Team payout

[DealornoDeal]

I am starting a team and have heard the best way to distribute payout to the players is to divide the amount of $ delegated to the players/hours played.

that number would equal 1 "share", and players get paid 1 "share" for every hour they played.

So, is the denominator the total number of hours played by everyone? So like...

Player 1: 10 hours
Player 2: 9 hours
Player 3: 11 hours

30 hours total?


And 2, how do teams do it when they pay the players who play better more than players who lose more? How can u even prove they are playing better? Could just be standard deviation

 

[mjbballar23]

I am starting a team and have heard the best way to distribute payout to the players is to divide the amount of $ delegated to the players/hours played.

that number would equal 1 "share", and players get paid 1 "share" for every hour they played.

So, is the denominator the total number of hours played by everyone? So like...

Player 1: 10 hours
Player 2: 9 hours
Player 3: 11 hours

30 hours total?


And 2, how do teams do it when they pay the players who play better more than players who lose more? How can u even prove they are playing better? Could just be standard deviation

i would say most teams don't discriminate payout based on actual winnings. As long as everyone is playing the same game, they should be getting paid the same no matter what happends at the tables.

It really depends on how you team plans to play though. If a spotter and big player are being used, the payout may not be equal. I have no experience with the spotter/ big player method so im not able to contribute much there; however, the MIT team made there living in this way so you might want to dig into some of their stuff to see how they distributed profits.

 

[DealornoDeal]

Well my plan was to use the spotter BP method because thats the only method I really have ever heard of, except every man for themselves which doesnt work for me as we have a backer.

 

[EasyRhino]

disclaimer: my ruminations are all theoretical:

And 2, how do teams do it when they pay the players who play better more than players who lose more? How can u even prove they are playing better? Could just be standard deviation

Ick. Paying based on individual win/loss is probably a terrible idea, there's simply too much variance. One of the books, I think it was Blackjack Attack, had a parable about this very subject. Also, if you're doing a BP approach, paying on win/loss wouldn't even make sense, as only the BP would have a realistic shot at winning.

I think, in general, you're going to want to assign hourly wages to players (as you outlined). The backer woudl probably take a big chunk, too. Even then, there's the question of if everyone gets "paid" only when you break the bank, or at regular intervals.

Which books discuss team payment schemes? Blackjack Blueprint, Ken Uston's? What else?

 

[moo321]

Well my plan was to use the spotter BP method because thats the only method I really have ever heard of, except every man for themselves which doesnt work for me as we have a backer.

Every man for himself is generally the best way to play. BP teams are for bigger banks, or if you want to really nail a juicy game without getting caught (hopefully).

 

[BJinNJ]

Which books discuss team payment schemes? Blackjack Blueprint, Ken Uston's? What else?

Blackbelt has a chapter on Team Play and considerations, too.

BJinNJ

 

[DealornoDeal]

1) Yeah, the payout would be 50% to the players, 50% to the backer.

2) How would the Every Man for Himself work on a team? Just have every member play on their own and then pool the winnings?

3) When teams break bank, do they reinvest a portion of the winnings to grow the bankroll as well as making profit for themselves?

 

[mjbballar23]

1) Yeah, the payout would be 50% to the players, 50% to the backer.

2) How would the Every Man for Himself work on a team? Just have every member play on their own and then pool the winnings?

3) When teams break bank, do they reinvest a portion of the winnings to grow the bankroll as well as making profit for themselves?

1) if your gonna be giving 50% return to the investor, you better be playing with a strong hourly EV otherwise it wont be worth your time.

2) I also think Every Man for Himself is the best team method and that is how i play. How it would probably work would be each of your team members would be given a portion of the bankroll to play. Then each of your sit/backcount at different tables and play a straight counting game. Unless you plan on playing for large stakes, this method will more than likely prove much more profitable.

3) when the bank is broken, alot of different things can happen. If the bankroll is already large and adding to it would not allow your max bet to increase, then reinvesting profits doesnt make a lot of sense. However, if the bankroll is reletively small, then increasing the bankroll with profits will help the team bring in more money because they are now able to get more money on the table and have an acceptable risk of ruin. In the end, team members are gonna want to be paid for the time they've put in so you will need to find the balance between how much to reinvest and how much to payout as profits to players.

Hopefully Bojack1 will see this thread and be able to provide some further insight. Hes been playing blackjack on a team for a long time and knows all the in's and outs of team play. Better yet, do a search and look through some of his previous posts and i think you will learn a lot as i no i did.

 

[davidpom]

For fairness i'd probably just work out winnings at the end of each week, fortnight, or month, and divide them EQUALLY amongst all team members.

