blonde poker forum

Started a new thread obv....

So far we have had horses that get very touchy any time someone dares suggest they aren't worth the markup on their thread.  It seems as if they felt the remarks were maligned, and often originating from some quarters that were highly unlikely to actually take a piece.  The latest development was the horse offering to take an additional piece of himself at the same markup in a (flawed but noble, with due respect) attempt to support the notion that it was good value.

On the flip side, we have stakers and punters that would like to have a healthy discussion about why a proposal may or may not be value before piling in at 3.6  2.7  1.25 1.1  Some of this may include sharing information that, despite assumptions, may not have already been in the public domain.  Perhaps something along the lines of "I'm still waiting to get paid from last time.."  A staker may feel that 1.4 is bad value, but unless he wants to stand a 6-fig liability when challenged to do so, it is difficult to strike a fair bet.

In a large-field, high buyin event, the most likely outcome is that the horse fails to cash.  So having a straight "bet you £500 you don't cash" does not work.  The horse needs an opportunity to have some further upside when they do go super-deep without bankrupting the poor unfortunate that dared to lay it to a £100 stake.

So, my suggestion would be a 100 index.  Those familiar with spread betting can stop reading now, but I will give an example for the others.

Me to play WSOP M.E next year - $10k buyin.

Fails to make the money ----- bet settles 0
Makes < $30k ------------------- bet settles 25
Makes $30k<X<$100k ------- bet settles 50
Makes $100k<X< $300k ---- bet settles 75
Makes > $300k ---------------- bet settles 100

NR no bet.  No other outcomes are possible. (obv the scales could change for different proposals, or for other events)

Now I can offer to pay 12 on this index for £100 a point to anyone that cares to sell.  People could snap me off (wouldn't blame them) and we have a bet where every eventuality can be calculated in terms of P&L.  (My max downside would be £1200 and their max downside would be £8800)  Bets can be with or without escrow, as agreed at the time of consummating the trade.

Alternatively, someone could decide that 12's was a bit skinny, but offer to sell at 18.  Now we have a 2way market that has taken shape, my supporters could buy from anyone that dared to sell me at 18, those still laughing that I was playing the M.E could sell £100 or any part thereof to me.  People should imo observe protocol here and sell to the first buyer, or buy from the first seller, until they have been seen off for their full size.  Ofc, the market can fluctuate, someone bid 13 and someone else can offer @ 16 and the market tightens up, everyone can back their opinions.  Some nutter might come along and take all the 16s, then take all the 18s and then bid over for more at 18, so the new market becomes 18bid, 25 offered.  (You may ask who is offering 25s at this point, the answer would likely be "some of those that bought 12's earlier :D)

Anyway, I think that framework would work, it has stood the test of time in many other areas and gives a fair risk:reward ratio to both buyers and sellers.

What does everyone think?

I think the cock measuring surrounding the staking threads is fun for us railers  :D

Very clever. I look forward to its debut in a thread.

I thought this was going to be one of those characther reference threads for stakers and stakees.

I do like the idea and seems solid to me, would certainly allow us to back our opinions without having to remortgage the house.

I am assuming we could change the £ per point as obv I would be more of a £2 per point kinda guy.

Great idea. Only thing I would suggest would be a cap on stake size/money at risk in relation to the buy-in of the tournament to mitigate possible non-triers (not that I believe this would happen but rather from a point of completeness).

100% agree with this.

Alex's in Columbia seems the obvious tournament to start with. Am I right in thinking the divisions + amounts can be messed with? If so, how about:

No cash: 0
Cash: 30
Final table: 70
Win outright: 100

Is that price-upable?

The final table/win outright parts will always be tricky until field size is confirmed.

The field size won't be confirmed until the tournament starts, setting a line will involve the educated guessaments, just wanted to check that 25 50 75 100 aren't required numbers for it to work, right?

This doesn't solve the anti funking dilemma.  

From where I was I wasn't happy with anti-funking Alex.  I can only speak for myself, but I'd have been reasonably happy with him cashing, but would be anti-funking him hard as he approached/got deep in the final table.  

Can we just not accept that some people may not think he is +EV playing off 1:1, but not value at the price?

I am not sure the betting solves this argument, as fairly big donks can always win tourneys and the greatest can go out first hand.  

Yeah you can plug whatever numbers in there one wants.

Theoretically if one knows a player's true ROI Vs the field (obv theoretical) and the distribution of their results (ie. are they a mincash merchant or a go-for-broke specialist) this market can be priced perfectly.

I would be very happy to leave it at that, but some people keep bringing up prices, I would like the opportunity to bet against them sometimes.

Have you considered a career in the porn industry?

Do you have some contacts?

Lol. Afraid not. I got laughed at at my first interview so never pursued it any further

Corrrect, you can build an index any way you think fit, or any way it best reflects what can happen in the underlying event.  Obv once the parameters are set, they can't change for that event, only the price.

i may be missing the point completely here...but if some one thinks they are good enough to warrant others backing them at a premium...then why the f@#k do they need staking at all??????

surely you would make shit loads more playing for yourself.

Hey Tittybean, does this remind you of me about 18 months ago lol

don't like you only quoted because you agree ;)

Capital FM has a really ironic series adverts about the university of Derby.

They each contain a different reason, for example "Reason number 7- small class sizes".

There's hundreds of reasons why good players ask for staking.

Reason number 4 - "Good players sometimes aren't rolled to play tournaments they're profitable in".

Deep down of course I agree, but I am being educated slowly

God please not this again!

Just in case anyone doesn't know this, sometimes in poker the best players do not win, even for quite long periods of time sometimes.

Reel me off a bunch of big name pro's and i'll happily wager 1/2 of them are staked.

the question makes sense there are just so many reasons in life for someone to have a cash flow issue that is valid.

fair enough if it makes sense to others but it just doesn't make sense to me.

i could understand an amateur playing in a big buyin wanting some of it secured.

i could understand a pro not wanting to put $1m in to a buyin event

i could understand people wanting to stake proven winners thinking they will always win

i just can't understand the proven winners (say someone with a £200-300K winning history on hendonmob) being worried about selling percentages for a tourny.

that said...i am relatively new to live poker and play because i enjoy it and like the challenge of learning from better players and becoming a bit better myself (i can be a bit crazy online).

no...thought about it again...i still don't get it  ;shame;

Imagine I am half as good as the man the myth the legend, Jason Herbertmob.

Say I have 5million in 'winnings' (they sure do track outlay lol), imagine that those were over 10 years ago and i've bought a house and had many many parties with hookers. That million is now not there, under the assumption I was actually a winner before and can adjust to the 'modern' game then there is alot of reason if they are trustworthy for them to get backed.


What amazes me is the number of people with no record/no even ability to justify a markup who get staked at markup.

Herbertmob so good.