Wait so if cash players are now earning points at 1point per $1 raked, we'd have to rake $70 to get the first $1.50 level of the ronin promo? That can't be right...

Under the dealt system, I think it's the whole table raking $70.

I would appreciate more info on this as well. Thanks Shane

This looks correct.

As the poster below you pointed out because its dealt its the tables rake.

So for every $1 in rake paid in hand you are dealt you get 1 point. So if there is a $1 in rake and you fold your hand you still get the point.

Yes please

Rake $10, get 70 points, exchange for $1.... am I right?

Switching from dealt to contributed means better rewarding the players that are earning us our money, this is the way we prefer to work.

Max Cut beat me to posting the math. See below.

You are pretty much right. The math we have now comes out at 99c not $1 so we are still considering bumping it to 15%.

This is so completely wrong.

Seems like contributed has to be the most fair, that way you get rakeback based on the exact amount you payed in rake. Dealt means that supernits can sit and earn rakeback without actually paying rake, meaning they end up with a higher RB% than a looser player. Is this not correct?

I think it was wrong and a money grab when FTP and Stars did it because they didn't adjust the system to keep rewards the same for grinders while hiding behind the strawman "fairness" argument. Lock is giving everyone 36%RB and other VIP benefits for grinders so it's not the same. We'll see how it plays out in the long run.

Jim, Part of that is true. The other part is not. The contributed method means that Revolution will not be paying out nearly as much overall.

And Shane's contention that it better rewards the players that are earning Revolution the money is DEFINITELY incorrect.

Pretty disappointed to hear of their plans on this but am thankful they told everyone ahead of time.

Maybe there is a chance they actually believe the line that Shane gave us and are just misinformed in which case perhaps they could be convinced to not make the change. My hunch is that they do understand that the line Shane gave is B.S. and that they are going to go through with it anyway.

This is a fair point and I hope it works out that way. Calling it a strawman "fairness" argument is definitely a good way of putting it.

Just to clarify: If FTP had bumped everyone up from 27% to 36% and added black card at the time they switched from dealt to contributed then I don't think anyone would have had much of a problem with it.

Gotcha, thanks.