[bobneptune]

am i the only one who thinks this is lewis carroll "through the looking glass" stuff ?

you have an agreement with a backer where you have significant make-up to attend to before you see cash. you state you want to play these lower prelims (he's not forcing you to play them), but you want the make-up not to apply to them ??? wtf ???

i'm not a very good player, but i did run my own small corporation for 29 years, so i know a little something about partnerships and employer/employee relations.

your backer assumes all the risk. you put up your time and expertise for a piece of the net. implicit in this deal is your backer has the reasonable expectation you will play your "best" game every time you sit down with his money riding. unless you have an agreement to the contrary, and he allows you to play on the side for your own money, he's in and you are morally obligated to play your very best.


for you to say you wouldn't play your best and rather gambool it up or it wasn't worth your time if you weren't participating in the cash profits of that smaller tourney would be a firing offense if i were your backer.