It's mark up time of the year again!

[cambridgealex]

Pads I'll take 5% at 1.7 for the main pls.

[arbboy]

Selling 20% of main at 5.0 if anyone is interested.    I will fund my own flights and accommodation out of the 'super soft' 5/10 cash games.

[The Camel]

I think the rano moron think has been taken wrongly. I didn't mean weak poker players. i meant literally, they random morons that you only see in the main event. there are people that have NEVER played before. IT's probably a bit harsh and wasn't meant to be supper offensive, they just are poker morons. they have zero idea what they are doing and that is good value.

I'd bet that less than 1% of the main event field have never played poker before. In fact I'd probably bet that there's maybe a handful of players who have never played before.

The 'random morons' that you refer to are poker enthusiasts, recreational players, gamblers, successful business people etc etc. They play because it's the main event, it's a buzz and they love it. Let's not refer to them in this way. The main event wouldn't be the main event without them.

Last year I'd sometimes go and sit in the poker canteen during a break or whatever and I'd usually pick a table that wasn't occupied by some obvious grinder but by someone who was clearly a recreational player and the energy and excitement they had for the occasion was greater than that of any pro, and a lot of pros are pretty fkn excited about the WSOP.

I would be amazed if anyone actually plays the main event as a first ever event either live/online/home games.  I would probably set the line at over/under 1.5 players playing it as their first ever exposure to poker and would expect to see people taking the under.  Without the 'random morons' all the dreamers who think they are worth 1.4 or 2.5 or 15.0 wouldn't be able to rip off their stakers by over selling themselves year after year.  Referring to people like this who then allow you to rip off other people over valuing yourself is highly disrespectful as Greek has said.

I know someone who played the main event as his first poker tournament.

He played a couple of hours of cash the night before as his first ever time playing.

He busted a Full Tilt red pro during level one, getting allin pre with TT v aces and flopping quads.

He had over 100k at the dinner break.

[arbboy]

I think the rano moron think has been taken wrongly. I didn't mean weak poker players. i meant literally, they random morons that you only see in the main event. there are people that have NEVER played before. IT's probably a bit harsh and wasn't meant to be supper offensive, they just are poker morons. they have zero idea what they are doing and that is good value.

I'd bet that less than 1% of the main event field have never played poker before. In fact I'd probably bet that there's maybe a handful of players who have never played before.

The 'random morons' that you refer to are poker enthusiasts, recreational players, gamblers, successful business people etc etc. They play because it's the main event, it's a buzz and they love it. Let's not refer to them in this way. The main event wouldn't be the main event without them.

Last year I'd sometimes go and sit in the poker canteen during a break or whatever and I'd usually pick a table that wasn't occupied by some obvious grinder but by someone who was clearly a recreational player and the energy and excitement they had for the occasion was greater than that of any pro, and a lot of pros are pretty fkn excited about the WSOP.

I would be amazed if anyone actually plays the main event as a first ever event either live/online/home games.  I would probably set the line at over/under 1.5 players playing it as their first ever exposure to poker and would expect to see people taking the under.  Without the 'random morons' all the dreamers who think they are worth 1.4 or 2.5 or 15.0 wouldn't be able to rip off their stakers by over selling themselves year after year.  Referring to people like this who then allow you to rip off other people over valuing yourself is highly disrespectful as Greek has said.

I know someone who played the main event as his first poker tournament.

He played a couple of hours of cash the night before as his first ever time playing.

He busted a Full Tilt red pro during level one, getting allin pre with TT v aces and flopping quads.

He had over 100k at the dinner break.

But he had played poker before albeit for 2 hours the night before.  What would you set the line at on how many people literally rock up and play the main having literally never played any form of poker before?  1.5 too high?

[The Camel]

I think the rano moron think has been taken wrongly. I didn't mean weak poker players. i meant literally, they random morons that you only see in the main event. there are people that have NEVER played before. IT's probably a bit harsh and wasn't meant to be supper offensive, they just are poker morons. they have zero idea what they are doing and that is good value.

I'd bet that less than 1% of the main event field have never played poker before. In fact I'd probably bet that there's maybe a handful of players who have never played before.

