blonde poker forum

There's recently been an emergence of 70/30 staking deals appearing on the rail. It seems alot of people have an opinion on this, it'd be nice to hear all of them and discuss what people think.

For those that don't know, a 70/30 staking deal is a deal in which the player sells 100% of their action, for 70/30 split in backers favour of any winnings. This equates to approximately the same as selling at 1.4 without stakeback, 1.3 with (thanks for the numbers Action Man).

Opinions are pretty split at the moment about this. Personally, I put up a thread for such a deal because I had no other way to play such a fantastic value tournament. I wasnt planning on making a living playing poker through these types of deals, though I may well revert back to one in the future. I also tried to be as blindingly honest as I could when I put up my thread, so I could inform people exactly what they were buying into.

Whats your opinion on this?

Terrible value.

Fun punt.

If people are happy to pay then what's the problem.  If yh really wanna be honest then just put the 'it works out at 1.4/1.3 in the thread.

Tbh just from reading the HH where you emptied the clip with less than 3rd pairc with 35 left makes me think ur more than worth it :)

One of the worse players on the circuit manages to get 1.3 becuase he's blinked couple of live donkaments...

Ilu <3

70/30 after stakeback on a £100 tourny, the horse is getting paid* £30 to play it.  (* +/- their skill set c.f. the field.)  It is punt territory, it may not be great value, but if the numbers are any smaller it makes little sense for the horse to play it.

70/30 after stakeback on a £5k event is a bit different.....

Personally...

I see these deals as people who are massively under-rolled, generally, no roll at all. I'm happy to back friends in this agreement to as Dubai said in other thread help them get on their feet. If for example Jamie won 8k this weekend he would definitely not put a similar thread up, but if he put a staking thread up would buy a piece as if anybody else put a piece up on the forum. For people REGUARLY buying pieces with this agreement I think a makeup deal or a deal similar to Guy's MTT staking thread would be alot more suitable and fairer to everybody involved.

Would much prefer people just say exactly what it is. If you are basically selling 80% at 1.3 then say it rather than some people on the forum putting up 30/70, 20/80 etc splits. Lots of people enjoy a punt on this forum and I can't remember (except Muscles) the last person who didn't sell out a staking thread for an event 1k and under. I think that means that we have ALOT of buyers and a healthy market on the forum, however it is imperative people understand what they are investing in and the value etc. I thik if we all just say X% at 1.x (2.x if you're Dave Fkn Shallow) then it would make things alot easier and you could compare how much somebody is selling their selves compared to others.

If we actually had a template that all stakees had to fill in it would probably be good for everybody.


Name

Tournament and buy in

Mark up

5% =
10% =

History/Pedigree

Vouches

Payment details

Yeh I think lots of people just aren't aware that a 70/30 deal = buying at 1.42, so may swerve buying a piece in someone at 1.3, thinking this is better value, when it's not.

I don't mind people putting up these threads of course, but I think they should write exactly what 70/30 means, and include the 1.42 figure. That way it's totally transparent.

selling at 80-20= ?

isn't that more the norm these days?

Also the first staking package I ever sold was for a tournament series in Newcastle.

Total buy ins was something like £500. And I was keeping 50% after cashes. So a 50/50 deal! I had no idea of course and was definitely a minus ev stake ldo.

The 70/30 deals usually look such bad value, but for a one off tournament to do friends a favour it is fine.  

When break even players put up a staking thread asking for thousands to pay a big schedule with 42% mark up, it looks like preying on people's genorisity/naivety.  There really can't be that many players who have a long run expected roi up there at decent stakes these days.  Even if they did have an roi in the 40s, they are taking credit for that from the backer and hence leaving the buyer just buying variance at best.  A lot of these deals are -EV + buying variance.  

The likes of Dubai/ railtard asking a reasonable make up which leaves something of their edge in it for a buyer, and is a completely different thing.

The only thing is, is somebody going to be motivated to grind a 12bb stack when they are only going to get 20% of a cash? Like sitting there for 2 days close to the bubble you're probably going to make ICM mistakes around the bubble because you need a stack to justify any kind of hourly.

I think generally anybody who plays a tournament should have at least 35% of themselves. But of course who am I to say how motivated somebody is going to be.

Yeh I mean, even with 70/30s saying Joe Bloggs ROI in the £500 deepstack is 25%, that means he's going to make on average £125 everytime he plays it, and say he play's it for 6 hours on average. If he's only getting 20/30% of the profits he's making £25 or £37.50 everytime. Across 6 hours that's an hourly of £4-£6....

Just need to get my ROI up to 40% and Id be able to quit my job!

I've never sold at any real markup before. I've never felt too comfortable with it, and I've also had the same people taking a %, and never felt like i could ask to put a markup on top, especially as I feel they may/may not have been doing me a favour. These 70/30 deals do seen somewhat unfair to the backer, but the onus on research is for the backer, and if the stakes sell, they sell, so who cares. Supply and demand yo

Hourly is irrelevant to the stakees reason for wanting to play.

People just want to play the event and they probably believe they arent the value in the field (or moreso there is value in the field). Most of these people will have jobs etc and just fancy playing etc

People who put a 70/30 thread up arent doing it because they think its a shrewd way of getting 1.4. Id say 95% havent even thougth about the fact they are getting a mark up.

As for PLeno's point - i think its quite important. If you dont have enough of yourself there will come a point where you could make a decision for the wrong reasons.  That being said, as most people are saying they punt on these type of stakes, then maybe it would never be the wrong decision as  both sides want to win not min cash.

How is that relevant in a once per month tournament?

It's clearly just a punt so hourly rates mean absolutely nothing whatsoever.

So how would a well worded proposal for a tourney be written with fairness to all parties.

Say I wanted to play the £500. Clearly I need to get something out of it but it's out of my bankroll.  Are we saying that ideally I'd buy 50% of the stake and put the rest up for sale ?  So for the £500 I'd ask for £250 staking (I know rake's not listed here) and offer to split winnings 50/50 or 70/30 after stake has been returned?  What would be a good example?   I'm not doing it, just curious.

From a personal point of view I've both sold %s and bought %s.

If I sell it's only ever at 1:1 and I try to keep at least 50% of myself. I just think that people will know I'm taking it seriously if I've put in a chunk myself.

As for staking others I usually just stake people that I like. I'm not interested in the actual 'value' of a stake. I fully understand what the value is but I really don't care.

Obviously there would come a point where it would take the piss in which case I wouldn't buy any.

As for the recent £500 staking thread's the only one I've gone for was Tom's. If you want to look at it long term I think Tom's probably worth 1:1 against that field so it's costing me about £17 every time I stake him.

If I can help a friend play a comp that he loves and also give both of us a chance of winning a few quid for £17 then I'll take it once a month.

Great subject for a thread Jamie, and well done / UL on the weekend.

It gets mentioned quite often but I'm not sure there are many people, if at all, who need staking to play a £500/1k comp but at the same time aren't motivated to win 30% of high 5 figs. I think the MC thread I put up was good value and all the rest were shite value.

I'm kind of struggling to understand how selling at 70/30 in an open and honest fashion is praying on the naive and should be banned,  but inducing a weak inexperienced player to put all his money into the pot when you have the nuts is something to be applauded

Personally I would just avoid the ones that are stated in 70/30 terms etc and think it would be easier for universal understanding and comparability if all staking proposals were stated in terms of mark up and amount up for sale ie: 50% available at 1.1 or whatever.

I'd also be more comfortable if the stakee had personal money at stake, so doesn't sell 100%, but realise that may not always be practical depending on circumstances. If I get staked I'd always want at least 40-50% of myself or I don't think I would bother.

I realise I dont stake that often but just how I see it

I thought it was more open to say I'm selling 100% for 70/30 split thus not putting any money up myself then to say I'm selling 70% @ 1.42.... as if to try and avoid the fact that I'm not putting any money up.

Good post.



Both of these are just not even close. The threads are very honest, not intentionally misleader or any incorrect information, like I stated above, the first time I ever sold I did exactly the same thing. If Blonde eductaed stakees and stakers and made it a rule that everybody had to say X% at 1.x it would make things alot eaiser for everybody and could help us decide at how much mark up to sell.

There are essentially two types of stakees...........

- people who want to take a punt in a tourney, but aren't rolled for it, and aren't necessarily big winners at that level. (Many of these have good game, but cannot reasonably argue that they will crush that level).
- people who are proven winning players, who want to sell some, to reduce variance.

I like to see the first group put some of the cash up themselves, and sell the rest at 1:1.
Always think it comes across better if someone is backing themselves to some extent, even if they have a limited roll.

The second group (Keys, Dubai, Goulder....) have a greater right to charge what they think they are worth, as they have proven that they can deliver in a similar situation.

As to Tom's point, I think almost all staking requests on BP are presented with honest and fair intent, and there is no real need to regulate / standardise...... it's a forum, and is self regulating, in that if someone is trying to pull a fast one, there are enough 'policemen' on here to get stuck in.

In what way doesn't the stakee have personal money at stake? All the people who sold at 70/30 at DTD this weekend were playing for around £25k in their own pocket.

How isn't that personal?

[X] Made it

WAL :)

cos they're freerolling the whole event

Longer term staking makes more sense to a backer, rather than one-off punts.  As for people not having enough of themselves to care, or to make decisions for the wrong reason:  If 20% of the tourny isn't worth their while, don't ask for 80/20 on a staking thread!!  If you ask for 80/20 on a thread and sell out, that's the best result possible?  Don't turn up at the venue and go "meh, not worth my while, may as well jam it in."  Price up your staking thread so it is worth your while and then go and play it properly.

If I saw a player that I thought "hmm he will prolly do 70/30 for 100% and then the dirttty little pr1ck will prolly swap a few %s at the venue" then I just don't go anywhere taking a piece.  

.....and his backer is going to be losing 17%(£85) every time he plays it.

