Would you be willing to name your horses?

[Matt24]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think he's trying to say that some mediocre players, who could possibly be -ev in big live events could very easily hit a huge score in wsop, wpt, etc. and already owe tons of makeup so bax/sheets get to keep the majority of the winnings.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, you realize that they already paid the majority of the winnings in previous buy ins right?

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah exactly, so not sure how that makes sense, be much better for me as a backer to have my players to hit bigscores without getting me stuck tons into them

[skier_5]

[ QUOTE ]
matt, convince me that Fischmann is honestly +ev... ready set go

[/ QUOTE ]

one example? pretty solid argument you have there.

edit: also i don't see how you can expect someone to be +EV online but -EV in 10k events.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
edit: also i don't see how you can expect someone to be +EV online but -EV in 10k events.

[/ QUOTE ]

tellboxes, scared money, marginal winners who play a style more suited for online ("tagfish")

also, when you think of some of the people who win lots of money online, it really doesn't take much of anything

[THAY3R]

"High Stakes" live events are infinitely easier than "High Stakes" online.

There's a case to be made I suppose that Bax/Sheets are staking poor(relatively) players solely for the fact they are +ev in the soft live events.

Lol @ at the thought process that caused someone to say he backs -ev players because they could get lucky [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Rocco]

Just out of curiousity, how much of your winnings does a backer normally keep? I assume full backing of a tournament fee. Is it dependant on the backee's skills and previous results?

[jordankickz]

[ QUOTE ]
"High Stakes" live events are infinitely easier than "High Stakes" online.

There's a case to be made I suppose that Bax/Sheets are staking poor(relatively) players solely for the fact they are +ev in the soft live events.

Lol @ at the thought process that caused someone to say he backs -ev players because they could get lucky [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see any other reason why losing players are continued to be backed besides the fact that they owe makeup and could easily pay it all back with one "lucky" score in a big event.

[Soulman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"High Stakes" live events are infinitely easier than "High Stakes" online.

There's a case to be made I suppose that Bax/Sheets are staking poor(relatively) players solely for the fact they are +ev in the soft live events.

Lol @ at the thought process that caused someone to say he backs -ev players because they could get lucky [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see any other reason why losing players are continued to be backed besides the fact that they owe makeup and could easily pay it all back with one "lucky" score in a big event.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not that they will be backed FOREVVA but rather they've agreed to a deal for a set amount of time/dollahs/MTTs/whatever. Being a backer and reneging on such a deal is probably not too wise.

[Ship Ship McGipp]

[ QUOTE ]
im backing aejones

[/ QUOTE ]

pob maybe, but not in poker tournaments, cmon now

[Ship Ship McGipp]

exhibit A: belowabove won something. tons of awful players can run hot and do well in live events. bax and sheets just increase the amount of players they have that all have a chance to run like jesus for a few days.

[Merek007]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
lol @ jeff george references

[/ QUOTE ]

Surprisingly appropriate eh?

[/ QUOTE ]

Or would Art Schlichter be more appropriate?