Calcutta question

[NobodySpecial]

In the player auctions I've seen or been a part of, the players are typically given the option to purchase half of themselves from the winning bidder.

Is this normally a request that the winning bidder has to honor, or can he/she decide to keep it for themselves?

Also, if a player couldn't afford to buy half of themselves, is it at all common for them to purchase 10% or 25% or whatever instead of 50%. I've never seen this, but it seems reasonable.

 

[Jimmorrison]

All depends on the guy running the Calcutta.

 

[bbb]

from what i have seen
the guy who buys the player in the calcutta
gives the player the option to buy as much of himself as he wants usually up to 50%
if the payout is great
the guy who bought the player will often give the player a "jelly" (tip) but not always

 

[kling&allen]

In the player auctions I've seen or been a part of, the players are typically given the option to purchase half of themselves from the winning bidder.

Is this normally a request that the winning bidder has to honor, or can he/she decide to keep it for themselves?

Also, if a player couldn't afford to buy half of themselves, is it at all common for them to purchase 10% or 25% or whatever instead of 50%. I've never seen this, but it seems reasonable.

The bidder normally wants to make sure the player is very happy to avoid dumping or partnering with other bidders.

 

[David in FL]

Mandatory, no. But commonly offered. Usually 50%, but any percentage up to 50% is generally acceptable

I would never consider not offering. I'd be a little pissed if someone didn't offer it to me as a player.

 

[realkingcobra]

In the player auctions I've seen or been a part of, the players are typically given the option to purchase half of themselves from the winning bidder.

Is this normally a request that the winning bidder has to honor, or can he/she decide to keep it for themselves?

Also, if a player couldn't afford to buy half of themselves, is it at all common for them to purchase 10% or 25% or whatever instead of 50%. I've never seen this, but it seems reasonable.

In which state is running a pool tournament Calcutta legal?

 

[Bob Jewett]

In which state is running a pool tournament Calcutta legal?

A brief search shows that Montana has guidelines for conducting calcuttas and they are illegal in Wisconsin. I think a major problem is that the organizer is required to file 1099-Gs with the IRS.

 

[Brookeland Bill]

I’ve played in golf and pool tournaments where if no one bought you you had to buy yourself for a fixed priced.

 

[j2pac]

I’ve played in golf and pool tournaments where if no one bought you you had to buy yourself for a fixed priced.

I've bought myself for $20, and sold myself for $15...in the same tournament.

 

[Bob Jewett]

I’ve played in golf and pool tournaments where if no one bought you you had to buy yourself for a fixed priced.

I think some calcuttas avoid that by lumping groups of "dead money" players together.

 

[Zerksies]

I think it’s completely bull shit around me that it’s expected that you buy half yourself. It drives up your price when the bidder is only having to pay half. I find it even more obsurd that I have to mention that I’m not buying half myself

 

[spartan]

The bidder normally wants to make sure the player is very happy to avoid dumping or partnering with other bidders.

I assume the player cannot buy his opponent

I've bought myself for $20, and sold myself for $15...in the same tournament.

Sounds like you sold yourself out and sold yourself short

 

[David in FL]

I think some calcuttas avoid that by lumping groups of "dead money" players together.

I've played in a lot where "dead" players are put together in the pool.

The last auction is for the entire pool, regardless of how many players are in there. Somebody will almost always throw a couple of dollars at that…

 

[mikepage]

A brief search shows that Montana has guidelines for conducting calcuttas and they are illegal in Wisconsin. I think a major problem is that the organizer is required to file 1099-Gs with the IRS.

Is that true if no prize was over $5,000? These were some guideline that a few years ago fit with laws in North Dakota.

*******************************

Calcutta Rules

Plains Art Museum will be conducting two Calcuttas starting 11:00am March 24, one for the High Roller tournament and one for the 530 & under tournament.

The minimum bid for the High Roller tournament is $20
The minimum bid for the 530 & under tournament is $10

Competitors age 18 and over are auctioned off in random order. A competitor may choose to begin with an opening bid on him/her self. Bid increments must be the minimum bid or greater. When all the competitors have been auctioned off, the group of competitors with no bidder at the bid minimum are auctioned off as a group.

High Bidders must pay in cash immediately following the conclusion of the bidding.

Prizes for each event will be the following percentages of the event’s total Calcutta pot.
1st place 36%
2nd place 27%
3rd place 18%
4th place 9%

Total prize pool 90%

The remaining 10% of the Calcutta pot is retained by Plains Art Museum

Reporting requirements

Names and addresses of winning bidders are reported to the State of North Dakota.
Reporting to the IRS using form W-2G is only triggered by a prize of $5,000 or more.
Canadian winning bidders will have a portion of the prize withheld and sent to the IRS.

 

[ChrisinNC]

In the player auctions I've seen or been a part of, the players are typically given the option to purchase half of themselves from the winning bidder.

Is this normally a request that the winning bidder has to honor, or can he/she decide to keep it for themselves?

Also, if a player couldn't afford to buy half of themselves, is it at all common for them to purchase 10% or 25% or whatever instead of 50%. I've never seen this, but it seems reasonable.

