the long run. If the backer offers these terms to a -10bb/100 loser than its the backers fault for not researching/understanding the horses skill level. It makes no difference when the horse chooses to cashout on a staking deal if there is makeup and the horse cannot leave the deal whilst in makeup unless he is qutting poker for good (which is pretty much every cashgame staking deal).

I have no idea how much experience you have when it comes to staking but from your posts id guess its close to 0.

I know you are a smart guy and I respect you but you are 100% wrong here. Your analogies are irrelevant because it is not comparable. A deal of any X/Y for the stakee can be completely reasonable up to 99/1 basically. It depends on the ability of the horse, games, volume etc. Staking someone who plays 10k hands a day and wins 10bb/100 at 2NL at 95/5 is basically comparable to putting money in the bank with much higher interest. There is essentially no risk. It's an extreme example obviously. I believe Adonis (HU reg) once said in an interview he had a backing deal where he got 92/8 in his favour and kept all of his SNE rakeback. Pretty good deal for him, sure, but also very good deal for the investor who has little to no risk. Obviously it depends on the horse and many horses won't be +ev to give rly high cuts, but in many cases it is.

Staking someone in Tuesday is different because of they lose, they lose and your equity is gone. You can not compare mark up to long-term staking splits. If you do long-term staking, there is make up and the stakee can not leave. If they lose money, your equity decreases some amount but not even close to the full amount. In many cases you barely lose any equity, if the make up is likely to almost certainly recovered (such as the Adonis example, 2nl mass grinder). This is a pretty rare case where the horse actually wants to quit poker, and in general for a good horse is pretty rare. It's one of the unlikely risks that as a backer, decreases your ev. It's pretty standard for a backing deal to have make-up, where the horse can not leave while in make up (unless mutually agreed or settled, or actually quitting poker - in which case the horse must offer future action if s/he rejoins the game). Cutting whenever up is also standard and common, although this varies with some people doing min amounts to split, time frames etc.

cliffs-
splitting whenever up is fine/std, as long as there is make up
having really high cuts in make up deals is fine
if horse actually quits poker he doesn't owe anything for mu
*but often for goodwill/to be friendly, horse rather compromises etc
*if ever comes back to poker ex-backer has right to action

Why are people making such a big deal out of the profit cuts here. Did you read the whole post? He's been grinding on his makeup for 5 months. Whether he took profit or every day or a more standard every month makes very little difference at this point. Either way, he's been working on the makeup in good faith for quite some time. I say, if he wants to quit poker, he owes the backer $0, no questions asked. Now, if he was looking for a new backer, that would be totally different, but the idea that a stakee can't quit poker after 5 months of grinding on makeup without owing money is absurd.

Wtf5, OMGClayDol and iggymcfly, you are right, I didn't appreciate the fact that the deal is long-term and there is a make-up.

So my apologies for posting stupid stuff.

nps. ^^

didnt read such a sentence in a long time

I mean I said he's a smart guy, over sights happen but yes cool to admit it, and don't need to say it was stupid.

as for the question i don't think this is a debate there is a clear and correct answer even though surprisingly there has been differing opinions from respected members etc..