when does the makeup gravy train stop?

[Tal]

To answer OP's question in the subject, I think people stopped using gravy browning as a fake tan in the early fifties.

I believe you're getting confused with the makeup gravy boat.

Ahhhhhhhh (bisto)

[AndrewT]

To answer OP's question in the subject, I think people stopped using gravy browning as a fake tan in the early fifties.

I believe you're getting confused with the makeup gravy boat.

Ahhhhhhhh (busto)

FYP

[Tal]

Hug kiss hug

[outragous76]

Hug kiss hug

Too good

[Simon Galloway]

I've always compared staking to like trading on the stock exchange (though probably much less complex).  

Nearly.  It is more like a commodities exchange where physical delivery ensues on the expiry of a contract.  You start off buying something because you think it might be good value, then 3 months later, you get  a couple of million tonnes of Kerosine delivered and you have hadn't really thought about that bit...

[SuuPRlim]

For the OP, if you're genuinely interested in the topic (most people who bring the subject up are purely trolling and never listen to the answers) ...

I guess it's pretty hard to comprehend for guys who play less intensively, but you gotta remember that big downswings are reasonably standard. Now if you're playing average buyin tournaments of say $40 (that's basically a range from $3rebuy's to $100 freezeouts) and you get into $100,000 make up, then yh, chances are you are playing losing poker. However, the guys who are most commonly staked are those playing high stakes MTT's (average buyin's of $140-$180) and throw a few live tournaments in there (a $10k, 5k EPT etc) and losing $100,000 in 6 months is nothing out of the ordinary. I'd go as far as to say that if you've been playing high stakes tournaments for more than 2 or 3 years and never had a $100,000+ downswing you've been very, very lucky.

I think referring to it as a "Make-Up Gravy Train"is kind of misguided. Yes, it's very true to say there are players out there who are being staked for games that they can't really beat, due to either past results or they just know the right (wealthy) people but there are a LOT of very successful staking deals out there, and staking isn't exclusively for people who are broke. We've had this discussion on blonde more times than Mitch has ordered the DTD cheesecake so let's not get into it in too much detail, but there are many different reasons why staking agreements develop - I'm not going to but I could list you a few names of people who are backed who you'd wouldn't think and they are very successful players.

The point you made though about "how far do you go" is a very valid one, I personally believe there is a point where, no matter how good the player is, he reaches a point where he is simply in "too deep" and it's borderline impossible to get out of it. I've known of a few guys be in $150k+ and gotten out of it, but not many, I agree with you that it defo has an affect (for most people) on their play. It's very hard on the backer, but he has to be responsible for his own business and if he thinks its too deep then he has to pull the plug. I think in a LOT of instances the stakers are just a bit too degenerate and this prolly affects their decision making negatively.

The "gravy train" will never stop, as long as people have money and good players who have a game they can beat have run out of money savvy gamblers will always wanna back people. ON the same page, people will continue to be backed who prolly shouldn't be, people are just degens at the end of the day

Hope you actually wanted this info and I haven't wasted my time.

[Skgv]

For the OP, if you're genuinely interested in the topic (most people who bring the subject up are purely trolling and never listen to the answers) ...

I guess it's pretty hard to comprehend for guys who play less intensively, but you gotta remember that big downswings are reasonably standard. Now if you're playing average buyin tournaments of say $40 (that's basically a range from $3rebuy's to $100 freezeouts) and you get into $100,000 make up, then yh, chances are you are playing losing poker. However, the guys who are most commonly staked are those playing high stakes MTT's (average buyin's of $140-$180) and throw a few live tournaments in there (a $10k, 5k EPT etc) and losing $100,000 in 6 months is nothing out of the ordinary. I'd go as far as to say that if you've been playing high stakes tournaments for more than 2 or 3 years and never had a $100,000+ downswing you've been very, very lucky.

