blonde poker forum

ive noticed a few sites poping up which deal in staking players, anyone used these sites? if you staked someone 100% for a tournament what kind of return would you expect? (50% profit?)

i;ve seen alot of people staking people into $3 + 30 comps the guys play the rebuys for extra value but run the clock down each hand to slow the game down to get to the freezeout stage

killing some games in the process

50% is pretty standard, much like live games. I think I heard someone made a top 3 finish at the Sunday Million in the last two or three weeks and was staked by one of these staking sites (And duly paid up).

The element of trust is really the issue, when you stake someone for a live game you have ways of contacting them thereafter, but they literally could dissapear off the face of the planet online. Every report I've heard suggests that they are pretty trustworthy.

Its certainly the future though, obviously we already have the online trader websites. I also know of a website that sponsors players regularly for the Sunday Million/live tournaments in return for signing up to poker rooms through them (Wont bother posting the link, PM me for details.)

Have they ever toyed with a staking sub forum on blonde?

Never toyed with it

Should we?

for a one off deal, 50% to the player is far too much, a fairer split would be something like 75% to the staker, and 25% to the horse. In a long-term deal, 50% is about standard.

The problem with 1 off deals is that all the times your horse doesn't cash, you are liable for the loss, whereas in longterm deals, the horse has to "make-up" the losses before taking a piece of the winnings.

It would be interesting. The benefit with blonde is I think a certain amount of trust is gauranteed, such is the community spirit. Obviously you wouldnt want to stake someone who joined yesterday and has one post.

I reckon a lot of the crew already confirmed for waterford wouldnt mind selling shares to those that aint?

One problem with selling shares for something like Waterford might be the price.

When you include my travel expenses, car parking for four days, hotel etc. the €500 tourney entry is more like €1000.

Now I doubt that anyone would want to purchase a 20% share of the €500 for €200

No but you may get 4 people buying a 5% share for €50

I wouldnt mind selling 20% of myself on that basis.

What the hell Ralph, I will start a new topic on this very subject, see how it goes

Why would anyone agree to play in a tourney where if they cash, they are only going to get 25% of the winnings?  Sounds like a crazy idea to me.  If it were capped so should the person go on to win a big one they still get a nice chunk of it (over 50%) then I would think it's a good idea, but I would never play for only 25 % of any winnings.

man that's a real shame I was gonna stake you for the 25K bellagio WPT. :)

If someone wanted to stake me into any tournament with a buy in of £1000 or over and pay my expenses, I would gladly play for 25%.

I suspect that I don't play my absolute A game when I play a big buy in tourney because subconsciously I always know that I have too much of my bankroll at risk, it would be great to play a few without having to worry about the money.

That being said, I'm very happy to plod along with £100 £300/ £500 "Good structure" events, with the odd biggie thrown in if I win a seat or if I am running particularly good.

Ah if all expenses are paid then I guess it's different, I thought only the buy in would be paid.    I still would want to play for more than 25% of myself though I think.   It's only ever going to be an attractive offer for tournaments way way out of my buy in range though.  I'd never settle for 25% of the Sunday Million for example, but if it was a major event (EPT, WSOP, WPT etc) with all expenses paid, I'd be more open to it.

So for that reason, I am able to accept the offer byron :D

well the first reason is that they most liekly cant aford the buyin, so they should be happy.. the second one is that they get a nice freeroll and dont have to worry about losing. Im pretty sure that if a poker player can get a 50% backing deal, tourney to tourney, with no make-up, its better for them then if they had the roll to bankroll themselves.

The best way to see it from the backers side is to assume that you have a 100 player tourney, and you back someone that is 0EV.. if they go 50/50 on a long term deal, (100 tournies) and the player finishes in each spot from 1--100, then the buyins will exactly match the returns, so with makeup, they both break even, but if the backer gives 50% of all the winnings, and absorbs all the losses, then if the player finishes in positions 1--100 in a 100 tournament trial, the backer will lose out as he absorbs all the losses, and the poker player, despite being 0EV, will make money from the deal... so it stands to reason that you cant give someone 50% on a tourney to tourney basis.

the Colonel is willing to be staked in the sunday biggies on stars / tilt  for a 25% return.

Graham believe you are about to play the GUKPT having to split your potential winnings with your Blonde team ?
Can you forsee any situation in the upcoming event that this might alter your decision making, taking this into account?

Me 2.. bring it on..

I would also love to freeroll all the big online comps for 25% ...

unless you already play them regularly, I would have thought most other players would love a shot at these comps without stumping up the entry fee.

ps....i'm running good

so basically we are all skint and looking for rich backers?

so is the chief

i was just thinking that  :D

No, of course not, I'll do my best, but this situation is a bit different.  I also get 50% of the winnings with the other 50% being divided between the other guys.  Regardless of what cut I was in for though, I would always do by best.

I'd appreciate free entry into tourneys, but I would value my contribution as more than 25%.  This is especially true for internet tournaments.   I guess there will be a entry level where I'd accept being backed for 25% of any winnings, but it would have to be a  high value tournament.  I'd rather buy my own way into the Sunday Million level of tourney rather than do what I can for the smaller cut.   Sure playing the Sunday big ones would be great to play in, but I genuinely feel that I am worth more than 25%.  I guess if it were entry to all the Sunday biggies then again I may accept as it's 4 or 5 tournaments in a single night so the total may add up to a nice amount, but for a one off event, I'd rather pay my own way.

If it's a live event on the other side of the world, or even in another country/town far away with expenses thrown in, then that's different.  I'd happily accept 25% for this, I did assume, probably incorrectly, that the thread was on about internet tournaments.

Lol at the thought of you not trying your hardest.  Not exactly the point I was trying to make.

I wondered if you thought if it would change your style of play, make you more aggressive as you were conscious that you wouldn't collect 100% of your take, or be more rocky as the bubble approached as you were determined to cash for your team.

Oh, I haven't thought that far ahead to be honest :D

I expect I'll just play my normal game, I can't see me changing much, mainly because I'm not quite sure what to change as it will be my first major tournament.  I guess I may tighten up around the bubble, but I sometimes do that anyway.  Once I've made the final table, I shall go for it though  ;whistle;

It's too hard to tell to be honest, I've never been in this situation before, but I shall try to ignore the fact that I have people that have an interest in me.  Whether or not I actually forget about that is another thing, the fact that I don't get 100% of the winnings is irrelevant in this to me.  I'm more pleased to be playing in my first major tournament and don't want to look an arse :)

me 3 (or 4 or 5) - I'm losing count!

Well Ralph, 20% has been taken up on me at that price.

 ;nemesis; ;snoopy'sguns; ;nemesis; ;snoopy'sguns; ;nemesis; ;snoopy'sguns; ;nemesis; ;snoopy'sguns;


No pressure from us.......honest!! :D

it's as good as in the bag ;)

Thought I would give my 2p as I been involved in staking and being staked.

The appropriate retun % should proportianally relate to the amount of risk. Im not ashamed to admit im currently in a bankroll rebuilding mode and am currently being staked on stars by selling shares in myself and am splitting it 65%/35% in favour of the backer. The variance for the backer imo is quite low as the investment is spread out of 30 tournaments in low fields.. In theory I could have ran at 60/40 as I am pretty certain I am going to run at a profit. This spreadsheet (http://www.matthewandnikki.co.uk/180mantracker.xls) shows how I am doing it.

However the higher the variance ie staking someone in the Sunday million should be about 70/30 as there is a very very strong change that no matter your skill level a backer paying 100% is often going to walk away with nothing.