DTD £300 Deepstack - March 09

[Royal Flush]

Am i reading this right?

You are charging a not unreasonable but top end 1.43 on the buyin, fair enough.

Then you are also charging 1.2 when people are sending the funds?? Why is 10% £40?

1.71 is a bit ridic and abusing the good faith of blonde posters.

[nirvana]

The more I read these live poker staking threads the odder I think the whole thing is.

With too much time on my hands I looked at the track record in general - apart from Aces & River Dave (decent expectations on both of these) the only notable score I could see was from the king of luton - The sicilian.

Not sure why people go for it really - especially in low buy in comps. I can't quite wrap my head around why any staking takes place in tourneys that cost less than a grand to enter.

T'internet consistent staking over a period of time I understand.

[Longy]

Well variance plays apart, i have not added it up but there can't have more than 50ish stakes that have actually got off the ground.

So 3/50 is obv not a great strike rate but it isn't at all outside the realms of statistical variance, that every stake was +ev in the given tourney.

The thing i bulk at is the mark ups on these stakes that people are offering, in some cases the stakees are getting nowhere near a fair bang for their buck and the variance of 1 tournament staking.That is why i have not staked anyone on this board, though there was the occasional spot like Flushy's partouche event which was so ++++ev where if I had that kind of $$$$'s hanging around, i would have considered it.

Sorry for the derailment and good luck Maria for the weekend, none of the above is realtedly directly to this thread, more a general opinion.

[Chili]

Am i reading this right?

You are charging a not unreasonable but top end 1.43 on the buyin, fair enough.

Then you are also charging 1.2 when people are sending the funds?? Why is 10% £40?

1.71 is a bit ridic and abusing the good faith of blonde posters.

Flushy, with this being my first attempt at staking I wasnt sure how to go with it.  So what i did was look over previous posters request and based mine on the ones that people staked.  Seeing as no comment like this was put on others, why have i got the treatment.  I was just using a model that was being accepted previously on here.

I thought because posters are getting their stake back first before any chop comes out then that is acceptable.  Then again I am no expert on what is the perfect model for this, hence using past requests.

To suggest I am abusing the good faith of blonde posters is a bit low.

If any stakers think this, I will gladly pay back any stake before the tournament.

[TheChipPrince]

I think it would be really helpful if someone with experience of this kind of staking, eg, Flushy, made a template for others to follow, i'm sure 90% of ppl are 'unsure' what to charge, even experienced live players...

Like Maria, I , and I think most, would look over old posts as a first 'guide' without perhaps fully understanding what a fair price is...

[Longy]

Am i reading this right?

You are charging a not unreasonable but top end 1.43 on the buyin, fair enough.

Then you are also charging 1.2 when people are sending the funds?? Why is 10% £40?

1.71 is a bit ridic and abusing the good faith of blonde posters.

Flushy, with this being my first attempt at staking I wasnt sure how to go with it.  So what i did was look over previous posters request and based mine on the ones that people staked.  Seeing as no comment like this was put on others, why have i got the treatment.  I was just using a model that was being accepted previously on here.

I thought because posters are getting their stake back first before any chop comes out then that is acceptable.  Then again I am no expert on what is the perfect model for this, hence using past requests.

To suggest I am abusing the good faith of blonde posters is a bit low.

If any stakers think this, I will gladly pay back any stake before the tournament.

I think the thing the flushy is getting at that you should be selling each 10%@£33 and then 5%@16.50. You are going to get £400 for a £330 tournament so you are making £70 before the tourney has started and then paying people 70% of the winnings.

The exception to this are where people build in expenses, when the tourney is far away from home. Given you are local this is unecessary.

Fwiw i don't think you are being malicious or anything of the sort, just you have unknowingly charged a bit too much juice.

[EvilPie]

Looks like an honest mistake by someone who's not asked for staking before.

Effectively Maria you are being paid to play in this event. You get £70 even if you go mental first hand and get busted.

