% trade deal reneged

[sketchy1]

This is a weird post, but I really would appreciate everyone's input. I don't want to reveal their name, but a member of this board and I chat on AIM regularly about poker and whatnot--just shoot the [censored], we sweat touraments with each other, talk strategy, etc.

We recently made a deal for a tournament. I wanted to ease the burden of buying into a million events that week since my bankroll was in bad shape, so I asked if he wanted a piece of any of my action in the $11 rebuy on stars I was entering. He agreed to buy just $11 worth which was okay with me, but he didn't have cash on stars. So I traded him 14% ($11 worth of my total expenses in the rebuy event) of me in that event for 1/10th of a % ($11 worth of him) of his action in the WSOP as he just won a seat.

I won the event and sent him $892, which was 14% of my win. After a few weeks he's decided he is probably going to sit out of the WSOP and since the site allows you to get $10,000 instead of the seat, he's exercising that option (or he might be selling it for all i know).

As a result I feel I should be given my $892 back. He wants to give me $11 back for what he technically bought 14% of my action with and keep the $892.

Before anyone says "he's full of **** you should know better kick his ass," for one he's not (and I am not) experienced in this arena. I have very little experience with backing. I am currently receiving some backing in tournaments on Party and Stars, but I don't know all the ins and outs of % trades, prop betting and side betting and whatnot. So, some of this stuff is all new to me.

The same could be said for him, and I understand why he is confused--I am too, but so far everyone I've talked to says i am right and he is out of line. So, I decided to post this here, hope to elicit some responses so he can see that he is wrong and will give me my money if he withdraws from the deal and from the WSOP.

Thanks in advance for anyone who posts their 2 cents.

[sthief09]

this isn't a matter meant for a strategy forum. if you post it somewhere else, where it belongs, I'll give my opinion. I encourage everyone else who intends on responding to do the same

[sketchy1]

You can be a forum-police jerk and do that or you can tell me your definition of the "proper" forum.

Looking at the list, I see 3 possible places it could go. Please, Mr. Perfect Poster, let's analyze this.

Texas Holdem - General: This could be it I suppose. But I would interpret this title as wanting more general topics about the game of holdem, not financial deals gone bad.

Tournament Poker - Multi-table tournaments: That's where we are. Hmm, this topic relates to tournaments and deals, so I would make a wild guess this is where it would go.

Other Topics - Other Other Topics: Well, anything could go here but it doesn't seem appropriate.

Thanks for the attempt to be a jerk and the lack of effort to help but next time just be nice and answer the damn question at hand.

[sthief09]

posts like yours start threads bring down the overall quality of the forum. people like you are too inconsiderate to realize it. I didn't mean to come off as a "jerk" but apparently you thought I did. and FYI it belongs in the Internet Gambling forum.

[sketchy1]

it belongs in the internet gambling forum? it doesn't have anything to do with multi-table tournaments so there's no way it should be there, of course.

get over yourself. i'm not "degrading the quality of the fourm" or whatever you want to call it.

[The Bloke]

I'm no expert on deals - but from a ethical and logical standpoint, it seems to me that the deal is off.

You traded a piece of your action, for a piece of his. As there will be no action from him, he cannot hold up his part of the bargain. It was implicit in the deal that you competed in your tournament, and he in his - without that happening, the deal is void.


Tom

[Pepsquad]

Bloke is right. Your friend owes you $892 back if he chooses to not play the WSOP.

The dollar amounts really are irrelivent here. The two of you agreed he would get $11 worth of your action and you would get $11 worth of his action. HE'S PROVIDING NO ACTION. The fact that it happens to be $11 is meaningless, the deal is void.

Take care,

Pep.

[sketchy1]

Thanks, that's about all I'll need.

If he doesn't return my money if he opts out of the deal, then I'll deal with him /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[The Bloke]

Just an aside - it strikes me that this wasn't a very good deal for you.

I have no idea how good your friend is, but aren't the odds very much against him (and indeed, anyone) making the money in WSOP 2005?