The 'random morons' that you refer to are poker enthusiasts, recreational players, gamblers, successful business people etc etc. They play because it's the main event, it's a buzz and they love it. Let's not refer to them in this way. The main event wouldn't be the main event without them.

Last year I'd sometimes go and sit in the poker canteen during a break or whatever and I'd usually pick a table that wasn't occupied by some obvious grinder but by someone who was clearly a recreational player and the energy and excitement they had for the occasion was greater than that of any pro, and a lot of pros are pretty fkn excited about the WSOP.

I would be amazed if anyone actually plays the main event as a first ever event either live/online/home games.  I would probably set the line at over/under 1.5 players playing it as their first ever exposure to poker and would expect to see people taking the under.  Without the 'random morons' all the dreamers who think they are worth 1.4 or 2.5 or 15.0 wouldn't be able to rip off their stakers by over selling themselves year after year.  Referring to people like this who then allow you to rip off other people over valuing yourself is highly disrespectful as Greek has said.

I know someone who played the main event as his first poker tournament.

He played a couple of hours of cash the night before as his first ever time playing.

He busted a Full Tilt red pro during level one, getting allin pre with TT v aces and flopping quads.

He had over 100k at the dinner break.

But he had played poker before albeit for 2 hours the night before.  What would you set the line at on how many people literally rock up and play the main having literally never played any form of poker before?  1.5 too high?

I would go over 1.5

Prize draw winners (think Jake Cody was on the table with a woman who won her seat from Planters Peanuts or something and had never played before , rich guys who have seen poker on tv and other randoms.

I'd be under 10 though.

[arbboy]

I think the rano moron think has been taken wrongly. I didn't mean weak poker players. i meant literally, they random morons that you only see in the main event. there are people that have NEVER played before. IT's probably a bit harsh and wasn't meant to be supper offensive, they just are poker morons. they have zero idea what they are doing and that is good value.

I'd bet that less than 1% of the main event field have never played poker before. In fact I'd probably bet that there's maybe a handful of players who have never played before.

The 'random morons' that you refer to are poker enthusiasts, recreational players, gamblers, successful business people etc etc. They play because it's the main event, it's a buzz and they love it. Let's not refer to them in this way. The main event wouldn't be the main event without them.

Last year I'd sometimes go and sit in the poker canteen during a break or whatever and I'd usually pick a table that wasn't occupied by some obvious grinder but by someone who was clearly a recreational player and the energy and excitement they had for the occasion was greater than that of any pro, and a lot of pros are pretty fkn excited about the WSOP.

I would be amazed if anyone actually plays the main event as a first ever event either live/online/home games.  I would probably set the line at over/under 1.5 players playing it as their first ever exposure to poker and would expect to see people taking the under.  Without the 'random morons' all the dreamers who think they are worth 1.4 or 2.5 or 15.0 wouldn't be able to rip off their stakers by over selling themselves year after year.  Referring to people like this who then allow you to rip off other people over valuing yourself is highly disrespectful as Greek has said.

I know someone who played the main event as his first poker tournament.

He played a couple of hours of cash the night before as his first ever time playing.

He busted a Full Tilt red pro during level one, getting allin pre with TT v aces and flopping quads.

He had over 100k at the dinner break.

But he had played poker before albeit for 2 hours the night before.  What would you set the line at on how many people literally rock up and play the main having literally never played any form of poker before?  1.5 too high?

I would go over 1.5

Prize draw winners (think Jake Cody was on the table with a woman who won her seat from Planters Peanuts or something and had never played before , rich guys who have seen poker on tv and other randoms.

I'd be under 10 though.

Enjoy the Chelsea guard of honour there Keith for Leics on SSN?

[danshreddies]

99% sure its bullshit, pretty pretty pretty sure i didnt.

Mutual friend we have out there in Hungary (I'll not post his surname here as feels like a dick move ) but if it's not true, maybe he was joking and I misread interpreted. You're prob worth 1.9 anyway!

[pleno1]

Adam or Luke probably just mistaken or thinking of somebody else.

