To be backed or not!!

[RED-DOG]

I'd like to reply on forum first because I want to be fair, the first event they 'put me in' to was the festival at Blackpool, I was going to play it anyway and I understood that I would not be paid until the site was up and running, although I was told that would be very shortly after the festival, Then I was told I was being put in to the Stanleys festival at Glasgow, after I had made arangements for myself and Mrs Red to go, ie travel, hotels etc I was told at the last minute that they couldn't put me in, I wasn't best pleased and I decided to play anyway because I had told people I would, as I say, I was told before hand that I wasn't being paid, although there was still the promise of 'when the site is up and running'

What upset me was the fact that despite everything, I still wore their logo at Glasgow, got second place, and I haven't heard from them since

I think they were under terrific financial strain and had things gone better for tham I like to think things would have been different

I don't know what the state of play is at the moment, I don't know what problems they face. so I don't like to judge too harshly

[Sheriff Fatman]

I think the question of sponsorship is very different to that of a backing agreement, in which both player and backer are seeking a financial return in (generally) a private arrangement.

Basically, there seems to be little downside to a sponsorship deal for a player, other than his own personal feelings regarding being tied to a sponsor/schedule and having to potentially share out any winnings he/she achieves.

Equally, its very difficult to determine who would be a 'good' sponsored player for a particular sponsor.  Some sponsors would love a 'brat' type character who will generate a lot of exposure via their antics while consistently failing to achieve any success compared to a well-mannered, winning player who only generates publicity when making a TV table.  Neither is wrong.  The decision lies solely with those stumping up the cash and their particular goals from doing the deal.

Personally, I'm frequently frustrated by the fact that Player A or B has a sponsorship deal when I could think of many 'better' players in terms of understanding/knowledge/ability/manners who would, in my opinion, generate more success in financial terms.  However, tournament success is not the only relevant consideration to any sponsorship deal so, provided that sponsor and player are happy with the arrangement, then I guess its really no-one else's concern.

Sheriff
(Available for sponsorship, considerable shirt-advertising space available!) 

[ariston]

Although I am not a sponsored player I still feel obligated (even though I have been told I am not) to wear the betfair logo at any event I play. I have a very good writing arrangement with them and help them out with anything they ask and they look after me. They were kind enough to put me in a big event this year but that was a reward for consistantly winning seats to all their other events. I wouldn't want to be sponsored by a site I had no faith in (even though I am broke at the minute)- I couldn't write/play for a site that was going to put people away (ie sites with no traffic or financial stability) as I would feel bad misleading people.
Sponsorship is as already been said by bobby and co so much different from backing where they have a budget to spend for marketing/advertising and the sponsorship deals come from this budget (the marketing spend for companies like betfair and will hills is frightening). Most of the people I know who are/have been backed are people who've had taken a hit to their bankroll and friends help them out, obviously this is returned when roles switch round. The regulars on the circuit do tend to help each other out. I have only ever been backed by my closest friends.
As a general investment to make money long term I think backing is not financialy viable but to help mates out short term is a different thing. I know people who have helped someone out for the odd game/festival and they have had huge results which have returned plenty for the backer. 

[matt674]

Personally i dont think i would ever want to be backed to play in an event or festival for a couple of reasons. The first is that i dont think i would want to play under the added pressure that somebody else is relying on me to make them money, if i make a mistake and it is my fault then i only have myself to blame and i have to endure the consequences on my own. The second reason is greed (not that i'm a greedy person by nature) but i feel that if i have done all the work and made all the effort - why should i then give a percentage of my hard earned winnings away. I also would never back another person as if i want to make money playing poker, i'd like to be the one playing not relying on others.

Sponsorship on the other hand is a different matter, but then there are so many stories about as to all the different kinds of deals that the top sponsored professionals get and without knowing which ones are true and which ones are just rumours it is hard to form an opinion. As i'm just an internet player who plays on the one site so its highly unlikely in the near future that i'll be getting anyone knocking my door down to get my signature even though my online record isnt that bad. My plan is to give up work one day so that i can spend a year playing poker for a living, this will enable me to then try and play a few more live events and festivals as most are now 2 day events and i struggle to get the time off work.

Like Junior said in his post earlier in the thread, I too could have played more live events than just the handful i have - using the money i have won online but instead the last 22 months i have used all that to pay off all my debts, all outstanding monies owed on both my houses, my car and my credit cards plus treating myself with spending money and flights to the WPT pokerstars event in the Caribbean and the WSOP main event in Las Vegas. I have decided however now that i have paid everything off that instead of giving up my job straight away, i will carry on working (even though my job pays less than i'm making online - its a steady regular income which means i dont have to touch my bankroll) while i build up my online bankroll to an amount (my aim at the minute is approx $60000) where i can take a year off work and just play poker, making sure that i have enough to last me for a year without putting myself under the added pressure of having to constantly get results week in and week out to pay the bills.

Whether i manage to achieve my target or not only time will tell but i want to try and do it myself without the financial assistance of a backer, then i hopefully will not have to rely on someone else to help me achieve my goals and also for the added personal satisfaction if i do make it. If i dont then ho hum, its been an enjoyable few years anyway and i'm still going to enjoy playing poker as an amateur!!