Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

High Stakes PL Omaha Discussion of 2/4 and above pot-limit Omaha poker

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-22-2013, 12:24 AM   #1
eldodo42
adept
 
eldodo42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: pre-flopping sets
Posts: 1,026
Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Hi All,

I will be one of the participants in the Pokerstars PLO rake discussions that will take part in the Isle of Man next week. The goal of the meeting (as I understand it) is to discuss the state of PLO rake (and maybe other games' rake as well) and to discuss various amendments to it.

As such, I expect that most of the time we will discuss amendments to the current system. However, I also intend to suggest a radical new method for collecting rake, which I think is much better than the current method. I'll outline it here, and I'd love any comments or criticism. Feel free to trash my suggestion: I'd like to make it as solid as possible before it stands up to decision-maker scrutiny.

The basic idea is to completely do away with per-hand rake, and rather for the site to take a certain cut of a player's winning when the player cashes out. (Let's fix this percentage at 50% for the sake of discussion, just to make examples easier) So, for example, if I deposit 1000$ in January, run it up to 2000$ by February, and cash the whole roll out, then I get 1500$ in my bank account: 1000$ that I initially deposited (I don't have to pay rake on that), plus 500$ which is 50% of my 1000$ net winnings.

If I then deposit 2500$ on the site in March, then actually 3000$ shows up on my account: My 500$ represented 1000$ minus rake, so when I deposit it back I get the 500$ rake back. The point here is that I pay 50% rake on my overall lifetime winnings on the site, and that's it. Obviously, net losing player never pay any rake.

I believe that this is the way poker sites will eventually work. I didn't finish describing my method completely yet, but we can already discuss some of its advantages:

1. there are no unbeatable games: any game is beatable by definition, and games where edges get smaller and smaller do not become unbeatable all of a sudden: their profitability degrades smoothly with time, as the game gets solved.

2. money moves up massively in the poker ecosystem: you know all these barely-breakeven regs in PLO100? Well, guess what: now they are 10bb/100 winners. They can cash out (and probably pay around the same overall amount of rake that they would have paid anyway), but they can also move up to PLO200, then to PLO400, etc. . The money will move up much more easily, and never get stuck at rake-trap stakes

3. The sites incentives become much better: Right now poker sites have a perverse incentive to spread unbeatable games, or games that are more gambling-based, so that money moves back and forth between players and maximal overall rake is taken. The players must currently rely on the decency of the sites, or on their long-term thinking, or on competition, to curb these perverse incentives. Under my system, sites will have an incentive to create winning players (because that's their way to make money), but they have to balance this with the need to provide a good playing experience for the fish (i.e. they must spread games that leave fish a chance to win). This means the incentive structure requires the site itself to balance luck vs skill. Sites' incentives become aligned with those of the community of winning players.

4. Currently, periodic rake updates are necessarily for all games since games will forever become harder and harder. Players can't even know if they're playing a beatable game. Rather than having to update the rake every couple of years and have grueling meetings with the poker sites, my system never needs updating or adjusting.

Okay, now I'll describe some more details of my proposed system.

First of all, the transition from the current rake system: I've been told that a lot of fish, and some regs, won't like the new system because they don't feel like paying 50% or more of their winnings to the site. (When 5% rake is taken off each hand, it seems negligible to them.) Due to this reason, I suggest to run the new system and the traditional system side-by-side: players will continue to pay the current 4.5% capped rake by default, but players who opt in for the new system just receive full 100% rakeback each day on all the rake they paid on pots that they won.

This full-rakeback process can be entirely transparent to anyone who chose to stay with the old system. I assume that after a couple of years everyone will realize that the rake-on-winnings system is better, but there's no reason not to run both of these systems side-by-side for as long as there is demand for that.

The rake-on-winnings method only makes sense because sites' operating expenses are very low: the cost of dealing a hand is miniscule. However, this cost is not strictly zero. If sites think that they have operating costs that manifest on a per-hand basis, they can still rake some small amount of rake per hand, say 0.1%.

My system does not include a parallel to the current rakeback/loyalty/VIP system which gives discounts to high-volume or high-stakes players. But of course this can be implemented into the system. For example, a player may pay 50% on his winnings for the first 10k$ each year, but only 40% after that.

I don't see any way to game this system: to me it looks like a fair system, whereby the sites can ask for whatever rake they think is appropriate (by adjusting the amount of rake-on-winnings paid), and the poker ecosystem can grow uninterrupted, with skilled players moving up indefinitely. Of course, I could have missed something. If anyone sees any problems with this system or any way to game it, or has any other ideas, I'd love to hear.

