A solution to the backers v stakers differences of opinion?

[Simon Galloway]

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

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

Is that price-upable?

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

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

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

[smurf]

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

surely you would make shit loads more playing for yourself.

[smashedagain]

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

surely you would make shit loads more playing for yourself.

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

[titaniumbean]

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

surely you would make shit loads more playing for yourself.

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

don't like you only quoted because you agree

[cambridgealex]

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

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

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

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

[smashedagain]

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

surely you would make shit loads more playing for yourself.

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

don't like you only quoted because you agree

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

[SuuPRlim]

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

surely you would make shit loads more playing for yourself.

God please not this again!

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

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

[titaniumbean]

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

surely you would make shit loads more playing for yourself.

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

don't like you only quoted because you agree

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

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

[smurf]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[titaniumbean]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

[millidonk]

Herbertmob so good.