Staking Dispute with TcCorbin - Page 9

TheWorstPlayer · #81 07-10-2007, 06:30 PM

LOL. I'd rather spend my money on hookers and blow, thanks.

KingDan · #82 07-10-2007, 06:32 PM

TWP,

A bunch of responses were just "lol give more monies. 2/4 is ezz he will get your 4k back." Figured someone might want to.

TheWorstPlayer · #83 07-10-2007, 06:39 PM

those people are stupid posters, but unfortunately for you that doesn't mean their stupidity extends beyond that...

KingDan · #84 07-10-2007, 06:40 PM

FWIW I dont think he's a thief or anything just NO self-control.

Josh. · #85 07-10-2007, 06:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW I dont think he's a thief or anything just NO self-control.

[/ QUOTE ]

and he strikes me a bit dumb when it comes to br management and ror and stuff. it's pretty clear he wasn't malicious in his actions, but he just doesn't get that +EV longrun can be -EV shortrun. for his actions to be justifiable, it would imply that you were willing to make a -EV deal with him. since that's obviously not the case he 100% owes you the money back

raptor517 · #86 07-10-2007, 06:54 PM

reading threads like this really makes me sad. i like neutrality a lot from the aim convo, hes trying v hard to help settle this, and thats commendable. basically, tcorbin messed up pretty bad here. dan might be partially to blame because he didnt hammer in the fact that tcorb was only allowed to play 2-4 and once he hit a certain point 3-6, but in my mind it was clear he shouldnt be playing 5-10 and 25-50. theres really no point in staking someone if they are just going to take the roll to the highest stakes and flip quarters and short stack.

its not my place to say what needs to be done to resolve this, but at least we can probably learn something from this. staking deals need to be CLEARLY defined before any money is transferred. limits need to be set, such as, 'i will send you 4k to play 2-4 you will be FOUR tabling until you hit 6k, then you are allowed to SIX table. from there, once the account gets up to 10k, you can start mixing in 3-6 tables should you so desire. this stake will go on for TWO weeks time, and you will agree to play at least 20k hands under it. should you lose the stake somehow, you will play for makeup, meaning you play and pay back the money lost IN FULL then we split the rest of the profits from there 50/50, and i will send you more money and you will play ONLY 2-4 until i am comfortable with you moving up. total profits will be split 50/50. should you do something other than play within these bounds, the stake turns into an INTEREST compounded loan at 10 points a week. thats obviously steep but you shouldnt be playing out of the rules we have setup. thats all, good luck.

thats what a staking agreement should look like.

Triumph36 · #87 07-10-2007, 06:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW I dont think he's a thief or anything just NO self-control.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW splits89 sucks - plz stake me to play him

KingDan · #88 07-10-2007, 07:15 PM

All,

Decided to give him 2k to play nl 200 with. If he starts winning we will talk about moving up but for now he is to stay at nl 200 until I tell him its ok. Don't want a piece of anything larger than that. I won't be online for a while (no internet at the beach) but will give updates when I get back. Hopefully can resolve this and end the drama.

edit: btw his cake name is tcorbin16 reward if anyone happens to spot him at anything other than NL 200

tcorbin16 · #89 07-10-2007, 07:15 PM

i def agree iwth the last 3 posts.

TheWorstPlayer · #90 07-10-2007, 07:15 PM

raptor, just want to say that makeup is pretty much the worst idea ever (for the reasons I've already outlined). i strongly suggest anyone thinking of a staking agreement to avoid makeup and instead just say that if he busts then you'll either decide to stake him again (no makeup) or you won't. much better than to have it hanging over his head that he'll have to play for makeup and that preventing you from doing a potentially lucrative second staking agreement.