question RE: backing deals

[riverboatking]

ok so i've been playing the 20-40 no limit at commerce pretty regularly and there is a guy there who loses quite a bit, but is really really wealthy.

he has watched me play and last night he approached me and asked if i would "play for him".

he wants to put up all the money and split the wins 50/50, eating any and all loses that may occur.

and he wants me to play in a 50-100 blind no limit game.

i've been beating the 5-10 at the bike, 10-20 and 20-40 at commerce, consistently, so i don't really need to take the offer, however it is tempting seeing as i have a chance to play in a big game with absolutely zero risk.

just wondering if any of you have any experience with, or thoughts concerning backing deals.

ps. don't worry about talking to me about anything other then the financial EV of the decision, as i'm not worried about the business dealings between us, my question is purely in regards to whether the deal is a good.
he already made it clear that i would have full control of when i played, for how long, etc...

[Yeti]

Sounds like it could be fun. I get the impression from your posts that you play for fun and are not financially dependent on your winnings (correct me if I'm wrong).

If so, it doesn't look like you've got much to lose. I say give it a shot.

[turnipmonster]

it really comes down to game selection as to whether or not this deal is good for you. as long as you practice good game selection when sitting in the 50/100, I can't see any downside to this.

--turnipmonster

[Two Finger]

If I put myself into your shoes, I'd love to take a shot and go into it w/you and the backer being comfortable w/the stakes involved. Maybe come to an agreement on how many times you want to take a shot, or a time period for like two - three months? And then decide to continue depending on how things are running.

But I don't see why not, cuz you'll be able to play closer to optimal w/out the risk of going busted.

[Tilt]

I have been thinking about seeking something similar. But all the deals I have seen on these boards (mostly the STT's) have been shared risk or essentially loan arrangements. This one seems too good to be true. Take it in a heartbeat.

[Post-Oak]

[ QUOTE ]
ps. don't worry about talking to me about anything other then the financial EV of the decision,

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't lose. You are not on the hook for any losses. So it is ++++EV. The only question is whether your time would be better used playing for yourself. How are the 50-100 games? What are your chances of beating them?

If the 50-100 are not much tougher than the 20-40, than the choice is obvious. Wouldn't you rather play 25-50 with no downside risk than play 20-40?

Of course the 50-100 game could be a lot tougher than 20-40.

I would make sure everything is clearly spelled out beforehand. What if you win $20K the first month, and you split it 50/50. Then the next month you lose $10K. Does he want $5K back because the total profit is only $10K so far? In other words, when do you settle up?

Basically you would be ripping this guy off, but if he's both wealthy and an idiot (pretty obvious) then I would jump at the opportunity.

You could also be a total dickhead and play a lot more aggressively, but that is taking it a little too far (as would making a side deal and dumping his chips). I only mention these things because this guy must be incredibly stupid/naive to offer this kind of deal.

[knifeandfork]

(as would making a side deal and dumping his chips)

this seems really dumb even dumber than offering to stake someone.

jason

[fsuplayer]

that sounds funs as hell RBK, if the games are often good. do it!

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
the financial EV of the decision. my question is purely in regards to whether the deal is a good.

[/ QUOTE ]

What exactly is your question?

[felson]

You are getting a great deal and the your staker is getting a bad one. The only reason not to do it is if you don't want to take advantage of him.