What % of major tourney players are backed by sheets/bax?

[The Camel]

[ QUOTE ]
shane,

What % chance do you think there is that something like what I've described is currently going on in major tourneys?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would guess 100%.

Edit: I am guessing cheating/colluding happens at least once in every major tournament, not that it's happening all the time in every tournament.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
shane,

What % chance do you think there is that something like what I've described is currently going on in major tourneys?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would guess 100%

[/ QUOTE ]

So, you know of, or strongly suspect, that there is a backer who employs several horses, some of whom are in the tournament with the sole function of dumping chips to other players?

[El Diablo]

shaniac,

"with the sole function of dumping chips to other players?"

I can't speak for The Camel, but that's not what I said is likely to be going on. I simply said I think there are probably backers w/ multiple horses in tournies who take advantage of that at opportune times.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]


I can't speak for The Camel, but that's not what I said is likely to be going on. I simply said I think there are probably backers w/ multiple horses in tournies who take advantage of that at opportune times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but the backer has to convince or incentivize the horse to act against his self-interest and that seems like a major hurdle. Feels like we are going around in circles here. I am probably naive, it does probably go on, but to acheive a fucntioning, cheating stable still seems far-out to me as a practical matter.

[The Camel]

[ QUOTE ]
shaniac,

"with the sole function of dumping chips to other players?"

I can't speak for The Camel, but that's not what I said is likely to be going on. I simply said I think there are probably backers w/ multiple horses in tournies who take advantage of that at opportune times.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the instances I have witnessed, I believe (but don't know) that the willingness to chip dump is a prerequisit of getting staked in the first place.

[Roswell]

El Diablo,

Sheet/Bax back many players. Many of the players owe large amounts of makeup to them. They need to win massive prizes to clear the makeup and make money. If they chip dump/pass chips, they are acting against their own financial interests. That's a huge incentive to play straight up.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]

In the instances I have witnessed, I believe (but don't know) that the willingness to chip dump is a prerequisit of getting staked in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes sense, is horrifying, but I'm happy to say that I don't think I know anyone desperate enough to participate in such a scheme (and I know some desperate people, too).

[El Diablo]

Roswell,

Uh, if a backer wanted to do something like this, obviously the players would have a financial incentive for doing it. Getting out from under a ton of makeup seems like a good one.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
Roswell,

Uh, if a backer wanted to do something like this, obviously the players would have a financial incentive for doing it. Getting out from under a ton of makeup seems like a good one.

[/ QUOTE ]

El D, I don't get it. You mention specific backers in the thread title, but seem to want to have a general discussion about unethical possibilities that exist in poker through backers. If you didn't want to cast suspicion on Bax/Sheets specifically, why would you mention them specifically? You just like to stir the pot, right?

Edit: No backer ever has or will publish a list of his players. Do you see why?

[Bolivia]

How would you quantify what cheating is worth? How does chip dumping get someone out of makeup? A player's best strategy to get out of makeup is to increase his personal EV as much as possible. This incentivizes them to not soft play, not chip dump etc.

Another thing, the risks that a backer brings on to himself by signing up unethical players FAR outways any advantages he gains in my opinion. You're dealing with situations where typically there is no contract, and in certain situations only limited ways of tracking money, not to mentioned you are trusting these people with large sums of it. Given this, it's very much in the backer's interests to bring on the most honest players they can, and get rid of anyone even with a hint of dishonesty.

If a backer felt a player of questionable ethics was so +EV, I guess he could bring the player on board if somehow he can very closely monitor them, or directly handle the money for them (however, if you're talking volume backing, backers have more important things to do than hold a players hand and handle cash for them).