Staking/Make-up question: What to do with lower prize-pools?

[WarDekar]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

The issue is I have a backer for bigger buy-ins that I obviously am not rolled to play in. This I consider to be like $500+. I will probably be playing some big buy-ins in the future, $10ks, etc. So far I have only played 1 major, a handful of other WSOPs and some other various $500+ tourneys.

You're right, he didn't "ask" me to play these events per se, and I don't have to play them. I would kind of like to play live again before I play another major since it's been a while so I thought I would go to these circuit pre-lims which I played in last year (bought my own way in). I guess just the issue with me is I got backing for bigger buy-ins that I can't afford, but it's obviously not fair to play in these on my own bankroll, so is there any better solution available?

I mean, the alternative is I play online all day on my own bankroll, so isn't it better for him to somehow at least split the action with me? I'm willing to pay for part of the buy-ins for these tournaments for a part of immediate winnings, does that not seem fair to essentially "buy back" a piece of myself?

[WarDekar]

[ QUOTE ]
you can negotiate with your backer to get a small % of your winnings if you want, just compensate him elsewhere in the deal for it. This should bea conversation between you and your backer; tell him your concerns, work somethign out.. or you could just work it off like normal.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand it's something we need to work out between us, I was just wondering if there was some sort of standard for this, as neither of us really knew of a good way to solve it but we both obviously want to be fair about it.

As I said this is the first staking deal I've ever had, I'm not sure what's "kosher."

[jtown1010]

You said earlier that you can play online rather than live and make more money than playing live and paying make-up. Why not ask your backer if he is willing to put you in the bigger online events like the 100+rebuys, Sunday majors, and 1K weekly's. Then you can play the stakes you normally play and some bigger MTT's that give you the shot at $20K+ wins you're looking for.

[A_PLUS]

The way makeup is usually enforced, is one of the reasons staking arrangements will typically fail. (I am speaking in total, on average, there are many many exceptions).

The whole point of a contract like this, is to keep everyone's incentives perfectly aligned. What I suggested in an earlier thread is to have some sort of sliding scale. The deeper underwater you are, the smaller % of your winnings you get, but always a reasonable share (10-20% maybe). The backer may make more in the short run with a full makeup, but having a fully motivated player will always work out best in the long run.

FWIW, I see everyone's point about just playing your way out of a make-up. But, you are just ignoring human nature. People should treat 30k less debt = 30k in cash, but they don't. It doesn't happen in basically any of the average person's financial dealings.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
. If I'm down $15k (I think that's about what I'm in make-up, mostly from the ME), why would I want to play a $300 tournament where 2nd place isn't even $20k?

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Based on your OP, I figured makeup was much higher...in this case, any $300 or $500 prizepool should offer plenty of incentive to scratch that makeup figure out.

[Clayton]

[ QUOTE ]
Clearly you aren't understanding the situation.

Do you not see that it would be incredibly demoralizing to play in a tournament knowing you see no cash unless you win? Do you not see how this will affect my play?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I think he understands it clearly. I think your mind is a little warped because having this mindset makes you a pretty poor investment imo.

Part of making profit means eliminating makeup, and if that means playing tournaments where if you finish third you still make no money, then so what. You're just that closer to making money of your own.

This reverse martingale mindset of yours is hazardous imo. Just work the grind, and play until the makeup is erased. 300 dollar tournaments, 1k tournaments, the nightly $162, whatever.

[Clayton]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah if you have to play only to get profit out of a win you shouldn't be playing tournaments. I was in an enourmous amount of makeup, won the stuper, stil had an enormous amount of makeup. Yes, it is demoralizing, but I don't play for fun. I play for a living which constitutes me doing whatever is most profitable. Now, if you just play as a hobby, then I'd only play what you had fun playing. Me, I play for a living so I have to play whatever I'm +EV in to pay the bills. If you can't play knowing it's all going towards you eventually winning money then you shouldn't play tournaments backed.

[/ QUOTE ]

this did a better job explaining it than me, didnt read it first go round. listen 2 randal.

[bobneptune]

[ QUOTE ]
You're right, he didn't "ask" me to play these events per se, and I don't have to play them. I would kind of like to play live again before I play another major since it's been a while so I thought I would go to these circuit pre-lims which I played in last year (bought my own way in). I guess just the issue with me is I got backing for bigger buy-ins that I can't afford, but it's obviously not fair to play in these on my own bankroll, so is there any better solution available?

