Quote:
Originally Posted by dark_horse
In theory, then, would a winner prefer to get 80% rakeback (assume weighted contributed) or have his winrate increased by 2.4? How did you come up with 2.4?
Jeez dude, I have met plenty of good poker players who suck at math, but this is middle school math lol. You were paying 3 BB/100 in rake at 3/6 and .6 BB/100 at 30/60. 3 - .6 = 2.4.
Thinking of this as rakeback is kind of an odd way to look at things since on a site like Stars, you are going to be getting both the rake drop you are talking about on Bovada in addition to 40+% rakeback from Supernova+. But yes, moving out of the rake trap is extremely important on any site and the key to making big money. On most sites, the rake trap ends at 8/16-10/20 and keeps getting better up to 30/60. Above 30/60, the stakes are so high that rake becomes almost nothing. Like I think an SNE at 100/200 on Stars might pay less than .1 BB/100 in rake.
The problem is that the bankroll/tilt management requirements are just too high for a lot of players at 30/60. Also, weaker regs will get absolutely smashed by top tier Stars pros to the point that the rake drop does not help them at 30/60+. In general, the higher rake games tend to be much softer than lower rake games because the high rake keeps pros out of the games, especially the rakeback grinder types. This is one reason Bovada is soft... if they gave out 30% rakeback, we would see a massive increase in pro players. Fish do not give a **** about rakeback.