And just to be clear: I don't think there's a particularly high chance that stars will adopt this system. And I don't intend to push it too strongly: I think we'll mostly be discussing incremental changes in the meeting. But still, I think it's useful to float this idea. And who knows, maybe they'll like it.
eldodo42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 12:47 AM   #2
CoronalDischarge
grinder
 
CoronalDischarge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Swongs and Donkabouts
Posts: 572
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

It's obviously a good, just, sensible idea, I'd love to see it happen, and variants of it have been suggested many times lately. The problem is that it's impossible to implement without shining a spotlight on the existence of rake in the first place. Rec players who regularly spew/throw away/gently bleed sums of money playing a gambling game are only dimly aware of the rake, and to the extent that they are aware of it, they would prefer to ignore it (as they would prefer to misremember just how much they have lost gambling). It is of course very much in the site's interests to keep it that way.
CoronalDischarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 02:48 AM   #3
Herrigel
adept
 
Herrigel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hattrick in a hurricane
Posts: 1,097
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

This helps regfish, scares Recs and hurts the few guys with decent winrates. I don't like it at all.
Herrigel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 02:58 AM   #4
Hoopman20
veteran
 
Hoopman20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,366
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

I think everyone is making this more complicated than it is. Any win for the players is a loss for Poker Stars if the market size stays the same. The only possibly rake solutions for the players that PS would (or should) entertain are those that increase PS market enough that total profits go up by reducing rake for the players. This is a pretty obvious statement but I feel like most players are losing sight of that. Our arguments have to be under the context of giving Poker Stars a little smaller piece of a much bigger pie. There are very good arguments in this direction and I think it is the only real chance at positive change. The truth is on our side IMO. PS really would make more money by reducing rake and improving the health of the poker ecology. We need to stick to that IMO if we ever expect PS to consider any rake changes seriously. The structure changes or how PS takes the money really makes little difference and shows a lack of understanding of the issue as a whole IMO.
Hoopman20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 03:06 AM   #5
FlyingDutchman
grinder
 
FlyingDutchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 635
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Please for now just focus on lowering rake.
You need to convince PokerStars why that is in their best long term interest.
I hope you have a marketing background.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldodo42 View Post
2. you know all these barely-breakeven regs in PLO100? Well, guess what: now they are 10bb/100 winners. They can cash out (and probably pay around the same overall amount of rake that they would have paid anyway),
They'd need to play twice as much for that, since you just cut rake by 50%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldodo42 View Post
I suggest to run the new system and the traditional system side-by-side
But that is practically impossible.
FlyingDutchman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 03:10 AM   #6
Whisper
adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berkeley
Posts: 1,138
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Irregular cash flows to PS from this system are a pretty big killer.
Whisper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 04:57 AM   #7
TGSM89
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
TGSM89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 8,488
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

It's good to think outside the box, but this isn't a solution
TGSM89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 05:01 AM   #8
captZEEbo
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
captZEEbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,993
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Is this for cash games or MTTs as well? How does it work where say someone deposits 100, binks a tourny (or cash game heater) for 4k, cashes out ~2k, then keeps depositing 100 a pop until they are a net loser. Do they get bonuses on each 100 deposit or something?

I think this will effectively kill high stakes action, TBH. This will be nice for low-mediumish stakes where rake is one of the biggest opponents at the table. However, for high stakes-nosebleed winners, rake is almost negligible. I highly doubt they will want to pay 1M in rake on 2M winnings when before they would only have paid 20-100k in rake (just guessing) and will move to another site that is more reasonable.

I also assume this will be horrible for rec players. I think rec players don't pay TOO close attention to the rake. They obviously know it hurts them. However, I assume they would absolutely despise hitting a big score (cash game heater or tourny bink) and then losing 1/2 their winnings all at once.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldodo42 View Post
Rather than having to update the rake every couple of years and have grueling meetings with the poker sites, my system never needs updating or adjusting.
I think this is just false TBH. Let's say they start at 50% or something. Higher stakes players can still complain they're paying too much rake in comparison to lower stakes players. Or the site will say "our operating expenses are too high" we need to bump it up to 52%, etc, etc....
Quote:
Originally Posted by eldodo42 View Post
My system does not include a parallel to the current rakeback/loyalty/VIP system which gives discounts to high-volume or high-stakes players. But of course this can be implemented into the system. For example, a player may pay 50% on his winnings for the first 10k$ each year, but only 40% after that.
which sort of shows how this thing is going to need tweaking every year or two anyways. More discounts for different levels and different stakes, etc....
captZEEbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 06:58 AM   #9
joeri
old hand
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: bemyguestbud/l0ve2playu
Posts: 1,238
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

I like most of the idea.

