Discussion of whether staking is +ev and why winners need to be staked?

[Young_gun]

I was intrigued how soo many of the bigger winners in tourneys need to be staked?

Firstly i think the main reason for staking is for playing higher buyins, or to create a starting bankroll, correct me if im wrong but thats my view at the moment However I dont understand if xxx wins so much and has sufficient bankroll why he would need it, ok alot of people will say varience.... but id like to counter argue this by saying say someone who has a big enough bankroll to take the swings or can drop down in stakes then what if he wins £10,000? if he's staked 50/50 or sold 50% then he is ruining his potential return.

The above scenario is probably rare though but i see quite a few big winners, like regularly binking 10k + yet still have to sell themselves.

On the + side of being staked, say i have 50 buy ins it enables me to play twice as many tourneys for my money etc depending on the staking agreement

I think like all poker you will get people who always look for +ev staking, but there will be equally as many losers i would assume.

Thats started it off but i would love to hear both sides from people who are staked on here? people who stake? or people who will rarely/never get involved. 

[Rupert]

probably cos xxx spends tons of money on stuff that isn't poker and so no longer has a bankroll, doesn't stop them from being a great player who would be worth backing

[Young_gun]

probably cos xxx spends tons of money on stuff that isn't poker and so no longer has a bankroll, doesn't stop them from being a great player who would be worth backing

I agree it doesnt stop someone being a great player because they get staked, it allows them more room to move. But also it could ruin potential binks, the bigger the bink the more your ruining potential return. #makemuchsense

[AndrewT]

If you bink results then other people will think you're good so they'll be prepared to stump up cash that you can use to cushion the pain that regression to the mean will bring you.

[scotty77]

MTT variance is absolutely massive.  Very very few have the roll to be able to take the swings

Also there are many, many sicko poker players who can grind millions of MTTs but as soon as they have any kind of serious roll they can't keep hold of it due to having degen leaks in other areas.

[Young_gun]

MTT variance is absolutely massive.  Very very few have the roll to be able to take the swings

Also there are many, many sicko poker players who can grind millions of MTTs but as soon as they have any kind of serious roll they can't keep hold of it due to having degen leaks in other areas.

[/b]

Perhaps this is very true, Ryan. Think u hit the nail on the head there!

Maybe some people need to be staked to play with no worries and to play disciplined/ Good bankroll, didnt think of that tbh

[cambridgealex]

People forget that so and so may have been staked for his bink in the first place. So it's no good saying "he won £10k now he wants staking for a £500 freeze", what if he only had half of himself in the original bink? What if he was in £8k makeup? You just never really know what's going on with peoples personal finances.

Remember, EVERYBODY has less money than you think.

[cambridgealex]

Some people think you need 500 buyins for MTTs. Live it's a bit less, but its still more than 100. So you need at the very least a 100k roll to play £1k freezeouts unbacked. Not many people have 100k rolls, so it's no wonder that people sell for these big comps, even though on the surface it seems like they could afford it (he won 25k here, 15k there etc).

[Young_gun]

2 good posts

I initially was thinking that if someone was staked earlier on and then won enough to cover a proper bankroll.... although thats always debateable how much is enough? Also about mark up i didnt really think of that and i know some people have other debts so that makes sense.

still adds to the variance tho, if they backer plays and stakes just varience + varience so have to make sure they are making +ev in stakes but could be even more swingy! good luck to them

[smashedagain]

People forget that so and so may have been staked for his bink in the first place. So it's no good saying "he won £10k now he wants staking for a £500 freeze", what if he only had half of himself in the original bink? What if he was in £8k makeup? You just never really know what's going on with peoples personal finances.

Remember, EVERYBODY has less money than you think.

you told us you had half a million so just took it as gospel.

[Cf]

Also about mark up i didnt really think of that

You should do as if someone has the ability to sell at a high markup it gives them an excellent reason to get staked.

[Young_gun]

Also about mark up i didnt really think of that

You should do as if someone has the ability to sell at a high markup it gives them an excellent reason to get staked.

No that mark up i am aware of, but the other one he mentioned i didnt take into account where someone is staked and in £xxxx mark up with backer

Fred failed anyways was hoping more of a discussion

[DungBeetle]

I never back anyone at above 1:1.  Poker is the only industry where the borrower expects the funder to pay them a premium.

A bank may think a business is a great idea but receives interest as a premium for the risk they take that the business fails despite it being a good idea against the market.

For risk substitute MTT variance.

I'm happy to take 20% of someone's action if they can't fund the $10k entry, but I get 20% of the winnings.  The rest of the poker world doesn't think that way though and wants me to pay a premium so I end up backing very few people.  Who am I to argue - if someone can get 1.3 of whatever they want then good luck to them.

[jgcblack]

I never back anyone at above 1:1.  Poker is the only industry where the borrower expects the funder to pay them a premium.

A bank may think a business is a great idea but receives interest as a premium for the risk they take that the business fails despite it being a good idea against the market.

For risk substitute MTT variance.

I'm happy to take 20% of someone's action if they can't fund the $10k entry, but I get 20% of the winnings.  The rest of the poker world doesn't think that way though and wants me to pay a premium so I end up backing very few people.  Who am I to argue - if someone can get 1.3 of whatever they want then good luck to them.

There are very few really comparable businesses, however I would be suprised if you were to tell me that a person using a 'known working' model for making money doesn't pay a premium in some way.  Surely a McD's franchise owner still pays McD a premium somewhere along the line?

The markup is because this person is 'above average' vs the field and that provides a good value investment for the cost associated with it.  Blonde is clearly 'rare' in the poker community with a lot of peices being sold at higher markups than other sites/ forums/ people would pay (myself included) however it continues to thrive and I for one am thankful.

[aaron1867]

I think there are lots of people that don't understand the dynamics of staking in poker world and with no disrespect to the OP, you do seem a little bit out of the loop with regards to staking.

You mention £10,000. It does not go far in poker world.

Person A goes and wins £10,000 from a £500 buyin, that is only ten buyins at that tournament. You still have bigger buyins, you keep going back to the £500 event and you keep on losing. You soon are left with not a lot of money out of the £10k, therefore staking reduces the variance, if you are a winning player, you can come back to staking. £10k is absolutely nothing.

In ideal poker world and it really is ideal, because not many people stick to it, you should only be buying in at 1% of buyin. Do all these people who play the UKIPT's & DTD monthlies have 50k in bank? I don't think so.