Cash Game Being Staked In Cash Games

buzzmonkey

Pair
Joined
Jun 29, 2020
Messages
173
Reaction score
265
Location
USA
Disclosure:
Never been staked and not a staker. Here are my thoughts based on that, many of which you've probably already considered.
  • If you do this beyond one game to try it out, you need to treat it 100% as a business proposal. That's going to mean writing up all of the details and going through them with a lawyer. He should do the same on his end. That's going to be an upfront expense.
  • You need to budget in the time away from your self-staked games, or plan to put in "OT" of several hours to play this side game.
  • Is your expected per hour profit going to be higher or lower under this arrangement than your normal sessions with all else being equal. Meaning will you make the same actual amount of money or more per hour on an equal BB buy-in after expenses and backer share are removed than you would in a normal session where you keep all your winnings?
  • Since this is your livelihood, you should make an offer that offers you incredible protections against dramatic losses. To me that would absolutely include no makeup. If he doesn't agree to that, don't do it. Grind up your roll until you can afford the game yourself.
How many BBs are you adding to your bankroll on average per week now? Or are you cashing out all of your profit for expenses?
 

skylines

Two Pair
Joined
Aug 28, 2019
Messages
355
Reaction score
535
Location
Ohio
Is your expected per hour profit going to be higher or lower under this arrangement than your normal sessions with all else being equal. Meaning will you make the same actual amount of money or more per hour on an equal BB buy-in after expenses and backer share are removed than you would in a normal session where you keep all your winnings?

I think this is what you should focus on. The point is to get you into a juicy game where you expect a higher win rate, but the stakes are too high for your roll. Work out the arrangement so you can still fit in your bankroll, but get into the better game. Get more of your own action as your roll/comfort increases.
 

buzzmonkey

Pair
Joined
Jun 29, 2020
Messages
173
Reaction score
265
Location
USA
I'm going to add another point to this. Ultimately the backer can manage his money however he wants. But it's in both of your best interest for him to set a bankroll himself and manage it as your sessions progress. There should be a predetermined number of buy-ins in his roll to start to allow for swings and that number should remain consistent or improve, meaning if it goes below, say 20 buy ins (or 10 since he's only staking half) then all profits go back into his roll. This protects your ability to play in the game over multiple sessions. Maybe that's too much formal business, but I'd think it a good policy to drive success.
 

SpaceMonkey420

Full House
Site Vendor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2020
Messages
2,534
Reaction score
3,083
Location
West Side USA
It’s been a while since I have spoken to him, but the guy I inherited our game from was/is a very low level semi-pro/pro with a backer and I vaguely remembered it being something like a basic no risk 80/20 split arrangement.


Standard
 

WedgeRock

Royal Flush
Joined
Feb 25, 2016
Messages
14,157
Reaction score
23,738
Location
America's High-Five
I think he is thinking we both put up half the money, then we split what is left at end of session with no makeup

So he gets me into the juicy games, and risks his half with no makeup

Just guessing at the moment

Sounds like he's buying 50% of your action (and taking 50% of the risk). I think you should be entitled to a slight markup, but if its a short term bankroll builder to get you on your feet and open doors, maybe its worth it. Plus its a friend, not just a money man.
 

Lil Tuna

Full House
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2016
Messages
3,959
Reaction score
10,110
Location
RolledUpVille U.S.A.
Sounds like he's buying 50% of your action (and taking 50% of the risk). I think you should be entitled to a slight markup, but if its a short term bankroll builder to get you on your feet and open doors, maybe its worth it. Plus its a friend, not just a money man.
A friend for now...........??????
I was staked a few times years ago by a “friend”. Cashed 2 out of 3 tournaments he staked me in. When I didn’t cash the 3rd time he questioned my play and asked if I thought I should have played any particular hands differently.
That was the last time I played for anyone but myself. Haven’t seen that dude at a game since 09.
Good luck with the friendship part when the cards go a little cold.
 

CrazyEddie

Flush
Joined
Jul 25, 2020
Messages
1,018
Reaction score
1,265
Location
Georgia
I mean, if you're 100% staked I get the makeup part. The backer is taking 100% of the financial/bankroll risk and you as the player are only out your time if you lose.

