Issues Arising from Staking

[kinboshi]

Reckon it's a good time to put up a staking 70/30 staking thread?

[pleno1]

its shown that 70/30 cases don't always get ridiculed.

look at the tood swain case for example, i even punted 50%

[rfgqqabc]

Well if i ever put an op up, with OPR and acceptable facts, gl everyone if someone chooses to question it after that. Atm there is clearly a one rule for one, one rule for another, depending on who is liked by certain members.

what for example you charge 1.7 for a really tough event and people question it then. extreme case obv but lets say its closer and somebody thinks otherwise, then what?

Well if i put up 1.7 for a DTD live event then I'm not sure someone should question it. Market decides etc, bit unfair to ruin people's action because your more outspoken. CBA to bring up Key's and Dreenie again, but if i was on Guys end, if you see what I mean, I'd be absolutely steaming. The politics of blonde is why I've stayed away from the staking forum.

[TightEnd]

Well if i ever put an op up, with OPR and acceptable facts, gl everyone if someone chooses to question it after that. Atm there is clearly a one rule for one, one rule for another, depending on who is liked by certain members.

what for example you charge 1.7 for a really tough event and people question it then. extreme case obv but lets say its closer and somebody thinks otherwise, then what?

Well if i put up 1.7 for a DTD live event then I'm not sure someone should question it. Market decides etc, bit unfair to ruin people's action because your more outspoken. CBA to bring up Key's and Dreenie again, but if i was on Guys end, if you see what I mean, I'd be absolutely steaming. The politics of blonde is why I've stayed away from the staking forum.

People questioning it, if they choose to, is the market deciding

Got to expect scrutiny, and if the proposal stacks up there won't be a problem

There is no "politics of blonde". It's all market forces.

[MANTIS01]

Offering advice and recommendations is a fair enough system. Just think people should be mindful when offering their advice in a public arena. Obv there's no law that says it has to be quality and unbiased but I think it is an important aspect of your character. Saying somebody is a good guy influences people who trust you and your judgement. So why risk telling people somebody is a good guy if there is doubt? There is a lot of talk about sample size on this forum and that you can't really make any accurate judgements about a player until thousands of hands have been processed. Yet people will commit to saying a horse is a good guy and a good prospect based on a dozen or so previous stakes. Unless you have a golden rep across that tiny sample size you clearly aren't a good prospect or indeed a good guy.

[rfgqqabc]

Well if i ever put an op up, with OPR and acceptable facts, gl everyone if someone chooses to question it after that. Atm there is clearly a one rule for one, one rule for another, depending on who is liked by certain members.

what for example you charge 1.7 for a really tough event and people question it then. extreme case obv but lets say its closer and somebody thinks otherwise, then what?

Well if i put up 1.7 for a DTD live event then I'm not sure someone should question it. Market decides etc, bit unfair to ruin people's action because your more outspoken. CBA to bring up Key's and Dreenie again, but if i was on Guys end, if you see what I mean, I'd be absolutely steaming. The politics of blonde is why I've stayed away from the staking forum.

People questioning it, if they choose to, is the market deciding

Got to expect scrutiny, and if the proposal stacks up there won't be a problem

There is no "politics of blonde". It's all market forces.

Market forces lead to people commenting on some peoples stakes and not others though. I would never post on anyones thread saying, not sure if the value is here, but people will on mine, because I'm not as well known, despite me possibly having a bigger edge etc. The longer you've been here, the less likely someone is to question it. If Ben Martin "Cheezies" came along and posted a live staking thread, people might comment, ruining his action here, without knowing anything about him. Whereas if Dan Morgan/Me/Lildave comment first saying 10% then it wouldn't be questioned afterwards. "Politics of blonde" might not be the right phrase, but I believe the market should decide by buying or not buying action, instead of commenting. If i put up a thread for the next DTD £500 @ 1.45, it would speak volumes if people didn't buy any action, instead of people commenting. I might not want to sell at less than this, so people saying to me "Markup looks a little high" ruins my action, adds nothing to me, and negatively effects me. Doesn't really seem fair that no one would do the same to others, such as Dan Morgan for the WSOP ME, but are happy to not buy, and not comment.

Disclaimer: These are just examples and not what i truly believe, Dreenie's thread probably was ok value for a sunday, especially with the offer @ spot on another Sunday, and so was Dan Morgans imo.

Edit: I guess what I'm trying to say is there is a very thin line between ruining action, and preventing scams/ scamlike markups, and I'm not sure people on the forum can make that decision.

