The odds of winning the Powerball drawing is 1 in 292.2 million. So when it got up to 1.6 billion, you are saying there was no positive expected return?

Correct. First off, let's dismiss the premise that it was ever worth 1.6 billion. That was the advertised jackpot amount but the actual value of that jackpot was a hair under $1 billion.

The thing that kills its value more than anything though is the likelihood of being split. Once the jackpots get that big they would have a positive return if you were the only person playing them. However, the country gets into such a fervor of buying up tickets that the most likely scenario is that it will be split X # of times (maybe 4 on that one, not sure how many tickets were sold. In actuality it was split 3 times). You split that jackpot up 4 ways and it's already a bad investment and then you still have to pay sizeable taxes on the winnings.

On the above "rake" topic, here is what I find ABSOLUTELY SICKENING....

http://gaming.unlv.edu/reports/longterm_nvgaming.pdf

Last year (2015), Nevada casinos earned $118,000,000 in revenue from poker. This means that the casinos (in Nevada alone) took $118 Million directly off of the tables from poker games. The only true winner in poker was the house.

During the last 10 years (2005-2015, ie, the "poker boom") Nevada casinos earned $1.5 BILLION in revenue from poker. We poker players paid Nevada casinos $1.5 Billion to simply sit at a table.

The casinos extracted almost as much from us poker players just as they did from all sports bettors across the entire state (during the high of the "poker boom," casinos were actually earning more revenue from poker players than from sports bettors).

My understanding of how poker revenue is reported is that this number only includes cash games and does not include fees from tournaments (could be wrong here, but that simply means the $1.5 Billion is even higher). Plus, the numbers also don't include how much players tip (which I imagine is probably about 50% of rake on average) meaning the actual amount extracted from the poker table for the casino's benefit is even higher still (probably $2-3 Billion).


In other words, Nevada casinos have taken $1.5 Billion (and maybe as high as $3 Billion) directly off the table from poker players.

So much for poker being the only game where the player isn't competing against the house.

What was the point of that post? Do you think casinos should charge a dollar per hand?do you think there are no costs to running poker rooms?

You're not paying them just to sit at a table.you're paying them to organize and run games, provide dealers and floor,use vlaueable land etc.



I mean if would be nice if rake didn't exist and for some reason rich guys opened poker rooms for us but it's not gonna happen.

Once you get above 1/2 nl rake becomes a lot less of a factor.
But if you're trying to make money off of poker then rake is a big expense-same as expenses in other businesses. If you aren't good enough to beat the take that's your fault.it's like someone opening upna store and complaining if it wasn't for rent electricity etc they would be profitable.

If you don't want to pay then don't play.I've done this sometimes when games get short handed in pot rake games with people who aren't that bad and aren't deep stacked (sometimes with a jackpot coming out and in Commerce's Case not even reduce rake)and these are games I'd play in of they were time games.But I'm not gonna cry about it and then still play.

Im in Florida too DC, i love that the guy makes fun of me for not doing the simple formula and then he messes it up.

Well said. To top it off it neglects that the games wouldn't exist without the rake.

You do understand that gross revenue has nothing to do with how much a casino actually made from poker, right? You're position is akin to saying that if a car dealership sold 20 cars at $50k each, then it "earned" $1,000,000 from car-buying customers because that's what its revenue was.

MGM Entertainment has lost money 7 of the past 8 years. Caesars is going through bankruptcy. Poker is one of their least profitable business units and rake in Vegas is amongst the lowest in the country. Many players are able to make a living playing poker and yet we are supposed to be sickened that Vegas poker rooms bring in a lot of revenue?

This dude has negative charisma.

Yes. Did I say anything about casino gross profit, anywhere?

You do understand that this disclosed revenue is money taken directly off of the tables, right?