I'm sure you all trust each other implicitly but what you don't want is a team member who;s p*s*ed off because they consider they've been paid less than what's fair playing for you - they could be encouraged to play badly to get back at the rest of the team. Paying everyone equally (on a formula which is based on number of hours played - so a 10 hour player gets half as much as a 20 hour player, from the pot) is a good way to avoid "jealousy".

It doesn't matter if they're a player or a spotter. You're a TEAM.

 

[RJT]

I certainly wouldn't - and don't - go down that line.
The facts of the matter - at least when playing the old MIT format BP - is that the BP is a far more skilled player than a spotter, the job is far tougher and the BP is the one risking getting barred. Everyone on the team should understand from the outset that the BP is going to get a better rate of pay, lest your BP say 'why should i put the extra effot in?'.
Even on an EMFH team, i know that if i was a competent shuffle tracker i sure as hell wouldn't be happy about getting paid the same as a Hi/Lo counter.
On an off note, i'm not sure Bojack's checking this board anymore - i haven't heard from him in a while.

RJT.

 

[shadroch]

If you click your heels and say his name three times,he'll be compelled to appear.

 

[Sonny]

It looks like I’m a little late on this thread. Most of the questions have already been answered but I want to blitz through a few things…

So, is the denominator the total number of hours played by everyone? So like...

Player 1: 10 hours
Player 2: 9 hours
Player 3: 11 hours

30 hours total?

Right. Player 1 would get 33% of the profit, Player 2 would get 30% and Player 3 would get 37%, although hopefully you wouldn’t be breaking the bank after only 30 hours of play if you are using a backer.

And 2, how do teams do it when they pay the players who play better more than players who lose more? How can u even prove they are playing better? Could just be standard deviation

You can adjust their percentages based on their EV. If Player 1 accounts for 40% of the team’s EV then you can think about adjusting his wage to reflect this. You should never base this decision on actual playing records because, as you said, the variance will be huge. You should make this decision based on the simulations you have run and any real-world adjustments you need to make.

This can be a slippery slope though. It might make sense to give people with different roles different shares (managers, investors, spotters, BPs, signalers, Gorillas, trackers, keyers, or whatever you are using) but it can quickly get out of hand. With an EMFH team people will start to argue about who is better and why they all deserve a raise. It is important to keep the pay scale relative to the positions on the team, not necessarily individual skill. This will also offer incentives for players to become more skillful and be promoted.

For fairness i'd probably just work out winnings at the end of each week, fortnight, or month, and divide them EQUALLY amongst all team members.

That’s fine if everyone is properly invested in the team and everyone’s skill level and role are equivalent, but it can really screw people over if there is an uneven distribution of investments (see below) or if people are using different skills. There’s really no universal answer for this type of thing. Every situation will be different and every team will have to come up with a scheme that all members are happy with. Some teams like to include small bonuses for winning sessions, incentives for promotions or any number of other arrangements. It all depends on the needs and desires of the group.

Well my plan was to use the spotter BP method because thats the only method I really have ever heard of, except every man for themselves which doesnt work for me as we have a backer.

Is the backer investing all of the money or are the players investing as well? Having a backer can make things much more complicated. If the majority of the money is invested by the backer then you can really screw him over by making payouts too frequently. Every time the team wins, everybody gets paid. Every time the team loses, the backer takes a loss but you guys don’t feel it. I think any backer will quickly become unhappy when he realizes that his money is slowly being skimmed by the players. In order to keep him happy you will have to play long enough to overcome enough variance so that your results are more stable. Basically, you need to set your payout schedule as a factor of your long run index (N0) so that you give yourselves a reasonable chance of reaching your EV before paying everybody. Blackjack Bluebook goes into much more detail about this. Blackjack Attack also covers a formula for breaking the bank early in case of emergency.

Which books discuss team payment schemes? Blackjack Blueprint, Ken Uston's? What else?

Blackjack Attack covers some team play issues, and BJinNJ already mentioned Blackbelt in BJ. Those four books should cover most of the basics of getting things off the ground.

On an off note, i'm not sure Bojack's checking this board anymore - i haven't heard from him in a while.

He’s still lurking but I don’t think he has much time to post these days. I’m sure he’s happy to see that we’re still thinking about him.

-Sonny-

 

[Automatic Monkey]

I am starting a team and have heard the best way to distribute payout to the players is to divide the amount of $ delegated to the players/hours played.

that number would equal 1 "share", and players get paid 1 "share" for every hour they played.

So, is the denominator the total number of hours played by everyone? So like...

Player 1: 10 hours
Player 2: 9 hours
Player 3: 11 hours

30 hours total?


And 2, how do teams do it when they pay the players who play better more than players who lose more? How can u even prove they are playing better? Could just be standard deviation

OK, couple of good points here. Let me answer before you get inundated.

