Prose from a Poshboy

[pleno1]

1.35 in ept is similar to 1.5/6 in wptn

[nirvana]

1.35 in ept is similar to 1.5/6 in wptn

Inclusive of the 'get shit done' factor ?

[SuuPRlim]

I don't 'get' the staking thing.  On the one hand you are asking people to buy action but at a premium, so why isn't it at spot rate when effectively you are asking for money in order to do something that you want to do, with a fairly good chance of a nil return?  And, secondly;

You scooped over £20k less than a week ago plus other bits and bobs on the cash, so why ask for anything at all? It seems odd to be saying 'I'm going to gamble some money, so give me some of yours even though I have plenty'.

This isn't a wind up, I've been meaning to ask somebody this for quite a while.

Thanks in advance.

this conversation has been had on blonde more times than my debit card has been declined in the Rhinos.

First thing you need to do to get your head around it is not see it as "giving someone money to play" but an "investment" Alex is proposing an oppurtunity for people to make money (in his belief he is offering them a profitable oppurtunity) and people either consider it to be so, or not (as is what has happened with the price of his original thread)

*note, there are plenty of times when people sell 0EV (maybe even -EV) stakes which people buy because they like the guy, or wanna give him a spin etc thats totally different.

Selling action for tournaments is a way to i) spread the value, and ii) play a wider spectrum of tournaments within your financial comfort zone - there are many tournaments you could play, but you get to select the ones that best suit you, or that are most convienient for you with a wider spectrum of buyins available.

That should answer point 1.

Point 2:

We can't really make any assumptions on Alexs finances, or his personal circumstances, only alex knows how much money he is comfortable putting into each tournament and the reasons why that is the figure. It's none of our business basically although it's usually pretty commonplace for people to give a basic explanation of WHY they are selling action when they do, although I don't think there is ANY need for them to do so whatsoever.

Selling action is one effectively the life-blood of pro poker and it happens at every level from the smallest stakes to the highest and people you think have multi-million$ bankroll's still sell action. It's just "one of those things" but a lot of people who haven't bought&sold a ton of action often dont understand the concept.

Hope this helps.

[Dubai]

Demps 1.35 was obv massively high.  But he bought so many shocking prices off worse players so he is allowed to get one through

[millidonk]

this conversation has been had on blonde more times than my debit card has been declined in the Rhinos.

<3

[Yian]

It's funny how no one is expected to sell between 1.5 and 1.99 but there's so many 'old school' players that sell at 2.0. The words "2.0" aren't mentioned but the words "i'll buy you in, and we'll split the profits" are normally said. These are likely to be bad players too.

Alex should be allowed to advertise how he wishes without interception by people who think his mark-up is too high. There's room for discussion about it after his staking thread is closed.

[GreekStein]

I'd be fascinated to see your ROI for all £500+ tourns you've played lifetime. Then I'd like to see it with best 5 and worst 5 removed.

Why? This would only skew things the wrong way imo.

In a pretty small sample of tournaments that Alex has played lifetime (which live player has played a decent sample?!) so taking out 5 best scores would just make him or any other player look bad.

[Tal]

this conversation has been had on blonde more times than my debit card has been declined in the Rhinos.

<3

How much money can you spend watching Leeds Rhinos?

[nirvana]

I'd be fascinated to see your ROI for all £500+ tourns you've played lifetime. Then I'd like to see it with best 5 and worst 5 removed.

Why? This would only skew things the wrong way imo.

In a pretty small sample of tournaments that Alex has played lifetime (which live player has played a decent sample?!) so taking out 5 best scores would just make him or any other player look bad.

This is kind of the point tho, should I think Rasta is good value at 1.5/1.6 ?

[kinboshi]

this conversation has been had on blonde more times than my debit card has been declined in the Rhinos.

<3

How much money can you spend watching Leeds Rhinos?

