When staking a player---if he wins, how do you split the money?
Staking a Player
- Thread starter Tennesseejoe
- Start date
Well I have staked and been staked.Its according to the situation and person.For instance I put Scott Lewis in the smokey mtn shootout and we stayed in the same room( which i payed for)He paid for his gas and food .He won 200.I gave him 100 and told him we would do it again next year.I had 150 entry and180 in the room.But thats just me because I ask him to go.Gambling is the same 4 me .But everybody is different.Im not greedy,rude and an as.hole .I treat people the way I want to b treated:wink:
RunOutRodney
Registered
I agree that it depends. However, one fair method (considering you have a good horse) is to take the expenses off the top and split the profit.
I agree with that too(good to c u rodney)
I stake players in tournaments sometimes.
I have been known to stake a few players. I take all cost, gas, hotel, entry and auction and write that amount down. Whatever the player wins I get back my out of pocket cost first. Then we split what is left.
As far as food, the player and myself pay for our own food and drinks.
When I am with a broke player, I buy his food and drinks and add that to the cost before the split. I pay for my own food and drink, that does not get rolled into the COST.
A few times I have lost hundreds of dollars, I can count those on one hand.
For the most part I am lucky my player usually gets in the money or wins the event. I also pick a couple guys in the auction with my money and do well in that format.
While sitting around for hours I make side bets on some matches, I keep that money for beer and food.
SO with all that said, earnings minus cost, then split it 50/50.
Some guys go 60/40 depends on how much you are putting out.
Like the DCC $2000 initial cost, you would have to have a good horse to get you even.
I have been known to stake a few players. I take all cost, gas, hotel, entry and auction and write that amount down. Whatever the player wins I get back my out of pocket cost first. Then we split what is left.
As far as food, the player and myself pay for our own food and drinks.
When I am with a broke player, I buy his food and drinks and add that to the cost before the split. I pay for my own food and drink, that does not get rolled into the COST.
A few times I have lost hundreds of dollars, I can count those on one hand.
For the most part I am lucky my player usually gets in the money or wins the event. I also pick a couple guys in the auction with my money and do well in that format.
While sitting around for hours I make side bets on some matches, I keep that money for beer and food.
SO with all that said, earnings minus cost, then split it 50/50.
Some guys go 60/40 depends on how much you are putting out.
Like the DCC $2000 initial cost, you would have to have a good horse to get you even.
Let me clarify---A local player needs money to gamble and you put it up. No travel involved. He wins---how do you split?
Doesn't the staker usually get a little more? Say 60%, at least? After all, he is the only one with any risk.
thats 110%
LMAO, damn mathmaticians!!! :yikes:
That's great, how do you get the TD to pay out an extra %10 for the house?
Nothing wrong with giving 110%. Everything says to do that, you know?
That is how I split if someone backed me (ages ago).
Table time
Local player the only cost you have is table time, which the winner usually pays when he snaps someone off for a few hundred bucks. If you are playing one pocket, make an agreement before the match to split time either way.
After table time, I split 50'/50 on local stuff.
Most guys tend to lean towards 60/40 because they are taking all the risk.
Besides, the player probably needs the $5 more than I do.
Local player the only cost you have is table time, which the winner usually pays when he snaps someone off for a few hundred bucks. If you are playing one pocket, make an agreement before the match to split time either way.
After table time, I split 50'/50 on local stuff.
Most guys tend to lean towards 60/40 because they are taking all the risk.
Besides, the player probably needs the $5 more than I do.
Thats the fairest way IMO. Both player and staker are in for winning the same amount and it mitigates the risk on the staker.
There only 3 types of people in this world. People who can count and people who cant. ha
If you...
If you have an ongoing thing with the same player and you keep giving him half when you win and eating it all when you lose you're going broke eventually. You need to keep a red number and split when a certain amount in win is reached, then you start over again. If it's a one time thing you're on your own. I doubt in today's climate anybody gets a good enough game to make it worth risking $2 for every $1 you will win. There are some nuthugger nits on this site that want what they perceive to be the "prestige" of being associated with a name player without thinking it through. If you think your boy plays good enough then make a long term deal with a red number. Otherwise you are probably wasting your time.
If you have an ongoing thing with the same player and you keep giving him half when you win and eating it all when you lose you're going broke eventually. You need to keep a red number and split when a certain amount in win is reached, then you start over again. If it's a one time thing you're on your own. I doubt in today's climate anybody gets a good enough game to make it worth risking $2 for every $1 you will win. There are some nuthugger nits on this site that want what they perceive to be the "prestige" of being associated with a name player without thinking it through. If you think your boy plays good enough then make a long term deal with a red number. Otherwise you are probably wasting your time.
I think the OP can see from the replies to his post that a 50/50 split of the net profit is pretty common. I've been around the pool scene for about 50 years now and have seen a variety of ways of handling the split between player and stake horse, but splitting the net profit has been the most common by far.
From a financial investment point of view, being a stake horse is a terrible proposition. Sort of like flipping coins but laying 2 to 1 on the money. Most stake horses are in the game for reasons other than a return on their investment. Often they just want to be involved in the action, hang out with strong or name players, and fancy themselves "sharp gamblers." But the smartest gamblers among the gamblers I have known rarely ever stake a pool player, not unless the game is a lock.
From a financial investment point of view, being a stake horse is a terrible proposition. Sort of like flipping coins but laying 2 to 1 on the money. Most stake horses are in the game for reasons other than a return on their investment. Often they just want to be involved in the action, hang out with strong or name players, and fancy themselves "sharp gamblers." But the smartest gamblers among the gamblers I have known rarely ever stake a pool player, not unless the game is a lock.