You cannot prove who plays "better" within a manageable amount of time, judging by results. The standard deviation is huge. The important thing in this respect is to know who you are playing with and know they are competent players all with a comparable work ethic. This latter is important. There are guys who want to spend an hour at the bar for every two hours playing, and being life is to be enjoyed that's just fine, as long as everyone enjoys that and considers that reasonable. And what you really don't want is a guy who's going to be upstairs doing a line or with a whore when you are supposed to be playing because that's the kind of behavior that is so easy for some people to get into when they have money in their pocket, and so easy to get the whole team busted. I cannot overestimate how destructive dishonesty and/or bad personal habits can be to this kind of a venture, as I've seen it trash partnerships in every kind of business.

One important parameter you've left out is investment. Suppose I provide 50% of the bank for a 4-man team and play 10% of the hours- now what? So you'll need to weight investment vs. time played. If you are all capable of providing a roughly equal amount of money and time, one simple way to do this is require that everyone put up an equal investment, and work as many hours as you want, on the condition that all losses are covered out of the investment equally while all profits are distributed according to hours worked. This helps keep everyone equal and gives everyone an equal incentive to play as much as possible.

It's also important for you all to understand just what the games you are playing are worth, and what benefit there is for you playing as a team. The only benefit in most cases is bankroll sharing, and you're going to need to do a bit of math to determine how much that can increase your EV to balance out the risks of team play. And of course you're going to have to adjust your betting to exploit that additional EV. Write any time if you have additional questions.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

It looks like I’m a little late on this thread. Most of the questions have already been answered but I want to blitz through a few things…
...

Dude you beat me by 5 minutes! Cool!

 

[Bojack1]

Yep, I'm still here. There's really not much to add to whats already been posted, you guys have been pretty thorough. I guess the only thing i could add would be a basic breakdown how we do it.

First off only players on my team are investors, although it wasn't always that way. The investors are not all equal but the profit at the time of payouts is split 50% for the investors, 50% for players. The investors are given proportionate amounts based on what percentage they have of the 50%. The players are given share amounts based on job title and hours played out of the other half. All investors are locked in until the breaking of the bank, or in other words when we have reached a specific money profit goal. Which by the way should not just be plucked out of the air. As Sonny has stated it should be a realistic point of profit as conceived by simulations for the fairest scenario. At the breaking of bank all investors are welcome to withdraw their money or to reinvest as they wish. We no longer do any reinvesting as we have much more than a sufficient bankroll to fund our units playing size. But investors can buy or sell investment shares to change their percent of investment. As was also stated the way the players are paid offers incentive to either play as much as possible and or move up in position on the team to receive max potential of pay.

On a side note the team does run a regular system of skills testing to instill confidence in each other that we all have the knowledge to play the best game planned for. The last thing you need on a team is taking a big loss or a series of them and think that the cause of it might be poor playing or even worse, cheating. For the most part my team practices together and is confident in each other's skills and honesty. Thats huge, and is also important with outside investors as well.

There are a few details that come into play sometimes but for the most part they are exceptions to our basic rules that really don't apply much. What might also be done that we don't do is to set a small % aside for expenses to be reimbursed at the breaking of bank. We don't set aside a % of profit for that we just deduct it from the trip results win or lose. We do have rules on expenditures and anything over and beyond that come out of personal pocket. At this point, and as most teams will find if successful, comps can really keep expenses down to a minimum.

I think the key to a truly successful team is when the players can also be the become the investors and keep all finances in house. It doesn't have to start that way, but it should be a goal to be a totally self sufficient team, if you are playing along the lines of what is known as conventional team play. Thats a basic outline how we've been doing it and its been working great.

 

[Paradox]

This sounds crazy to me

If you are asking these questions on this forum, you are no where near prepared enough to lead a team. I've got to be honest and in this case my honesty may seem hard. If you haven't read all the texts on teams and began and understand them, you are too far away to even think about starting to play. Most of the best information that has been shared is not in books.

Yes, read BJA3 and the other texts that are available. You will need to have a good understanding of the math or do many many sims to teach yourself about more complex statistics and risk.

If you are actually starting a team, you do have a BJ21 membership, don't you? If not, this is silly to start with. If you search the general page for all of DD's posts you will find the information that you need. He is one of the most successful team players. It would be foolish to play until you understand a lot more than you do. I say this, since you are posting here and asking these questions.

When you are ready for team play, you will be able to answer all of these questions yourself plus a few very very important ones you haven't even thought of yet. This may seem harsh, but if you are not well prepared, you have a seriously small chance of success. Good luck and read, read, read. Make some email contacts with team players that you find at more professional sites, like BJ21. You have a lot to learn before you can have a reasonable chance of success.

Cheers,
Paradox