Vladimir Geshkenbein finishes 62nd in ME and scams his backers

[ShadyJ]

[B]

This happens a lot. I have ended cash stakes early because I have ran really hot but I always let backers know upfront I could end it at any time.







This is just scummy imo. Sure you let them know so then they are idiots for letting you build your roll off of their money. Not that you care but I've lost alot of respect for you.

[ShadyJ]

purely theoretical here, but, i am curious -- what if the situation were different....what if a backer came to Gehkenbein and said I want my money back I am not backing you.

Is the deal unilaterally canceled?

What if Geshkenbein says, well that is fine, but you are going to have to loan me your stake because i am broke and it is too late for me to find other backers. The guy is due the stake back and nothing more?

What if the backer says that is not good enough, I want to cancel and you must pay me back now so I know I am truly out instead of being dependent on your play just to get my money back? If Geshkenbein goes ahead and plays anyway, what does Geshkenbein owe the guy? If he loses, it seems Geshkenbein still owes the guy back the stake. IF Geshkenbein wins, he owes the guy the stake. He probably doesnt owe the guy a full share in the cash, but he does probably owe the guy some compensation for the risk the guy was forced to undertake against his agreeement.

It seems like there is a potential for the freerolling to go both ways. Just interesting discussion

I actually had a situation like this. I bought a coaching session from a top 45/90 man sng player on ftp at the time. He was impressed with my play and offered me a really good stake in my favor, so I accepted. He was staking under whos now known as a scammer Nick Rainey.

After a few weeks of me crushing Nick tells the kid backing me that for the stakes I was playing he could back a bunch more people at much lower stakes, and get a much better deal with them.

I was pissed because this wasnt part of the deal, but I had to do the right thing and return the money even though it put me in a bad spot since I did other things with my roll since I was being backed.

[ShadyJ]

Don't really understand why you're still debating this.

The original backers are never going to see a dime of any of this money. I did better in the Jasep BAP then they will here & he had 2 good cashes to start it off.

[/Thread]

Thats not relevant. Its the principle that matters not the outcome. I honestly didnt care about this until i was shocked by what china said. If i ever thought the way he does i would never say the things he says on a site where he sometimes gets staked.

[Steve-O]

Don't really understand why you're still debating this.

The original backers are never going to see a dime of any of this money. I did better in the Jasep BAP then they will here & he had 2 good cashes to start it off.

[/Thread]

Thats not relevant. Its the principle that matters not the outcome. I honestly didnt care about this until i was shocked by what china said. If i ever thought the way he does i would never say the things he says on a site where he sometimes gets staked.

I kind of agree with this. Not that I think China is a scammer or even scummy as he makes it known up-front what the terms are and ending it early is mentioned (I consider him to be a pretty standup guy), I just think that he has a bit of a warped attitude on what is expected in a staking deal. You're supposed to live up to the agreement you made, not change things based on results. There is a difference between accepting the terms offered in a situation like this as a matter of practicality, and actually making the case that the scumbag has the right to do this because he fucked up.

Under this logic it would be ok to cancel a stake if another person offered you a better deal midway through it; or as Lurker1998 proposed, for a backer to demand his money back at some point. Obviously you can come to some agreement in these situations, but it doesn't mean they have the right to demand it.

A stake is a binding agreement, plain and simple, and whatever you think the "best" solution might be, it doesn't mean both sides have to go along with it. People are allowed to make "bad" decisions. If I sign a lease for a car and four months later find it at another dealership for $30 less a month I can't go in and cancel my lease. From a different angle, suppose the dealership says I can lower your payment $30 a month but I have to tack on two more months to the lease agreement? It's in your best interest to take this deal, but you don't have to.

[chinamaniac]

[B]

This happens a lot. I have ended cash stakes early because I have ran really hot but I always let backers know upfront I could end it at any time.







This is just scummy imo. Sure you let them know so then they are idiots for letting you build your roll off of their money. Not that you care but I've lost alot of respect for you.

How is it scummy if I write a clause in a cash stake and all backers agree to it and know I could quit at anytime? If someone doesn't like that they are not obligated to buy my action. I am not forcing anything on anyone.