There is only exactly 0% chance that Stars would implement such a drastic change, and can we blame them? They have a hugely succesfull company now that is a huge market leader. Its not up to them to do the market shifting alterations.
joeri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 07:12 AM   #10
eldodo42
adept
 
eldodo42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: pre-flopping sets
Posts: 1,026
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoopman20 View Post
Our arguments have to be under the context of giving Poker Stars a little smaller piece of a much bigger pie. There are very good arguments in this direction and I think it is the only real chance at positive change. The truth is on our side IMO. PS really would make more money by reducing rake and improving the health of the poker ecology. We need to stick to that IMO if we ever expect PS to consider any rake changes seriously.
This is a different argument than the one I'm making in this thread. I totally agree with you that the type of argument you're outlining here would be very good to make, and should be made in the meeting. The problem is that, as FlyingDutchman alludes to, I don't have a Marketing background and I don't understand business issues. I have tried to build this kind of argument myself in the past and I failed miserably: I hardly knew where to start.

Are you confident that you can make a convincing argument that stars decreasing rake would be in their own best interest? Can you possibly flesh out some details of such an argument? If you could help me with this I would really appreciate it and will of course carry this to the IOM meeting. if you're up to it then we should probably do this in a different thread (or start over skype).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoopman20 View Post
I think everyone is making this more complicated than it is. Any win for the players is a loss for Poker Stars if the market size stays the same.
That's true, but it has nothing to do with my proposal. Stars can take as much rake as it wants, by throttling the 50% figure I used: they can take 90% rake on winnings, or 10% rake on winnings. My suggestion doesn't involve taking less rake from the player pool; rather, it involves redistributing the rake burden differently among games and stakes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoopman20 View Post
The structure changes or how PS takes the money really makes little difference and shows a lack of understanding of the issue as a whole IMO.
I totally disagree. Note that this meeting is not about NLH rake, it's about PLO rake: everyone seems to agree that NLH rake, while high, is bearable, while PLO rake is unbearable and makes micro- and small-stakes games barely beatable. Why does the problem arise? Because each game has different properties and should be raked differently. So now we expect stars to start designing a rake scheme for each game separately, and to update it periodically as game conditions change? This seems like a ton of work and complications. My system is simple, and requires no periodic adjustments and no differentiation between games, because it splits the rake burden fairly among all games.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Whisper View Post
Irregular cash flows to PS from this system are a pretty big killer.
If the move to the new system is done all at once, then yes. But if the move is gradual and both systems are kept side by side for a long time (possibly forever), then I think the cash flow will stay regular.


Quote:
Originally Posted by captZEEbo View Post
Is this for cash games or MTTs as well? How does it work where say someone deposits 100, binks a tourny (or cash game heater) for 4k, cashes out ~2k, then keeps depositing 100 a pop until they are a net loser. Do they get bonuses on each 100 deposit or something?
Yes, each time they deposit 100$ after withdrawing all that money, 200$ appears in their account (i.e. they get the rake back).


Quote:
Originally Posted by captZEEbo View Post
I think this will effectively kill high stakes action, TBH. This will be nice for low-mediumish stakes where rake is one of the biggest opponents at the table. However, for high stakes-nosebleed winners, rake is almost negligible.
High-stakes players can keep paying using the current rake system if they want.

If we wanted to force everyone to move to the rake-on-winning system, then this would be certainly an issue. There are various ways to fix this: for example, make the decrease in rake for high-stakes players more pronounced. So for example a player that already withdrew 200k$ from the site this year will only pay 10% on his winnings past that, etc. . The problem is that relaxing the rake burden on the high end incentivizes players to withdraw by chip-dumping to high stakes players, so this needs to be balanced carefully to avoid making it too tempting.

Also, my system will likely increase liquidity and availability of high-stakes games, so it might end up being a net win for stars. But I admit that I don't understand enough the way my system affects the ecosystem to fully understand how it will affect high stakes.

I do agree that high stakes seems to be the delicate point of this proposal for various reasons, and that some work should be taken care in making sure that the site gets enough rake, that high-stakes players are not turned off, and that chip dumping or other circumventing the system is either non-lucrative.


