Each £50 staked is equal to approx 4.78% of the total buy-ins (£1045) for the three tournies.

Its not conceivable to pay the stake + 4% if I cash.

Eg if I did quite poorly and cashed for let's say just £300 ($510) then paying all 10 stakes of £50 ($85) alone would cost me £500 ($850) before paying the 4% and is just not a viable proposition.

If this was the case and I went 50/50 with someone in a £1000 staking and just won my £1000 back I couldn't give them their £500 back plus 50%, they'd get the whole £1000! Obviously they'd just get 50% of the cash (or its actually usually nearer 40% is agreed for stakers and 60% to the player in this kind of scenario)

All stakers are staking approx 4.78% of the  combined buy-ins for 4% of the combined payouts from the 3 tournies stated.

Anyone who has staked me and has misunderstood this and isn't happy will be refunded if they PM me or post on this site before 8pm on Sunday 8th Nov 2009.

XrayEye

It's often easy to outplay opponents- my problem is outplaying the dealer!!

10 stakes paid up
3 stakes paying at event


3 stakes left for anyone who can pay me at the G-Casino tonight or can transfer on either 888 (to XrayEye)

Thanks to those who have already shown confidence in me

XrayEye

It's often easy to outplay opponents- my problem is outplaying the dealer!!

Terms read and understood.

Good luck mate, go get me some return on my investment !!!

In xray we trust !

gl mate.

Appreciate the clarification (as I'm sure the stakers will as well).

After all, stakes, BAPs, etc are at root, investments.

Its not conceivable to pay the stake + 4% if I cash.

Eg if I did quite poorly and cashed for let's say just £300 ($510) then paying all 10 stakes of £50 ($85) alone would cost me £500 ($850) before paying the 4% and is just not a viable proposition.

A cash wouldn't mean you'd automatically return the original stake. You'd break the cash up accordingly to the backers to pay back as much of the buy in as possible in appropriate %'s.

(if Idi0 bought 3 shares you'd pay him 3x what you would pay me if I bought 1 share).

The reason being is:

If you cash all three games, for a total of say $1800. At 4% shares, your backers are only making $72 a share.

You could cash in all three games, and your "investors" are still taking a loss.

^^ This should never happen.

It's going to cut into your profits, but you're playing for a significantly reduced price with the backers, so your ROI will still be great.

If this was the case and I went 50/50 with someone in a £1000 staking and just won my £1000 back I couldn't give them their £500 back plus 50%, they'd get the whole £1000!

- So backer gives you $500 to buy you into a game.
- You just make it into the money and get the $1000 back.
- You return the buy in back to the investors (backers).
- $500 back to your back, $500 back to you since you invested the other half.
- 50/50 split of profits (profits = 0)

Seems to make sense to me ...

How about this though (which is closer to what we're talking about).

You want to play a $1000 game. Backer gives you $1000 to play for a 50/50 split of profits. You cash making $1000 back.

-If you only give 50/50 back to the backer, you're making $500, backer is losing $500
- You're taking an infinite ROI earning $500 on 0 and the backer is losing -50% on his investment.

^^ This hardly seems right.

- Instead, Backer gets back the buy in first, and then you split profits.
- You'd give backer $1000
- You would make $0 (but have played the tourney for free)
- Backer would make $0 (but would have broken even on his investment).

There is no 50% to give because there are no profits.  

(or its actually usually nearer 40% is agreed for stakers and 60% to the player in this kind of scenario)

Stakes and BAPs are very specific to the community.

However in a high risk BAP, you would actually typically be 60/40 in the Backers favour, not the player.

High Risk BAPs, are games where you are buying a piece of a single, or a couple tournaments over a short period of time. Very high variance, very high reward.

Because of this you need to offer incentives to the backers so that they have a reason to invest. The incentives, a 60/40 split in their favour.

I'm really happy you made this thread. Offering BAPs and Stakes are GREAT for a community. They encourage players to work together, and add another dimension to the Rail. It's a great experience.

Even more interesting is when you offer it for a live event. There is a certain energy that comes with live events, and knowing you have a piece of someone playing in a live game who could win some real money is exciting.

So I absolutely wish you the best of luck for both you and your backers. Obviously the better you do the more success this will have in the future.



