Staking Agreement
 

Hey guys, a good friend of mine wants to stake me for some low limit cash games. He wants to start up a new account with $1000 in it, on PokerStars so I can multitable 50NL FR.

We're both keen on the agreement, but we are having trouble figuring out what a good percentage is that I should take of the potential winnings? I have been a fairly solid winner at 50NL and 100NL on Stars.
We really have no clue as to what is a fair deal for both sides. We plan on running this stake for a few months or so. Thanks for any input guys.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

If you're a "fairly solid winner" up to NL100, why do you need an NL50 stake?

stake ends when account hits $3K, he gets $2k, you get $1k. He absorbs any loss.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

I guess it's the fact that I'd feel pretty bad if I lost my friend's money, but obviously I am confident I can make him some money.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

If you are a solid player why do you need $1000?

Re: Staking Agreement
 

It's more for him than me. I have my own bankroll and would like to make him a little money where he is willing to take on the entire risk.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

If it is more for him than you just charge him per hour at whatever your time is worth.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

I'd appreciate responses that are more related to the question at hand rather than the sanity of the agreement. I've already agreed to the deal, it's just a matter of working out a proper percentage that each person should get. Is that cool?

Re: Staking Agreement
 

His time is worth whatever he is capable of earning over a long sample. So that wouldn't work.

If everything stated is true then he should just give his friend money. No matter how the situation is set up in the end that is what he is doing.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

People who think they're solid players at low stakes are usually lying to themselves.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

[ QUOTE ]
If everything stated is true then he should just give his friend money. No matter how the situation is set up in the end that is what he is doing.

[/ QUOTE ]
QFT

Based on what you've told us, you apparently just want to give your friend some money to help him out. Which is fine, but no reason to do it this way, just give him the money.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

Yeah since I'm a charity. We just wanna make a bit of money together through, is that so hard to understand?

Re: Staking Agreement
 

What everyone is saying is that as a solid player you should not / don't seem to need the initial capital which is the entire point of a stake. Assuming you have that already just giving him a percentage of your winnings makes more sense.(Unless you were trying a new game/ new structure - moving from limit to nl or to tournaments or something in which case I can just about see the logic)

Re: Staking Agreement
 

37.3124%!. Also, make a pole!

Re: Staking Agreement
 

Every couple of days someone starts one of these and it is always the same situation. The poster claims he is a solid player and then he is getting staked for some insignificant amount of money. Then they get angry when people point out that something doesn't add up.

A solid player does not need to be staked nor should a solid player want to be staked in a ring game if the stake is for an insignificant of money that anyone who is not a complete degenerate could come up with easily.

The only possible conclusion is

[ QUOTE ]
People who think they're solid players at low stakes are usually lying to themselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Staking Agreement
 

stunnersuh, don't know much about staking agreements so I can't address your original question.

Others in this thread do have a point, though. If you're actually a solid winner in these games and have a full bankroll then you're just donating time or money to your friend. There's no reason not to do this, but it might be more fruitful for both of you if you add his money to your roll and move up to NL200.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

How do you have 2 accounts at a site in the first place?

Re: Staking Agreement
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah since I'm a charity. We just wanna make a bit of money together through, is that so hard to understand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it is that hard to understand!!!!!

If what you say is true why not teach your "friend" how to win..While "teaching" you get 50% of the profits and he bears the risk of loss...

Re: Staking Agreement
 

I didn't read the post...but don't need to.

Staking friends is -EV...PERIOD!

If you want to be nice and do it, fine, but don't do it for the money, do it to be nice.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

Because what he is saying isn't true. Unfortunately the friend is not here to read this so he won't have any warning until all his money has been lost.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

50/50 split, 3 mo, no makeup.

Although I agree with every other poster that something is fishy.

If you are a solid winner, you are donating time and money to your friend- so save the time and donate the money.

If you are not a solid winner, you are fooling either yourself or your friend.

So either way, [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img].

Re: Staking Agreement
 

[ QUOTE ]
stunnersuh, don't know much about staking agreements so I can't address your original question.

Others in this thread do have a point, though. If you're actually a solid winner in these games and have a full bankroll then you're just donating time or money to your friend. There's no reason not to do this, but it might be more fruitful for both of you if you add his money to your roll and move up to NL200.

[/ QUOTE ]

evryone else is correct but if you insist, what he said sounds like a good idea.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

It's possible OP donked off his BR playing blackjack or practiced horrible bankroll management and went broke, he just refuses to admit it here. If this is the case, he probably learned his lesson, and this stake is a way for him to get back on his feet. The other scenario is that he's not nearly as good at poker as he thinks and he wants someone else to fund his habit. Lol at being a solid winner at $100NL and then voluntarily playing essentially $25NL for months.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

[ QUOTE ]
50/50 split, 3 mo, no makeup.


[/ QUOTE ]


As the staker I would never do this.