And if I am quitting they probably made a good chunk of change which has been the case 2 times.

The first time I quit early I immediately went on a 20k downswing right after we all spit up our profits which sucked for me but backers got paid during my "running over expectation period". Second time there were 2 weeks left and it was christmas/new years and I wanted to book a solid win for all of us and took a break for the holidays. Every guy that invested was very happy that they made a lot of money and none were pissed I ended it and my biggest backer had very kind words

3rd payment received. Weekly BOA transfer limit reached. 99% received. waiting for new BOA week to start for the last small % payment.

Couldnt ask for a better stake holder. Super professional, always available, frequent daily updates and subsequent blogs.

Really cares about about keeping his investors in the loop at all times.

More trustworthy as anyone I've come across in poker. Would have no problem investing large sums again and again.

Oh, and a pretty good limit player to boot

Thanks again for letting me invest.

[ShadyJ]

How is it scummy if I write a clause in a cash stake and all backers agree to it and know I could quit at anytime? If someone doesn't like that they are not obligated to buy my action. I am not forcing anything on anyone.

And if I am quitting they probably made a good chunk of change which has been the case 2 times.

The first time I quit early I immediately went on a 20k downswing right after we all spit up our profits which sucked for me but backers got paid during my "running over expectation period". Second time there were 2 weeks left and it was christmas/new years and I wanted to book a solid win for all of us and took a break for the holidays. Every guy that invested was very happy that they made a lot of money and none were pissed I ended it and my biggest backer had very kind words

3rd payment received. Weekly BOA transfer limit reached. 99% received. waiting for new BOA week to start for the last small % payment.

Couldnt ask for a better stake holder. Super professional, always available, frequent daily updates and subsequent blogs.

Really cares about about keeping his investors in the loop at all times.

More trustworthy as anyone I've come across in poker. Would have no problem investing large sums again and again.

Oh, and a pretty good limit player to boot

Thanks again for letting me invest.

How you ran after you ended the stake means nothing. If you put in the deal if I hit such and such a number I will break off the stake then fine, but if you just put in there you can cancel whenever you want cause your ahead is just plain bad imo.

Your basically saying thanks for investing in me but Im making you too much money and me not enough so even though you helped me build my roll so I can now play the stakes I'd like to cut you out.

Theres tons of suckers you can take advantage of and they wont even know your taking advantage of them and in their fish minds their happy. More power to you I guess. I guess you look at backing kinda like poker you want to play with the fish and there may be nothing technically wrong with that its still a character flaw and lives up to the poker player stereotype imo.

If you point out a $ amount money prestake then its absolutely fine. Theres just 2 many ways this can go so lets stay on topic.

I will say if Sheets is really Sheets and he says Im wrong Im willing to take his word on it as far as the subject of this thread.

[chinamaniac]

How is it scummy if I write a clause in a cash stake and all backers agree to it and know I could quit at anytime? If someone doesn't like that they are not obligated to buy my action. I am not forcing anything on anyone.

And if I am quitting they probably made a good chunk of change which has been the case 2 times.

The first time I quit early I immediately went on a 20k downswing right after we all spit up our profits which sucked for me but backers got paid during my "running over expectation period". Second time there were 2 weeks left and it was christmas/new years and I wanted to book a solid win for all of us and took a break for the holidays. Every guy that invested was very happy that they made a lot of money and none were pissed I ended it and my biggest backer had very kind words

How you ran after you ended the stake means nothing. If you put in the deal if I hit such and such a number I will break off the stake then fine, but if you just put in there you can cancel whenever you want cause your ahead is just plain bad imo.

Your basically saying thanks for investing in me but Im making you too much money and me not enough so even though you helped me build my roll so I can now play the stakes I'd like to cut you out.

Theres tons of suckers you can take advantage of and they wont even know your taking advantage of them and in their fish minds their happy. More power to you I guess. I guess you look at backing kinda like poker you want to play with the fish and there may be nothing technically wrong with that its still a character flaw and lives up to the poker player stereotype imo.

If you point out a $ amount money prestake then its absolutely fine. Theres just 2 many ways this can go so lets stay on topic.