But BAPs are investments, and should be treated as such. These ^^ type of issues are absolutely necessary to discuss when talking about poker investments, that most members here won't have much experience with.


It's important to set a high standard for the quality of BAPs so that -EV investments don't become the norm in a community.

Hope you can see where I'm coming from here. I'd hope logic would prevail and you'd see that I wouldn't go to this much trouble for "mischief" sake.

-------------------------

Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo

-------------------------

Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo

These would be good points if I wasn't being misquoted.

eg in the 50/50 staking I said my backer pays £500 of a £1000 event ie 50% of the buy-in not the total amount as you stated. In that case then yes you would be right that if staked 100% the backer should first of receive the stake back but I would never do this to small personal stakers as the incentive to win is subconciously(!?) diminished, I think 66% should be absolute max. A sponsor who offers to 100% stake into a tournament is a different matter.

I understand the point of not profiting (slightly) while stakers make a slight loss on a break even scenario eg total payouts $1800 (the approx cost of the buy-ins) does mean stakers would make a loss of $13 (but this is not an unusual split in staking) but thats one of the reasons I gave a free added bonus.

I've stated clearly that stakers are putting up 4.78% for a 4% return.

I have no problem at all staking myself and have done since my first live tourny in March 2008 (totalling approx £25k) and making a very nice profit. My staking offer was purely that, an offer. I've been completely transparent as to the figures and backers decide whether to accept or not. These 30 days (7th Nov - Dec 6th) I will be competing in tournies with a total worth close to £10,000 so I'm not gonna rip-off backers for the sake of 0.78% of a £50 stake. In live poker integrity is pretty much everything and I very much believe in karma and attribute a lot of my success to this (only yesterday at roulette I insisted the attendant recalculate the chips she had cashed out for me, one batch she wrongly totalled to £51 when I knew it was only £46 and I returned the £5). At poker I have NEVER cheated, I've done silly, stupid even childish things but never cheated. I believe Karma can and probably will bite you in the pale parts!

And one thing you haven't taken into account is that I actually want my stakers to make a profit (actually selfishly for my own satisfaction too and even for continued staking in the future) and have other ideas which I didn't want to state for reasons of my own but which may or may not come to fruition and as such could be a nice surprise for those backing me. Afterall, nobody wants to disappoint their backers. Its nice to have the support and encouragement of others.

Maybe I'm defending my corner too vigorously when I don't think I really need to, but I won't have my honesty and integrity put to the slightest question without answering.

I know you only want a fair deal for stakers and next time quite possibly I will offer an exactly equal % stake for % payout. Of course this means all travelling expenses and/or accommodation costs will be borne by myself

ps anyone else with views either way would be appreciated

XrayEye

It's often easy to outplay opponents- my problem is outplaying the dealer!!

read all your posts and never thought you were trying anything on best of luck at the tables and have a drink on me afterwards.

Tried many times to post my Event2 report but it keeps saying I'm trying to enter a domain name (which I'm not!).

XrayEye

It's often easy to outplay opponents- my problem is outplaying the dealer!!

I understand the point of not profiting (slightly) while stakers make a slight loss on a break even scenario eg total payouts $1800 (the approx cost of the buy-ins) does mean stakers would make a loss of $13 (but this is not an unusual split in staking) but thats one of the reasons I gave a free added bonus.

That's the only point I'm making.


When you're doing a stake for multiple events, the minimum cash does not equal the minimum buy in. So backers take a loss. To counter-act this, you offer stakeback.


When doing a BAP for a single tournament, your structure is more than fine. Since the minimum cash would very likely cover the initial buy ins, and nobody would be taking a loss. Everybody wins.



You definitely seem to think this is personal. It's not. I can tell you with 100% certainty that I'd have replied the same way to absolutely anyone (idi0, L67C etc), who posted a similar structure. Whether you believe that or not, I really don't care, I can't change it.

-------------------------

Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo

hi.. i think im to late. but hope you do well in tournements. and let me know when there are some good tournements in the future. im from holland. so only tournements with minium buy-in 1k. or higher. becasue otherwise with hotel ext.. its not plus ev.

gl and hope you win!! if you have 5% left. let me know

greets,

 jolmer