I play a £1000 GUKPT.  I'd like to think I am still fairly positive roi in these, but it probably costs me upwards of £100 in expenses even before I cost in the time off work.  So overall my EV is probably negative, so reallistically I am just playing for ego reasons, and I am a bit of a masochist for stil playing them.

Yet somebody who isn't rolled for it wants to mantain £6 an hour, while I lose 17% backing them.  You serious?

If you aren't happily with the hourly of slow structured deepstack live donkaments, don't play.  

I mean this issue only comes about because ppl actually buy these type of packages. Sure there almost always terrible value, but the ppl would buy these have their reasons and generally just fancy a punt so fair play. If it sells, more power to the person freerolling if not they will have to offer something that nearly constitutes value....

I don't really care how much the mark up is etc etc... up to the buyer what he wants to buy and at what rate as has been discussed numerous times.

I just found it a bit odd to ask for 100% staking into  £500+ comps on a regular basis and then say if you binked you would continue to ask for a 100% staking... thats like saying to your mate im on my uppers can I come and stay with you and eat ur food but if i win the lottery id like you to still keep me..

With  not winning a seat this weekend I decided to help out the blog during the devilfish stream then after with Tighty. Before the event I had numerous people on here and Facebook saying they wanted to buy a piece of me. 7 people in total wanted between 10% and 75% and could have sold out almost 3 times. I assume that these offers would all be at 1: 1.0.

As I am walking around blogging Everyman and his dog is like "did you play yesterday " and I explain that I only play deepstacks if I win a seat ( due to family commitments and traveling light as Tikays diary would put it ). Two guys offered to put me in then and there as a late registration, one splitting the money 70/30 and one 50/50 ( I politely declined their offers I know of people that sell at 2.0 and think this equates to the being put in at a 50/50 split).

Surely is the market not dictated to by supply and demand. The guys who sells at 70/30 can't have his ethics questioned but is just taking the best option that is available to him. If making him put the deal is actually 1:1.3 (Triggs figure) looks a bit more transparent then I am sure he would do it.

Just to make sure we are all on a level playing field I have noticed that a lot of people moaning about reds 70/30 and advocating using the other system are backed players in make up deals. Can you work out for me in the 1:1.x formula what the amount is when you are put into tournies for 50% on a make up deal.  I would bet the price that you get it is not far off the price that red has asked.

The deal I have is that my buyins are paid for in full and I get to keep 50% of the profits. That would be @ 2.0 were it not for the makeup. I don't know whether it's possible to calculate an equivalent figure taking into account the makeup component. 

Make up deals are completely different Jase. You can't compare them at all.

The player gets all his buy ins paid for but he owes the staker all of the money. It's just a loan really with the player basically working for the staker and earning a wage based on how much he wins.

Galen Hall put up some interesting staking thoughts on 2+2 recently, though obviously it is more apt for Americans with the tax implications he discusses ...

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/184/staking-selling-shares-live/couple-thoughts-about-markup-1175405/

Funny timing, was gonna put staking thread up for big buyin comp and was playing around with what price to charge cos think its the type of comp people overestimate the field quality and underestimate edges due to size of the buyin and misperception of players abilities. Will leave it a few weeks now :)

Just my opinion...I have always thought it a little cheeky when I see these 70/30 fully staked by backers. The player wants to free roll the event but is basically saying up front that I don't want to have my own cash at risk. It isn't rocket science surely, if you are not rolled to play a 500 event, or you are not comfy putting your money into it, why are you asking to play it?

Just play the 50/100/150 that you can afford.

Ok Ty for being open and obv makeup has to reduce that 2.0 considerably tho.

Yeah I do get that also Matt but for people to say 70/30 is not value and have a dig is completely wrong. If you are happy to buy buy but if you are not happy to buy then don't.  

After back to back finals ceri must be considered better value than Tikay but who are we to say that they should ask between 1:1.0/1.3.  I am pretty sure if either of em put up a staking thread asking for 1:2 they would both sell out (both for differing reasons)

You will get 1:2.5 you legend ( just not off Tom) :)

Whens the $25k mate?

That is what we used to call a SOTBO

Surely the $1mil One-Drop at the WSOP?

Nah Dave got a seat for the $25 WPT for winning Dublin. Was just wondering when it is as have a v small %

end of May. :)

There is talk of 24 confirmed for this, 8 absolute whales (silly bands man etc). If I won the Euromillions I would put Dubai into it!

If you dont think someone is going to be motivated to play for 20-30% surely you would not of invested in them in the first place?

People must take character/reputation into consideration in some way when buying pieces so you have an idea on whether the guy is giving it 100% even before the event.

Make up makes a huge difference, you can back somebody who is only marginally profitable with the mark up in place, as in the very long run you would make 50% of that marginal profit.

Where we do differ is that I think it should be perfectly OK to criticise a deal proposed on a public forum.  It would be always wrong to have a personal dig, but I don't see why I can't say that I think it is lousy value.  You say if you think it isn't value just don't buy, but I would reply if you can't take criticism don't ask for money on a public forum.

The fact I am posting on this thread rather than the threads elsewhere is simply because I don't think it is particularly right to pick one particular thread.  I'd far rather do it here.  When this thread popped up, I'd been thinking about starting a general mathematics of poker thread where value and otherwise of staking would be one of the things that could be discussed.

As an aside, in your previous post you mentioned there was a lot of criticism of red's 70/30 proposal.  I don't think there was and I am not sure you should have singled him out.  But as you mentioned him, I'd say that given the amount he gives to blonde than that is one particular proposal I really don't have a problem with.

One of the things that all stake request should have in them is the real name of the person asking for the stake, I read a lot of them and have no idea who the person is. Tho most have a link to THM database some of them don't.

Just got in from the school / playing at the park but used you as an extreme example to highlight the fact that you are both gonna get backed for different reasons by different people. No offence intended but used you as an extreme example of being popular and would sell out a staking thread

Lol, no offence taken Mr Updater.

It's rather late in my life, & I am singularly ill-equipped to worry about appendage waving.

of course you have every right to your opinion and on thinking back it's generated a lively debate and has not actually got personal in any way as far as I can see. Most people post "flame away" so don't mind it.

I suppose I ought to comment here given that I was one of the players that was staked 70/30 for the £500 Deepstack.

There are obviously lots of varying views on here and it has created a lively debate, which is great.  I must admit I am surprised with some of the views and feel a lot of people are completely missing the point here....  Staking proposals are purely a case of basic economics, i.e. supply vs. demand and finding the market’s equilibrium price.  As a person looking to be staked you put forward a proposal that you think is priced correctly according to what you offer (skills, record, time invested etc) and the market (in this case blonde forum members) decide whether it is a value proposition or not and decide if they want to buy or not.  It couldn’t be simpler. If people don’t want to bother buying a piece then also... fine.

I read almost every staking thread on this forum and have done for years and at times I think a player’s proposal represents value and if I have a few quid spare I get involved.  If I feel it isn’t value and I don’t want to invest, I ignore it. I take particular issue with Doobs here who for some reason feels he can publically decide, be judge and Jury and comment who is and who isn’t value... should we care about your opinion or just expect you to politely not get involved if you’re not interested? I wonder if you examine every item on eBay each day and flame the sale price and seller on their forum if they are selling their tut for a price you don’t like?...


On sicilian’s point
“just found it a bit odd to ask for 100% staking into  £500+ comps on a regular basis and then say if you binked you would continue to ask for a 100% staking... thats like saying to your mate im on my uppers can I come and stay with you and eat ur food but if i win the lottery id like you to still keep me..”


This is NOT the point I was making by saying this, it’s actually the opposite.  If I had won the £90K (£30K for myself) I would have paid a huge chunk of my mortgage off, gone on holiday, bought some furniture, treated the wife and have a new bank roll but it still wouldn’t be enough to play this event regularly. Also, to say to someone who stakes you that now you’ve done a bink with their money and next time I won’t need you as i’m on my ‘own dime’ now is in my view morally wrong – even though I could now afford to play the tournament with my own cash, I would have actually wanted to give those same people the chance to profit again from me playing for them and look at it as a long term arrangement, which was mutually beneficial to both parties, so your point couldn’t be more wrong.

People are failing to see that these staking arrangements are designed to be mutually beneficial to both backer and staker and not as one person put it (Doobs i think) ‘asking for money’ on an open forum – no-one is holding a gun and robbing these people – everyone has a choice whether or not to invest!

Final point... I don’t think anyone on here has ever sought to confuse anyone about rates by using 70/30 instead of 1.3 etc and I think anyone buying pieces will know the score.

Good luck to all with you future staking threads.
Greg

some good points in that post bud.

gud reading this when i get my post up im hoping to get some backing from u lot i know u dont now me but would like to sell out it only going to be the £150 deepstack any way lol but u never know  any way that along way off

this pretty much spot on for me. Its a golden time for stakees at the moment. Without building a roll from scratch playing thoasands of hands online and going through the limits, just have a big bink live. People, including myself are just addicted to the sweat these days.

Personally, its nothing to do with not wanting to risk my own money lol. I stated on my thread that I will be moving out of my parents house soon and moving in with my girlfriend. This means buy furniture, appliances and all that other stuff, along with getting a mortgage. I cannot justify playing poker when we need the money for other things.

All I wanted to do was get a chance to play a tournament with a massive prizepool to attempt to bink a score for myself/investors. By the sounds of things, you want people to play for free?

When people have a bet they should bet to their pocket.

If I have £500 on something I pay for it myself, If I cannot afford it I have what I can afford. If I grouped a set of people together and told them I fancied something at a really big price but didn't want to risk my own money, then said I want you all to club £500 together and put it on my selection, if it wins I want 30% of the winnings they would tell me to fuck off, and rightly so.

I accept that poker staking is seen differently but at the end of the day if you cannot afford to play poker because you have put your money into more important things, and girlfriends and houses and appliances are far more important, then you should cut your cloth accordingly.

