PDA

View Full Version : Jelly



stickman
11-10-2004, 11:29 PM
If you buy someone in the calcutta, and they don't buy part of themselves, if they win, what do you think is fair? Is it a percentage or just whatever feels fair. Of course, you could just give nothing, but it wouldn't promote much good will with the player.

Rod
11-11-2004, 01:24 AM
What ever you feel like at the time. They should be grateful, no matter the outcome. If they really felt like they should have won or placed, then they should have bet on themselve. End of story.

Rod

Jimmy B
11-11-2004, 02:20 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote stickman:</font><hr> If you buy someone in the calcutta, and they don't buy part of themselves, if they win, what do you think is fair? Is it a percentage or just whatever feels fair. Of course, you could just give nothing, but it wouldn't promote much good will with the player. <hr /></blockquote>


I always try to give a small piece back, like 10% of the profit. But how bout I reverse it and say what do you do when the guy doesn't buy 1/2 and then screws you over at the end by splitting but letting the other guy take first for calcutta reasons? This has happened many more times then not and it's caused me to harm certain people and now I no longer participate unless I know the player well.

JB

SpiderMan
11-11-2004, 06:43 AM
They made the choice. By not buying half of themself, they are basically saying you overpaid and they don't want to share any of the risk. It's never happened to me because I'm careful not to overpay, but if it did I wouldn't give up anything.

I have been on the other end, though - someone greatly overpaid for me in a calcutta (must have been a case of mistaken identity) and I didn't see any reason to ease the burden of his bad bargain because I had nothing to do with his mistake. On the other hand, if I had won or placed, he would have been entitled to the full payback because the risk was all his.

SpiderMan

Chris Cass
11-11-2004, 08:30 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote stickman:</font><hr> If you buy someone in the calcutta, and they don't buy part of themselves, if they win, what do you think is fair? Is it a percentage or just whatever feels fair. Of course, you could just give nothing, but it wouldn't promote much good will with the player. <hr /></blockquote>

Hi Jim,

Your such a classy guy but I must disagree with you. If you buy that person and that person chooses not to take half of themselves then, tough toenails. You keep everything and don't feel one ounce of guilt for it either.

Regards,

C.C.~~just the way it is.

stickman
11-11-2004, 09:56 AM
Thanks for the replies. This is an unusual occurence. Usually, a person would buy at least half of themselves if they thought they had a chance to win. I bought this person once before, and he asked me if I was going to jelly him, if he won, and I told him sure. He didn't win though. This time he did and I gave him a cut. He was happy with the cut. I just wondered what was typical. His bid went pretty cheap, so it was a good bargain. I probably, won't bid on him again though. Undoubtedly, this will be routine for him, and will feel entitled to a cut when he wins.

SPetty
11-11-2004, 10:20 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote stickman:</font><hr> I probably, won't bid on him again though. Undoubtedly, this will be routine for him, and will feel entitled to a cut when he wins.<hr /></blockquote>Or... Go ahead and buy him again, then seek him out and ask him ahead of time if he wants to buy half. That might give him a clue that maybe you're not as willing to just give him your money. So then if he wins and comes around looking for his jelly, you can say "Hey, you had your chance!"

Jimmy B
11-11-2004, 10:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> They made the choice. By not buying half of themself, they are basically saying you overpaid and they don't want to share any of the risk. It's never happened to me because I'm careful not to overpay, SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>

I could not disagree more, I don't think it has anything to do with OVER paying, I think most players are broke and the better the player the more broke in most cases. I also feel that most of the top players are so used to getting backed they don't care to take any risk they don't have to. I am still amazed that some of these top guys want to be staked in these tournaments, they are almost a lock to get their cash back in most big events. I think also in most calcutta cases the out put of cash is to high for the reward. I was at a Joss Event 2 weeks ago and the first blind bid went for over $700, I think first place only paid around $1,500, to me that's a bad bet, and I think most players agree with me.

JB

Deeman2
11-11-2004, 11:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> They made the choice. By not buying half of themself, they are basically saying you overpaid and they don't want to share any of the risk. It's never happened to me because I'm careful not to overpay, but if it did I wouldn't give up anything.

I have been on the other end, though - someone greatly overpaid for me in a calcutta (must have been a case of mistaken identity) and I didn't see any reason to ease the burden of his bad bargain because I had nothing to do with his mistake. On the other hand, if I had won or placed, he would have been entitled to the full payback because the risk was all his.

SpiderMan <hr /></blockquote>

I now only buy guys who look strangly familiar to me and go for a low price. I guess I'm getting to be an old nit.

Deeman
hey, it worked in Atlanta last year....