I will say if Sheets is really Sheets and he says Im wrong on Im willing to take his word on it as far as the subjest of this thread.

If you put in the deal if I hit such and such a number I will break off the stake then fine, but if you just put in there you can cancel whenever you want cause your ahead is just plain bad imo.

That's why when I write a BAP I write it out very clear and if people are turned off by that then they don't have to invest but most people like to make money so it is never a problem. Also keep in mind I offer makeup too. If I were down I would never quit and say "sorry guys I found a new backer". I would never quit down and run to a new backer or any bullshit like that and have finished every cash Bap in the green.

If you want to label the backers as "fish and suckers" that's your opinion. But a lot of the action that I have booked has been from experienced and knowledgeable backers and a couple of large staking syndicates have bought large pieces. They are looking to profit and I always give them profit.

And yes it is the real "sheets". We already got Reggimans response and I am looking forward to hear what sheets has to say

[Steve-O]

How you ran after you ended the stake means nothing. If you put in the deal if I hit such and such a number I will break off the stake then fine, but if you just put in there you can cancel whenever you want cause your ahead is just plain bad imo.

Your basically saying thanks for investing in me but Im making you too much money and me not enough so even though you helped me build my roll so I can now play the stakes I'd like to cut you out.

Theres tons of suckers you can take advantage of and they wont even know your taking advantage of them and in their fish minds their happy. More power to you I guess. I guess you look at backing kinda like poker you want to play with the fish and there may be nothing technically wrong with that its still a character flaw and lives up to the poker player stereotype imo.

If you point out a $ amount money prestake then its absolutely fine. Theres just 2 many ways this can go so lets stay on topic.

I will say if Sheets is really Sheets and he says Im wrong on Im willing to take his word on it as far as the subjest of this thread.

If you put in the deal if I hit such and such a number I will break off the stake then fine, but if you just put in there you can cancel whenever you want cause your ahead is just plain bad imo.

That's why when I write a BAP I write it out very clear and if people are turned off by that then they don't have to invest but most people like to make money so it is never a problem. Also keep in mind I offer makeup too. If I were down I would never quit and say "sorry guys I found a new backer". I would never quit down and run to a new backer or any bullshit like that and have finished every cash Bap in the green.

If you want to label the backers as "fish and suckers" that's your opinion. But a lot of the action that I have booked has been from experienced and knowledgeable backers and a couple of large staking syndicates have bought large pieces. They are looking to profit and I always give them profit.

And yes it is the real "sheets". We already got Reggimans response and I am looking forward to hear what sheets has to say

Reggiman's response was simply what the people should do, not what they are obligated to do

[ShadyJ]

If you put in the deal if I hit such and such a number I will break off the stake then fine, but if you just put in there you can cancel whenever you want cause your ahead is just plain bad imo.

That's why when I write a BAP I write it out very clear and if people are turned off by that then they don't have to invest but most people like to make money so it is never a problem. Also keep in mind I offer makeup too. If I were down I would never quit and say "sorry guys I found a new backer". I would never quit down and run to a new backer or any bullshit like that and have finished every cash Bap in the green.

If you want to label the backers as "fish and suckers" that's your opinion. But a lot of the action that I have booked has been from experienced and knowledgeable backers and a couple of large staking syndicates have bought large pieces. They are looking to profit and I always give them profit.

And yes it is the real "sheets". We already got Reggimans response and I am looking forward to hear what sheets has to say

Reggiman's response was simply what the people should do, not what they are obligated to do

In reality this situation is different then the typical backer horse relationship. Someone can say I backed people for 10 years and this is my opinion, but when your dealing with selling pieces of yourself there is a difference.

A Backer typically has disposible money, so getting rolled sucks but they wil be ok.

When you sell pieces your dealing with some people that dont have a huge grasp on how staking works. It may be disposible money or it may be bill money you would never know, but I would think getting rolled as a person buying pieces would hurt them more then the average backer. In reality buying a piece of someone is gambling, and some people just love to gamble even if they cant afford to.

Im not sure that it changes anything in this case but I think it should be said because when you change any terms your not trying to iron something out with 1 person who probably doesnt need the money instead of dealing with alot of people who probably do.