Given the vast starting field, it's very much more likely that he won't make the money, than he will. And even if he does, it's very unlikely he'd make more than the $15000 prize. The chances of him making a big profit are miniscule.

However in your Stars tournament, you have a very good chance of making a small profit, and a good chance of making a big profit (as you proved!)

So you're trading a good chance of you making a small-medium profit against a very very slim chance of him making a huge profit.

[sketchy1]

i understood the profit but after thinking about that I wasn't too upset about it. It was only $11 worth of action. I was willing to give up a little on my own end to make a fun deal with a friend. If I had taken more time to think about it or it was for a larger sum of money, I would have made a better deal.

[sthief09]

as I said, this is a strategy forum. I asked you nicely, but apparently you're too self centered for that. it's give and take here for me. I offer as much advice as I can, I spread as much of my knowledge as I can, and I respect the forum guidelines, and I take by reading what other people write. people like you only leach off what other people write. that's fine. it's a public forum. the least I ask is you don't pollute the forums with crap that doesn't belong. in other words, being that you have nothing to offer everyone else, at least refrain from making the boards worse. this is a multitable tournament strategy forum. the least you could do is post it in general hold'em, which is used as an OT forum.

and FYI, he owes you whatever his EV in the WSOP is. you made a trade. the trade was 1/7 of your EV in that tourney for 1/1000 of his EV in the WSOP. since he is not playing in the WSOP, he owes you whatever his EV is valued at divided by 1000. if he values his WSOP appearance at $20,000, he owes you $22. the deal was EV for EV. you deserve a return on your money invested, not his. if he's nice he'll throw you $100 for his troubles. he'd be an idiot to give you $800 that isn't yours

[sthief09]

if he loses $5 worth of EV to this guy, it means a lot less than the $200 he makes if the guy makes it to the final table, or $5000 he makes if the guy wins it. he's essentially buying a lottery ticket

[The Bloke]

Yeah I understand it's fun - that's worth something on its own.

But the thing is, it wasn't just $11. If he competed in WSOP, you'd have to give him $892!

My point was that there was a much better chance of you winning Stars, and making $6300 profit, than there was of him making even $5000 profit in WSOP.

So basically the draw of the WSOP deal was the tiny chance of him making a really big profit - kind of like a $11 lottery ticket /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[The Bloke]

Yeah it's basically a long shot gamble - good as a bit of fun, but quite a costly bit of fun.

[The Bloke]

[ QUOTE ]
and FYI, he owes you whatever his EV in the WSOP is. you made a trade. the trade was 1/7 of your EV in that tourney for 1/1000 of his EV in the WSOP. since he is not playing in the WSOP, he owes you whatever his EV is valued at divided by 1000. if he values his WSOP appearance at $20,000, he owes you $22. the deal was EV for EV. you deserve a return on your money invested, not his. if he's nice he'll throw you $100 for his troubles. he'd be an idiot to give you $800 that isn't yours

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree - I think the deal was dependant on both of them competing in their tournaments. Otherwise how could they evaluate the EV for the WSOP? Of course his friend would want to say 'I expect I'd end OOTM, here's $0 back' and he would want to say 'You'd win, I want my share of $7.5m' - it's impossible to resolve without the guy actually competing, which makes the deal void.

Say I made a deal with a friend that we'd buy one lottery ticket each, for two different lotteries. Any winnings are shared. I buy my ticket, and I win - but he doesn't buy his ticket at all. Do I still have to give him half of my winnings, in return for a refund of the cost of the ticket he didn't buy?

[sthief09]

they took gambles on each other. there was no discussion of "what if someone doesn't play." because of this he's entitled to a refund of his money, which is probably about $20

[ChipFish]

[ QUOTE ]
the least I ask is you don't pollute the forums with crap that doesn't belong. in other words, being that you have nothing to offer everyone else, at least refrain from making the boards worse.

[/ QUOTE ]
Hello pot.

[Rushmore]

In future, wait to settle up until all aspects of the deal have been fulfilled.

FWIW, he clearly needs to give you that money back.

Although there is no rulebook on the subject, it only makes common sense that it was implicitly part of the deal that you'd both be complying with the particulars discussed.