I mean, the alternative is I play online all day on my own bankroll, so isn't it better for him to somehow at least split the action with me? I'm willing to pay for part of the buy-ins for these tournaments for a part of immediate winnings, does that not seem fair to essentially "buy back" a piece of myself?

[/ QUOTE ]


maybe because i'm an "old guy" i see things like this in black and white.

it seems to me, you entered into an agreement with someone who is putting up money you cannot afford to play for and is giving you a very big shot compared to what your roi on stars would dictate.

when things get a little rough, you really have no moral right to whine that you are obligated to make up the money you lost before you see cash.

i don't know how else to put it without sounding mean, but you have to man-up to your responsibility here. you entered into an agreement with a man, now fulfill your end of it.

you ask if there is a way to buy back part of yourself. sure their is... go out and borrow the 15 dimes and pay the man back and then start over with the original deal. either that, or work it off by playing and winning to get back to zero. this is business.... you cannot expect to buy back part of yourself with your good looks for collateral.

you really should be thankful you have a backer that will allow you to take some shots at making a real breakout in this game. i wouldn't go too far with this line of thinking if i was you. he might not take kindly to it for very long.

which reminds me of one of the albums of 1970 "lady of the canyon" by joni mitchell. in it , she has a song about relationships called "big yellow taxi". the last verse goes thusly :

Late last night
I heard the screen door slam
And a big yellow taxi
Took away my old man
Dont it always seem to go
That you dont know what youve got
Till its gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot

[WarDekar]

[ QUOTE ]

it seems to me, you entered into an agreement with someone who is putting up money you cannot afford to play for and is giving you a very big shot compared to what your roi on stars would dictate.

when things get a little rough, you really have no moral right to whine that you are obligated to make up the money you lost before you see cash.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? For the record just so you know we have never had any written or official agreement. He's a friend of mine and offered to stake me over the summer in bigger buy-ins live, and now that has continued after the summer. This is also a reason why this is a situation because there is no set deal like "I'm going to play $X in buy-ins" or "I'm going to play Y amount of tournaments." I accepted this offer obviously but we never had anything set as to what I was playing under him. At the time I played whatever I wanted online, and continue to play anything I want to online under my own bankroll.

That's another reason why I'm not sure what to do because where's the cut-off? I can play the Sunday Majors under my own roll, and do sometimes. Should he be staking me in that , too, to be fair? As I said I feel comfortable bank-roll wise putting myself in these tournaments but I'm not going to do that because I don't think it's fair to my backer, is it fair if I won 100k online for instance in the Mil?

And I'm not sure why you guys are giving me a hard-time, it's not like I'm saying I'm running off or trying to erase my make-up to 0, that's not what I'm doing at all. Obviously I'm going to try to play out of make-up and I feel worse about losing someone elses' money than I do about losing my own. Quite frankly Bob, you're being a huge jerk which is completely unwarranted and from someone that I've never even seen post before.

[WarDekar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
. If I'm down $15k (I think that's about what I'm in make-up, mostly from the ME), why would I want to play a $300 tournament where 2nd place isn't even $20k?

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Based on your OP, I figured makeup was much higher...in this case, any $300 or $500 prizepool should offer plenty of incentive to scratch that makeup figure out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I looked at prizepools for similar circuit events this year and first place has been low 30s, meaning only 1st or 2nd would get me out of make-up.

As I said that make-up was from WSOP prelims, the Main Event (most of it obv), and other $2k buy-ins. I would like to play some live again before playing anything bigger, but I just don't think I will be motivated enough to play in a tournament with this situation as I'm not going to be playing my best, and I just feel like I would feel so awful playing all day and not getting anything out of it.

And before you quote me saying "not getting anything out of it" and go off, trust me I know I am getting something out of it, and paying off make-up is something I have to do. I know this. I was in make-up over summer and won a $1k event which got me out of make-up (temporarily, before the ME). I know the feeling to play 12+ hours, get paid, then give it all back to my backer. I'm okay with that, but again it's just demoralizing to know that for me to "make anything" I have to get 1st, and only 1st.