In Response to Re: Staking deals, the lowdown, : That's because you have £125..... In case you didn't realize, people generally choose to be staked because they don't have the funds necessary. Oh and £10 - £125 in 2 weeks playing DYM's? Can you explain further with what stakes you would play and how many games it would take to reach £125 without risking your roll? Oh yes, there's also the 10p table with a tenner advice.,...... that's 1 buyin........ MrWhite...... in all seriousness i don't think posting such a question on this particular forum will gain you much knowledge as you mostly end up getting advice from people who don't really know what they're talking about but would like to pass on their thoughts anyway No offence meant to most of the replies in this thread, that's just how it is. Posted by cottlad
Dude dont really know what your problem is, saying people dont know what they are talking about... mr white plays some low stake cash games so he obviously will have £125, he might not now, but im sure he will before long. You can go from £10-£125 in 2 weeks playing £3.30 dyms.
Mr white wanted oppinions etc... so its not really kl to shoot down everyone else.
So what do you recommend, i assume you do know what you are talking about?
MrWhite...... in all seriousness i don't think posting such a question on this particular forum will gain you much knowledge as you mostly end up getting advice from people who don't really know what they're talking about but would like to pass on their thoughts anyway No offence meant to most of the replies in this thread, that's just how it is. Posted by cottlad
I agree. This has gone so far from the OP tbh. When I started this post it was because I didnt know anything about staking and wanted to know if it was a good deal or not. Thread may as well be closed, after my replies to latest posts I wont reply again.
but this is the guy who started a thread some time ago saying he wanted to make £600 a month for 10 months playing 15p/30p NLH and MTTS so he could have his dream honeymoon in Florida for all his family. If he need's the £125 he's looking to make from the staking to start grinding away again then good luck to him, although i think he might seriously be struggling to make his 6k before the big day. If that's not the case, what's £125 going to get you when your trying to pay for a wedding?? My point is if it was me i would borrower the money off a family member or even a small loan rather than some guy who i had never met even though he say's he trust's him 10000%. If im still missing the point im sure you will put me right! Posted by tallboy
Wasnt for all the family, was for just my fiancee and myself. That said, I made £700 profit first month but had to withdraw it.
Therefor, stake money is simply to get back in the game. There is no way I am borrowing money in order to play poker, no way at all. This isnt a loan, this is a business deal with risk on both sides.
In Response to Re: Staking deals, the lowdown, : Dude dont really know what your problem is, saying people dont know what they are talking about... mr white plays some low stake cash games so he obviously will have £125, he might not now, but im sure he will before long. You can go from £10-£125 in 2 weeks playing £3.30 dyms. Mr white wanted oppinions etc... so its not really kl to shoot down everyone else. So what do you recommend, i assume you do know what you are talking about? Posted by BlackFish3
Am not shooting everyone else down, i'm simply saying that if yr gonna make statements and give advice to someone it should be backed up with facts. You saying playing DYM's for 2 weeks is just a sweeping statement without saying level, expected ROI, number of games needed etc. Saying he might not have 125 now but he soon will have is exactly what i'm talking about. He DOESN'T have 125 now...... and even if he did....... he still wouldn't be able to afford to play £30nl..... which is why he's considering a staking deal. Also, playing DYM sng's is a sure fire way to demolish what is a good cash game.
Am not saying yr wrong..... am saying the comments you make aren't relevant to OP's questions
As someone with no experience of staking deals, I find this whole thread totally impossible to understand.
Poker or any form of gambling must be played at a level that can be afforded.
I have worked hard to build a bankroll over three years, and to me it is sacred. I try not to think about it as spendable cash at all.
Yes, there have been times when I have taken money from my bankroll to fund other things, but I have never reduced it to a level where I cannot play the poker games I want to play, or to a point where I feel any financial pressure on it.
The thought of playing with someone elses money does not appeal at all. I dont need any outside pressures on my game.
I would far sooner face the challenge of rebuilding it from £50/100 of my own money.
In Response to Re: Staking deals, the lowdown, : I agree. This has gone so far from the OP tbh. When I started this post it was because I didnt know anything about staking and wanted to know if it was a good deal or not. Thread may as well be closed, after my replies to latest posts I wont reply again. Thanks to all for advice. Posted by MrWh1te
I thought t was a good debate myself i respect Cottlads comments hes a fine poker player nobody was getting out of order just a good debate. Im not saying im right its just how I see it thats the whole point of a forum. Hope everything goes well for you Mr White.