This would be one of those all bets are off scenarios.

[schwza]

suppose you didn't cash and he didn't play. then would he have to give you back your $0 that you won? that would obviously be wrong, just like it's wrong for him to give back 892 now.

what he should do is to give you back your expected win from the 1% stake. if he were break-even, it would be $11. he should give himself the benefit of the doubt, call himself great, and give you $30.

asking for $892 for an $11 stake is ridiculous. if he's your friend, don't force him to spend 10k he doesn't want to just to avoid giving you an undeserved 900.

and fwiw, i think this post does belong here. the fact that this took place online is irrelevant - it's about MTT's. you're more likely to get people experienced with backing/deals here.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
suppose you didn't cash and he didn't play. then would he have to give you back your $0 that you won? that would obviously be wrong, just like it's wrong for him to give back 892 now.

what he should do is to give you back your expected win from the 1% stake. if he were break-even, it would be $11. he should give himself the benefit of the doubt, call himself great, and give you $30.



[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, this is what I'm saying. I think it's the most logical way to look at it

[ QUOTE ]

and fwiw, i think this post does belong here. the fact that this took place online is irrelevant - it's about MTT's. you're more likely to get people experienced with backing/deals here.

[/ QUOTE ]

fair enough, but I was under the impression that this was a strategy forum. regardless it's here and it's long and it's not going away, so there's nothing I can do.

[The Bloke]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
suppose you didn't cash and he didn't play. then would he have to give you back your $0 that you won? that would obviously be wrong, just like it's wrong for him to give back 892 now.

what he should do is to give you back your expected win from the 1% stake. if he were break-even, it would be $11. he should give himself the benefit of the doubt, call himself great, and give you $30.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, this is what I'm saying. I think it's the most logical way to look at it

[/ QUOTE ]

I think there are two different ways to look at this arrangement:

1. That this was two separate backing deals. OP bought into WSOPguy for $11, and WSOPguy bought into OP for $11. These deals were arranged at the same time, but are otherwise independent. Therefore it is possible and not unreasonable for only one half of the staking to actually occur, because that does not affect the other.

I think this is the view you two are taking.

2. This was a deal/contract based on two events taking place - OP playing in Stars, and WSOPguy playing in WSOP. The two events are thus linked, and if both do not occur, the deal does not stand. Therefore WSOPguy should pay back OP the $892, and they will be even.


To be honest, I can now see your point of view, and I do see that 1. is a reasonable approach. Particularly as the reason for the WSOP part of the deal was only because WSOPguy did not have $11 on stars to give to OP. We would therefore assume that if WSOPguy DID have $11 on stars, he would have staked OP without any mention of WSOP participation, and there would be no argument - the $892 would belong to WSOPguy.

I guess the lesson here is that the terms need to be very clearly stated at the outset - including every eventuality. This may seem awkward if the deal is between friends - but as this shows, they may not remain friends for long if something like this does occur.

As to which path should be taken now - I suppose that really depends on whether OP and WSOPguy can come to an agreement on the terms of their original deal; if OP feels that the deal was definitely conditional on both events taking place (perhaps this was even mentioned), he has a case.

[The Bloke]

Or, to put it more succintly, either you said:

"I'll back you in WSOP, and you back me in Stars"

or you said:

"I'll trade you a $11 backing in Stars for a $11 backing in WSOP"

If the former, the deals are independent and he keeps the $892, minus the $11 you paid for the unfulfilled WSOP backing. If the latter, the deal only stood if both took place, and so he pays back the $892 and you're quits.

[IgorSmiles]

Listen to Rushmore, he seems to be the only voice of reason here. Don't settle up until the other party fufils their end.

The rest of you guys have got to be kidding! Of course the guy should return the money. Sure, he was buying a lotto ticket, but the whole point of buying a lottery ticket is you have a "chance" to win. In this case, a chance at .1% of the $9 million anticipated first prize. You cant turn and now say, "well, there's no way I was gonna win so here, take your eleven bucks back." There was a "chance" he was going to win, and that was what the $11 stake was intended for.

