What's a good payout percentage?

[mcgin]

Thought I'd start off a thread to see what people think is a good payout percentage for a staker in different scenarios as I see wildly varying returns offered on here, and was curious to see what other people think. I've seen a few threads from strong players I would normally stake, but with the poor payout on offer I just felt like it was a bad investment.

Here's my thoughts to start things off anyway.....

After running several stakings in my 10xSTT thread I've come to the conclusion that 50/50 is about right for a strong player in a series of STTs, although I think in general (i.e. for not so strong players) the staker should get a slightly higher return, maybe 55% or 60% (although I might be biased as a staker )

MTTs IMO are a different kettle of fish. The variance in these is massive compared to STTs, and when you start talking about fields of 1000+, the staker is taking on a very large risk of getting no return. After my short foray into staking, I don't think I would stake anyone in a MTT for less then 80% return, and if it's a 1000+ field I'm not sure I'd even be interested, but would certainly be looking for >90%. It obviously of course depends on the strength of the player, not just the number of entries.

Is this too harsh on the stakees given the time they have to put in? I don't know, that's why I started the thread, that's what I currently think, but could be persuaded otherwise........

[PGremlin]

I think it also depends on the:

- Added value of a tournament
If anyone wanted staking for the TonyG games then I am sure more then enough would be willing to stake them :P

I often miss the added value in a tournament when people ask staking.

- History
The experience a player has is very important. Do they feel comfortable at the level they ask staking at?

Often enough they are trying a new level and I think they should give a better % for the stakers.

Are they profitable players at the level they ask for? Dunno

- Reliability and payment options
No problems so far with payments, but sometimes I wonder if they even can receive/send money, especially when they don't have Pokerstars or Full Tilt.

Even though I have these doubts I still believe we have very high level skilled players who ARE winning players and would turn a profit if regularly staked. I am absolutely convinced that you can make an profit if you watch for good staking opportunities.

Also good fun to rail for someone to try their best, not just fighting for themselves but also for the stakers. Think it brings us more together as a community by sharing the joy and the profits when one of us wins.

[Blatch]

Alot depends on how good the player is in my eyes. The one ting the stakers have to remember is that they will want the player to lay properly and if they only have 10% of themselves then they may take un due risks that they normally wouldnt.

I played the GUKPT main event weekend just gone, £1000 buy in and it was my first comp where someone has paid me in fully for 70% of me. Being the player I would never go above the 70% as anything less and my feeling towards the tourney wouldnt make it worth while.

You have to find a happy medium.

[PGremlin]

I also like the thought of series of MTT's, like this one of Samba

http://www.punterslounge.com/forum/f...ll-paid-72674/

It lowers the variance that is so big by a large margin.

I would still stake him even if he gave a lower % then the offered on october.
To bad he didn't offer it for November

[GeordieGaz]

Originally Posted by PGremlin

I also like the thought of series of MTT's, like this one of Samba

http://www.punterslounge.com/forum/f...ll-paid-72674/

It lowers the variance that is so big by a large margin.

I would still stake him even if he gave a lower % then the offered on october.
To bad he didn't offer it for November

So you'd be willing to invest in a higher buy-in series?

[PGremlin]

Originally Posted by GeordieGaz

So you'd be willing to invest in a higher buy-in series?

I might , but that's going off topic. Don't want to hijack this topic.

[mcgin]

Originally Posted by Blatch

Alot depends on how good the player is in my eyes. The one ting the stakers have to remember is that they will want the player to lay properly and if they only have 10% of themselves then they may take un due risks that they normally wouldnt.

I played the GUKPT main event weekend just gone, £1000 buy in and it was my first comp where someone has paid me in fully for 70% of me. Being the player I would never go above the 70% as anything less and my feeling towards the tourney wouldnt make it worth while.

You have to find a happy medium.

That is an interesting one alright Blatch. Motivation to play needs to be a big consideration, and 10% is going to have a big influence on that.

I also like the thought of series of MTT's, like this one of Samba

http://www.punterslounge.com/forum/f...ll-paid-72674/

It lowers the variance that is so big by a large margin.

Couldn't agree more, that's why I try and stake players in more then one tournament wherever possible once I decide to back them. It was also the biggest reason I ran the STT stakes the way I did.

[george2loose]

also depends if its a one off or a long term investment

[mcgin]

Found this on two plus two, seems 80% payout is a good rule of thumb for the types of staking we do here.........

the most frequent question I see asked about staking is what a standard deal is. It’s hard to say exactly what the standard deal is, based on the quality of player, the stakes he’s playing for, his volume of play, whether he’s doing both online and live, etc. It seems though that the majority of staking deals are either 60-40 in the backers favor with make up or 50-50 with make up. As far as deals with no make up are concerned (often done for a single event situation) the standard seems to be 80-20 in the backers favor, though considering the variance involved there those numbers can fluctuate to a good degree.

We should also discuss make up. For those who aren’t aware make up is similar to debt but not the same thing. Make up is what you are down on your backing arrangement, but not necessarily money owed to your backer. That is to say, if you are in make up for $50,000, and have a net worth of $100,000 and for some reason are no longer able to play poker, you do not owe the backer $50,000 out of your own money. As far as leaving a backing arrangement in make up for no reason goes, unless you are under contract there isn’t necessarily repercussions in the traditional form of something like a lawsuit (or broken legs) but there are factors to consider. First of all if you leave a backer while in make up for no good reason it is very unlikely you’ll ever find another backer since word of your actions will get around. Also, some would consider this unethical, and it is a considerable grey area of morality. While you indeed have the right to opt out of your staking arrangement while in make up for no legitimate reason, the damage it will do to your reputation in the poker community is something you need to weigh it heavily against. A backer and a player need to set the conditions of what happens when a player is in make up but wants to change or leave an arrangement ahead of time.