[ShadyJ]

How you ran after you ended the stake means nothing. If you put in the deal if I hit such and such a number I will break off the stake then fine, but if you just put in there you can cancel whenever you want cause your ahead is just plain bad imo.

Your basically saying thanks for investing in me but Im making you too much money and me not enough so even though you helped me build my roll so I can now play the stakes I'd like to cut you out.

Theres tons of suckers you can take advantage of and they wont even know your taking advantage of them and in their fish minds their happy. More power to you I guess. I guess you look at backing kinda like poker you want to play with the fish and there may be nothing technically wrong with that its still a character flaw and lives up to the poker player stereotype imo.

If you point out a $ amount money prestake then its absolutely fine. Theres just 2 many ways this can go so lets stay on topic.

I will say if Sheets is really Sheets and he says Im wrong on Im willing to take his word on it as far as the subjest of this thread.

If you put in the deal if I hit such and such a number I will break off the stake then fine, but if you just put in there you can cancel whenever you want cause your ahead is just plain bad imo.

That's why when I write a BAP I write it out very clear and if people are turned off by that then they don't have to invest but most people like to make money so it is never a problem. Also keep in mind I offer makeup too. If I were down I would never quit and say "sorry guys I found a new backer". I would never quit down and run to a new backer or any bullshit like that and have finished every cash Bap in the green.

If you want to label the backers as "fish and suckers" that's your opinion. But a lot of the action that I have booked has been from experienced and knowledgeable backers and a couple of large staking syndicates have bought large pieces. They are looking to profit and I always give them profit.

And yes it is the real "sheets". We already got Reggimans response and I am looking forward to hear what sheets has to say

If i start a bap to play 2 tournaments and I win the 1st and tell everyone hey I made you a ton of money so Im going to play the 2nd on my own. They will all be happy since they made alot of money off of their investment, but it doesnt make it right. You like to clarify that they made money, so what? thats not the point. Im spinning in circles with you so Im not going to keep going on. Unless you specify I dollar amount which it didnt seem like you did in your first post then its fine, but just because they made money and their ok with it still doesnt make it the right thing to do. We clearly have a ethical difference of opinion.

If you never lose on a stake then why would you ever need to be staked? You clearly dont do it in the goodness of your heart. Do you suck at life like alot of poker players? Just curious. Did you make cmoney money at the wsop this year?

[chinamaniac]

If you put in the deal if I hit such and such a number I will break off the stake then fine, but if you just put in there you can cancel whenever you want cause your ahead is just plain bad imo.

That's why when I write a BAP I write it out very clear and if people are turned off by that then they don't have to invest but most people like to make money so it is never a problem. Also keep in mind I offer makeup too. If I were down I would never quit and say "sorry guys I found a new backer". I would never quit down and run to a new backer or any bullshit like that and have finished every cash Bap in the green.

If you want to label the backers as "fish and suckers" that's your opinion. But a lot of the action that I have booked has been from experienced and knowledgeable backers and a couple of large staking syndicates have bought large pieces. They are looking to profit and I always give them profit.

And yes it is the real "sheets". We already got Reggimans response and I am looking forward to hear what sheets has to say

If i start a bap to play 2 tournaments and I win the 1st and tell everyone hey I made you a ton of money so Im going to play the 2nd on my own. They will all be happy since they made alot of money off of their investment, but it doesnt make it right. You like to clarify that they made money, so what? thats not the point. Im spinning in circles with you so Im not going to keep going on. Unless you specify I dollar amount which it didnt seem like you did in your first post then its fine, but just because they made money and their ok with it still doesnt make it the right thing to do. We clearly have a ethical difference of opinion.

If you never lose on a stake then why would you ever need to be staked? You clearly dont do it in the goodness of your heart. Do you suck at life like alot of poker players? Just curious. Did you make cmoney money at the wsop this year?

