Hey

The guy who posted the data in the PLO thread is the one who has the access to the Russian PTR and downloaded all that data. But then he added rakeback rates, and took out the original winrates before deleting all his data, so I just tried to come up with a formula to put it back in.

Was hoping someone would have looked at the formula and said it's okay by now - but maybe no news is good news, and if anybody hasn't said there's anything wrong with it by now, that might mean it's okay?

Here's the other Zoom data that the guy with the access to the data posted, with winrates added back in using the formula I came up with that's hopefully ok:


Wasn't totally sure about all the stuff the original poster of the data did to the data either - he mentioned not including FPPs for everybody, or something like that. And he also said that all the winrates were ev-adjusted - that made it sound like he used everybody's all-in EV rate? Not totally sure though - hopefully he comes back to answer questions so there'll be a chance to ask him, but if not, it's still nice to have some rough data and stuff ...

Would be interesting to have access to that Russian PTR - do people have to pay for access I wonder?

wtf is br-pl , br sn, br sne & all those other abbreviations hahhaa, sry not in tune with what they mean.

lol exactly
but these hud loving simpletons incapable of anything resembling creative or independent thought think it's the rake hurting the game when it's themselves more than anything

Hehe, indeed. There's been quite a lot of things I've been into other than poker.
I don't have a clue of what I'm doing, maybe that's why it's still fun?

then look at it as a rare hobby that you can make some money from

its obvious that micros dont have a voice so they rake whatever the f the want, theres desperate need for regulation.

It's a bit of a double edged sword.
On the nits side, you only pay rake when you see a flop, so it might be a good idea to select your hands well.
On the other side, with so many nits, it might be more profitable to steal pots preflop, even with the increased risk of paying more rake.

It's the view I have.

But, I still think that it's too much money taken away from poker.

(I don't think those thoughts are mutually exclusive.)

Oh ya, these tags ...



Guess that's one more question to ask the guy that posted the data if he ever comes back to answer questions ... so what do those mean, exactly? lol!

He gave the rakeback tag 'br-pl' the value of 19%, but I couldn't tell if that was meant to include everybody between bronze and platinum? Or if he was assuming most people by that level are going to be platinum?

Not totally sure ...


PS It's so interesting to see all these winrates all at once - am still trying to process all this new info ...

PPS Wanted to add a smiley and couldn't quite find the right one - that doesn't seem to happen very often! Guess my mind is preoccupied with mulling over all this new info, hmmm ...

All the regulation I have heard about so far did actually cause the rake to increase not decrease.
Interesting stats BTW, thanks for sharing.

Seems it's winrate adjusted for VIP level, so it tells you the WR with rakeback depending on whether player is SN, SN @ 500k VPP, or SNE

If "rake" is rake in bb/100 then those seem very low. I paid 9.5bb/100 at 25 zoom over 350k hands.

Since it's contributed rake, the looser you play, the more likely you are to pay more rake/hand. I would guess you're not playing as tight as those in the sample.

Yeah, thats entirely consistent. Theres one guy at NL50 who has 10bb rake, hes also the biggest winner. The others I guess are ur typical PS quadrillion table nits.

I'd stopped looking at rake this year as part of a concerted effort to try and just focus on playing well and winning but this thread, and the fact that I have been reevaluating the point of playing poker, led me to look.



I find it vaguely depressing that I have earned more for Stars at 10NL than I have for myself.



2NL less so because its so insanely value heavy but even still, paying almost $100 to play at 2NL, you have to beat that level for a nice win rate to escape.

No one can replace the liquidity FTP brought to the onlinepokersphere. It boosted Stars/Bodog's numbers because all that cash just flooded into the scene seamlessly due to the other thing we all miss, the thing more important than the games on the felt: the ability to transfer funds amongst one another.

We've went from abundance to drought, for a myriad of reasons. It will never return, especially since the incomes in the past 5 years for the average worker has been stagnant while the costs of goods and services rises. Less disposable income = less poker cash. This is an issue notwithstanding online gaming regulations, laws, dev, investment, operations, etc.