So, this is kind of backwards (and I think you know this, based on more stuff further down the thread). A backer offering a deal with makeup is taking almost no financial risk. If you lose, it's 100% on you, and they're out nothing... as long as you stay with the backer and they stay with you. The only time the backer is out any money is if either you or they decide to quit the arrangement while you are still in makeup. And in some deals, you may still be on the hook for some or all of the makeup even if you do quit.

Makeup or not makes all the difference in the world. Without makeup the arrangement is simply selling your action, and is essentially an investment; the backer pays a portion of your bankroll and gets a matching portion of your winnings (potentially with some markup, making the deal net profitable to you at the investor's expense), but he loses his investment if there are no winnings. By selling half your action, you're doubling your effective bankroll for free, or better!

A no-makeup deal like Knish's - bankroll 100%, take 50% of the winnings - is a bad deal for Knish. He's paying Mike a 2.0 markup. A no-makeup deal like I think your friend is offering - bankroll 50%, take 50% of the winnings - is a bad deal for you; it's only a 1.0 markup. But both of those deals need to be evaluated separately from any kind of deal that includes makeup.

WITH makeup it's not an investment, it's a loan, and the loan terms are terrible. Half your winnings for as long as you keep the stake. And if you're down since the last time the winnings were split, then any further winnings are 100% dedicated to paying back the loan until you're back up. Just like a regular loan, the lender's only financial risk is if you default on the loan, i.e. if you're down so far that you decide it's just not worth paying back the makeup - or if the lender decides on his own that you're down so far it's not worth waiting for you to pay it back and they write off the loan. Instead of doubling your bankroll for free, you're getting an illusory, temporary increase in your bankroll; you haven't actually reduced your risk of ruin, you've just delayed it by getting a loan which still must be paid back, and yet you're still paying for this illusory increase with half your winnings.

I dunno about you, but I'd rather have investors than lenders.
 

Lil Tuna

Full House
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2016
Messages
3,959
Reaction score
10,110
Location
RolledUpVille U.S.A.
So, this is kind of backwards (and I think you know this, based on more stuff further down the thread). A backer offering a deal with makeup is taking almost no financial risk. If you lose, it's 100% on you, and they're out nothing... as long as you stay with the backer and they stay with you. The only time the backer is out any money is if either you or they decide to quit the arrangement while you are still in makeup. And in some deals, you may still be on the hook for some or all of the makeup even if you do quit.

Makeup or not makes all the difference in the world. Without makeup the arrangement is simply selling your action, and is essentially an investment; the backer pays a portion of your bankroll and gets a matching portion of your winnings (potentially with some markup, making the deal net profitable to you at the investor's expense), but he loses his investment if there are no winnings. By selling half your action, you're doubling your effective bankroll for free, or better!

A no-makeup deal like Knish's - bankroll 100%, take 50% of the winnings - is a bad deal for Knish. He's paying Mike a 2.0 markup. A no-makeup deal like I think your friend is offering - bankroll 50%, take 50% of the winnings - is a bad deal for you; it's only a 1.0 markup. But both of those deals need to be evaluated separately from any kind of deal that includes makeup.

WITH makeup it's not an investment, it's a loan, and the loan terms are terrible. Half your winnings for as long as you keep the stake. And if you're down since the last time the winnings were split, then any further winnings are 100% dedicated to paying back the loan until you're back up. Just like a regular loan, the lender's only financial risk is if you default on the loan, i.e. if you're down so far that you decide it's just not worth paying back the makeup - or if the lender decides on his own that you're down so far it's not worth waiting for you to pay it back and they write off the loan. Instead of doubling your bankroll for free, you're getting an illusory, temporary increase in your bankroll; you haven't actually reduced your risk of ruin, you've just delayed it by getting a loan which still must be paid back, and yet you're still paying for this illusory increase with half your winnings.

I dunno about you, but I'd rather have investors than lenders.
Also to ad to this, a legit lender won’t send someone to break your legs if you so happen to default on your loan. ;) Or steal the tires and rims off your new Trans Am while it’s in the parking garage.:p
 

CrazyEddie

Flush
Joined
Jul 25, 2020
Messages
1,018
Reaction score
1,265
Location
Georgia
... that said, they both have their places. If you need a bigger bankroll to get into a softer game, sell action. If you need a bigger bankroll to get into a bigger game, borrow a stake.