Sure a portion of the revenue goes to pay dealers' salaries, many of whom use said salaries to play poker. Sure a portion of the revenue goes to pay casino utility companies--who employ workers who (may) use some of their salary to play poker. Etc., etc., etc. The point being that it should be a slightly eye opening statistic that 1.5 Billion is extracted directly from the table by the casinos (not including tips to dealers).

If you go back and read the first 4 or so pages of this thread they are hilarious.

MGM stock on January 1, 2009 was 13.65. MGM stock today is 21.63. MGM lost money during 2007, 2008 and 2009, because they previously went "all in" on huge property developments, believing real estate was a "sure bet." It took them years to recover from horrible management decisions related to failed real estate ventures. Their "least profitable business unit" was real estate expansion. Same thing with Caesars Ent.

WYNN had a great 2009-2014. Stock went from 48 to 243. WYNN then decided to make huge investments in Macau, which recently tanked. Stock went from 240 to 65.

Poker is also one of the casinos' lowest operating cost units.


Be that as it may, the point of my post (as was questioned by some already) was to show the impact rake actually has on cash game poker--as was the topic of the previous few pages. There is a lot of money taken off of the tables by the casino year after year, so a low stakes (long-term) grinder (ie, Trooper) needs to try and move up from these stakes as quickly as possible (among other obvious reasons), because (long-term) low stakes rake has a large impact.

I forgot to mention that MGM's market cap went from over 50 billion in 2007 to 12 billion today. Wow, they are doing great. That's the type of return I'd like to see over a 9 year period.

The most profitable company (Wynn) is the one that has invested the least in poker? You don't say.

The typo in the title of this thread, "make a living OF poker" tilts me.

You forgot to mention why.

So they can watch it too!

What? I didn't mess anything up. That's why you do it yourself - so you can understand it. There's nothing to mess up. If you don't want to count BBJ, don't include it in the cost. I include it because I choose to.

Don't listen to other people. And don't listen to me. Do it yourself!

fwiw - here in CA there are no high hand payouts. Although, I have seen aces cracked promos at Hustler and Hollywood Park. But those always seem to come and go. It's all bad beat - aces full of tens or better beat by quads. Both hole cards have to play.

Picking on the messenger is missing the point (message). I'm actually trying to help you (errr Tim).

Me doing the simple math for you just opens a can of worms. Do what you want.

THANK YOU. Seems likable enough, but zero personality, zero original thoughts, zero camera presence. Just a bore.

If we're going to split hairs, the casino earns interest on the players money held in escrow. i see no reason to not split hairs. Splitting hairs gets you a better estimate of cost. Just another source of revenue for the casino. And I guarantee the bean counters think about it like that.

actually, Wynn has always had a poker room in his properties-

Re: rake

I play way less than Trooper, but I do track results. 2014 Had some good outliers, like a BBJ score and was positive 5 figures. 2015 was a 4 figure loss. I did some analysis to determine what happened.

A huge part of it was I hit very few promotions. Nothing from the BBJ, almost no other promos. I calculated an estimated rake plus tips for the year and guess what? It was greater than my loss. So, I was actually a winning player, just my expenses ate all my profit, and then some.

I agree with Dicey. All serious poker players should do this analysis for themselves, based on where they play, how much they tip, etc. If you don't already have an idea, the results are shocking.

Just LOL at this logic. You can't just delete rake and go look I was a winner! Rake is a part of the game and its going nowhere. You need to be able to exceed it. It does not matter how much rake you paid because it won't change your end sum.

Literally identical to any faulty logic.

this is correct-it really is a fools errand to calculate such things-your win rate is post rake-most of the underground games around the country rake FAR more than $5-and some of those games are a must play situation due to the make up of the game. People that don't notice a $10 rake on a $150-200 pot are the ones I want to play with-

the rake matters-but not in post earn analysis-either you chose games well/played better than your competition- or you didn't (variance aside)

Rake is pretty low in Vegas and some places don't even have a jackpot drop so this talk about how the game is so tough to beat with the rake is pretty silly IMO.

If you don't beat the rake you're not a winning player.