In Response to Re: Staking deals, the lowdown, : Am not shooting everyone else down, i'm simply saying that if yr gonna make statements and give advice to someone it should be backed up with facts. You saying playing DYM's for 2 weeks is just a sweeping statement without saying level, expected ROI, number of games needed etc. Saying he might not have 125 now but he soon will have is exactly what i'm talking about. He DOESN'T have 125 now...... and even if he did....... he still wouldn't be able to afford to play £30nl..... which is why he's considering a staking deal. Also, playing DYM sng's is a sure fire way to demolish what is a good cash game. Am not saying yr wrong..... am saying the comments you make aren't relevant to OP's questions Posted by cottlad
1. My reference to playing dyms was not to suggest to him to do that with exact figures, I was merely trying to show that a roll of £125 can be relatively easily reached by just starting from a small amount in less than a month for a good player, which he obviously is.
2. He is not considering a staking deal in order to play 30nl, this deal will leave him with a bankroll of 125, thats 4 buy ins at 30nl... no where near enough to play 30nl.
3. Again reference to dyms was just an example of how a good player can easily build a roll. They do not demolish a good cash game at all, but they do stunt a poker player's growth imo. But they have use in building a roll easily with low risk.
4. To summarise, the relevance of my comments are to suggest to mr white that he can easily get to a roll of 125 (which he would be left with after the staking deal) from a small amount in a short space of time, considering he won 600 in a month. So because of that I dont think a staking deal is at all necessary. That's the point i am trying to get across, a staking deal leaving you with a roll of only £125 is unnecessary imo as i am sure he will easily be able to build a roll himself quickly enough and be back to his normal stakes etc.
In Response to Re: Staking deals, the lowdown, : I thought t was a good debate myself i respect Cottlads comments hes a fine poker player nobody was getting out of order just a good debate. Im not saying im right its just how I see it thats the whole point of a forum. Hope everything goes well for you Mr White. Posted by tallboy
+1 apologies to highjacking mr whites thread with this debate.
But debates are surely beneficial, only when people resort to things like personal attacks it becomes an argument really.
In Response to Re: Staking deals, the lowdown, : +1 apologies to highjacking mr whites thread with this debate. But debates are surely beneficial, only when people resort to things like personal attacks it becomes an argument really. Posted by BlackFish3
I dont think its hijacked and i will carry on reading it still
Comments
Enough said
You can go from £10-£125 in 2 weeks playing £3.30 dyms.
Mr white wanted oppinions etc... so its not really kl to shoot down everyone else.
So what do you recommend, i assume you do know what you are talking about?
Thanks to all for advice.
Therefor, stake money is simply to get back in the game. There is no way I am borrowing money in order to play poker, no way at all. This isnt a loan, this is a business deal with risk on both sides.
Saying he might not have 125 now but he soon will have is exactly what i'm talking about. He DOESN'T have 125 now...... and even if he did....... he still wouldn't be able to afford to play £30nl..... which is why he's considering a staking deal.
Also, playing DYM sng's is a sure fire way to demolish what is a good cash game.
Am not saying yr wrong..... am saying the comments you make aren't relevant to OP's questions
As someone with no experience of staking deals, I find this whole thread totally impossible to understand.
Poker or any form of gambling must be played at a level that can be afforded.
I have worked hard to build a bankroll over three years, and to me it is sacred. I try not to think about it as spendable cash at all.
Yes, there have been times when I have taken money from my bankroll to fund other things, but I have never reduced it to a level where I cannot play the poker games I want to play, or to a point where I feel any financial pressure on it.
The thought of playing with someone elses money does not appeal at all. I dont need any outside pressures on my game.
I would far sooner face the challenge of rebuilding it from £50/100 of my own money.
Hope everything goes well for you Mr White.
u can all continue, i just wont
2. He is not considering a staking deal in order to play 30nl, this deal will leave him with a bankroll of 125, thats 4 buy ins at 30nl... no where near enough to play 30nl.
3. Again reference to dyms was just an example of how a good player can easily build a roll. They do not demolish a good cash game at all, but they do stunt a poker player's growth imo. But they have use in building a roll easily with low risk.
4. To summarise, the relevance of my comments are to suggest to mr white that he can easily get to a roll of 125 (which he would be left with after the staking deal) from a small amount in a short space of time, considering he won 600 in a month. So because of that I dont think a staking deal is at all necessary. That's the point i am trying to get across, a staking deal leaving you with a roll of only £125 is unnecessary imo as i am sure he will easily be able to build a roll himself quickly enough and be back to his normal stakes etc.
But debates are surely beneficial, only when people resort to things like personal attacks it becomes an argument really.