Bankrolling Other Players

I was wondering what was the common split that is involved with bankrolling another player. A friend of mine, who I know is a good player (better poker player then me) is out of money (due to some large unexpected bills not losses) and has a very good poker game to play.


Assume that you trust the other person and know they are skilled what type of split is typical. Any good articles on this?

Although Ive never played on others money or bankrolled anybody. I beleive the standard deal is if you bankroll your friend you a take the losses but get 50% of the wins.


Ryan

i can't see how there can be a typical split


i assume that he has approached you, rather than the other way round


if i staked phil ivey i might be happy with 10% - if i staked dyno i would want my money back when he lost


if you are taking 100% of the potential loss then you want as much of the potential win as you can negotiate - he's in a bad position so he might be happy taking very little for no risk to him, whatsoever


if it's on a "loan" basis - say, he pays you back 50% of any losses, some time in the future - then he is in a slightly stronger "negotiating" position - you might be happy with 75% of any winnings


the crucial point is to get the agreed deal down on paper so that there are no arguments later - if he happened to win a bundle and you had agreed 10% for him, then maybe you would be happy giving him a huge tip - in fact, you could build in a sliding profit-share scale, if you wished


there could be some stage in the game where he has won a lot of money and he decides to pay you back your stake plus agreed profit


let's say you had staked him $3200 for only 50% of the winnings and he doubled his stack - he might pay you back your $4800 and play on with his $1600 - that sounds good for both parties if it happens that way - but, in fact, in retrospect you can see you were risking a $3200 loss for a maximum win of $1600 - good for him but bad for you, the money-man


hope this helps


good luck to both of you

Allow me to begin by paraphrasing an old adage "Those that can do, those that can't become backers." Bankman stated that his friend was a better poker player than he. Pehaps during this $3200 winning streak of the horse Bankman may have lost $800 if he had been playing. That gives him a net gain of $2400 or a 75% return using your example. Seems pretty sweet to me!!!!


Bankman a normal split when backing someone better than yourself is 50/50 over a prolonged period of time not session by session. If the two of you are unable to agree on a specific length of time a reasonable proposal would be for you to give the player 25% of each winning session and apply the remaining 75% towards your initial bankroll. For each losing session the entire amount would be added back to the initial bankroll amount. If at some time the bankroll amount supplied becomes $0 (in other words if the bankroll was $3000 and you had taken $3000 profit out of the game) then a 50/50 split on the future sessions would be equitable. Upon such time that the partnership dissolves the remaining bankroll (it should be at $3000) could either be split be split 50/50 or you may negotiate that it remains your property.


The advantage to this arrangement is that it gives your friend some positive cash flow, keeps him in action (which does have value to many players) and decreases your risk while potentially offering you a better return than you might make on your own.


Jimbo

i would agree in general with what you say, jimbo, if bankman is trying to make money out of poker by looking for someone to bankroll


if this is the case, then he may be able to find yet another even better player to back


however, i read his post as him having a mate short on readies but him wanting to play in a specific big game, and bankman seeing it as a way to help his pal plus make a few bucks at the same time, and i see this as a different exercise altogether


perhaps bankman would add a little more to his story?