If you make the same BB/hr in a game where the stakes are four times the size of your normal game, then selling 75% of your action won't net you profit, but borrowing a stake three times your current bankroll will double your income while quadrupling your risk of ruin.

If your BB/hr in the bigger game is twice your normal BB/hr, then selling your action to get into the game will double your income with no increase in your risk, and borrowing a stake will quadruple your income while quadrupling your risk.

(in a simple idealized model... assume a spherical cow, etc etc)
 

JustinInMN

Full House
Joined
May 23, 2017
Messages
3,323
Reaction score
3,651
Location
Burnsville, MN
9. What occurs if the backer or I decide to end the arrangement while I'm in makeup

I really think makeup is only a concept for longer term arrangements when the backer is putting up 100% of the money. To the other questions if the backer quits, I think the player is free and clear, if the player quits in makeup, then that is fair game for negotiation on future stakes for sure.

So I guess a 50/50 split of whatever I have left each session without makeup would make the most sense.

I really think so, if the backer isn't putting up 100% all you are really doing is selling half of your action for given sessions.

You won’t play or make the same decisions you would normally make on your own and you’ll have someone questioning you if you hit a rough patch. Totally not worth it. If your a profitable player on your own, stay that way and stay in the stakes that keep you that way.
Just my 2 cents.

This is definitely worth considering. At the same time, if this arrangement lets you play in a higher game, the profit may be worth it. I don't think this particular backer is going to question Anthony too much based on previous comments. He knows who the expert is.
 

Legend5555

Flush
Joined
Jul 15, 2019
Messages
1,999
Reaction score
2,653
Location
Georgia
a77496be2abc06e1bd7208f8e5ec0ff8.jpg
 

Anthony Martino

4 of a Kind
Joined
Sep 26, 2015
Messages
7,310
Reaction score
11,778
Location
Tampa, FL
I really think makeup is only a concept for longer term arrangements when the backer is putting up 100% of the money. To the other questions if the backer quits, I think the player is free and clear, if the player quits in makeup, then that is fair game for negotiation on future stakes for sure.



I really think so, if the backer isn't putting up 100% all you are really doing is selling half of your action for given sessions.



This is definitely worth considering. At the same time, if this arrangement lets you play in a higher game, the profit may be worth it. I don't think this particular backer is going to question Anthony too much based on previous comments. He knows who the expert is.

It's funny because I give him my thoughts on hands he's played. He lacks patience and straddles/gambles too much, so recently had the "WHY do you play poker?" talk

One hand last week he had something like :8h::6h::5s::5c: on a :js::9h::7h: flop

Guy in the blinds pots $125 into a field of 3 other players, another player calls and then my buddy reraises all-in for $300 total

I tried to explain afterwards that the first guy leading OOP most likely has the nut straight, making my buddys straight draw worthless

So now he has an open-ended straight flush draw. Well, that LOOKS pretty, but what is that 2nd player calling the pot sized bet with?

If he wanted to get it all-in against one opponent, ok, I can maybe see it. But against two guys there a lot of his outs are dead and he's likely drawing to just the two straight flush outs

Trying to help him analyze spots better to determine if it makes sense to continue, what his opponents likely holdings are, etc
 

SpaceMonkey420

Full House
Site Vendor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2020
Messages
2,534
Reaction score
3,083
Location
West Side USA
It's funny because I give him my thoughts on hands he's played. He lacks patience and straddles/gambles too much, so recently had the "WHY do you play poker?" talk

One hand last week he had something like :8h::6h::5s::5c: on a :js::9h::7h: flop

Guy in the blinds pots $125 into a field of 3 other players, another player calls and then my buddy reraises all-in for $300 total

I tried to explain afterwards that the first guy leading OOP most likely has the nut straight, making my buddys straight draw worthless

So now he has an open-ended straight flush draw. Well, that LOOKS pretty, but what is that 2nd player calling the pot sized bet with?

If he wanted to get it all-in against one opponent, ok, I can maybe see it. But against two guys there a lot of his outs are dead and he's likely drawing to just the two straight flush outs

Trying to help him analyze spots better to determine if it makes sense to continue, what his opponents likely holdings are, etc
Love the great game of PLO. Hold em was mastered years ago. Who’s gonna cooler/notch who is the game now. lol This scenario here is why I don’t play anything but PLO. Gonna learn. Gonna learn.
 
Top Bottom