zinzir
Legend
Silver Level
I have noticed several threads opened by people asking for staking, looking for backers. The sums of money were pretty modest and they wanted to trade a percentage of the buy-in in exchange for the same percentage of the potential winnings. They posted a description of their history highlighting their poker skills and personal worthiness. Also, after backers found, the player had to report to them about the playing, and they were not always happy with his timing or quality, in one case even suspecting him of trying to run away with their money.
What I don't understand is the rationale behind this type of staking. Why would someone go through all that instead of simply playing a lower buy-in tournament and paying the full buy-in himself? A lower buy-in tournament or tournaments would be, at least theoretically, easier to win and the player would not have to spent time and energy to advertise for the stake, take care of financial transactions (Paypal even charges the recipient a fee, if I'm not mistaken) or report to any backers.
I understand staking for a player who is broke and a backer pays him the buy-ins in exchange for a percentage of his potential winnings until he gets back on his feet. It makes sense, the backer pays the stake recipient for his work at the poker table, and there is an incentive to play as well as possible since he receives a percentage of the winnings. But the type of staking I saw here on Cardschat trades a percentage of buy-in for the exact same percentage of the winnings, so all the extra work and responsibility for the stake recipient, besides the actual playing, is completely free. So again, why do all that instead of playing a lower buy-in?
What I don't understand is the rationale behind this type of staking. Why would someone go through all that instead of simply playing a lower buy-in tournament and paying the full buy-in himself? A lower buy-in tournament or tournaments would be, at least theoretically, easier to win and the player would not have to spent time and energy to advertise for the stake, take care of financial transactions (Paypal even charges the recipient a fee, if I'm not mistaken) or report to any backers.
I understand staking for a player who is broke and a backer pays him the buy-ins in exchange for a percentage of his potential winnings until he gets back on his feet. It makes sense, the backer pays the stake recipient for his work at the poker table, and there is an incentive to play as well as possible since he receives a percentage of the winnings. But the type of staking I saw here on Cardschat trades a percentage of buy-in for the exact same percentage of the winnings, so all the extra work and responsibility for the stake recipient, besides the actual playing, is completely free. So again, why do all that instead of playing a lower buy-in?