I bet you have spent less on going out, maybe cut a few corners here and there too to make those things happen, then do the same with the pokering too.

The mentality seems to be 'I can not afford this now but I will sell my action to my mates at mates rates that favour me, not them.'

Where I come from mates rates mean the mate gets a discount, not pays a premium.

My view isn't person specific by the way, it is just how I see it as a whole.

great great thread. Some really good replys here, and the thread hasnt been de-railed like many are.
I think sellin old school by saying 70/30 in backers favour is a pretty clever way of disguising ur actually selling at 1.4, I say this as its common practice to sell at a premium, in a decimal, 1.2, 1.25, etc etc
I think a community like blonde (and the poker community in general) is built around friendships, with a ton of banter and 'sweats'. Buyin pieces of people in comps is a great way to build relationships. I think if people are willing to pay premiums, then there can be no real argument. for many its fun, but For many its a serious investment and even buying at 1.3 can be hugely +ev in the right situations.
I personally have sold action for online stuff at 1.15 - 1.16. I am probably still a decent investment at 1.3+ in high stakes online mtt's, but keep it smaller as dont want to price out smaller stakes guys who want sweats for pretty cheap.

I saw someone comparing poker staking to some other form of real life investment (mentioning to friends about "sticking in 500 each and having x amount of equity"), but this is a pretty pointless comparison IMO (dont mean this offensively in any way), as the poker world is a far stretch from reality at times, and that is why having poker (and poker friends), and a life outside poker is so important.

As i said, great great thread.
marc

Although its not great value in a lot of cases I dont think its bad to buy or sell pieces in a 70/30 after stakeback deal.  Some people might genuinely not be able to afford it and will be a good sweat in the tournament however if I saw someone putting these up and had a big cash or several cashes and theyre still putting up staking threads for the same deal Id be wondering wtf theyre doing.

Being freerolled is fine but I think its bad form if you get some results and have the money to buy more of yourself but are happy just to keep freerolling.  You're taking money out of the poker community at no expense to yourself with no intention of putting any back in.

Hi Railtard,

I would take a % of you in a heartbeat at 1.15/1.16 and I don't think we have ever met. I know Greg but I wouldn't take a % at 1.4. At 1.15/1.16 and putting the % amount of cash in that you do on your staking threads then I would take a % of Greg in a heartbeat too because it is the right price.

yeh nice post m8, agree.

Spot on bobby.

I am pretty sure I have only ever commented once on a proposal on the staking board that I wasn't involved, and pretty much regretted it not long after.  Even then I was trying to be construcive, but realised it was never going to come across that way to some.  Hence I am not sure where you get the idea that I like to publically decide who is and who isn't value. 

I am not even sure why you have taken particular offence to me, and not the others who share the same view.  It seems you are doing exactly the same thing you accuse me of, by naming and shaming just the one person.

Anyway better be off, Bobby1 made my point far better than I did. 

Good night.

Very good thread...

I think there are alot of good points in this thread and its certainly one I am going to keep bookmarked for the future...

I have spent pretty much the entirety of my poker career backed and have publically sold action elsewhere for varying different types of stakes. I have never actually sold a stake using markup before as I have always used the backers cut after stakeback method.  The main reason for that is due to the fact that I started on PTP where that system is used and written into the software. 99% of the times I have been involved in backing people I have also used the same method. While it may be considered by some as a clever way to disguise selling at a larger markup it may also be unfamiliarity with how markup itself works. Saying its a clever way to disguise asking for staking an 1.4/1 or w/e I think is somewhat unfair because if the person buying the action doesn't fully understand the numbers, thats his fault for buying something using a system he doesn't understand. Nobody is hiding from anything or deliberatly trying to decieve because if that was the case then 99% of the time there will be larger issues than just wether the guy posted using markup or backers cut.

Another thing that should be added is that I think that just because someone doesn't have their own money at stake, does not necessarily mean they are a bad horse. Its certainly a nice thing to see when looking at a player you don't know with limited results but I do think there is a stage where you can start to look past that type of consideration, wether it be because you know them or because of their results/history/vouches etc.

I do favour a free market system and I don't think that people should be stopped from posting stakes in using markup or backers cut. I do think the backers cut method is actually an easier method to use for some types of stakes (ie longer term stakes where br is being recycled multiple times) but that may also be due to my limited knowledge oh how markup works.

Good Post Boba...... I think to continue to risk none of your money on a regular basis without make up is not on.... as many have said cant pay..don't play

As has been said, a great thread. I think there are so many factors at play when staking - especially the community angle that exists on Blonde.

When I decide to stake someone, I consider three things in this order; do I think they represent good value, if less so, are they a member of the community I'd like to support (within reason), and do I want a punt.  I also consider the tournament and buy in and make a decision.  An example would be the recent £500 at DTD - I was happy to take a piece in Sharky and JJandellis based on the fact they were selling with minimal mu, had a couple of pieces of evidence that suggested "solid" and most that fall into this category will be decent value at spot at DTD in these diverse fields.  Clearly, the larger the investment, the more skewed my decision is towards the first point; good value.  Another important factor is trust; guess work at times but over time you get better. Good example, I'd trust Dubai, Trigg explicitly from a monetary perspective due to their historic behaviour with me, others I may think twice about.

I think the 70/30 deals don't represent good value; however I have a choice and if I am posting in a staking thread I have the accountability to make sure I know enough and know I am paying 1.4:1.3.  I had a small piece of Tom, no probs with that; stalwart of the community, top bloke, solid, and I wanted a punt.

Personally, when asking for staking I have a sort of personal code of ethics. When it's last minute and I think I'm asking for the favour, or it's just to reduce variance or allow me to practise BRM,I have sold at lower rates than I know I represent. Some have said that is stupid, however I see that as a situation where its a two way relationship.  I have also approached people direct and offered a discount, also given a discount to regular backers.  I think there's an element of customer service too - I haven't had to put a thread up for a while as I have small group of customers who will support; like to think some of that is because I keep them informed, pay promptly, offer the odd discount and play ok.

Marc is a good example of above as well, as he said he has sold pieces at 1.15 ish - he has his won reasons as he stated; what's not in doubt is incredible value, so he's created a customer base itching to take a piece whenever he posts.  Being an incred player clearly helps.

I guess is summary, my view on all of this is it's a personal choice of the staker and stakee and the market will be driven by supply and demand.  Our accountability as a community is to encourage and open and transparent market, where there is a good level of trust.  A consistent approach to pricing my help that.  The actual price; well it's all the factors you consider as an individual, personal to you.  I think a lot works here; someone correct me if I am wrong but I have not seen one staking "issue" or "grim" or issue with paying back - that's a great compliment to the members here and long may it continue.

did you remember to go to the doctor about your memory loss like I told you?

Lol - really, poker wise? I was obv ignoring the one we don't mention - lets call it the sports betting one, as totally incomparable. If there are some I stand corrected

All the people saying how great this thread is - are there some hidden links to porn that I don't see for some reason?

yeah, quite a few. nothing for a while though I don't think

I don't play as much poker as I used to, and I use staking as a way of keeping a tiny bit of action in asome comps.

I have three criteria I use when I stake someone:

1. I trust the person implicitly
2. I like them.
3. I feel the stake is good value for me.

The smaller the stake, the less importance 3 has. If I was putting up £500 or so, 3 would be very important, but still not as important as 1 or 2.

For £100 or so, 3 is almost irrelevant.

Although definitely mathmatically unsound, my system has served me well and I do pretty well staking!

there is a charge to upgrade your account to see the hidden links

Greg meant Dubai not doobs I think

Bobby crushes thread imo

As for this being a free market economy and nothing is hidden it's the buyers fault if they don't understand. Bullshit. This is a community forum not a market,some people here will buy shares without having a clue because it is a community, that is a great thing and something that should be protected.

Is that code for "tikay, please sell me some of your action?"

this is generally true but there are times when the price is so wrong that it needs to be pointed out

I think there's also a problem with people selling shares and not knowing that they are inadvertently over pricing themselves.

For example Tom put up a 100% 70/30 thread for the Feb deepstack. Everybody who backed him knew 100% what the score was so it's all well and good.

The following month there seemed to be a flood of similar threads where the seller doesn't even think about what they're doing but just copies what appeared to work for someone else.

There's no way that all of the 70/30 threads should've been the same price value wise, they were all very different players. I just wonder if the sellers even thought about it or just c & p'd to see what happened.

Camel makes a good point with his comment about the lower the cost of a stake the less importance the actual value is. For example there's no way I'd have 100% of Tom for 70% as I don't fancy a £560 -EV outlay. For £56 though I don't give a shit about the EV as long as it's somewhere in the ball park.

Now where's those porn pics??

I'm selling the porn pics in 10% chunks at 1.6.

Can I have the bottom 50% please?

I have only had a browse of this and can't read all of this due to the fact I got loads of things to be getting on with.

As one or two have you may noticed I got into an arguement with someone over Facebook about their markup for the 770 coming up and I still think I am right. When a person who is marking up at 1:1.3 is aking for stake and perhaps you have no interest in the stake, should you be commenting? For me, the .3 is nowhere near his value and for me to be quite honest, I think .1 is his face value.

I am not a massive staker and only have bits and bobs now and again, but I should be entitled to opinion, yes?

Another question is about when you should be able to tell a person to piss off?

I did a thread another forum asking or stake at the last minute for the £560 at the weekend and was only gonig to sell 25%. I didn't get any offers and played it off my own back, was fine by me. But after I realised why there was nobody interested and that was because many memebers of that forum was away playing the LTVC challenge. A day or so after I mention how I get donked out and you get someone saying I should have done this and that and so on. I say OK enough, blah blah blah. Anyway later mention if there was any interest in the UKIPT next month, same person asks for results, I post some and he says no. Later in another stake thread, he does the same, then later still without any results of that person says I will take 2%, contradiction much??

