What are everyone's thoughts on a backing deal where the backer offers the horse 10/90 with a makeup reset weekly, how does this compare to a normal 50/50 with makeup.

So if you’re down 5K in buy ins at the end of the week, u have to pay him 5K?

Sounds awful. Why not just play with your own roll at that point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, if you are down 5k at the end of the week it gets erased and you start with 0 makeup the next day

And u get 10% of the prize (minus makeup) if u you’re up on the week?

I think it depends on the stakes for the to be a worthwhile deal. If it’s high stakes tournaments I think this is a good deal for u. If it’s low stakes tourney this seems like a waste of your time.

Right, at the end of the week, whatever the profit is the horse would get 10%

unreg pre

Maybe 20/80 would be an ok deal if mid+ stakes.

10/90 would be horrid at any stakes imo. What stakes is backer offering OP?

Obv plus side to this kind of deal is being able to leave at any time as no makeup.

This is an odd deal, probably proposed by someone who either has no idea what they are talking about or by someone who's trying to semi scam you. If you have a big edge and put in serious volume, this is a terrible deal for the horse. If you are negative EV or are winning very small its somewhere between amazing and ok for the horse. There are also some serious incentive issues for the horse when they are down on the week and its day seven.

There's no real answer to your question as it entirely depends on your expected roi and volume. My gut would say to stay away as someone is going to get burned by this deal.

This is a good deal for 25k+ buyins

An explanation given to me was that

"If your ROI is 22% or less this deal is better than a 50-50 split with makeup.

And if your ROI is > 22% it's a better deal for the backers."


" A 90-10 split is like us buying 100% of the action at 1.11 and you using your money to repurchase 10% of the action.

That is basically apples to apples.
What is the difference between selling 90% of a tournament at 1.11 and you taking the 10% you receive and then buying the last 10% of the tournament?

The short answer is there is no difference.
Those two things are identical.

If 90-10 profit split and selling action at 1.11 are the same activity then the math gets easier to pontificate when no MU is involved.
Basically if you have a 22% ROI and sell action at 1.11 the investor gets 1/2 the profit and the player gets 1/2 the profit.
You get an 11% ROI on the buyin in the form of markup.
And we get the difference between the 11% markup we are paying and the 22% ROI you have which is 11%. "

huh?

I disagree with your first and last sentences, but this is the only reply so far that is making any sense.

Seems like a bad deal for both parties I feel. If player sucks, they keep getting makeup set to 0 which is great. If player is a world killer, he gets screwed with 10% of profit.

This type of deal would be bad for both parties unless it is for only high roller tournaments like someone above mentioned. Horse is going to play less than optimal only going for big scores because any small cashes are worthless. If horse gets in 8k makeup 5 days into the week no point in playing or caring.

Not to mention horse would have to profit 300k in order to make 30k on the year which is absurd. Hardly can live off of that...

sup norm

shrugging real hard right now.

If you lose 10k for 50 weeks and then bink 300k in the 51st week you're down 200k but have 30k in your pocket.

Bad deal for a winning player and a good one for a losing player.

For those of you saying it's a terrible deal, at what point do you think it's clearly better than a traditional 50/50 split?

15/85? Why do you draw the line where you do?

I think it's easier for someone to focus on playing well for a week while in MU that resets, than to focus on playing well in a $33 mtt when $100k in MU. Even if you think that's not the case, no matter the staking deal, that problem exists to some extent and trust is required.

I was thinking the samething as most people about the split. Unless it is for larger buy-ins or the player is a losing player but wants to get into high roller tournaments, it seems like a bad deal.

Buying in for $1500 and the Horse cashes for $8K and then makes $800 profit. Seems a little small. The idea of make-up reseting is interesting though.

No obviously not.

Just as a thought experiment, if you free-rolled an entire year's worth MTT schedule for 10% of action, you would make a lot of money.


The horse doesn't get only 10% of his winnings, because his losses are free, and on every losing week (and most weeks probably will be losing) he will not have to pay anything.

Imagine a guy who loses 30k over 3 weeks and then ships something in the 4th week for 30k. He's made nothing in the month, and he gets 3k risk-free...so it's not as though he has to be a $300k per year winner before he sees money.

In fact, it's 100%+EV for the horse unless he's an absolute crusher.