[Simon Galloway]

Call me old fashioned, but I still like to think everyone has a good rep until there is reason to think otherwise.  That said, I'm not a complete soft touch!  I won't give someone a bunch of money to go to Vegas and say "have a nice time, let me know how much you have when you get back"  until I know them exceptionally well over a long period.  Nor will I normally get involved for live cash game staking.  Whilst it may be profitable done correctly, it isn't of interest for me and I have heard of/thought of too many ways to get done over.  It's why I generally don't stake people for Vegas full stop.  Vegas has a very strong pull, I lose count of the number of stake requests promising "no drinking, in bed by midnight, this is a work trip" and then 2 days later, FB photos suggest they are having a good time in Pepppermints at 08:30......(or, ahem, they are sat next to me at the time  )  

So whilst others are strutting around defending their decision to charge 1.5, I'm more likely to be thinking that whilst they may be worth 50% on their best form, they are also likely to be spending a portion of their playing time very tired, distracted by a multitude of other happenings and, in some cases, still pissed.  Difficult to think that their average performance will be 150% territory.

[smashedagain]

When the time comes for me to put up a staking request I won't be accepting anyone's money unless they have flamed me first. It's the best bit about the staking boards imo

[claypole]

Well if i ever put an op up, with OPR and acceptable facts, gl everyone if someone chooses to question it after that. Atm there is clearly a one rule for one, one rule for another, depending on who is liked by certain members.

what for example you charge 1.7 for a really tough event and people question it then. extreme case obv but lets say its closer and somebody thinks otherwise, then what?

Well if i put up 1.7 for a DTD live event then I'm not sure someone should question it. Market decides etc, bit unfair to ruin people's action because your more outspoken. CBA to bring up Key's and Dreenie again, but if i was on Guys end, if you see what I mean, I'd be absolutely steaming. The politics of blonde is why I've stayed away from the staking forum.

People questioning it, if they choose to, is the market deciding

Got to expect scrutiny, and if the proposal stacks up there won't be a problem

There is no "politics of blonde". It's all market forces.

No - you don't understand the Guy thing.  FWIW - I have met Guy once, really like the guy and have no ill feeling as one of his stakers in the long run on his thread; however the point being made was about his new threads, Sundays etc when he was effectively in make up - it wasn't a random pop at Guy or different standards or politics.  I think, for example if Monda busted hbis roll for the $35s and was in make up then put "one day $35" schedule up affter ceasing staking he would get challenged and we all love him.  We can debate the rights of wrongs of where / how it was bought up - but I think its a legitimate challenge and not about "favourites" or "politics"

Also - I have never pushed it with Guy, because, back to my original post, I chose to stake him, I wasn't clear on secondary schedules, make long term etc, so in essence my fault and no re-course

[TightEnd]

Well if i ever put an op up, with OPR and acceptable facts, gl everyone if someone chooses to question it after that. Atm there is clearly a one rule for one, one rule for another, depending on who is liked by certain members.

what for example you charge 1.7 for a really tough event and people question it then. extreme case obv but lets say its closer and somebody thinks otherwise, then what?

Well if i put up 1.7 for a DTD live event then I'm not sure someone should question it. Market decides etc, bit unfair to ruin people's action because your more outspoken. CBA to bring up Key's and Dreenie again, but if i was on Guys end, if you see what I mean, I'd be absolutely steaming. The politics of blonde is why I've stayed away from the staking forum.

People questioning it, if they choose to, is the market deciding

Got to expect scrutiny, and if the proposal stacks up there won't be a problem

There is no "politics of blonde". It's all market forces.

Market forces lead to people commenting on some peoples stakes and not others though. I would never post on anyones thread saying, not sure if the value is here, but people will on mine, because I'm not as well known, despite me possibly having a bigger edge etc. The longer you've been here, the less likely someone is to question it. If Ben Martin "Cheezies" came along and posted a live staking thread, people might comment, ruining his action here, without knowing anything about him. Whereas if Dan Morgan/Me/Lildave comment first saying 10% then it wouldn't be questioned afterwards. "Politics of blonde" might not be the right phrase, but I believe the market should decide by buying or not buying action, instead of commenting. If i put up a thread for the next DTD £500 @ 1.45, it would speak volumes if people didn't buy any action, instead of people commenting. I might not want to sell at less than this, so people saying to me "Markup looks a little high" ruins my action, adds nothing to me, and negatively effects me. Doesn't really seem fair that no one would do the same to others, such as Dan Morgan for the WSOP ME, but are happy to not buy, and not comment.