What Flushy is saying is that it's fair enough to ask for the 100% stake for 70% equity because of your abilities but to guarantee yourself a payout no matter what is a bit much.

If you want to sell at 1.73 the preferable way would be to sell 100% for 55% equity (or whatever it works out at) but not over sell.

I know you've not done it on purpose but to mark up on the equity and with an over sell can look like a sneaky way of increasing your take from the event.

The usual way to do these is to either:

a - Sell at a premium. This means that you sell each £33 share for more than it's actually worth because you have an edge over the field. If you do it this way you would keep a certain % for yourself so that you make something if you cash.

For example you sell half of your action for £200 and you pay the other £130 yourself. You keep 50% of any cash the rest goes to backers. Backers are paying £200 for £165 worth of entry which is an over sell of 1.21

b - Sell 100% for a set equity. This means that you sell all of your action but only pay out a set % of winnings to backers. By keeping 30% for yourself backers effectively only get 70% of the value of their stake. each £33 is only worth £23.10. The mark up here is (£33/£23.10) 1.43

By combining the two you have sold at 1.43x1.21 which as Flushy says is 1.73.

All that said, it's laid out clearly on the OP and if any stakers didn't read it properly then more fool them, they shouldn't be in the staking game.

[Royal Flush]

I don't think anyone so far has charged 30% equity which i think is fair, but also wacked an extra 20% on after! If they had i would have said the same thing, your shares should be 33/10% not 40.

[Royal Flush]

Now i look again it does look like an honest mistake, i didn't mean to sound harsh Maria but you have inadvertently overcharged a £330 product by £70!

[StuartHopkin]

Surely the fact it is there in writing is enough?
Mistake or no mistake no one has been cheated.

The whole idea that this staking is about working out if someone has an edge of 1.76384794 is a joke.
Its about a bit of fun and helping people play tournaments they might not otherwise be able to.

If peope were unhappy with the calculation they wouldnt stake her.

The staking Flushy does is a whole different level to this. Professional long term staking if you like. Where as this is a one of gamble.

[StuartHopkin]

Oh yeah! Just remembered what the field is like at these £300's

I would suggest anyone who posts on these boards could reasonably sell at 4.4

[Chili]

To suggest that I am abusing people's good faith is just plain wrong but to suggest that I am a thick donkey without thinking out my proposal properly is totally 100% TRUE.  I do feel like a complete div to be honest, I see what I have done by charging a premium twice over is NOT at all what I wanted from this.

Wish I could go back and do this agian sigh, what I should have really is only sold 70% at a small premium and not 100%.  What I will do though is refund everyone the difference from £20 for 5% to £16.50 for 5%.

So sorry to the backers, please could you pm your bank details and I will do this ASAP.

Redsimon & Booder, I will do this through stars.

[The_nun]

Ooopses Did I do the same ? if so I must owe my backers 70 correct?. BTW GL this weekend Maria xx Can someone with more experience take a look mine way back in Dec then if i do owe i will gladly return any that i owe.

[EvilPie]

To suggest that I am abusing people's good faith is just plain wrong but to suggest that I am a thick donkey without thinking out my proposal properly is totally 100% TRUE.  I do feel like a complete div to be honest, I see what I have done by charging a premium twice over is NOT at all what I wanted from this.

Wish I could go back and do this agian sigh, what I should have really is only sold 70% at a small premium and not 100%.  What I will do though is refund everyone the difference from £20 for 5% to £16.50 for 5%.

So sorry to the backers, please could you pm your bank details and I will do this ASAP.

Redsimon & Booder, I will do this through stars.

Fck 'em it's their own faults  

[EvilPie]

Ooopses Did I do the same ? if so I must owe my backers 70 correct?. BTW GL this weekend Maria xx

No you didn't.

You are an honest upstanding Blonde unlike some other unscrupulous characters I could mention.