Sid_Vicious
11-11-2004, 11:30 AM
If he was A-hole who seemed like he deserved it, heck no! If I bought someone and they were entertaining and/or meek but won, I would find it impossible to let them go un-rewarded, at least with an offer of something top shelf from the bar. I am the type to appreciate those who never ask or assume rather than someone you know by association to be self centered. It would all depend on the person, but I'd agree with Spiderman also...they knew their options when they passed the 1/2 buy back, so there's no obligation to do anything at all if you don't want to, perfectly ok...sid

Rod
11-11-2004, 01:28 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I have been on the other end, though - someone greatly overpaid for me in a calcutta (must have been a case of mistaken identity) <hr /></blockquote>

Well you do look a lot like Corey. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif Hey a guy bid on me in a calcutta. I didn't want him especially, or any body for that matter to have half. Here I am driving the price sky high on myself. We were the only two bidding at that point. Um well, the bid got pretty high so I dropped out. I just made less money when it was time to collect. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Rod

SUPERSTAR
11-11-2004, 03:49 PM
I think i've dealt with all possible scenarios concerning this. I have seen players going for tons of cash, only to have the guy who overbid them get pissed when the player didn't want half of themselves. Like they fully expected them to take half themselves, and that somehow factored in to them going bananas in the first place when it came to bidding.

I asked this question to many when i was still wet behind the ears, but the player who came up with the answer that made the most sense, was GINKY.

I had watched 4 top players go for $500 each at a joss in long island a while ago and the rest of the field go for Squat. When i was talking with Ginky, i had asked him why he didn't take half of himself.

He replied that most of the time, it comes down to someones ODDS on the money.
If your going to pay $100 dollars to play, and you stand to win say $1700 if you snap off the event, that's 17 times your initial investment.
Why then would someone want to take a piece of a $500 calcutta bid, when first is only say $1200.
He said it was crazy that the open bids for the calcutta would be 1/3 the first place prize money.

How do you think the guy in D.C. felt when he payed like $2000 for Parica in the One Pocket event, only to have the rest of the room bid basically nothing, so when Parica WON, The guy who had him in the calcutta got paid $2007.

Anyway, i think the only time that i've felt the need to give someone a handout when they didn't buy half of themselves, was when they were Broke. (Been on both ends of this scenario)

I remember i bought a guy for like $30 in some local event, and when i asked the guy if he wanted half of himself, he was like...you know...i'd love to take half of myself, but i can't afford it. I only have enough for the tournament. (which he had borrowed)
I watched him go ask 2 people and get shot down. So he turned to me and shrugged his shoulders in a "i tried/what can you do/oh well/don't worry about it" type of way.
He then proceeded to rip the tournament up, and after everything was done. I tossed him $20 and took him out to eat. I figured it was the least i could do considering he played his nuts off.
It can see someone who overpayed having a different outlook on things, but this was a cheap bid, and a great profit margin, that i WOULDN'T have won if he didn't play well. He earned it in my book.

SUPERSTAR

stickman
11-11-2004, 04:27 PM
I think I feel somewhat like you in the scenio you described. If the guy is a tightwad and doesn't buy half of himself, that's different than the guy who doesn't have the money. In that case, I feel good giving a bonus for the great job.

Chris Cass
11-11-2004, 04:38 PM
Hi Jimbo,

I have a few things I'd like to point out about buying half oneself in the cal that might give you a little more to think about. Not trying to be a smart guy but just a different look at things is all.

Mark Wilson never buys himself in the cals at all. He has one many of the tourneys over at Ride the Nine in Bloomington. He won it so much that they actually listed, no pros. He doesn't buy himselfr because of the added pressure he feels it brings.

Jamie Baraks is another. He'll let someone else buy him and sometimes works a deal with them. He might have picked this up from Mark, I don't know?

Some can't afford it either after the cost of lodging and entry fees and some want to never put up a dime and whatever they make is all profit. Not really but that's they way some do look at it.

Some guys like Whitey Walker don't even start his bid on himself for the usual 10 bucks and bids a hundred right off the bat. He does this at his tourneys to beef up the cal to keep everyone coming back, I'm sure.

So basically, everyone has different reasons for doing the things they do. It's hard to narrow it down to one or two reasons. Myself, I have gone for big doe and been a blind draw and also have gone for $5. and that time I will always remember. lol

The way I see it is according to the amount of money I have on me at the time. I usually pay my own entry and gas, food, hotel if needed and although I do lioke to buy myself in the cal. I might not be able to and feel comfortable. I usually will buy myself for 1/2 anything under 100.

I just don't like some who are my friends that are just trying to out bid me. I also won't buy myself unless there's enough spots paid. If there's 4 spots paid, I'll do it. I don't care who's in the tourney as long as it pays down to 4, I'm ok with that.

