Bankrolling players: Should I bother?

[TStoneMBD]

I have a relatively decent bankroll going at 17k and am interested in maybe backing a few players I know at a 10/20 level as long as I am certain they are winning players. My plan would be to devise an extensive test that should determine whether a player in question is ready to beat 10/20 or not. Does anyone think this is a good idea? Should there be any emotional questions on the test? Does anyone have any important questions that I should add? The 10/20 games in my area are amazingly easy to beat, and I know of a couple of players that should be winning players, despite having noticeable leaks. The tests should be able to clarify their abilities for me. What types of guidelines should I use? What sort of backing system would prove most optimal for both parties? Please speak your mind. Let me know if this is just a silly idea and that I am just going to get myself into a whole lot of problems doing this. Flame away.

Tks.

[Blackjack]

Make sure they dont drtibnk and drive. I mean post... uhhh Pffftt 17k I piss 17k liters

Goodluck to you man.. Sounds actually like a sound investment

Blackjack

[OrangeHeat]

Nothing but trouble can come of this.

Seriously - Invest the extra funds in equites, etc.. not poker players..

Orange

[Nightwish]

[ QUOTE ]
Nothing but trouble can come of this.

Seriously - Invest the extra funds in equites, etc.. not poker players..

Orange

[/ QUOTE ]
I totally agree. Poker (like all gambling) brings out the worst in people.

[billuhbong]

stupid idea unless ur talking about staking them for online poker, live poker is just not worth it

[Lawrence Ng]

Since you mentioned the games are in your area, I'll assume you mean live games.

Trust is obviously the most important thing here. Other than that, you should have played with whoever you want to back up in a live game. Sit with them, play with them, see how their style is and whether or not you think it's good. That's the best way imo.

As for tests, I could give you the right answer 100% of the time when we are not playing, but the true test is in the heat of the battle and as mentioned about you would need to see that person in action to determine if it meets your standards.

Good luck

Lawrence

[tolbiny]

I agree with Lawrence,
I think playing with them is the best test there is. One of the differences between 10-20 and 5-10 for me when i first played was the amount of money involved. My heart was racing when i was in pots, and i got a little timid at first. This went away for me after a couple of sessions.
Mostly i would make sure i thought that they weren't tilters. That is the one way they could piss your money away quickly.
On the whole i think that staking can be good for you if only because it will give you a vested interest in helping them improve their game. And teaching is one of the best ways to shore up your own game.

[srw5n]

TStone-

My main question would be the viability of any stake you can provide. Providing an adequate bankroll for a 10-20 game is a significant investment. With 17K you have a great personal bankroll, how much are you prepared to invest in other players?