I think referring to it as a "Make-Up Gravy Train"is kind of misguided. Yes, it's very true to say there are players out there who are being staked for games that they can't really beat, due to either past results or they just know the right (wealthy) people but there are a LOT of very successful staking deals out there, and staking isn't exclusively for people who are broke. We've had this discussion on blonde more times than Mitch has ordered the DTD cheesecake so let's not get into it in too much detail, but there are many different reasons why staking agreements develop - I'm not going to but I could list you a few names of people who are backed who you'd wouldn't think and they are very successful players.

The point you made though about "how far do you go" is a very valid one, I personally believe there is a point where, no matter how good the player is, he reaches a point where he is simply in "too deep" and it's borderline impossible to get out of it. I've known of a few guys be in $150k+ and gotten out of it, but not many, I agree with you that it defo has an affect (for most people) on their play. It's very hard on the backer, but he has to be responsible for his own business and if he thinks its too deep then he has to pull the plug. I think in a LOT of instances the stakers are just a bit too degenerate and this prolly affects their decision making negatively.

The "gravy train" will never stop, as long as people have money and good players who have a game they can beat have run out of money savvy gamblers will always wanna back people. ON the same page, people will continue to be backed who prolly shouldn't be, people are just degens at the end of the day

Hope you actually wanted this info and I haven't wasted my time.

Really mature an intelligent post dave for the average poker player to understand. Really makes more sense !

[Royal Flush]

Highest makeup brags, once got to $192k, anyone beat that?

[RED-DOG]

£1,377.4 billion

Click to see full-size image.

[Simon Galloway]

Nice post Dave (and lol @ Tom)

I think a couple of your paragraphs need to be considered at the same time, by backers and players alike.  For example, a guy playing $7 hypers suddenly swings 200 buyins and is $1400 in MU.  A lot of players react to that by saying "how do I get out of that, playing $7 sngs at 2%?  I need money to eat/pay the rent/get a job etc" and all of a sudden, they are nowhere near as keen to grind as they were when in profit (despite it only taking a 200 buyin uptick to reverse.)  For backers, it is gold to work out which applicants are going to turn out like this and which aren't.  The old axiom 'you don't know how good a horse you have until they are 200 buyins in makeup' rings true.  That's also true in many walks of life; anyone can buy stock and watch it rise, go to lunch and think life is good.  You only find out who can actually trade when the price falls sharply.

At the other end of the spectrum, you have guys playing $100+ mtts.  The makeup here is a little different, as players/backers can reason that '1 good bink gets me out' for a long time.  However, when it gets to the point where the best result in a tourny doesn't even clear MU, then you definitely do get guys that start taking on every flip possible, playing like a lunatic going for the win.  If 1st doesn't get them out of MU, what good is 8th?  To balance, you also get guys that now get gunshy, because they aren't flipping too well, they now don't pull the trigger in spots where they always used to.

I talk to a lot of online backers around the globe and a lot of them aren't very scientific, they just crave a massive bink and are prepared to throw lots of darts at it.  When a player gets deep in makeup, they are quick to reason that it must be +EV to continue as effectively the $$ from the next result is 100% them 0% player.  However, they haven't always considered all the ways it can turn bad.  Many stables start up and fold very quickly because they don't have the discipline to pull the plug (or the foresight not to start) on bad spots.

[the sicilian]

How do atakers work out living expenses..?  if your horse is in makeup do you give a certain amount of living money too?

[theprawnidentity]

How do atakers work out living expenses..?  if your horse is in makeup do you give a certain amount of living money too?

Not all stakers do this, but some will for their better horses.  If a horse requires extra money for living expenses etc it is usually charged at double MU, so for every $1k of expenses, $2k is added to MU. (assuming horse is on a 50/50 deal with MU)

[the sicilian]

How do atakers work out living expenses..?  if your horse is in makeup do you give a certain amount of living money too?

Not all stakers do this, but some will for their better horses.  If a horse requires extra money for living expenses etc it is usually charged at double MU, so for every $1k of expenses, $2k is added to MU. (assuming horse is on a 50/50 deal with MU)

yikes ! wonga.com

[Simon Galloway]

hardly wonga Deano, that's interest free.

[the sicilian]

hardly wonga Deano, that's interest free.

1k borrowed..2k paid back?