They will all be happy since they made alot of money off of their investment, but it doesnt make it right. You like to clarify that they made money, so what
It doesn't make it wrong or right. It is what it is. I set terms, I offer people a chance to buy pieces. They buy at the terms that are set or they don't buy at all. I am not forcing anything on anyone. Some guys have asked me to cash out early when I was up and I did that for them no problem


Unless you specify I dollar amount which it didnt seem like you did in your first post then its fine

The terms are I can quit when I want to. Backers either agree to that or they don't.

I have never packed up and left a stake after a week or 2 . I have been asked a few times before it started if I am going to "hit and run" and I tell them the same thing- My plan is to play it out but I can quit at anytime for whatever reason. I ended 2 early (about 2 weeks left on each) both near Christmas and never a complaint. They locked up their wins , got paid, I thanked them, they thanked me and we move on


We clearly have a ethical difference of opinion.

This isn't an ethical debate. There is no debate because my terms are clear and both sides know that. it may be different if someone came to me and offered the stake and set their terms but that's not what has happened here.

If you never lose on a stake then why would you ever need to be staked? You clearly dont do it in the goodness of your heart. Do you suck at life like alot of poker players?
1. After Black Friday I vacationed a lot (which cost a lot), I cut back volume and took a semi break and after a layoff I was rusty/didn't play well + ran bad in 6 max games at my highest stakes at the time. So I picked up a stake to cover some sites where I wasn't rolled to play

2. I do not suck at life. I dont spend excess money, I don't gamble any money that will impact me negatively and I rarely drink and do not use drugs.

3. Even though I ran some stakes I never went broke. I did it to make more money on sites I was not rolled to play.


Just curious. Did you make cmoney money at the wsop this year?

No, but he and I knew going in the chances of me cashing were slim as only what?- 10 % or so of the field cashes.

When I said every "cash stake" has been profitable that meant for cash game stakes

[ShadyJ]

The terms are I can quit when I want to. Backers either agree to that or they don't.

Well clearly if thats the case then its ok. In your original post you just said I ran hot so I stopped the stake early, but if stopping whenever you want is in the stake and you can find dumb enough people to agree then more power to you

[chinamaniac]

The terms are I can quit when I want to. Backers either agree to that or they don't.

Well clearly if thats the case then its ok. In your original post you just said I ran hot so I stopped the stake early, but if stopping whenever you want is in the stake and you can find dumb enough people to agree then more power to you

Running hot is always good but just one of many factors when I have decided to end my runs.

I still don't see why you would think they are "dumb". Even if the situation were reversed and I am the guy putting up the money let's say for Druff. Druff runs 4x or 5x his normal win rate. I'm happy for both me and him if he decides to lock it up. Win win for both sides.

[Steve-O]

The terms are I can quit when I want to. Backers either agree to that or they don't.

Well clearly if thats the case then its ok. In your original post you just said I ran hot so I stopped the stake early, but if stopping whenever you want is in the stake and you can find dumb enough people to agree then more power to you

Running hot is always good but just one of many factors when I have decided to end my runs.

I still don't see why you would think they are "dumb". Even if the situation were reversed and I am the guy putting up the money let's say for Druff. Druff runs 4x or 5x his normal win rate. I'm happy for both me and him if he decides to lock it up. Win win for both sides.

This is true for cash games as the volume you put in will eventually even out and bring things back to the mean, but tournament staking is a different animal. Imagine if you staked Tom Schneider this year and he ended it after his first win, which is why I've never seen a tournament stake with an early release clause in it unless it is for very specific reasons --I'm sure they are out there.

[ShadyJ]

The terms are I can quit when I want to. Backers either agree to that or they don't.

Well clearly if thats the case then its ok. In your original post you just said I ran hot so I stopped the stake early, but if stopping whenever you want is in the stake and you can find dumb enough people to agree then more power to you

Running hot is always good but just one of many factors when I have decided to end my runs.

I still don't see why you would think they are "dumb". Even if the situation were reversed and I am the guy putting up the money let's say for Druff. Druff runs 4x or 5x his normal win rate. I'm happy for both me and him if he decides to lock it up. Win win for both sides.

Cause your just using them to build your roll. Yes they're using you as well, but they take all the risk. I can only speak for me, but I never quit my backers no matter what I was up because I just felt a sense of loyalty to them. I might play different stakes with my own funds, but I would never cut them out because it was usually a time that I needed that stake money to be able to make money to pay my bills, so I just felt obligated to the person who in my eyes helped me out. In reality thy were just using me to make money, so maybe this is a leak on my end.