You don't have to be a charity to "help"- but every edge you push trying to get the better end of the deal makes you less of a friend trying to help.

An argument could be made that the best thing a friend could do is simply say no to risking a buddy's money.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

There's nothing to hide here. I've been playing online since 2003, it's nothing more than a case of him wanting to get a piece of my action and we can make some money together. If you guys want to come up with your own theories that's fine, was just merely asking for a few honest suggestions. Not trying to start a war with anybody.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

The part I didn't post was "allow him to buy whatever part of the action he wants for an equal share of the loss".

I was seriously replying to the suggested 50-50 with no stakeback by the other poster. I think it's bad for your buddy.

I'm not trying to say buddies should never do this- just that I've seen quite a few friendly relationships strained thru staking.

Best of luck with it.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

my suggestion: you play, and just give him any bonuses from FPPs etc.

it's all going to be arbitrary, because as posters in here have stated, on what you have written, this is essentially some weirdly concocted way for you to give money to your friend.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

theres no fair arrangement to be had for someone whose earn rate exceeds what both the staker and stakee stand to make/hour combined.


do you have any friends who are successful in the real world? ask them to take the day off work to deliver newspapers with you, and see how you can equitably compensate them. it's absurd. just like this would be if you didnt suck at poker.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

lol

OP, just tell us the truth already.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

I guess the real reason everyone is so skeptical is that the "stake" that a solid NL 100 winner could possibly find attractive isn't a NL 50 bankroll; its a NL 400 or above bankroll. In other words, if the only thing that was holding you back from winning at NL 1000 was the roll, then staking might sound mutually beneficial. But a typical staking arrangement goes 50-50, with the staker accepting all losses, for some time period. So if you move down from NL 100 to NL 50, and get staked, you earn about 25% of your current earnings, assuming your winrate stays the same. It is highly doubtful that your winrate is so much higher at NL 50 than 100 as to absorb this huge loss. If you look at it the other way, you can see why staking makes sense for a player who doesn't have the roll to compete at a level that he has the talent to play at. If you could beat NL 1000 for 3 ptbb per, but are currently playing NL 100 and beating it at 7 ptbb per, that friend with 30,000 and you might both make money. But under your scenario, somebody loses for sure. Either you (because you didn't need the cash) or him (because you can't really beat NL 100), so he's staking a dead horse.

If you are a winner at NL 100, a better staking model would be to attempt to move up and let him buy a piece of the action and risk. The problem is that you would only be breaking even at NL200 IF you kept the same winrate (doubtful) and there is more money at stake. Thus all the hate by other posters.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

Not sure why there is so much hate to a simple post.

The OP may have genuinely thought this was a good way to get a friend off to a winning start thereby allowing the friend to play with "won" money.

I agree that it is a stupid way to do it and many posters have explained why. But why so much aggression?

OP - listen to the advice given because it is valid and surely you can see why. The way some posters have put it though leaves a little to be desired.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

Obviously the post makes no sense if everything stated in it is true so the OP is lying or delusional.

If he is lying then he thinks the population of 2P2 is not smart enough to realize this which is kind of insulting.

If he is delusional then he needs to be shocked out of it.

Re: Staking Agreement
 

funny?

Re: Staking Agreement
 

hilarious

Re: Staking Agreement
 

Thanks for the honest response. I maybe should have explained my situation better, as I don't play poker for a living. I have a fulltime job and only play poker as beer/fun money.

I can see where most of the posters are coming from in that this deal isn't really beneficial for me, that's true. I would be playing the stake money occasionally along with my own bankroll money. I was just surprised at how aggressive most of the responses were, I don't really want to start any name-calling. For the few that have played with me, I hope you can at least say that I'm not a donk that spews or goes on megatilt or am a bad player.

Appreciate the response Grande

Re: Staking Agreement
 

"I was just surprised at how aggressive most of the responses were"

That's 2+2 for ya - full of testosterone fuelled kiddies I'm afraid. I wouldn't believe a word they say about their win rates or sex lives either [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Grande's response is spot on of course - staking cash games is rare at small/medium stakes as generating the required roll out of your own winnings is pretty trivial.

If you have a 5PTBB/100 win rate (including bonus/RB etc) then 50 hours of 400 hands/hr at the $100 tables is going to generate $2000. Put in 100 hours and that should get your roll up to the level needed to play the $200's anyway. Most people's skill level doesn't outrun the stakes they are playing at (often the reverse is true).
If you had to make an unexpected cashout or your funds are tied up for some reason then maybe I can see you getting staked.

Staking can also put stress on friendships if it goes wrong. A friend (who plays $5/10 NL and who I've been discussing strategy with on and off for 3 years or so) offered to stake me this month to play at those stakes(I'm playing $1/2 at the moment and am just about to move up to $2/4) but I siad no thanks and prefer to play $2/4 under my own steam. If I win I will win almost as much. If I lose I will feel guilty as hell and put a stress on my relationship with the staker.