[verndog158]

Ill reiterate how much it costs to play the main event.  Flights 1k-2k, hotel 1-2k, live poker expenses are huge, and mark up is a way of minimizing this.  the player has to commit his time and $ to travelling and indeed playing, and this is something that helps with this cost (And would have to be paid by a backer if they were to play the main them self (or indeed any tourney equal to the value of their %)). YEs the guy gets a trip in vegas etc, but serious players arent going to be getting fucked up and having fun all day. the series is long and the grind is real. IT comes once a year, and serious pros go to vegas to work hard, not party 24/7 (some have 3 or 4 nights out only over the whole series).

sounds like you are being ripped off, if youre paying that much! £850 last year for flights and 10 nights on the strip.

anyway, anytime i see a thread at 1.2/1.3 i often breeze past it, dont think many are worth that, appreciate the main is different, but I still feel like they are trying to pull a fast one on you and make a few extra ££ themselves.

p.s Arrboy is the best :p

[arbboy]

Selling 20% of main at 5.0 if anyone is interested.    I will fund my own flights and accommodation out of the 'super soft' 5/10 cash games.

Sold out.

[JGill_DTD]

imo if someone is selling action in a place where you can comment on it and pass judgement on it then you are very much free to do so, as indirectly it's being advertised to you. Offering a % to someone, then when they reply saying they don't believe you warrant the markup, can you explain a little and your response being "GTFO" seems pretty OOL.
Always annoys me when people sell with a markup and zero explanation as to why they are worthy of such a markup (unless recently made such a post, where others are aware of it or VERY well recognised within the poker community). You are looking to get investment from them, if you were appearing on Dragon's Den for example you wouldn't rock up with a product with zero maths/financial studies, just allowing them to take your word on it being a profitable investment. People when selling should invite discussion about the markup and give full justification for why you believe you are worth that, even if many believe otherwise. Any time I've seen a thread blowup about justified/unjustified markup OP tends to get defensive and aggy simply because the only reason they offered a set markup is because they had seen others doing it and presumed it's the done thing or believe they are of equal ability. Too often it's a number plucked out the air based on trends.
I agree it's a buyers market and the whole don't like it don't buy it line, but if someone brings you up on it then I'd have hoped you would of at least thought through your realistic ROI. Also the whole expenses argument is ridiculous as these don't influence your ROI of the MTT, which is the only factor that determines whether it's a fair markup or not. I can't imagine anyone playing the same mtt in two consecutive weeks, 1st week selling at 1.1 because they are able to kip on a mates floor but then justifying a markup of 1.2 the week after due to your mate being out of town and having to grab a hotel room.

[DungBeetle]

If someone was absolutely average against the field (selling at 1) then really they should be charging at a "markdown" discount (eg 0. because they effectively require a loan and the lender needs to be compensated for credit risk and charge interest.  Same argument applies at people who consider themselves to have an edge.  If random poker bloke is charging 1.3 on facebook then in reality he is charging 1.5.

Poker is the only sector where credit risk is seemingly completely ignored.

[david3103]

Don't think anyone here knows Danshreddies well enough to pass judgement on his staking offers.


Anyway, as I understand it 80/20 arrangements are pretty much equivalent to a 1.25 mark up but with less risk for the player?

http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=64520.0

[Magic817]

Don't think anyone here knows Danshreddies well enough to pass judgement on his staking offers.


Anyway, as I understand it 80/20 arrangements are pretty much equivalent to a 1.25 mark up but with less risk for the player?

http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=64520.0

I don't think people were questioning his staking offers. It is a general point where lots of poker try and get every edge and offer poor deals for investors. There are obviously some good offers out there but is a lot of players selling at questionable mark ups compared to expected ROI and if you look at 2+2 some are doing it as a regular thing trying to pass on a lot of the risk to investors.

The 80/20 type deals are generally someone saying they are under it and are trying to spin up so often people will do it to help out a mate.

As others have said, if you cant stand scrutiny with regards to the mark up (even worse when the MU is not disclosed) then it probably isn't a good deal for investors.

[IT5PAYDAY]

To be honest, the biggest issue I have regarding the whole MU situation is when people charge it to cover 'travelling costs'... I see it a lot in the poker community and it's pretty disgusting.