Sure, its all male porn

yep, the one that always comes to my mind and is surely the most extreme example is when snatty got his maths wrong and was trying to sell at more than 10.0. because he is well known/liked people just snap took shares in the worst deal ever, I think 5 people signed up before it was pointed out

Lol that guys value is in the negative so incred that he has got markup at all.

'For example there's no way I'd have 100% of Tom for 70% as I don't fancy a £560 -EV outlay. For £56 though I don't give a shit about the EV as long as it's somewhere in the ball park.'

In a way that's why these bad value deals get taken tho, you know you aren't getting value, but you are happy to support the person at £56 a go. Ten people all taking 10% for £56 is still 10 people taking a deal that is bad value. The only person getting the value is the one getting staked, extrapolate that to 5 comps, ten comps or more and all of a sudden you can free roll your way into playing  bigger comps than you want to buy in yourself, at no risk.

As the one putting part of the stake in, when you have taken 10 bad deals at 10% a time you have already taken a full buy in at £560 knowing it was bad value with each piece you took. As you say in your post, you wouldn't think of doing that to 100% in one deal. I appreciate ten different 10% has more chance of beating the variance but realistically no player was less than 175 to 200/1 to win last weeks event pre game. In taking bad value 10% in fields where the players are a huge price to win one of the meaningful prizes the stakee is charging way above a proper rate for their time over expected returns.

I have a piece of Fraser this weekend who will put in many hours to play online, but has almost no expenses, he is charging 1.16. Keith charged 1.23 ish for his Irish Open stake. He has flights, hotel and just as much time involved.

Railtard charges the same as Fraser and sells out in no time every week, so there are good, well priced stakes available. In the long run I think you would be costing yourself decent amounts of money in staking in bits on too many occasions at bad prices. I do appreciate your point about taking a bit of a friend, that is obv unquantifiable from a financial point but in return the friend could set up the deal so the stakers have  better value in return too.

http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/player.php?a=r&n=222646  this is why you never got staked at 1:1

http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/player.php?a=r&n=105932 This is why Pete sold out in minutes at 1.3 to Various people including to gukpt winners and members of the hit squad.

Calling him out on Facebook was not the way to go when you hardly know Pete

lol you noob Jason, check your post again..

Those two Database entries are of the same person, Jason.

Oop fixed ty

I have seen him sell out at 2.0 Ryan.

Not sure if you can work it out, but from point of view, I don't believe Pete is .3 and I won't go back on that view. Also, bring up my Hendon Mob is pointless, because everyone who knows me knows, I only really play play the local games in Sheffield, hence why my Hendon Mob is empty. Previously had sold out on other stakes for DTD, and also can able to fund it off my own back like mentioned.

Anyone who knows me knows that I only play in Sheffield??? Then you say you sold out for Dtd before. Anyone who has ever met you thinks you are a cockend fool and this includes your only mate ken top ten

Guys, the thread is a good one, with a civil debate, so please keep it cool.

but how much did he lose Jason?

Just cos people manage to get markup doesnt mean they deserve it.

I regularly buy off someone on this forum who would probably be considered within the top 10 players on here and he charges 1.15ish.

But w/e their money to punt as they wish.  However the markup game is getting abs ridic and it's good that people like flushy  and Dubai are putting across their views, which carry far more weight than most.

Jason all this stuff gets explained to you time after time.

Serious question now, are you just trolling or actually deluded? You confuse me a lot.

LOL.

Like I said on Pete's status, I only play DTD now and again as I have a general rule of not playing poker at the weekends. I had sold out on previous events, then decided against.

Not sure why there is some sort of issue though Jason, I have my opinion and you have yours, but I know for a genuine fact, Peter is not a good enough player to warrant .3, it's just a way to get some extra money. If he is a .3, player, then perhaps I should be selling at .2? hey who knows.

This was interesting and something i will be testing as an argument in the next couple of months, as i am going for a mortgage application with HSBC and they said they would go though all the items on my recent statements, as part of the process.
I am planning on spending a small portion of my net current assets on staking. The point of a portfolio approach of asset allocation is to diversify "investments". Poker staking is the ultimate uncorrelated asset, no links to bond prices, stock markets, inflation etc. Its high risk, but so was my share purchases of BP & RBS. If they tell me that I will never make money on poker then I will tell them that the £2k I took off Stars (from MTT cashes) in Nov cant have happened then, so this money does not exist so was not spent so they cant give me a hard time over it.

If people like Pete, Red Dog, JK et al can get it, then what is the problem.  They are not looking to rip off their stakers in anyway.

Railtard sells out instantly and there are always more people that want to buy a piece that lose out because they dont see the thread quick enough. Should he not be able to charge a premium over his true value?

Skolsupers auctions have been good fun on here and he will probably do them again despite a few people having a go at them.

People are not investing in Red Dog, Pete Wigglesworth and Paul Romain because of the value Papertits. There are other factors going on and for people to have a go at em is totally wrong. I am 100% sure that all their backers are more than happy with their investments.  Sorry if it comes across as trolling. Just get fed up with people saying such and such ain't worth the mark up when to other people they clearly are.

Is that what you consider an impressive HM Jason? A whole bunch of mincashes in <£300 comps and one win in 2 years? Not a single cash in an event >£500? How does that make him worthy of 1.3 in a 770? I wouldn't buy at 0.3, seriously.

It's a bit of a joke and IMO is nothing like red or JKs threads, everyone knows the score there.

Something/someones value is purely determined by what someone else is actually willing to pay for it...and not by opinion. We all as individuals have different opinions which will rarely be in line..

Arguing the toss whether someone is worth 1.3 or 1.2 is pointless...if someone is willing to pay 1.3 then thats what they are worth..

Staking has improved immeasurably - at least now people only sell 100% of themselves at most.

would happily crossbook aaron or any other blonde vs wiggleworth at max 5k

Same. Dunno who Aaron is.

i tried to sell 200% of myself at 0.5 but it didnt sell for somereason

Lol  Andrew, i can think if one player that was given the entry fee by his sponsor for the EPT final in Monte Carlo one year but lost the cash punting with it. He then re sold the whole 100% of himself to get the stake together again. Off he went to Monte Carlo to play when the only thing he could not afford to do was cash in the event!

Knowing he had no intention of cashing he was still swapping 3% with other players in the hotel before it started too.

Whats our thoughts on...

Somebody selling pieces on facebook and then removing the status once sold out (usually selling out in 5-10 minutes) and v.reguarly busting super early and getting all in with very bad hands in deepstacks.

Well, let's put it this way. A quick way to make 200 quid a week is to sell 100% of your action in a 200 event to 2 totally different sets of people.

Play the game with a view to not cashing and you have made 200.

Although you might qualify under point 3, Points 1 and 2 mean..

"I'm Out"

 ;kneelsucker;

Springtime for Hitler and Germany...

"might qualify" under Part One is actually quite a result......

You always do so much win. If you had a Hendon Mob it'd be endless list of threads were you've come 1st  ;tightend;



douchetastic? most likely a current or soon to be scammer? Sure is to be trusted.






Tonnes of good points have been made about values and why people stake and back. Every time it becomes specific though someone somewhere gets upset and feels insulted. The person who sets the stake sets the markup, if he doesn't sell out he priced it wrong. If he snap sells out did he price it incorrectly? that depends on why he priced it how he did + how you view 'the correct price'. Is that to maximise his own income or to maximise the punt for his backers or to fall somewhere in between?


I honestly don't think alot of people actually understood the 70/30 stakebacks deals but then again those deals are more community ventures than specific +ev stakes.

Part of staking is people trying to take +ev punts and a large part is people trying to play an event that's out of their roll, the community spirit on blonde particularly makes it alot easier. Having said that I don't think it's right for the seller to be selling at the absolutely maximum of the markup he thinks he can charge just to try and get the largest % of his buyin paid, that doesn't quite work with the community spirit aspect of why alot of people back.

from what I hear the dutch guy did this in the EPT and won it, but had sold 105%, then did a runner!! never been seen since!

Not quite true. He's still about:

http://pokerdb.thehendonmob.com/player.php?a=r&n=120392

He re-appeared recently, Mr Q, as he periodically seems to.

I believe he was involved in a legal dispute with 2+2 Forums, having (allegedly) taken a "copycat" domain name. I believe 2+2 won the case, & were awarded symbolic damages.

I'll try & find a link for you.

There you go, see "Two Plus Two  Lawsuit", near ther bottom.

The Crew is no more.....

I am told he is a quite splendid chap.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Boyd

He posts pretty much daily on 2+2 too.

I'm not sure what exactly happened but from what I understand, he sold for an EPT that he didn't play. Before he'd returned any funds, he went and played another and had sold separately for that. Backers from the previous thought their stakes had been rolled over and then he won x amount and it was a big fuck up.

If he had oversold intentionally, he wouldn't have made the money.

Tony, why are you posting about Dutch Boyd when everyone else is talking about Constant Rijkenberg?

I am not talking about either of those guys. The guy I know of is based in England

Phil - some of your points are kind of mising the point here. a staking proposition is a two way thing.  I am not asking someone to take me to dinner or buy me a telly so i can have a better telly and not let anyone else watch it.  By asking for staking I believe that I can genuinely make a profit for both staker and myself, hence a mutually beneficial arrangement. As long as the up front proposal is honest and the backer is happy with it what business is it of anyone elses?

I spoke to Fraser last night and had a text off Tikay this lunch time both saying they would back me again and were more than happy with the agreement.

or as its sometimes known being a winning player

again look at the benefits to both backer and staker in these deals - both of which are voluntarily entering into an agreement

Half way down page 4 sir... check what you said "its perfectly ok to criticise on a public forum"

I would rather those that weren't interested in the proposition just went and did something else like play a quiz in the lounge or something

Lol, I got confused.

Still, interesting story. Well I thought so, anyway.....