[Post-Oak]

[ QUOTE ]
suppose you didn't cash and he didn't play. then would he have to give you back your $0 that you won?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. He would have to give $11 because the rest of the deal would be off (and you can't allow him to have gotten a freeroll on your action).

This is a slightly different situation. The deal is still off, but now he has to return the $892 he was given.


What is hard to understand about this situation? If he does not live up to his end of the bargain (PLAYING IN THE WSOP AND GIVING YOU 0.1% OF THE CASHOUT) then the deal is off.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
suppose you didn't cash and he didn't play. then would he have to give you back your $0 that you won?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. He would have to give $11 because the rest of the deal would be off (and you can't allow him to have gotten a freeroll on your action).

This is a slightly different situation. The deal is still off, but now he has to return the $892 he was given.


What is hard to understand about this situation? If he does not live up to his end of the bargain (PLAYING IN THE WSOP AND GIVING YOU 0.1% OF THE CASHOUT) then the deal is off.

[/ QUOTE ]

you could make the same argument about the case where the first guy didn't cash. ok, i'll give you back your 0 and the deal's off.

the real issue is that the two guys are friends. it's a dick move to black mail your friend into playing in a 10K event he doesn't want to and try to to stick him for 900. it's a pretty lame effort on OP's part to get out of having to pay the 900 he owes.

[adanthar]

(blah blah law student not lawyer not legal advice blah blah)

I don't know about morally, but legally speaking, if you take him to small stakes court you have a roughly 100% chance of getting the money back.

Actually, I do know about morally; he's a weasel. Screw him.

[Post-Oak]

[ QUOTE ]

you could make the same argument about the case where the first guy didn't cash. ok, i'll give you back your 0 and the deal's off.


[/ QUOTE ]

No you can't. I thought I just explained that to you.

Let me explain it really simply. Let's say Mr. X and Mr. Y come to an agreement to split lottery winnings. Mr. X is to buy $1 of lottery tickets per week for 26 weeks. Then Mr. Y will do the same. They will split all profits.

After 26 weeks Mr. X has spent $26 and won nothing. Mr. Y says "OK, I don't really feel like trying to win the lottery anymore".

If YOU are Mr. X, you say "OK, pleasure doing business with you."

If I am Mr. X, I say "Pay me $13". And that would be the last time I come to a verbal agreement with Mr. Y (should have known he was a bit shady just from his name).

Do you understand now that the WSOP guy can not freeroll on the satellite tournament and then back out if Rebuy guy doesn't cash? It really is a very simple concept. If Rebuy guy does not cash, and WSOP guy reneges, then WSOP must pay $11.

[ QUOTE ]

the real issue is that the two guys are friends. it's a dick move to black mail your friend into playing in a 10K event he doesn't want to and try to to stick him for 900. it's a pretty lame effort on OP's part to get out of having to pay the 900 he owes.

[/ QUOTE ]

He is not trying to blackmail anyone. He has an agreement with someone. He has fulfilled all of his obligations and he expects that the other party will likewise fulfill their obligations. He is not forcing anyone to join the WSOP. The guy can pay the $892 back if he doesn't want to fulfill his end of the bargain.


Let this thread (and the irrational responses) be a lesson to anyone who considers making these types of deals. You don't want to be dealing with illogical people in business deals (without a written contract). Just because someone is a great poker player does not mean they understand business deals.

[drewjustdrew]

[ QUOTE ]
the real issue is that the two guys are friends. it's a dick move to black mail your friend into playing in a 10K event he doesn't want to and try to to stick him for 900. it's a pretty lame effort on OP's part to get out of having to pay the 900 he owes.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a dick move to request a refund on a whelched bet??? Unbelievable.

[TomCollins]

If Sketchy fails to cash in the first tournament, and WSOP player decides not to play in WSOP, does that mean that "The deal is off" and he owes Sketchy $0? Most sane people would argue that he owes Sketchy $11.


If he could get out of the deal, it would be a wise move to buy pieces of action in return for future tournaments. When the first player cashes, play in your event. When the first player does not cash, call off the deal, and owe nothing. You can never lose.