[Hockey Guy]

Running hot is always good but just one of many factors when I have decided to end my runs.

I still don't see why you would think they are "dumb". Even if the situation were reversed and I am the guy putting up the money let's say for Druff. Druff runs 4x or 5x his normal win rate. I'm happy for both me and him if he decides to lock it up. Win win for both sides.

Cause your just using them to build your roll. Yes they're using you as well, but they take all the risk. I can only speak for me, but I never quit my backers no matter what I was up because I just felt a sense of loyalty to them. I might play different stakes with my own funds, but I would never cut them out because it was usually a time that I needed that stake money to be able to make money to pay my bills, so I just felt obligated to the person who in my eyes helped me out. In reality thy were just using me to make money, so maybe this is a leak on my end.

You're lecturing somebody on ethics & then you post something as stupid as this?

As a backer this would be way worse than quitting a stake a couple weeks early to protect a profit for everybody.

I can only assume you meant to say "I might go onto a different network than the one I'm playing the stake on & play some with my own funds as long as I had already disclosed to the backers that any play on this network was not part of the stake". Even with this disclosure it would, IMO, be a slightly unethical(only slightly because you disclosed it, but the backer's may not totally understand the implications of this) thing to do since it could be perceived that you really are just using the backer's money to play 100% for yourself. How the fuck would anybody know where the money came from that enabled you to play on this other network 100% for yourself?

If you meant you're gonna play on the same network, whether on the same account or a different account on a different skin, you've lost all moral high ground because that would be blatantly unethical whether you've disclosed it or not. Either way, I think you've lost the moral high ground.

Just my 2 cents.

[ShadyJ]

Cause your just using them to build your roll. Yes they're using you as well, but they take all the risk. I can only speak for me, but I never quit my backers no matter what I was up because I just felt a sense of loyalty to them. I might play different stakes with my own funds, but I would never cut them out because it was usually a time that I needed that stake money to be able to make money to pay my bills, so I just felt obligated to the person who in my eyes helped me out. In reality thy were just using me to make money, so maybe this is a leak on my end.

You're lecturing somebody on ethics & then you post something as stupid as this?

As a backer this would be way worse than quitting a stake a couple weeks early to protect a profit for everybody.

I can only assume you meant to say "I might go onto a different network than the one I'm playing the stake on & play some with my own funds as long as I had already disclosed to the backers that any play on this network was not part of the stake". Even with this disclosure it would, IMO, be a slightly unethical(only slightly because you disclosed it, but the backer's may not totally understand the implications of this) thing to do since it could be perceived that you really are just using the backer's money to play 100% for yourself. How the fuck would anybody know where the money came from that enabled you to play on this other network 100% for yourself?

If you meant you're gonna play on the same network, whether on the same account or a different account on a different skin, you've lost all moral high ground because that would be blatantly unethical whether you've disclosed it or not. Either way, I think you've lost the moral high ground.

Just my 2 cents.

wtf are you talking about? I have always had set in stone limits that I could play whole backed. Whatever I do with my own money is fine which is why you play different stakes so its not confused with the deal. You're completely looking like an idiot for even posting what you said.

[Steve-O]

Cause your just using them to build your roll. Yes they're using you as well, but they take all the risk. I can only speak for me, but I never quit my backers no matter what I was up because I just felt a sense of loyalty to them. I might play different stakes with my own funds, but I would never cut them out because it was usually a time that I needed that stake money to be able to make money to pay my bills, so I just felt obligated to the person who in my eyes helped me out. In reality thy were just using me to make money, so maybe this is a leak on my end.

You're lecturing somebody on ethics & then you post something as stupid as this?

As a backer this would be way worse than quitting a stake a couple weeks early to protect a profit for everybody.

