Tuesday, November 10, 2009

WSOP ME Backing is for Suckers?

Backing somebody in the WSOP ME has got to be the worst investment you could possibly make. I am saying this now, as once again we have a backed winner making it look like easy money to the ill informed. Lets look at it from a pure economic perspective. Poker is not a zero-sum game. There is a significant rake in the ME that will need to be overcome. Most backing agreements are not 100% either. For example this year's winner is paying out 50% based on 100% backing from what I understand. So you need to overcome the rake and then double your money on top of that to break even. Now lets look at who is entering the ME. Sure we have a bunch of donks that lucksacked through an online donkalite, or rich/celeb types who don't care about the 10k. Then you got your part timers, pros, wannabe pros and the like. Most real pros can probably cover themselves. So the part-timers and wannabes should be decent winners to even take a stab at a 10k MTT. So a good portion probably saved some winnings up from cash games or whatever they play to cover their entry. Other breezed their way through a satellite on in. Out of the remaining players not in with their own winnings or a satellite win, you get your players seeking backing. Tons of losers are already in, but nobody from this group. So out of this group you pick out your gem and look for a double up plus to break even, in a marathon where anything can happen and you you will need to get a week deep for any kind of payback.

Variance is an issue in big MTTs. I get that. The problem is that backing can't possibly help. You need to run 1000s of trials to get long-term in the WSOP ME. Sorry, but you are not going to get there backing a handful of players each year. Not even close. It's just another way to gamble, and if you have 1ok to waste and you are in to that type of thing go for it. Just don't argue backing players is some long-term profitable strategy.

Labels: ,


At 12:39 PM, Blogger Hammer Player a.k.a Hoyazo said...

What about backing a guy who will only push all-in with the nuts, who will only accept investments in $1000 increments, and who recently took third place in *THE* 18k on full tilt?

At 2:57 PM, Blogger BLAARGH! said...

Kind of a silly statement, don't you think? They're just playing the odds, and obv doing it well. Their horse won... that's unusual, but not really the point. One of their horses only has to make it to the top 60 or 70 to pay off the investment for all of them, and all of these guys have a better chance than most to do that. It's like playing the stock market.

There are tons of guys out there that like backing for all kinds of reasons. Tourney poker is expensive as hell. Just because someone takes backing doesn't mean they suck as you suggest.

Read this from Devo... he says it better than I could...


At 6:01 PM, Blogger Bayne_S said...

Backing someone for a single event is just like playing the stock market with a broker commission of 105%.

Taking backing is a no brainer for one event.

It's the long term arrangements with make-up that really introduce some angst for the backee.

At 3:37 AM, Blogger Janet Hartsfield said...

Money is not seminal - stop making money!


Post a Comment

<< Home