Quote:
Originally Posted by captZEEbo View Post
I also assume this will be horrible for rec players. I think rec players don't pay TOO close attention to the rake. They obviously know it hurts them. However, I assume they would absolutely despise hitting a big score (cash game heater or tourny bink) and then losing 1/2 their winnings all at once.
This is why we offer both methods side by side. These players can keep paying rake using the current method. In fact, they pay this by default: they need to opt-in to pay rake by my method.


Quote:
Originally Posted by captZEEbo View Post
I think this is just false TBH. Let's say they start at 50% or something. Higher stakes players can still complain they're paying too much rake in comparison to lower stakes players. Or the site will say "our operating expenses are too high" we need to bump it up to 52%, etc, etc....which sort of shows how this thing is going to need tweaking every year or two anyways. More discounts for different levels and different stakes, etc....
Yeah, I wasn't saying that rake has to stay fixed forever. I was saying that rake will not affect games' beatability: it will have a very clear, linear, effect on players take-home income, so it will be way more transparent than the current method, and arguing about it will be just arguing about one number, and everyone will understand what effect changing that number has on players' incomes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by CoronalDischarge View Post
The problem is that it's impossible to implement without shining a spotlight on the existence of rake in the first place. Rec players who regularly spew/throw away/gently bleed sums of money playing a gambling game are only dimly aware of the rake, and to the extent that they are aware of it, they would prefer to ignore it
That's true, but I'm not sure my proposal will actually make a big difference. Rec players are currently aware of rake, albeit marginally: they are aware of VPPs and FPPs, and they see the little rake pile each hand. With my method these players will just be aware that some people agreed to pay rake-on-winnings, but they will be on the current rake method (unless they choose to opt in to rake-on-winnings), so they won't be particularly more aware of it. This is why I suggest to refund rake to rake-on-winnings players in the form of rakeback: so that to everyone looking from the side and not thinking of it too much, it looks like everyone is still paying rake the old way.


Quote:
Originally Posted by joeri View Post
I like most of the idea.

There is only exactly 0% chance that Stars would implement such a drastic change, and can we blame them? They have a hugely succesfull company now that is a huge market leader. Its not up to them to do the market shifting alterations.
I completely agree. I mean, I think there's 5% chance they'll implement it, but I'm not holding my breath. I do think it'd be useful to float this idea in the meeting. For one, having a good solution in front of your eyes makes it easier to discuss the suitability of other solutions.

Last edited by eldodo42; 06-22-2013 at 07:23 AM.
eldodo42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 07:25 AM   #11
grizy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
grizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Looking for Rush HU Poker
Posts: 17,910
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

The assumption net losers don't withdraw is absurdly wrong. They keep coming back because they occasionally win and get to withdraw. You cut their "winnings" by half and they will detest PStars like Americans detest the IRS.

You do NOT want them to implement this even if you could convince Stars it's revenue neutral. The last thing you want net losers to do is to google to see which option is cheaper, only to find out 50% is about the same.
grizy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 08:02 AM   #12
offmenut
enthusiast
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 97
Can you please suggest a timed raked solution? Based on avg rake per hour of equivilent nl games.
offmenut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 08:17 AM   #13
eldodo42
adept
 
eldodo42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: pre-flopping sets
Posts: 1,026
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Quote:
Originally Posted by grizy View Post
The last thing you want net losers to do is to google to see which option is cheaper, only to find out 50% is about the same.
That's a pretty terrifying notion, I agree. I don't know if it's a real danger, but I concur it's certainly something to take into account


Quote:
Originally Posted by offmenut View Post
Can you please suggest a timed raked solution? Based on avg rake per hour of equivilent nl games.
I don't know if it's my preferred solution, but I'll make sure to bring it up: both timed rake and flat rake in terms of bb/100. Does anyone have any thought on the matter?
eldodo42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 08:18 AM   #14
joeri
old hand
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: bemyguestbud/l0ve2playu
Posts: 1,238
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

No, there is not 5% chance, there is exactly 0% chance.

Aside from the feedback you received (which show valid concerns), would you risk your market leader position by totally changing your business model?
joeri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 08:24 AM   #15
eldodo42
adept
 
eldodo42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: pre-flopping sets
Posts: 1,026
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeri View Post
No, there is not 5% chance, there is exactly 0% chance.

