Scumbag Poker Staking

[Gata Kamsky]

What do you tell a person whom you staked for some money for 50% of the profit at a session, then lose it all but put up some of their money and win back your money and then say they don't want to pay you back because they put up their money in that session too? Eventually they lost it all which I was happy to see even though I lost my money but I really want to let them have it as it's been a while and they deserve to be put in their place?

[whiskeytown]

tell him to go to hell and stop staking him.

RB

[Greg (FossilMan)]

I don't understand. Why should they pay you back? You made a deal with them, and the deal ended when they lost the stake you put up. The fact that they then went on to win with their own money has no relationship to the deal they made with you.

I mean, if they had quit that game, come back the next day with their own money, and booked a big win, would you feel they owed you any of that win? It's the same thing, only instead of going home, sleeping for a night, and then winning, they did it without bothering to leave the table for a night's sleep first.

I think you need to learn more about staking players, or quit doing it.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Regulator]

I don't think that example is quite the same. The player could have used the stake as fuel for a certain kind of table image, and used his own money to reap the benefits afterwards. The same players might not be there day after day to consider this as the same session. It's hard to say that the original stake had zero bearing on the eventual winnings.

I'll admit that I don't know a lot about staking either, but what prevents someone from doing something like I mentioned? I do agree, though, that this person should have made a better and more explicitly worded deal with the player.

[jakethebake]

Don't stake scumbags, or people you don't know well.

[dakine]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think that example is quite the same. The player could have used the stake as fuel for a certain kind of table image, and used his own money to reap the benefits afterwards. The same players might not be there day after day to consider this as the same session. It's hard to say that the original stake had zero bearing on the eventual winnings.

I'll admit that I don't know a lot about staking either, but what prevents someone from doing something like I mentioned? I do agree, though, that this person should have made a better and more explicitly worded deal with the player.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're assuming the deal was not the same as Raymers. The poster should explain specifictly what the deal was before flaming off and seeking sympathy.

[krazyace5]

You better have 100% trust if you are going to stake someone, there are too many ways to get burned otherwise.

[sfer]

Greg's point is that a standard arrangement is for the amount of the stake. That's it. The staker does not have recourse to any other money belonging to the stakee. This is common in lending. Can't pay your mortgage? Give the bank your house and g'bye.

[drewjustdrew]

[ QUOTE ]
The player could have used the stake as fuel for a certain kind of table image, and used his own money to reap the benefits afterwards.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a little due diligence is in order before you stake players. I hope someone would not stake (stake does not mean loan) a player without understanding their character.

[dakine]

(stake does not mean loan)

Semantics. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]