Getting staked at 2/5 NL - what's standard for staking?

[friedace]

Hey guys,

I just came back from the greatest poker session of my life. I went to a local room as usual and was in the 1/2 NL $300 Max. My buddy there told me I should play in the 2/5 $500 Max game because it's super soft. Up until this point, 1/2 is the highest I've played, but the 1/2 game was all short stacks who were super tight, so I decided to switch to 2/5. I bought in for the chips I had at 1/2 ($464) and then played a hand. I'm a university student who about to start to dip into his line of credit, so after thinking for a bit, I thought that I should take my buddy up on his offer to stake me for 50%. It seemed like a good idea at the time to cut down the variance. And, I figured that, since it's roughly double, if I get staked for 50%, it's like I'm playing 1/2, except just against shittier players. So, my edge will be greater, but the variance will only be at 1/2 levels (since down 1BI @ $500, is only down $250 of my cash, which is equivalent to down 1BI @ 300 1/2).

I can't even tell you how bad this was. This was the worst poker game I've ever sat down in. One guy was dumping $500 racks like it was a joke, with no pair, no draw, or *sometimes* bottom pair. I raised to 15 UTG with QQ, someone reraised, 3 calls, I reraise to 150, **4 callers**. Luckily, I took that one down. At one point, another donkey came in and played hands blind for $300 with the dumper. I couldn't believe it! In any case, I had the biggest win of my life (not just in absolute terms, but in BBs) for a 3 hour session. I walked away from the table with $2436 in cash after 3 hours of play. Of course, I was hitting hands and my hands basically always stood up, but it still feels great to walk away with such a big win. At the end, I gave my buddy half of that, and headed home.

Now, for the question. As I started stacking my chips, I began to think that this 50/50 arrangement was a bad idea. I began to think that the standard arrangement is he puts up 100% of the bankroll, I play, and then we split the profit. In any case, it wouldn't have made a difference here, but it would in the future if I had a downswing.

What do you guys think? Should I get staked for 100% in this game in the future and split the profit? Or should I just grow some balls and try to take a shot under-rolled? FYI, I have about $3500 to my name, but I do have a line of credit and can probably borrow if I need to. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I figure if I forget this [censored] and have another good session, I'll have enough of a roll to sustain some beats.

P.S. I realize that this amount of money is nothing compared to what some of you play, but for me, it's a big deal, so please no flames. I'm definitely not thinking I'm a hot shot because I obviously don't expect to average anywhere close to this over the long run.

[MaxRaises]

Yes, tell him it's 100% no risk.

[jschaud]

If you can get more money and possibly get a 100% stake if you go busto, I would go at it on your own. If the game stays that bad, the variance will be high, but your win rate should be pretty solid.

[AMT]

live 2/5 is so soft if you have 5 BI id stick with it on your own. drop down and move back up as soon as you have enough again/you lose 1 or 2 BI (however many youre willing to). if youre decent, the edge is so penetratingly big in those games that it probably isnt worth a stake. i can certainly understand the point and motive behind getting staked with your BR at these levels, however.

seems like if hes staking you 100%/eating the losses that 50/50 is standard. i am an advocate of taking shots underrolled live bc of how bad people play, however.

[freekie]

borrowing money for playing poker is ALWAYS a goot idea

[atrainpsu]

[ QUOTE ]
I began to think that the standard arrangement is he puts up 100% of the bankroll, I play, and then we split the profit.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is usually a really bad deal for the staker for a one session arrangement, which this appears to be. If you win $1000 2/3 of the time and lose $1000 1/3 of the time, your buddy's EV on this proposition is $0.
The deal you made seemed descent, although, maybe you could have sold a smaller piece of yourself, or tried to negotiate a better deal with your friend.
I think now that you have 5 or 6 buyins, I would take shots on your own.
P.S. I guess this was a minibrag, but otherwise wrong forum?

[friedace]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I began to think that the standard arrangement is he puts up 100% of the bankroll, I play, and then we split the profit.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is usually a really bad deal for the staker for a one session arrangement, which this appears to be. If you win $1000 2/3 of the time and lose $1000 1/3 of the time, your buddy's EV on this proposition is $0.
The deal you made seemed descent, although, maybe you could have sold a smaller piece of yourself, or tried to negotiate a better deal with your friend.
I think now that you have 5 or 6 buyins, I would take shots on your own.
P.S. I guess this was a minibrag, but otherwise wrong forum?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry bro. I don't get it. If I win $1000 twice 2/3, he gets $1000. If I lose $1000 1/3, he loses $500. He's still up $500, isn't he?

Ok, so it seems like most people are advocating go alone. I figure that with a good run in 2 sessions, I can be up another $2k minimum, in which case, I'll have 10 BI's, which can absorb some variance. If I wait until I have 20 BI's at this level ($10,000), it's going to take me 10 years to move up. As some of you have stated, the games are so terrible that it's obvious I have the biggest edge here than in any game.... so I guess a shot is warranted. I guess the key is to set a point where I'm moving back down right? Or, at that point, start getting staked.

As a side note, I just realized this morning that the guy who staked me was dealing in our game last night. Maybe this isn't such a great idea, because even though all my big hands came with other dealers, people can get the wrong idea and I could be in [censored] on my way back to the car.

In any case, I'm happy with the nice stack of $20s that I have, all wrapped up tight like on HSP :P It sucks to give away a piece of yourself when you make the biggest win you've had. In any case, right now, I probably have about $3500 in BR, so I guess I just need to get lucky.

Good point about get staked if I go broke. Even then, I still have my line of credit, which is an option if it gets to that point (god... that sounded so degenerate...).

I'm going to have limited internet access for the next few weeks, but I'll keep checking this thread.


Thanks for the responses guys. If anyone has any more advice, I'd greatly appreciate it.

P.S. I know that some might say there was a little brag in this, but it's more just excitement. Most players on here could kill this game.

[so sick bro]

[ QUOTE ]

As a side note, I just realized this morning that the guy who staked me was dealing in our game last night. Maybe this isn't such a great idea, because even though all my big hands came with other dealers, people can get the wrong idea and I could be in [censored] on my way back to the car.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're right about that which is why you do need to keep the fact that you're being staked just between you and the staker. Also, you shouldn't be giving up 50/50 if you're putting up half your own buyin, if he stakes you the whole 500 50/50 is then reasonable though

[qdmcg]

Why would you get staked 50/50 for a 2/5NL game if your normal game is 1/2? Divide 2/5 by two and you're playing 1/2.50 with (theoretically) better players and higher swings.

[friedace]

[ QUOTE ]
Why would you get staked 50/50 for a 2/5NL game if your normal game is 1/2? Divide 2/5 by two and you're playing 1/2.50 with (theoretically) better players and higher swings.

[/ QUOTE ]

The $500 max buy makes for bigger swings for sure. Also, they are definitely not better players playing there. It was the juiciest table of my life. So, it's higher variance, weaker competition.