In a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, Alexandra Berzon pulled back the curtain on the staking and swapping that goes on in the poker world.
The article covers how staking works in poker, who partakes in it, the different methods of staking, and how pervasive it is, but it stops short of asking the following critical questions: Is staking good or bad for the game, and is the pervasiveness of staking something that we should be concerned about?
Let’s get one thing straight right out of the chute, staking isn’t going anywhere.
It’s an impossible practice to police or somehow standardize, as staking deals often happen in private and if the parties involved do not want their deal to be made public nobody will ever be the wiser. There is simply no conceivable way to force players to disclose their backing arrangements, and there is simply no way to prevent players from staking or buying pieces of other players.
With that being said, there are pros and cons to staking:
The benefits of staking
Without staking there is less money in the poker economy
Without staking there would be far less money in the poker economy as players with poor money management skills would simply crash and burn and have to leave the game, while the best players (with good money management skills) would continually take money out of the poker economy and never reinvest back into the poker community.
Staking not only keeps players in action which keeps games going, but it also keeps the money won at the poker tables flowing back into the poker economy.
Without this constant reinvestment through staking there would simply be less money in the poker economy.
Without staking there would be fewer players in tournaments
Without staking there would be no possible way high-buy-in tournaments would last, and by high-buy-in I’m not just talking about Super-High-Rollers, I’m talking about tournaments with buy-ins of $5,000 and $10,000.
Poker tournaments are very difficult to beat in the long-run, and this is especially true when you’re talking about tournaments that are made up almost entirely of skilled players.
Furthermore, not only are the margins pretty slim for the vast majority of participants, but the variance is an absolute killer. Without staking and selling and swapping pieces the tournament world would be a shell of itself, and few players would have the necessary bankroll to play anything higher than $1,000 buy-in tournaments.
The cons of staking
Staking deals can lead to unintended collusion
Staking and swapping can have some serious unintended consequences for the people involved. For instance, there are a number of issues that could arise if you end up at the same table as someone you have a significant percentage of, especially at a short-handed final table.
Players can say that they will play just as hard, and their staking deals will not impact the integrity of the game, but this is simply not possible. you may not blatantly collude, but when you have 10% of another player it will certainly sway your decisions in very close, marginal spots.
You can justify to yourself that this is not colluding, but even having to entertain this thought demonstrates that the percentage of the other player you own is weighing on your mind.
Staking often leads to scams and scandals in poker
Many of the scandals and black eyes poker has received in recent years have originated with staking deals gone bad, both from the backer and the stakehorse.
Staking deals and BAP’s (Buy a Piece) tend to attract the denizens of the poker community who are looking for a handout (players who may be skilled but are often broke for one reason or another), and every time one of these players absconds with their backers’ money or fails to live up to the arrangement it paints the game in a negative light.
How casual players view staking
To the average player staking is likely seen as a form of cheating or collusion, especially when they hear stories about multiple people at a final table all having a piece of one another.
Staking, and to a lesser extent deal-making, is also part of the illusion of tournament poker. Sometimes I feel like the way tournament winners are marketed is akin to a snake oil salesman from the 19th century. In the modern poker world most “professional” tournament players have less than 50% of themselves, some as little as 10%, and many are deep in makeup.
My thoughts on staking
While staking has always been a part of the game (I’m willing to bet that the practice goes back to the days when poker was first proliferating up and down the Mississippi River) it certainly is not in the best interest of the game, and creates a myriad of problems from soft collusion to outright cheating.
There are many people would like to see it either stamped out or at least brought into the light, but it’s akin to trying to prevent “ghosting” in online poker (where another player or a coach is sitting in on someone’s online session and offering advice) there just isn’t any feasible way of doing so.
I’ll finish with this thought, in the grand scheme of things staking is not a high priority, and beyond making people aware that the practice is pervasive in poker, especially in tournaments, there is little we can do.
100% up to $3,000 Bonus
Bovada is our most recommended ONLINE CASINO and POKER ROOM for US players with excellent deposit options. Get your 100% signup bonus today.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.