Disclaimer: These are just examples and not what i truly believe, Dreenie's thread probably was ok value for a sunday, especially with the offer @ spot on another Sunday, and so was Dan Morgans imo.

but Ben couldn't post one until he has 300 posts, by which time people will have an idea what he is about

Personally I see nothing wrong with people questioning any proposal. I'd prefer and think its more useful when the feedback is constructive and kept away from personal views. Its business, to coin the phrase used in here

The fact that it might be regarded that someone asking for staking who has made a sustained contribution to the community might get, in your opinion, a softer ride than someone who hasn't is a fact of life. Sometimes people stake someone not just for EV reasons, on here especially

[AndrewT]

The fact that it might be regarded that someone asking for staking who has made a sustained contribution to the community might get, in your opinion, a softer ride than someone who hasn't is a fact of life. Sometimes people stake someone not just for EV reasons, on here especially

This is important as well - not every stake is a hard-headed business decision. There are many people who will give a -EV punt on someone they like in a bowl comp and will do so with eyes wide open for the sweat. Not sure these stakees need a policeman deriding them for lack of stats or markup which is .2 too high.

[MANTIS01]

Well if i ever put an op up, with OPR and acceptable facts, gl everyone if someone chooses to question it after that. Atm there is clearly a one rule for one, one rule for another, depending on who is liked by certain members.

what for example you charge 1.7 for a really tough event and people question it then. extreme case obv but lets say its closer and somebody thinks otherwise, then what?

Well if i put up 1.7 for a DTD live event then I'm not sure someone should question it. Market decides etc, bit unfair to ruin people's action because your more outspoken. CBA to bring up Key's and Dreenie again, but if i was on Guys end, if you see what I mean, I'd be absolutely steaming. The politics of blonde is why I've stayed away from the staking forum.

People questioning it, if they choose to, is the market deciding

Got to expect scrutiny, and if the proposal stacks up there won't be a problem

There is no "politics of blonde". It's all market forces.

Market forces lead to people commenting on some peoples stakes and not others though. I would never post on anyones thread saying, not sure if the value is here, but people will on mine, because I'm not as well known, despite me possibly having a bigger edge etc. The longer you've been here, the less likely someone is to question it. If Ben Martin "Cheezies" came along and posted a live staking thread, people might comment, ruining his action here, without knowing anything about him. Whereas if Dan Morgan/Me/Lildave comment first saying 10% then it wouldn't be questioned afterwards. "Politics of blonde" might not be the right phrase, but I believe the market should decide by buying or not buying action, instead of commenting. If i put up a thread for the next DTD £500 @ 1.45, it would speak volumes if people didn't buy any action, instead of people commenting. I might not want to sell at less than this, so people saying to me "Markup looks a little high" ruins my action, adds nothing to me, and negatively effects me. Doesn't really seem fair that no one would do the same to others, such as Dan Morgan for the WSOP ME, but are happy to not buy, and not comment.

Disclaimer: These are just examples and not what i truly believe, Dreenie's thread probably was ok value for a sunday, especially with the offer @ spot on another Sunday, and so was Dan Morgans imo.

but Ben couldn't post one until he has 300 posts, by which time people will have an idea what he is about

Personally I see nothing wrong with people questioning any proposal. I'd prefer and think its more useful when the feedback is constructive and kept away from personal views. Its business, to coin the phrase used in here

The fact that it might be regarded that someone asking for staking who has made a sustained contribution to the community might get, in your opinion, a softer ride than someone who hasn't is a fact of life. Sometimes people stake someone not just for EV reasons, on here especially

I posted in that staking caveats thread questioning a proposal and it wasn't personal at all. The next two replies were 'yawn' from skolsuper and 'trolling for the sake of it' from op. These are two guys who regularly offer their own opinions in other people's staking threads. So the inbalance I see is that some people feel obliged to question proposals for the 'good of the community' but then accuse others of trolling or rudeness when they or their friends are on the receiving end. It should be one or the other. So while I agree with you I see this other guy's point.

[TightEnd]

I see his point too

On a forum full of entrenched opinions about some people, by other people its tricky to

a) ensure all staking feedback is constructive (ie "yawn" and "stop trolling" replies need to be avoided, really)

b) ensure those in receipt of feedback from certain quarters take it without being thin-skinned. This sensitivity has definitely been a problem at times

As Camel says, don't take it personally.

[nirvana]

Mantis, the new thin skinned mantis

If people decide to troll one thread and approve of another based on personal likes/dislikes they are taking a subjective view - this is OK

If they want to say 'yawn' to you and 'wp' to someone else they are taking a subjective view - this is OK

Somebody, lets say Keys, exhibits some inconsistencies in views - this is OK.

If someone's staking request doesn't sell because of a few neg comments from a perceived clique member - this is OK. If the case had overwhelming merit it would sell.

What all everyone is whinging about is really hard to determine and appreciate

Bunch of over sensitive girls imo - this is not subjective - I'm honely tuckin on facts

[MANTIS01]

I love nirvana and find it hard to take him on using my usual techniques. Must be a hard ass to bluff imo.