Some guys I know feel that if the6y're not willing to buy themselves that it shows that they have no confidence in themselves. I think that's a bunch of baloney myself.

Regards,

C.C.~~DCC coming up for you soon JB.

SUPERSTAR
11-11-2004, 11:52 PM
Sometimes it's not about being a tightwad. I know people who don't buy themselves or a piece, cause they think they are mushing themselves. Like if they buy themselves, they are gonna get bad rolls and have bad luck.
And yet others who just come to play in the tournament and want nothing to do with any calcutta. EVEN if they go for $10. It just doesn't figure into their plan.

But reading this thread it seems apparent to me that the only people that get upset when their horse doesn't take half of themselves, are the people who have either overpaid, people who don't get any money back when their horse loses, or people who are tightwads themselves.

Who in their right mind is gonna complain if they can steal one of the favorites for say....$10. Why on earth would anyone be mad if the guy didn't want any of themselves.
But......I CAN see some idiot who went ballistic during the bidding get pissed when he pays $200 for someone, and gets stuck with the whole bill.
If you can't afford the price, you shouldn't be bidding in the first place.

Personally, i think the calcutta is a waste of time. Taints to many things if you ask me. They should have a separate room where the people involved with the calcutta can hang out and tv monitors to watch the tournament from.
Can't stand it when someone buys you, and then STALKS you throughout the tournament. Sitting right by your matches, sweating everything under the sun, looking like they are going to have a heart attack when you get a bad roll, or second guessing your decisions at the table.
I'll be the first to tell someone to get the hell away from my table and leave me alone if they bought me, and they are bothering me.
One guy i know that bought me got so bad, he got in an argument with my OPPONENT, so i told him to get away from me. Which he completely ignored.
So...after i had reached the cash line....(i played hard to get what i felt was a decent chunk of cash for my efforts), i then lost 2 in a row....BEFORE i reached the calcutta cash line. Teach this IDIOT some manners.

He has since learned to calm down....but someone had to teach him.
There is no reason that a spectator should get involved to try and shark someone who is playing their horse.


SUPERSTAR

stickman
11-12-2004, 12:33 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SUPERSTAR:</font><hr> Sometimes it's not about being a tightwad. I know people who don't buy themselves or a piece, cause they think they are mushing themselves. Like if they buy themselves, they are gonna get bad rolls and have bad luck.
And yet others who just come to play in the tournament and want nothing to do with any calcutta. EVEN if they go for $10. It just doesn't figure into their plan.

But reading this thread it seems apparent to me that the only people that get upset when their horse doesn't take half of themselves, are the people who have either overpaid, people who don't get any money back when their horse loses, or people who are tightwads themselves.

Who in their right mind is gonna complain if they can steal one of the favorites for say....$10. Why on earth would anyone be mad if the guy didn't want any of themselves.
But......I CAN see some idiot who went ballistic during the bidding get pissed when he pays $200 for someone, and gets stuck with the whole bill.
If you can't afford the price, you shouldn't be bidding in the first place.

<hr /></blockquote>

I'm not sure I understand your reply, but I certainly agree that people that can't afford to gamble should forgo. I've found myself there many times. As for bidders, hawking over the match, I have no problem with interested observers, but they should be just that. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif I didn't mean to say that anyone that plays in a tournament and doesn't bid on themselves or buy half of themselves is a tightwad. I have a friend that never does. He is an excellent player, and a doctor. I don't know his reasons, I just know he never does.

Jimmy B
11-12-2004, 06:46 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chris Cass:</font><hr> Hi Jimbo,


Some guys I know feel that if the6y're not willing to buy themselves that it shows that they have no confidence in themselves. I think that's a bunch of baloney myself.

Regards,

C.C.~~DCC coming up for you soon JB. <hr /></blockquote>

I agree with most of what you said, I never thought it was a sign of no confidence, like I said in my post it's really a case of a bad bet most of the time. Again take the last Joss event Danny B went for over 700, if he didn't finish first it was a loser, second paid out 900, so the $350 he had to lay to get $100 IF he finished 2nd really isn't worth it. Specially if you figure he is laying $100 Entry to get 2K (give or take) in the tournament. I never fault a guy who doesn't buy 1/2, as a matter of fact I don't really care it's the people who pull moves at the end based on the calcutta that piss me off, when I play in a tournament I play to win, I don't ever care about the cash (maybe I'm lucky that way) but it's about more then the money. People who are money driven and have no pride piss me off. If someone told me I could win the DCC and get $100 or go 1 and out and make 5K I'd take the win any day of the week, maybe that's just me. I'm pretty sure I'll go 1 and out and lose $200 ;-)

JB

Angel_R
11-12-2004, 08:36 PM
Great Discussion Guys! Kind of like a Calcutta 101! /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif