Stake Question

[PokerPrince]

I've recently been on a losing tear of mythical proportions and was offered to be staked by a close poker-playing friend. He didn't offer me the usual 50% of my winnings, lose it's on him deal. He gave me a 30BB buy-in which he bought in for as well and said if our total outcome is positive I get 1/3 of the winnings. If we lose I don't lose a penny. He is very tight, reasonably experienced, and a good reader of other players. Otherwise, a decent longterm winner. Is getting the standard 50% deal better than his 1/3 deal? Does anyone have any input on this?

PokerPrince

[CrackerZack]

All things being equal its good for you. If you both are 1BB/hr winners playing 10-20 for 3 hrs you should both expect to win 60 or 120 for the group. He's gonna give you 40 of which you only won 60 so you're getting 66% and risking nothing. Now we all know that things are never equal but most likely, if you are players of similar caliber in the same game, you're doing a bit better than the 50%. Although if you sit at the same table you're probably counteracting a bit of each others winning. Realistically, if he's a better player then you then you are getting a better deal. If you're better its close... if you're a lot better then you're probably losing out just a bit, but not much so overall it sounds like a good deal.

[PokerPrince]

Thanks a lot for the response it put things into a clearer perspective for me.

PokerPrince

[D.J.]

My feeling is, if you're short on poker money, take a free shot however you can get it. I wouldn't worry about your friend screwing you on the deal, he's just giving you an opportunity to play w/o risking your money. I'd say just take the deal b/c you have nothing to lose essentially, if you've got the money to play, then play on your own. If you find yourself short like most of us players do from time to time, take the freebie.

-D.J.

[ThePinkBunny]

This deal is so good, that he is an idiot for offering it to you.

Jump on it.

D

[HDPM]

I think this was a great deal for you and he should not have offered it. But the deal was unethical if you two were in the same game at the same time. Your post appears to indicate that you were playing the same game. If so, never do this again. If you played different games or will play separate games, you are getting a fantastic deal.

[CrackerZack]

I disagree that it is unethical if playing in the same game as long a both people play hard in hands they are both in. It will actually cost the team money, but is not unethical.

[HDPM]

It is unethical. I have heard of times in big games where people have shares of each other, but it is announced from what I understand. Poker is an individual game; your phrase, "it will acually cost the team money..." says it well. They are playing as a team. Even if their intentions are good, they will know they are a team and it will probably affect their play. It should at least be announced to the table, but I think it is a very bad practice. Also, if people find out, they may not say anything but it will be very damaging to the game in the long run. The rumor will spread that people are playing partners and both the reputations of the individuals and the game will suffer. Even if you don't think it is unethical, others will. And rumors mischaracterizing what they are doing will start. As for me, I don't think I would play in a game if I knew 2 players had such an arrangement, unless I knew them and knew they were horrible players who lost anyway. And that's even if I didn't think they were colluding.

[Mash]

I don't know if this is unethical or not. My question is, how is this any different than a husband and wife playing in the same game from the same bank account? Do you think a husband and wife in the same game is unethical too?

[HDPM]

I don't think it's good. I have seen husbands and wives in the same LL games and it has not bothered me to the degree the staking arrangement does. I have played LL in the same game as my wife for brief periods. I don't feel comfortable even though we weren't colluding or anything. I don't think I would do it again. Also, for whatever reason, when I have seen husbands and wives play they are usually pretty cutthroat. (I saw a guy check raise his wife with quads in a 1-5 game) But still, I think I could get my wife off hands and stuff that I couldn't do with an average player, so I don't think it's a good situation. And once you get to even mid limits it is a whole different deal. Also, having a community property interest in any winnings is different from two opponents having an agreed interest in each other's winnings. Can't exactly say why, but if you're married you understand. Try insisting on a third of your wife's win. LOL. /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif

[Mash]

I see what you are saying, although the husbands and wifes that I have seen play at the same table seem to play each other quite soft. Even dealers will remark to the husband "better not raise her or you'll be spending the night on the couch, ha ha", when they are in a hand together. It is low limits though and hasn't bothered me yet. Thanksfully my wife has no interest in playing cards!