And anyway, I've never heard of this Constant chap, though doubtless the name will recur.....frequently.

haha, can tell you were to be an HRD! good, well structured post!

sigh.

staking people in one off's is complete punt, doesn't matter if it's Ivey in a GUKPT @1.1 or one of Jason's hendom mob hero's (who he revers on here 6 times a week despite the fact they've spent 13 years losing $400k at poker and the height of there achievement really is that you need to use the scroll button to see there hendom mob page) in the $10k 6max at 1.5.

It's one tournament, and if you play decent, time everything well and get good cards you'll do well, if you don't then there is very little way you can win. So picking when you invest is pure gamble, James Keys has played a billion £1k's and never cashed but we all fancied a punt on him in the Aussie Mill's and he cashed for a mirrion, he could easily have cashed in another 10k at another time, just so happened it was this time. This is the cool thing about card games, anyone can win on any day, so if you can afford it, like the gamble, then punt away, not like it's not a much better investment than craps and blackjack and I never stop to think how -EV they are before I go play!

It's also cool in poker that when someone buys a piece in you, then they ask you to reciprocate, you often are happy to do so, so it's not taking the money out as such it's moving it round. If the person you are buying can actually win at poker tournaments then obviously this is a huge bonus, but them being a nice guy is way more > that for me.

I think the 30/70 after SB is a little misleading, I have on numerous occasions typed out posts in those threads saying to people you do realise that £56 does NOT = 10% it actually =7%, but decided against it because I do feel calling anything out on someones thread is a bit out of order. I'd like to see a small amount of investment from the person personally say for the DTD 500 if they sold 85% of the buyin at 1.25 they'd have like 40% of themselves for a £84 investment, which would be much more appealing to me.

I seem to remember a lot of people clubbing together on one of my threads once telling me "no-one was good value in a tournament at 1.4" yet people buy up these 30/70 things in no time at all which I was pretty tilted at and wanted to rant but refrained (all grown up now!)

All this comes in the time I'm trying to grim everyone out of my LAPC staking money (sorry guys !)

Some very good points here -

Tbh, I have never thought about it like I'm selling @1.4 if I sell 100% of my action, mainly because I usually get staked my a long term deal/ or one friend who is trying to do me a favour.

I can see both sides, for me personally tho, I am not trying to rip anyone off, If I am short of money at the time I put up a thread to play some tournaments to try and get back into action. This is the only reason I would sell 100% (70/30). If I had a decent amount of money, but wanted to play a bigger schedule then I would put up a thread to sell X amount  to reduce variance.

I won a package for the ept, have never played a 5k buy in before, so sold a few %'s at spot rate, which I think is fair. I think u defo have to look at what tourney(s) it is for, if you have had zero results in the buy ins u want to play, then I think it's unfair putting a high mark up on ur selling price.

For me personally I feel terrible when I lose people's money, so unless it is a long term deal I have, will not keep asking if I lose a couple of times, but that's just how I feel about it.

I don't think anyone is getting ripped off, and agree, that if you don't want to buy a piece of someone, then u don't have to, if u think the mark up is too high, and u are trying to help them out so they sell of the package, then yes, I think you have a right to say something.

I read the thread on staking with must interest, after Jason mentioned my name had been mentioned in vain again on Blonde, I'm used to a few haters on Facebook but that comes with the territory, being a blondeite all be it on that posts irregularly I had hoped that people's responses would be fairly measured, and mostly they are... So that is point 1.. Point 2 I hope that Aaron isn't embittered by the fact that I removed he as a friend on Facebook, altho I have a fair few mostly, poker contacts, however I am systematically removing people who spam me or make defamatory comments.
Point 3 I value the advice of many of the blonde players such as chompy, tikay, vinnie and all of whom have given me good advice recently....not knowing much about the staking arena but as Jason H commented I had sold action, a full compliment in fact at 2:1 in my naivety. I then spoke to Cos again someone who's opinion I value highly and he informed me that most people sell at between 1:1.15 and 1:1.3, which seems not a great deal for the player imo, but if that is the Market who am I to argue. I spend most of my spare time away from poker and work helping our team members in blue blood and it's finally nice to find a good group of people who are serious about improving their poker and helping other players in the process... Poker certainly attracts a lot of nobs, but there are a lot of decent people too! I shall try and post a lot more on blonde because generally I think the discussions are pretty measured.... Thanks for your ears and gl at the tables!

that would certainly explain why someone may not think investing in you is great value

I have checked what I said and I didn't say that, Ctrl c ctrl v works here.

"I think it should be perfectly OK to criticise a deal proposed on a public forum"

and then went on to say "The fact I am posting on this thread rather than the threads elsewhere is simply because I don't think it is particularly right to pick one particular thread". 

How this can be construed as me wanting to act as judge and jury on all these staking threads is beyond me. 

I was saying that I personally didn't want to criticise on individual threads there, but people should be willing to accept any reasonable criticism or discussion that appears after their post when they post on a public forum.

All ive learnt is that everyones got an expected roi of well above 50%. Some poor bloke somewhere must be doing his brains for us all to keep carving it up

Point 4 most blondeites have a good sense of humour!

I was watching one of these antique shows, think it was Bargain Hunt, the one where the guy wears a dickie bow and says "we're orf to the auction". Anyway he had this toby jug he valued at £50-£80 which I thought was a terrible valuation because it was a fckin hideous looking thing, but after lots of frantic bidding it actually sold for £300. I thought wtf?

lol  Ahrt

You win. Would probably buy at .1 more after this post

Ah didnt realise all that!! thanks for the link Tikay!

 :hello:

guess that proves the underlying point that anythings immeadiate value is always = to whatever someone is prepared to pay for it.

 rotflmfao rotflmfao ;

Pete are you not aware that after all the girls who work at Dtd, you are the nut worst spammer on Facebook. Channing does not even come close to you :)

Jason, if hendon mob ever showed profit/loss mate you would be bang in trouble. Fwiw i bought 20% in pete W, for this 770. For a few reasons. I like how much he cares about the game, although his play might be a tad fundamentally flawed, who says you have to be crushing the stars high stakes mtt's to win a dtd comp. Look through every one of DtD's results and you will find a lot more of what people would say are 'clowns' winning that established good thinking online winners. Obv variance accounts for this but also the fact that people still can't adjust to live poker and still ike to 7 bet with blockers and lose their minds. I have a day 2 sweat almost always. Oh and he caught me at a vv good time. I had just been paid back an almost identical amount that the 20% i bought would cost me. GO on the wiggler

Petes a good mate with me Trigg and his style means that more often than not you are gonna get a sweat. I used the hendonmob to highlight that and not to say if Pete is profitable or not. You are 100% correct that the types of winners at Dtd come with differing skill sets. Ceri and Tommy getting heads up this weekend is the first time in a long while you can actually say the best two got there. But that's what makes poker so fun and interesting. If the best 25 players won everytime at Dtd then the 95% of recreational players would stop playing and the club would shut.

Your investment in Pete is a good one despite what Aaron Alex Pleno might say.

deff punt, not nvestment

Jason I'm going to have a go at explaining what I think you think lol (god help) remember ofc I'm a big herbie fan and this is not a dig or anything of the sort.

You think that the younger generation, don't fully respect the older generation and there style of play/approach to the game. I think in a lot of cases you are right. You use the hendon mob constantly as a reference but I think you're intentions in referencing the HMD are slightly mis-interpreted by the forum. I think it's the best reference point you have to the younger, online driven generation where this kind of stat is really easy available, but it's not to say "look this guy has cashed $700k therefore is 100% a winning player" you're a smart guy you obviously know this to be the case, I think what you actually want to say to people is "look, this guy has been playing a lot of comps, for a lot of years, and despite what anyone thinks of his game he DOES have the capability of going deep or even winning a poker tournament." Profit at the bottomline isn't actually what defines you as a "good player" (it's what defines you as a good proffessional) Is Pete W good value in the 770 comp at the price trigg paid? I have no clue, his hendon mob doesn't tell us but it does tell us that he has it in him to win a poker tournament of this nature, and he has done it in the past. For this he deserves some respect and I agree with that (whilst also 100% confirming that it says nothign for his actual poker ability)

am I anywhere near the mark?

Yes you are quite close Dave. Wish I could answer more in the style of Mantis tho. It's has nothing to do with the younger generation disrespecting their elders it's about a few decent stand up guys being made to feel like twats because people are saying that they should not be charging 70/30 or 1.3. Even Gregg has found it neccessary to justify himself itt. You have been in the same position as these guys and will know how bad it feels. To say a guy ain't  worth  something is a matter of opinion but these guys are selling out and everyone of their investors are 100% happy afaik and would buy again.

It's amazing how sensitive these poker players are. Maybe the truth hurts

They are selling because they are decent blokes, which as I said is fine IMO to get people back on their feet. But ain't right if they pocket the winnings of an already lopsided deal, give it to their missus to build another extension on their mansions before reverting back to selling at what is again a deal that offers the backer nothing but variance

For a deal to be fair IMO both sides need some leeway. Marc obviously has a longterm roi expectation of well over 16%, so he offers the backers a decent incentive. Maybe some of these people selling at 1.4 have longterm expectations of 100% rois, I mean I severely doubt it but luckily for them it will never be proven anyway. But if they are that sure of their abilities it would be nice if they put some reddies up to back it up. As we like to say "Put up or shut up"

Gamblers opinion means nothing whilst the money stays in the clip

This post is pure guff and says absolutely nothing. What is the point of speculating on someone else's opinion, especially someone so happy to provide their opinion as Jason Herbert?