Yes, they do have the right to purchase half of themselves in all auctions/Calcutta‘s I have run or witnessed. As to whether that player has an option to buy less than $ half of the winning bid amount from the winning high bidder, I would assume that’s a private negotiation between them, but the high bidder would not necessarily be obligated to do so if they so choose, although it would generally be in their best interest to do so, to keep the player sufficiently motivated to play their hardest.

I’ve also seen where if the player does not choose to purchase half of themselves, a third-party may come in and offer the winning bidder to take half or whatever % they agree to. That does happen regularly.

 

[Bob Jewett]

...Reporting requirements
..
Reporting to the IRS using form W-2G is only triggered by a prize of $5,000 or more.
..

So it seems that reporting requirements for gambling winnings are different from tournament prizes which I think are $600.

 

[hang-the-9]

A brief search shows that Montana has guidelines for conducting calcuttas and they are illegal in Wisconsin. I think a major problem is that the organizer is required to file 1099-Gs with the IRS.

I think they are illegal in most places; I did not even realize they were legal in Wisconsin, but it almost makes sense due to the number of cue makers working out of there.

I also thought the player option to purchace part of himself from whoever won the bid was a built in thing like a constitutional right of gambling LOL I'd love to know if the pro players actually do that when their bids run into the many thousands or if they just expect a large tip from the bidder?

 

[SBC]

In the player auctions I've seen or been a part of, the players are typically given the option to purchase half of themselves from the winning bidder.

Is this normally a request that the winning bidder has to honor, or can he/she decide to keep it for themselves?

Also, if a player couldn't afford to buy half of themselves, is it at all common for them to purchase 10% or 25% or whatever instead of 50%. I've never seen this, but it seems reasonable.

Better to sell half back and have someone not dump you.
Sure people buy less sometimes

 

[KyHighball]

B

I've bought myself for $20, and sold myself for $15...in the same tournament.

Buy high, sell low
Perchance you're a crypto day trader?

 

[ShootingArts]

Considering what they are named after, no surprise that calcutta rules and traditions are pretty wild and all over the place. Calcuttas are legal in Louisiana but I expect that to become an issue soon. Almost a quarter million dollars in a calcutta pool and the casinos strangle any other form of gambling. The pool calcuttas are getting too well known.

Current laws allow for calcuttas with very specific rules. The main one is no skimming the calcutta pool for any reason. Not to pay the auctioneer, not to donate to poor orphans with cancer, no reason! 100% payout to the bidders. I know this has been violated, but such violations are illegal in Louisiana. After that, calcutta rules are all over the place.

Generally, if there is no bid on a player he has to buy himself for minimum bid whatever it may be.

Also, call it tradition, a buyer usually tips the player 10-15% jelly. Something to consider when a player or his combine already can expect 10% to 15% free, do they really want to pay thousands for 50%? In a current or just past calcutta, half would have ran $15,000 to $20,000 for the top three. Compare that to a thousand or two entry, I think just a thousand, and $20,000 added money I believe. The pot is $42,000 I believe, the calcutta about $230,000! That imbalance isn't going to last long in my opinion!

If I am a typical top sixteen player that may cash in the calcutta or will be an outside possibility to win, I am not buying half for thousands, the money isn't right for me. If I do cash and don't get a nice jelly the winning bidder would be well advised to never buy me in a calcutta again.

The problem is that the huge calcuttas are bringing in outside gamblers, not just pool players. These guys are putting up huge money at good odds. The top three players sold for $100,000 total in round numbers. $40,000, $30,000 and $30,000. Not exact numbers but close enough. The guys betting this kind of money are gambling on sports and other things too. His calcutta winnings if he hits big may not take him into the black on all his bets.

Before giving out any jelly the person that paid out $40,000 in the blind only got 1:1 on his money. He probably bought a few cheap outliers to cash too so he may be out fifty grand to gross eighty thousand! Gonna toss the player $12,000 to keep him honest? Probably, but now if the blind wins the buyer has spent forty to sixty thousand dollars to win ten to twenty thousand dollars.

If the blind doesn't win which is common, he will probably cash in the calcutta so the forty thousand isn't dead loss but the buyer is probably still in the red. The next two buyers that paid thirty thousand each for players that are in about the same position to win are probably better off at the end of the year. Wonder what happens if one buyer or group takes the entire top of the calcutta? Kinda like boxing horses at the track. You won't win much but your odds of losing it all are slim.

Calcuttas were designed to allow modest betting in small groups I believe. Thirty or forty thousand dollar bids are going to bring in unwanted attention especially with them being posted on the internet. Loose lips sink ships, and are gonna kill calcuttas in Louisiana I believe. The casinos are too greedy to let this kind of money be bet elsewhere. Horse racing only exists because the casinos have been forced to subsidize racing.

This turned into a long ramble but might be interesting to those curious about calcuttas. They are bringing in outsiders and rapidly spiraling out of control. The calcutta five times the purse?Knocking on the door of a quarter million? Trouble on the horizon!

I see the calcutta numbers have been updated, rock'n'roll!

Hu