Haha, was going to ask if he meant the Leeds Rhinos club shop or somewhere else

[rfgqqabc]

I think the problem is that as a staker you need an edge too.  So my maths on this was as follows for the Monte Carlo.  I will be staking you at a value of £1650 (1100*1.5) so on the amount that goes into the prize pool you need to have an ROI of 65% before I even break even.  Now lets assume I want the same return on my money that you are getting ie 50% then  your ROI in this tournament has to be 245%.  Now of course I could argue that I would take less but I also have to take into consideration the chance of not being paid (this is absolutely no refelction on you but just a reality of staking).  I would never take a stake which I expected to return less than 15% on my money no matter who it was so you have to be worth  1.897 before I could even consider it.  I am not sure anyone is worth that in this tournament no matter how good they are and even then you would have an earn rate well above mine for an event we are effectively partners in.

Redarmi absolutely killed it for me. I have basic rules I apply to my own staking and try to have as few as exceptions as possible. This has always worked out pretty well for me, but [ ] sample size. This is also something you have to factor in live. If you had lost one or two flips here or there, you wouldn't have considered 1.5 fair, at least in my opinion. Another problem I have is that if 1.5 is fair and good value, why are you reducing it? Surely the best justification for the price isn't to lower it, but to take it all on. This would have been the best statement regarding the price in my opinion, especially if you went on to win it. (Lol results) I understand this isn't correct for you due to bankroll etc, but it would have looked better in my opinion. However, your statement came off very well in my opinion, the comments or timing (timing is everything :p) clearly didn't help, but you have come across well overall in my opinion.

Someone mentioned the 2+2 marketplace and how the prices would have been laughed at over there. Well have a look at Galen Hall's 2012 package. He has a 24% roi over 7k tournaments @ an average stake of 139$. Impressive yeah. Won the PCA too so has the get shit done factor. He charges 1.61 in the 10k 6max and 1.59 in a 2.5k at the Venetian. Obviously structural differences there but it does seem a bit off. However, unless his roi has to be absolutely massive for his investors to see a similar return to himself. This is one of the factors people fail to consider staking. Having an roi of 50% doesn't mean you can charge 1.4. He also brags about $3.6 million worth of live cashes in less than a hundred tournaments. That is a heater not a sample size.

I have linked the thread below for anyone interested.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/184/staking-selling-shares-live/galen-hall-2012-summer-selling-1204267/


For what its worth as I have previously expressed is the marketplace talks. I think more may have sold if it was left up. Also, if people can say positive things on a staking thread then the opposite certainly ought to be true. Staking in poker is still a murky area, I have read lots about it but I still see fantastic players sell awful packages or make bad decisions regarding markup. Both buyers and sellers on blonde are lucky because the scam risk is extremely low. Personally I have never seen a package or something that could be deemed as unfair. For example certain people on 2+2 have sold packages for the WSOP including the main at 1.35 say, and then gone home before the main. They have sent returns but the Main is a huge chunk of their package and they charge 1.35 because of this, when they might only get 1.2 normally.

[kinboshi]

Good post rfbbgbafgabgfabaccc.

[skolsuper]

I'd be fascinated to see your ROI for all £500+ tourns you've played lifetime. Then I'd like to see it with best 5 and worst 5 removed.

Why? This would only skew things the wrong way imo.

In a pretty small sample of tournaments that Alex has played lifetime (which live player has played a decent sample?!) so taking out 5 best scores would just make him or any other player look bad.

This is kind of the point tho, should I think Rasta is good value at 1.5/1.6 ?

Possibly you're missing the point here, which would be a surprise as you'd be among my picks for top 3 shrewdest forumites, but Greekstein is right. He's (probably accidentally) used the key word 'skew', in that mtt results are not normally distributed. I get your general point, but maybe taking away something like 10 downside for every 1 upside outlier would yield more accurate results.

As someone with a relatively unbiased sample of hundreds of live mtts (through the stable), I'd estimate live mtt ROIs for good players in fields of 2-500 in the £300-£1650 bracket are around 75%.

[kano]

I genuinely thought it was an April Fools.

[aaron1867]

1.5 was ridic, field is still going to be tough and not really sure anyone should be over .3 IMO.

Yeah you cashed the last two, but how long was that ago & the sats in place? I think it's about 35% of field will sats, still will be one of best fields in recent times.

Lots of silly marks up though lately