Staking someone in SnG's. Questions

[wateronrock]

Listen carefully, if this guy is your friend, give him the 500$. Making money by "helping" your friends isn't cool.

Seriously. What goes around, comes around.

[threeonefour]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone have a general rule of thumb for a chop of percentage? 90% for the stakee seems WAY too high. I could be wrong. But I can't believe that would be standard.

[/ QUOTE ]

i am assuming under the deal (and i personally think the deal should be this way most likely) that if the stakee loses any or all of the money then the staker has 100% liability for that loss.


given that assumption, you need to do some math.

first what is his ROI for 22$ sng's. say 15%.
what is the standard deviation for playing sng's. i don't know what this is but i don't think its very player dependent, i think SD from player to player doesn't vary too much so you can just use your own SD.

using that information make a 95% (or what ever %) confidence interval of where he will be at after 500 sngs. people in the probability forum, such as brucez, can help you with that if you can't do it.

[actually the problem is a bit more complicated in that, because you do not have an unlimited bankroll so there is a chance the stakee will go broke before even hitting 500. once again, go to prob forum if you can't factor that in yourself]

once you get a confidence interval, you'll now have something to work with. the lower bound will probably be negative.

lets say your interval looks like this:

there is a 95% likelihood that the stakee will end up with an account balance between 300(a 200$ loss) and 1300(800$ win).

in this scenario it would be -ev for you to take less than a 33.33% cut. the reason way is obvious. from the staker stakers perspective, he stands to make between -200 and 200 if he takes a 33% cut. lower the percentage any further and the upper bound gets small while the lower bound stays the same

[itsmarty]

Since he's your good friend, there's no need to worry about what a standard staking deal might be, if there even was such a thing.

I would go with the following setup:

For the right to future payouts, you agree that the $500 is never to be spoken of again unless it's him paying you back. Never say "you drive, I loaned you $500" or "I'll change the channel when I get my $500 back".

He agrees to pay you back $500 two times when his poker winnings can support it. You don't care when, because getting $500 you never expected to see again is going to be nice both times it happens.

If, at some point in the future you get married, have a kid, graduate from college, or some such thing and his poker account is flush with winnings, he agrees to buy you a startlingly large gift.

If that won't work for you guys, stay away from staking.

Martin

[Wake up CALL]

Martin,

That is one seriously good recommendation.

[Guthrie]

Why didn't he just cash out $12.5K to pay bills and keep $500 for a bankroll. No way in hell I'd give him my money to manage.

[Slim Pickens]

I think staking him would be a bad idea. However, if you do decide to stake him, you should manage his bankroll for him, without his input, until the stake is repaid.

[HoldEmKillah]

of course.