I can only assume you meant to say "I might go onto a different network than the one I'm playing the stake on & play some with my own funds as long as I had already disclosed to the backers that any play on this network was not part of the stake". Even with this disclosure it would, IMO, be a slightly unethical(only slightly because you disclosed it, but the backer's may not totally understand the implications of this) thing to do since it could be perceived that you really are just using the backer's money to play 100% for yourself. How the fuck would anybody know where the money came from that enabled you to play on this other network 100% for yourself?

If you meant you're gonna play on the same network, whether on the same account or a different account on a different skin, you've lost all moral high ground because that would be blatantly unethical whether you've disclosed it or not. Either way, I think you've lost the moral high ground.

Just my 2 cents.

Just a guess but I think he means he plays different games after he has put in his quota for the stake. So if the stake calls for him to play 5,000 hands of $5/$10 every week, it's ok to play your 5,000 hands and then play $10/$20 on your own dime after the fact. So not an instead of, but post obligations. Again just guessing at what he meant

[ShadyJ]

Cause your just using them to build your roll. Yes they're using you as well, but they take all the risk. I can only speak for me, but I never quit my backers no matter what I was up because I just felt a sense of loyalty to them. I might play different stakes with my own funds, but I would never cut them out because it was usually a time that I needed that stake money to be able to make money to pay my bills, so I just felt obligated to the person who in my eyes helped me out. In reality thy were just using me to make money, so maybe this is a leak on my end.

You're lecturing somebody on ethics & then you post something as stupid as this?

As a backer this would be way worse than quitting a stake a couple weeks early to protect a profit for everybody.

I can only assume you meant to say "I might go onto a different network than the one I'm playing the stake on & play some with my own funds as long as I had already disclosed to the backers that any play on this network was not part of the stake". Even with this disclosure it would, IMO, be a slightly unethical(only slightly because you disclosed it, but the backer's may not totally understand the implications of this) thing to do since it could be perceived that you really are just using the backer's money to play 100% for yourself. How the fuck would anybody know where the money came from that enabled you to play on this other network 100% for yourself?

If you meant you're gonna play on the same network, whether on the same account or a different account on a different skin, you've lost all moral high ground because that would be blatantly unethical whether you've disclosed it or not. Either way, I think you've lost the moral high ground.

Just my 2 cents.

Your post is just retarted. It makes no sense at all. If a backer had a problem with me spending my money I earned in any way I see fit then I wouldnt be with them in the 1st place.

Heres an example of what i did for a few different backers that were totally aware and had no problem with it whatsoever.

I was staked for 45/90 mans on ftp up to $26, so anything I played that was a 45 or 90 man up to $26 was part of the deal. I played cash on the side and I would play some $75 45 mans with my own money and had nothing to do with the stake. I'm lost on how this takes away my moral ground which I never claimed to have anyways. I have a difference of opinion then China thats all i even admitted I could be wrong about the way I look at it. If this is your way of standing up for your buddy you failed miserably because everyone on the planet knows its completely exceptable. Well everyone except you I guess. I could care less what anyone on here thinks of me ecepet Sonafag of course

[ShadyJ]

You're lecturing somebody on ethics & then you post something as stupid as this?

As a backer this would be way worse than quitting a stake a couple weeks early to protect a profit for everybody.

I can only assume you meant to say "I might go onto a different network than the one I'm playing the stake on & play some with my own funds as long as I had already disclosed to the backers that any play on this network was not part of the stake". Even with this disclosure it would, IMO, be a slightly unethical(only slightly because you disclosed it, but the backer's may not totally understand the implications of this) thing to do since it could be perceived that you really are just using the backer's money to play 100% for yourself. How the fuck would anybody know where the money came from that enabled you to play on this other network 100% for yourself?

If you meant you're gonna play on the same network, whether on the same account or a different account on a different skin, you've lost all moral high ground because that would be blatantly unethical whether you've disclosed it or not. Either way, I think you've lost the moral high ground.

Just my 2 cents.

Just a guess but I think he means he plays different games after he has put in his quota for the stake. So if the stake calls for him to play 5,000 hands of $5/$10 every week, it's ok to play your 5,000 hands and then play $10/$20 on your own dime after the fact. So not an instead of, but post obligations. Again just guessing at what he meant

I never really had any quotas because I played insane volume and my backers knew that.