Posts like that aside I have quite enjoyed this thread. Personally I think Dubai's posts have been pretty spot on, 100% agree people have been overcharging, but is it our place to point that out? In my opinion yes it is, if someone fancies an argument on the internet this is a good issue to start one over, having it happen in their thread is the risk people take when they post a staking request on a public forum. The only reason I didn't comment is that I didn't fancy falling out with anyone, and both the sellers and the buyers get very defensive. Not surprising really, turning up on a staking thread and trolling the price is basically like walking into a room where two people are shaking hands and pointing at each of them saying "You're a scumbag, and you're a mug". But I still think someone ought to do it so I applaud Dubai in this instance, and credit to trigg who also likes to keep people honest, perhaps after someone did it to him some time in the distant past.

all the girls?
I clearly need to up my spam game

i havnt read every blonde thread ever assembled, not even close. But out of the many i have read, for intelligent responses, conflicting opinions, entertainment and lack of de-railment, this thread is the best i have ever read.
Staking is a grey area, and down to the individuals discretion, which is why a thread like this will have so many good points.

I would have no problem with someone posting in one of my staking threads and saying they thought I was offering a poor deal as long as it was constructive and not just pure flaming for the sake of it. I believe I've only ever done 70/30 threads when I've been busto so it was a necessity if I wanted to play the event, as a one off staking it probably wasn't good value for the backer and would put it in the punt category. I've been taking pieces a bit more regularly lately as I do think it's good to put back in when you've took out a few times like I have.

glad i got Jamie to make this thread :D

Firstly, the rate people sell at is seen as an ability indication and that’s why other players get their knickers in a twist about it. Pure ego thing rather than genuine worry for the welfare of random buyers. Such and such a player shouldn’t be selling at such and such a rate as they aren’t good enough to justify that mark up. In other words that player is over-estimating his ability. Good luck to everybody who fights the battle of getting poker players to not over-estimate their ability, because that battle is against 100% of poker players.

Secondly, quantifying whether a one off punt is worthwhile from a pure maths perspective is an awkward business. It’s hard to justify why people paid so much for that ugly toby jug when the expert said it wasn’t worth the money. Perhaps they were collectors and needed that one to complete the set or perhaps they just liked the colour. In the same vein somebody might pay over the odds for staking because of a profitable history with that player or simply because they woke up with a good feeling about that player’s chances. If you dreamt you won the lottery you might wake up and buy a ticket. If somebody at the counter says they are concerned about how –EV that coup is you would be like wtf who are you? i've got a feeling baby!

How do you quantify the value of your personal hunch to 0.1 or 0.2 of a %? Maths can’t be purely applied if there is any hint of romance in a coup and a one off stake in a big comp is absolutely a romantic notion. Market forces will dictate the success of a proposal and hence comment simply doesn't need to be made about perceived value from anybody uninvolved in the process. I think it's quite rude actually.

Thirdly and finally whenever there is talk of poker community it makes me rofl.

I staked a guy from Newcastle Poker forum 7 months ago. He stopped the deal (fair doos) and never sent the money back, I've received dribs and drabs of the money but owed me over $400 for over 7 months now although promising t pay me and saying that he is skint.

He is now staked by the head on Newcastle Poker Forum, is up over £2k and still hasn't paid me back (continuing to tell me he is skint) he has also won the Newcastle Poker championship (yearly event) and not paid me back.

How do I go on from here???

I've posted on his facebook (he removed the message from his wall straight away) and he always repsponds politely to PM's, but still no $

I've spent so many hours chasing this up, obv dont get interest on the money either!

Link to his blog - http://www.newcastlepoker.com/forum/showthread.php?p=300925#post300925  which I can't post on as banned from NPF, lolsigh


His response:

"i cant cash out till the 6 month is over if i wasnt gettin staked i wouldnt be playin as have no money im working for 2 weeks from sunday and gettin paid at the end ov it cash in hand and will be able to pay soon as i do as im gettin 400 a week "

My response:

xxxxxxxxxx has to pay me
if hes going to stake u
i should have first right to staking you if you owe me money"

Very good post, only disagree on one point, I think feedback is a part of the pricing process, and blonde's staking forum is the obvious place for it. Think of it as like the programme watchdog calling out people selling dodgy antiques, yeah the buyers are fine with it and the antiques look the same, which is all that really matters if they're being bought for their aesthetic value, but it's still not on.

sorry i dont get this but if you was staking him and he lost and the staking finished why would he owe you money or was it unused stake?

or does this make up mean if you are in make up when the staking finished you owe the staker the make up  inwhich case what was the point in getting staked in first place


its confusing to me

i stake him for NL25, I send $1k..

2 weeks later he says that he has no time for poker anymore. He is small profit, so starts to withdraw. 7-9 months later I haven't received the money he has lost.

2 months ago he starts new staking deal where he can't withdraw his winnings for 6 months!

Means I don't get paid for 15 months whilst new staker gets profits in the mean time!

Not to de-rail, too far (ok , it is still staking..) but Stars don't have a 6month time frame...  It is imposed on the new staking agreement, your move is to contact the new backer, explain the situation, provide your proof of entitlement, agree a settlement with him, and move on.

nono, the new staker doesn't let him withdraw any profits for 6 months as it allows the stake to grow and him play higher or wte.

are you not Gillian?

If the new staker isnt a complete schmuck... he will put this right for you out of the horse's profits. 

If another staker came to me with documented evidence of a wrong-doing by one of my current horses, I would put it right, or put a plan in place to put it right, or drop the horse.

sounds like you may be getting had over patrick. something i am pretty sure everyone of the guys who are charging 70/30 would never do.

I can see i am in the vast minority here but even tho i agree with an awful lot of what is said i will continue to amuse everyone  to try and keep some balance in the thread.

Having recently taken a stake in somebody in the deepstack £560 on 70/30 basis I feel I can offer my viewpoint .With the tournament offering so much value I was looking to add a few more horses/percentages so as to hopefully get a return. The guy in question was Greg ( Junior ) with whom I agreed a 70/30 deal (after stakeback) . The percentage I finally agreed with Greg is not relevant, but for easier maths lets assume I invested 100 % (ie £560) and lets also assume he got in the money and cashed for £10,560 ,Our agreement was simple ..I get my stake back (£560)  we then split the 10k ...7k for me and 3 k for him . Simple maths then, Greg is working for 30% of any profit (after my stake back) or as some might say he is free rolling...or is he ? All Ive done is put up the money and agreed the deal, Greg has to drive to the venue(petrol) and do the grind for 2 full days, granted if he gets a major bink its seriously good money  but we all know in a field of 650ish runners major binks are few and far between. The question I would ask any backer is what is an acceptable % for somebody to play for ? Well the first thing to consider is have they got the game to go deep ? Are they going to pay you should they get in the money ? ( as there is no point agreeing with somebody to play /freeroll for 15/20 % if they have no intention of paying you), and the final thing is that the player themselves need the motivation to play so there has to be a decent % reward should he cash( granted you could reduce the % in a bigger buy in tournaments ).Taking these points into consideration,plus the fact Ive known Greg for some years ,respect his game ,admire the way he conducts himself as a person, and the fact I know 100% he will uphold the deal should he cash we shook hands .This post is not about sticking up for a Greg( he can do that himself) , its to make people aware I was more than happy to proceed (eyes wide open) on a 70/30 deal. Its all about trying to be fair and to agree on a figure based on the facts that works for both parties.

A recent example of this was when I was in Galway a couple of weeks ago. I bought in for 770 euros for the UKIPT main event but by the time I had taken into account hotel,flights & taxis(not including food and drink) it was costing me 1250 so effectively with these costs the tournament is standing me at 1.5 which is certainly -EV. A couple of mates in the UK then ask me for a % at 1.25ish and I explain my overheads and suggest its not value for them to buy at 1.5 and its certainly not value for me to sell @1.25 I explained the reasons why to which they totally understood.In the end I concluded it was either better to keep it all myself or swop a % with somebody over there.(By the way Ireland is so fkin expensive and people wanting to play the next UKIPTS in Dublin and Cork should consider the overhead costs) ....Anyway I digress slightly but my point is that its horses for courses and there are more factors to consider when both being a staker or a stakee  when negotiating a deal than just  "the price"

Dubai ,Action man and others  are correct in their statements about the prices being wrong sometimes purely based on mathematics and they are well intentioned in their observations( although a tad direct and" to the point ") but its very important for the "poker community" (which 100% exists ) that these points are raised so as to make people aware of the full facts when entering into an agreement and of course to help stimulate healthy debate, so well done them .

What we dont want to do is stop people from posting staking requests( or any other posts) on here for fear of being ridiculed or flamed etc , so by making more helpful & constructive replys this hopefully wont happen.

As regards which person can command which rate, well market forces will dictate that ! People will buy or sell mainly based on the factors highlighted above !

Peace x

Poker is like sex and driving.

Almost everyone thinks they are better at it than they actually are.

If everyone knew how bad they were at poker there wouldn't be a game.

If Jake Cody or Toby Lewis showed up for a tournament, no-one else would play!

lol Keith. batteries are always top of my wifes shopping list. i am lucky to have a license. i now blame varience. and my twins are called Jake and Toby and hope they grow up to be the luckiest buggers ever

yh. I think it's the responsibility of the player to offer "fair" value in a community like blonde where everyone trusts each other, whereas the "market move the price" theory is ofc correct this is Blonde, not the stock market.

People should just be careful not to be rude whilst opposing a mark-up. I remember in my ME thread someone who doesn't know anything about me came in and said that I was defo not value at 1.4, was cheeky to try charge it and then made some assumptions about my finances all in public. This too me is way out of line and tilted me a lot, but coming in and saying

"Mark-up seems very high, can you show us HDM/HEM graphs/P5's or something to further justify, without seeing something else I'm not sure this is good value"

would be completely fine, and justified imo.

