Hello!

I´m trying to play some poker at pokerstars and am doing okey so far. I started out on NL2 and got my bankroll up so I can now play NL5 and is half way to NL10.

While fighting my way upwards I was hoping to get a bit boosted by lower rake but I now I see that pokerstars increase rake for every new level?

NL2: 3,15%
NL5: 4,15%
Nl10:4,50%

There is a rake-roof in every hand and I started to think that maybe that is the solution to my problem but I am playing 6-max so there is "always" 5 or 6 players dealt in to the hand. Given that I get it to that the pot need to get big to hit that roof.

NL2: Roof at 0,3/0,0315=9,52 that is 5 buy ins!
NL5: Roof at 1/0,0415=24 that is 5 buy ins
NL10: Roof at 1,5/0,0450= 33 that is 3,3 buy ins
NL25: Roof at 2/0,0450= 44 that is 1,76 buy ins

(NL600: Roof at 3,5/0,05=70 that is 0,11 buy ins, just tested for fun)

I can see that in NL2-10 there will very rarely be max rake. And the rake differences between NL2 and NL5 is huge! It is 1-0,0315/0,0415=0,24 or 24%

And then another 7,7% extra rake at NL10... If I ever get up to NL 25 there will be same rake % as at NL10 but I finally get "boosted" by lower rake because 1,76 buy ins is possible to get in to a pot every now and then...

Am I calculating right? Should I do any action because of this, like play on other site or play at NL2 instead of NL5?

Tanks for any comment!

Source: https://www.pokerstars.eu/poker/room/rake/

On Stars (and some other sites) the rake percentage goes up for the first few levels, before it starts going down. You shouldn't worry about the direct rake so much, as whether you make money depends on "effective rake" which takes into account rakeback (which is hardly anything any more on Stars) and your skill edge on the field. Some people find the jump from 2NL to 5NL is very hard, partly because the rake percentage goes up a little bit, but mainly because the average skill level jumps up a lot. If you can beat 2NL or 5NL, it often makes sense to move to 10NL even sooner, as for some weird reason it's often a bit softer, and the average pot is smaller in terms of BB (the game is slightly nittier, with fewer multiway pots), so you end up paying a lower amount of rake in bb/100.
To work out what's best for you, you really just have to put in some volume at various levels and see what your winrate is post-rake and post-rakeback. (You can also use a tracker to measure how much you're paying in rake at each level). Some people get "trapped" at 2NL, 5NL, or 10NL. Others manage to make it out of the micros.

I think other sites are more profitable places to play nanostakes (with softer fields, lower rake and better rewards/rakeback), but the situation is always changing. Stars is generally treated as the toughest site to win on, but some people are saying that PartyPoker is just as tough if not tougher. That might be even more true if Stars' new rewards scheme means "masstabling breakeven rakeback grinders" switch to Party instead, leaving a higher proportion of fun players on Stars, and thus improving the winrates of the regs who stick around. The situation is fluid, as I said. You just have to give it a try and see how you get on. If you can't beat Stars, or find it too tough, there are plenty of other sites to try out.

Tanks for a very good and nice answer!

Yesterday I went on my first tilting season and lost 5 buy ins That together with your answer made me thinking a bit about poker in general.

I will stay on my very soft bankroll management (20 buy ins) and only play 4 tables at the time while I keep on learning the game. I will focus on gaining knowledge not dollars. And then the site does not really mater because if I can learn the game I can bet the rake and get upwards at any site (and if it goes slower because of higher rake I learn more).

I will set my self a few rules to avoid tilting/multi table to hard/break bankroll and think in my hands, use my time. After that start to think more about what I have to learn..

Once again tanks!