This all hinges on being a nit and actually caring about what anyone's actual ROI is, if you buy and it's "his/her day" you're going to win, if it's not then you wont.

most people who sell pieces on blonde prolly aren't even profitable long term in the tourney they are playing in but i'm not going to call people out in public because that's just my opinion and I have no way to back it up, if someone came to me and said "i'm gonna take X% of Y person do you think he's a good buy" my answer about 70% of the time will be "no, but i'd defo do it anyway"

In reply to Plenos posts as Im one of the stakers involved with the player in question. 3 of us jointly stake various local N.E. players

Always found player a genuine & honest lad and very much respected around Newcastle area and since agreeing to play for us has done nothing but been spot on and commited to the agreement we have in place

We didnt know of any previous problems or deals he had with anyone else nor do I see that as any business of ours with regards to any debt involved to previous backers. Ive no doubt also that the player concerned will give his side of what happened in due course and reply to the accusations that have been made.

If Pleno is owed any money from him then Im also very confident that the player in question will honour any debt due


Thanks

Hi Dave,

Thanks for giving your side of story. I disagree that it is no business of yours if one of my horses starts playing for somebody else whilst in makeup and still owing money, without offering me the chance to stake him for this.

If you're very confident he will pay debt due, I don't mind selling the debt to you at 0.8. It has been going on since June last year..

OK... I take it back, lol.

Not too much evidence of the staker's code of honour. 

Oh and


Pleno finally gets the hang of it.

fwiw despite my previous troubles with Teamdobb/deeiron would trust him as much/more than anybody else in poker. Def trustworthy and not his fault that he didn't know about our staking agreement. I'm sure he will sort it out now.

thank you Patrick for kinds words and it will deffo get sorted. Can you email me please with what is owed and your settlement amount. Mulhuzz has my email or leave it at blog 

probs badly explained by me but deffo getting any monies owed to Pleno sorted which is the most important thing once we know all the facts and figures. Matter should of been dealt with in far better way imo but getting sorted now

Let's concede feedback is part of the pricing process. Afterall when the toby jug was sold bargain hunt man said "wtf that was a lot". And in doing so the expert informs all of us to be mindful of the true value of ugly toby jugs in the future, tyty. Importantly thou the timing of the feedback is appropriate. I didn't see people standing up while the auction was in progress shouting zomg at this price for an ugly toby jug.

Hi, feel the need to give my version of this as some of the facts are not quite accurate

At the start of the stake you sent me £450 to deposit in a euro site and to use Nettella which i did. Started playing and after a few weeks decided playing cash wasnt for me so ask to end stake. You agree so i withdraw the money back through Nettella this is where i mess up and i lock the account with the money still in there explain to you and your happy give me time to sort it out after several attempts via email and phone calls i'm still no further so agree to pay you back as it was my fault. I have paid you back a majority of the money owed and haven't had alot of money the past few months so found it hard to pay more.

I am not going to make excuses because it is my fault the account has been locked, but i don't agree with you making me out to be ripping you off when i have every intention to pay you back the full amount but i do agree it should have been sorted by now and if i had the money to pay you I would have.

Also will agree i should have discussed this with Deeiron as he had no idea i was staked/owed you any money

can you prove the account is still locked?

I haven't tried to access the account for sometime now but sure i will be able to dig the details for account up and prove it that way, I also gave pleno the accounts deets and password when it first happened (was the first reset password i recieved from Nettella)

well seems poor form regardless that you haven't really pursued this and made sure it's unlocked. Since Pleno hasn't been paid in full, it's basically his money in there and your responsibility to get it out.

Imo you're hugely in the wrong already, despite your intentions or what you've said already.

When you say 'several attempts via email and phone calls' could you post some of the emails and the responses you got?

The policeman is BACK lol

 rotflmfao

:)

fyp

Another staking problem.

I was staking a guy that was doing v.well and made decent amount of money for me and him. ALso very trustworhty and good friends.

We got 8k in makeup in 2 weeks after winning previously after grinding a similar makeup number.

He decided he wanted to play on a new site and play on his own moiney getting 100% of his action and basically leaves me owed 8k.

Both of us not sure exactly what best way to go about this is. He has started playing 50 and 100nl and in meantime lost about $1500 on "our" account and is now basically playing  100% for himself.

Obviously I don't want to be 8k in the red and want that money back, but happy to write some of the money off if theres a good solution we can come up with.

100% both trust each other. And as a good will gesture is willing to ship me $1k at the moment and decide from people in the thread how we go on.

Any idea whats the best way to do this?

was the deal 50/50 after makeup?

Let's say he made 20k for himself and 20k for you and then is 8k in makeup atm.

In which case, he is 20k up, you are 12k up.  The obvious place to start is for him to buy out at 4k ~ at least that way you both made 16k on the deal which is what a 50/50 deal is after all.

Depending on the situation, you could ask for more (or accept less) than that.

deal was 5050 yeh.

He doesn't have the money to buy out and then still have a bankroll available to play aswell. He was happy to ship $1k meaning he still has a roll for 50-200nl.

He didn't make 40k, he made around about 20k, 8 of which is now makeup. So I'm up 2k and he is up 10k from the deal, and he is 8k in makeup.

Does this mean I'dlet him buy out for 4k which could be bought out over x amount of time so he is able to keep grinding too?

If he's pulled out of his own accord he owes you the full MU.

Give him fair time to pay it back but he should pay the lot. It's YOUR money he was playing with and he lost it.

Are you wanting to continue to back him?  If you do, he should either pay $8K to go on his own, or play for you.

Yeh this. It's not even close really is it? He can't decide to play on his own and then not pay you back the makeup.

The excuse "if I pay you back I won't be rolled for xyz" is pretty laughable.

Yeah I want him to keep playing for me, hes v.good and a good friend who I trust, so great horse.

This.

You can offer to sell at less, or you can offer him a payment plan, but he wants to go on his own so he owes you the full 8k.

Also, if he wants to be backed again, you get first refusal until he's paid off his MU.

How would you enforce the above?

He's a great friend?

Really? Yet just wants to ditch you with 8k makeup and play his own dime?

He owes you 8k if he wants to play on his own.

You can't - which is why you should only stake people you really trust.

guy owes you 8k pads if he quits, or he can ply on..... those are his 2 options

Some of these numbers in the thread are wrong, including those in at least one of my posts.

I did some maths earlier and I think this is what stakeback means in a single tournament.

If the arrangement is 70/30 including stakeback in a tournament like the DTD £500er, the maths is as follows:

Here, roughly 10% of the field cash, if you cash you are pretty sure to get your entire stake back, so 10% of the prize fund is paying the stakeback.  Hence 90% of the prize fund is money in addition to stakeback.  

So in the long run expected return is (.1*100 + .9* 70) x expected cashes from horse = 73% of expected cashes from horse. This is equivalent to a mark up of around 37%.

Something I had never thought of before is that this changes in something like the sunday million where 15% of the field are paid.

15% of the field cash, if you cash you are pretty sure to get your entire stake back, so 15% of the prize fund is paying the stakeback.  Hence 85% of the prize fund is money in addition to stakeback.

So in the long run expected return is (.15*100 + .85* 70) x expected cashes from horse = 74.5% of expected cashes from horse. This is equivalent to a mark up of around 34%.

Where my maths falls over is what happens if you put up a long list of tournaments offering 70/30 after stakeback.  Here the stakeback is assumed to apply to the whole list.  A lot of the time the staker will get 100% of the prize money because the stakee will cash for less than the entire stake.  Without doing the maths I am guessing that the equivalent mark up here must be significantly less than the 34% above, possibly as low as 20% or so.

So when people said offering 70/30 after stakeback had the potential to mislead then I would have to agree with them, but probably not in the way they intended!

Please feel free to point out any errors in the above.

I think there is at least one more geek point on the above topic which I don't have time to do now.
 
Cheers

yh pads he is well out of line offering you $1k. Sounds a pretty sick deal for him I could grind and make 50% of everything I win over $8,000 or I could just pay $1,000 and make 100% of everything I make whilst my "friend" is $7,000 out of pocket.

if he can't afford to pay you more than $1,000 and still have a BR to play for himself, then how would have been able to finance his recent $8,000 downswing? Or is he looking for a deal where someone else takes the hit for his losing periods?

Can he not continue to play for you until he gets the win that gets him out of make up on the sites he is playing with you and at the same time grind his own money on the other sites.

What would you do in the situation were he played poorly on purpose to try and get deeper and deeper in make up to a point where you would not want to continue the deal and would end the agreement?

this i spose could be something you could work on. problem is though he is just going to focus really hard on playing on his own money over grinding his MU down (which would reasonably be what anyone would do in such an arrangement)

Maybe pads you could say as long as he plays x hands for you p month he is free to play on a different site on his own money so he can make some cash whilst he is in MU?

Agree % profit chops whilst in makeup...

This thread has raised some great points. Lots of people who I respect a great deal offering opinions. I'd like to reply to some of them now from my perspective.

First of all, I should apologise to Dubai for my reaction to the OP. His point is valid and I shouldn't have taken exception to it. I'm prone to biting too quickly and I've been making an effort to change that. On this occasion I failed.

I've never really been rolled for the bigger tournaments, and I've almost always sold a percentage (Usually no more than 50%).

Until recently, I've always sold at even money. It never occurred to me to charge a markup. I just wanted to play a better structured comps for less outlay.

Recently, due to personal circumstances, It became important that I be extra careful about maintaining my 'life roll' and with that in mind, I decided that it would be irresponsible for me to be spending too much on poker. That's no problem for me, I can play small buy-in good structure comps on line, or not play at all. Either way, it's no biggie.

When the Monte Carlo at DTD came along, I had no intention of playing, but then I noticed that someone had sold 100% of themselves at 70/30 with stake back in another comp, and thought it seemed a good idea. I didn't know if anyone would want to buy a piece of me, but I though I would give it a go anyway. I never even gave a thought to the markup, or the value to those having a punt.

I played the MC and had a small cash. When I paid my stakers, they almost all requested an option to buy another piece if I did it again.

So that's how I started with the 70/30. I had no intention of trying to do anyone down. I just didn't think about it like that.

There were one or two other good points that I would like to address.

Someone said that the stakee needs to have some of his own money invested because maybe he wouldn't care or try hard enough if not. Well perhaps that might be true for some, but certainty not for me. I'm the worlds biggest nit, and there's no way I'm giving up my chance of a 30% share of a big cash lightly. What's more, I really really want to make a return for my backers. (Sending someone money is a great feeling).

Even with a 100% 70/30 deal, I still have an investment. Fuel, food & drink works out to ~ £60 / £70 over the two days, not to mention the 20+ hour grind. (Not complaining, just saying).

Someone else asked, 'If you binked, would continue you to ask for a 100% staking?' Well I know it's a minor point, but one that's important to me. I offered shares at 70/30. I don't like to think I asked anyone for anything.

Pedantry aside, if I binked a reasonable amount, then no, of course I wouldn't continue to sell 100%.  I would still feel obliged to offer a % to my stakers, but at a more favourable rate. (If there is a favourable rate, considering my ability).

I'm really torn about the idea of ever doing another 70/30. I've enjoyed them a lot and the rail is great fun if I manage to go deep. But In the grand scheme of things, poker tournaments are of minor importance. I would hate to take advantage of anyone, especially my friends.

continue to do it imo, you're a top guy and its a lot of fun to buy a piece and sweat you to victory! I know I didn't buy a piece - I tend not to buy too many pieces because I'm so clumsy sorting it and never see the threads in time. I think Dubai's point was more the 70/30 thing really should stay as what it is, nice people punting cheaply on other nice people and not turn into a fashion where people can play big comps for free all the time.

So you set up a hot cake stand and snap sold all your produce. Your customers said they wanted more hot cakes when you bake the next batch. But because a couple of guys walked past saying they didn't like the recipe you're thinking about closing the business. Can't believe you're in conflict about this. Trying to please everybody is a tougher business than selling cakes Tom.

Not too sure about this analogy Mantis. Let's face it anybody can sell hot cakes.

This one was more to do with the seller rather than the product itself. It takes a special kind of person to sell out of horse shit sandwiches and that's what Tom has admirably achieved.

10% of April's batch please.

Get in the queue, you never had any last time. Oh, wait.......

What yo talkin about EvilPie?? Analogy is perfect as usual.

Two hot cake stands side by side selling an identical product. Behind one stand is some fat bloke who looks like he just rolled out of bed and behind the other is a sexy girl with a nice smile. You fancy a cake as yo feeling peckish. The sexy girl hot cakes are 10p more. Same cakes, same recipe, same place, and the fat man sells +ev cakes and the sexy girl does not. So what? I'm buying hot girl cakes at a mark up every frickin time. In fact my analogy hit the nail on the head so well you rightly concluded that when buying something it's often the seller you buy into as often as the product.

I reckon the pretty girl could sell her cakes at 2.0 and still sell out.

i was thinking i really wanted to play the ukipt Nottingham ,and as a one off thought i would put up a staking thread and  do it as 70/30 % copying tom ....don't know now am a bit put off!!

I would like to think that  you will sell out 100% for sure. People know I back  more for sentimental reasons than ROI and as long as I can give you cash in your hand and don't have to do moneybookers, bank transfer or Pokerstars then I will takE 10%  good luck

Would be really cool if we had one person who arbitrated and did all the markups. So for example X wants to put Y staking thread up, he approaches Mr Z who then gives S markup.

Personally, I believe that would be perfectly horrible, to be honest.

We buy action for a variety of reasons, & I don't really think I want to be told by others what I may, or may not, buy at.

Free market forces should always be allowed to prevail, in my opinion.

nut worst idea in a large pool of stupid ideas pleno. wpwp

I really like the Keys auction with people bidding openly. Although I never bought a piece it was entertaining to watch. That way the market decides what the price should be.

I also like it when someone like Trigg or Keith has the balls to price up final tables etc.

yer this.

How can you like it?

Trigg's books are always like 4000% overround

is he meant to give us all edges? and expose himself to potentially large swongs for nothing?

This is such a key point in terms of staking. Having monies invested with people who will always give 100%, is probably more important than getting the mark up at the right level.
Tikay is the best at having a punt with 'triers', and it's not a surprise that his ROI is pretty good.

I've heard a lot of smart people say things like "he doesn't have a big enough slice to care about it" and I have also seen people flick in perfectly playable stacks because they can no longer be bothered.

I'd rather back a trier than a "flair" player that gives up half way through.  If you sell on a thread such that your maximum result is 30% of any prize THEN YOUR MAX RESULT IS 30% OF ANY PRIZE!!  You shouldn't set foot in the casino if winning 30% of 1st prize isn't enough for you.  You can't get a better result than that, given you already chose to sell 70% to someone else.

Maybe I don't get it, but I would definitely never put a shilling into play knowingly with someone that cba to hang in there during a tough couple of levels.

How can you have possibly got there from the post I made?

I didn't say he shouldn't be making money from it or having an edge - that's what bookmaking is all about. Trigg's are just redic though sometimes.

If there were 10000 people putting a quid on each he'd probably make them a bit more reasonable.

As they are he takes in about £500 of bets with potential outlays ranging from 0 to several k.

I don't blame him one bit for making them swing a bit towards himself.

yes very much this...backing with Trigg is pretty much in the same vain as backing the 70/30 guys... potential value and roi is not the key issue. its all about the fun factor. if he can be arsed to do it then good for him if he makes a quid or two but that more than compensates for the outside chance of him getting a bit burnt for a laugh

i watched an interview today from when keys gave mark trett 10/1 in the coral masters thingy.

dont really agree with titty or titty but think your post is pretty good jase. agree.

also f <3 trigg and ive done pieces to him :)

my post is quite obviously being extreme to make the point. trigg isn't a bookies yet he's taking liabilities why woudn't he have a round up, i'm sure gamblers everywhere would love to know where the bookies is who doesn't build in a profit margin.

But it's a given that he's going to build in a profit margin. That's standard and not what I was saying.

What's not a given is just how much it is imo - a little excessive.

provide a better one?

no u

I'd do one if I knew how to price it up. Anybody teach me? Total noob btw

honestly i'm so tilted from a session i've just played.

read this and burst out laughing. A+

 ;applause;

such an incred response.

Only 'Your mum' would have been better.

'no u' is perfect imo.

works so brilliantly. I reopened the thread a minute ago and loled hard again, i'm that small minded. NO U ARE looooool

Titty you watch gay lords say no last night?

what time was it on?

I have no idea what you are talking about and i'm exceptionally scared to try googling it rofl.

explainaments?

now I understand, yes I watched it, and I touched myself many many times over. :D

Omg serious? Its a playground classic!!!

yeah seriously, I had to do some research, obv used google images first just incase. I'm pretty disappointed I didn't say no at first rofl.

We used to just tell people they'd dropped their gay card, and if they looked down DEY A GAYER. innit. rofl

Oh god loled embarrassing loud just then. Dtd regs think I'm mental.

#takesonetoknowone

If you ask my dad to price it up he might do it and take the action. He used to do the local final in the poker thing and has plenty of experience in bookmaking/gambling.

hahahah @ dropping the gay card!

We used to say like as rapidly as possible. 'Do you lickadickaday?' and just hope the response was yes for much pisstaking to ensue.

wow, amazing banter at posh all boys schools that your parents paid monies for you to go to. Feel my parents let me down somehow.

new one I heard for the first time 2 days ago

have you seen the clown at mcdonalds that hides from gays?

So good!

A question for staking and so on.

Like me, I have nothing but one result on my Hendon Mob from a team event, the reason for that is generally I don't play anywhere but Napoleons in Sheffield and DTD a couple of times a year. But when do you think a stake mark-up should change?

Let's say for example, the next deepstack I go and get £30k in that, then the next one I go and get some sort of mini cash in that too, then perhaps a mark-up should be increased? Or maybe not?

I only sell at 1:1 now and again and whether or not that sells or not, I still play the event anyway.

You are defo over charging at that rate :)

I don't understand people who say "if I don't sell then I'm going to play anyway".

If you can play without staking then why are you selling? If you can't afford to play (either literally, or due to BRM) then if you don't sell, you can't play. Right?

Variance

Alot of casual live players don't really have an actual roll for live events so selling pieces is more for piece of mind/ able to play one more event that month etc rather than rigid BRM that I guess the live regs need to employ. If casual players employed strict BRM to live events then you wouldn't have many in larger regular comps at all, we'd all be grinding the £20 freezeouts at gala.

Every man and is dog is gonna find the ukipt entry fee next month.  Gtd at 1 mirrion means brm can gtfo for most people lol

good point imo. The real answer is no you're price shouldn't change because you're still the same player.

I also dont get the "can afford to play but going to sell" business, if you an afford to play why not just play? I guess there are loads of reasons why actually thining about it

Why is everyone selling at 1:1.1 ATM?

What's wrong with a flat rate?

Why not? It takes some pressure of for such a high buyin.

It's not just a £770 buyin, you have petrol costs, possibly hotel costs, food and drink and so on. So really, you are looking towards a total cost of £900, if not more.

haha.

I think the 1 I can remember was something like "Are you a caged bummer?" NO "urghhhhh bummer on thhe loose bummer on the loose"

Thread just keeps delivering...

I've sent "Now then mate, have you seen the clown at McDonald's that hides from gays?" to pretty much every person in my phone book...

oh god  Ahrt

I think the most bizarre one from primary school was

'have you ever seen a BMW?'
'yes'
'haha, you've seen a black man's willy'

This is the best one ainec. So so much win.

Incred how this thread has developed.

I have been up and down the biggest brown willy in the country...

Several times...

AGREED 88888% .
 ;iagree; ;iagree;

Jamie Jamie Jamie

Love it

Didn't take long :D

Also saw that there is a guy who sells pieces on Ebay, not sure how successful it is though, but probably likely some people will have a punt sometimes.