Aside from the feedback you received (which show valid concerns), would you risk your market leader position by totally changing your business model?
Either they'll change it or they won't. So it's 50-50.

But seriously, you're probably right, but let me have my hope for justice and world peace .
eldodo42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 08:24 AM   #16
chinz
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
chinz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NOT SCANDI
Posts: 9,061
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

No, just no.

That'd look awful in the eyes of recreational players who don't really understand how rake works and how ridiculously high it really is. Why the hell would PS want to illustrate to everyone how much rake their taking? In the current system rake is "hidden" from recreational players and even if they read about it they'll just think what's some <3% gonna matter anyway? Make it 50% on cashouts and even the most ignorant idiots will definitely notice it.

Not to mention a lot of fish will be playing with "I'll have chance to win $xxx" mentality anyway, possibility for bigger wins is gonna look more lucrative to them even if actually end up paying more rake longterm.

edit:
There's nothing wrong with current rake system, why even try to fix something that isn't broken?

Last edited by chinz; 06-22-2013 at 08:37 AM.
chinz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 08:26 AM   #17
cbt
veteran
 
cbt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hell
Posts: 2,960
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

I really like the idea because of the money moving up BUT it's simply not going to happen and any more time invested in thinking/debating about it is a waste.

When recs see how they have to pay 50% of their winnings at once they will get mad for sure even tho it's 100% the same deal... it's stupid and so are people.
cbt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 08:29 AM   #18
joeri
old hand
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: bemyguestbud/l0ve2playu
Posts: 1,238
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Problems with time raked that i see from top of my mind are:
- Rake is way more visable. So recreationals are suddenly aware of how expensive the hobby online poker is.
- Who would start tables with a reg if it is time raked?
- Should you pay before hand for a specific number of hands? What if you bust/want to leave the table after a few hands. If you pay afterwards, what if you bust?
- What if players play really fast of really slow?

Flat rake in terms of bb/100.
I obviously agree with this line of thinking. Only problem is that the level of play increases dramatically as the stakes get higher. You should have some form of a decreasing rake in bb/100 if the stakes get higher. Also bb/100 rake is different for everyone based on play style.

I personally think pokerstars doesn't want to do huge changes to their rake system itself. I personally don't hate the system of a % with a cap at all. I just think the % and the cap is too high

It's also very possible that pokerstars doesn't want to chance the rake, but wants to alter bonusses. That would not be my first choice, but maybe something can work from there.
joeri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 08:37 AM   #19
blopp
Pooh-Bah
 
blopp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Skjervoy
Posts: 3,756
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeri View Post

I personally think pokerstars doesn't want to do huge changes to their rake system itself. I personally don't hate the system of a % with a cap at all. I just think the % and the cap is too high
+1

I also think your overthinking this and I think this is the wrong focus to bring to any meetings unless you beforehand have community support for it tbh.

I think the model they use for rake works fine but its unreasonable to tier in PLO with NLHE for game structural difference (just like its unreasonable to lump NLHE and FLHE together, even its actually the same game with different betting structure, PLO is different game and betting structure).
blopp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 08:44 AM   #20
CoronalDischarge
grinder
 
CoronalDischarge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Swongs and Donkabouts
Posts: 572
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Quote:
Originally Posted by blopp View Post
I also think your overthinking this and I think this is the wrong focus to bring to any meetings unless you beforehand have community support for it tbh.
Yeah, eldodo it's fine to bring up ideas for discussion on the forums beforehand but please don't go and peddle your own pet theories without the widespread backing of the community. And I mean no disrespect by this, but keep in mind that your name was put forwards as a stats guy, not an ideas guy.
CoronalDischarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 09:51 AM   #21
eldodo42
adept
 
eldodo42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: pre-flopping sets
Posts: 1,026
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Quote:
Originally Posted by CoronalDischarge View Post
Yeah, eldodo it's fine to bring up ideas for discussion on the forums beforehand but please don't go and peddle your own pet theories without the widespread backing of the community. And I mean no disrespect by this, but keep in mind that your name was put forwards as a stats guy, not an ideas guy.
No disrespect taken. And you're entirely right: I definitely consider myself more of a stats guy and think my primary purpose in the meeting is to understand the numbers. I'll happily defer to joeri, Shane and the others in terms of possible solutions and what to bring up for discussion; I'll be perfectly content to avoid mentioning this proposal at all if it seems that there's lack of interest in it from the community (which seems to be the case right now).

I think this rake-on-winnings idea can also be used to define what "fair rake" is: suppose we do the math and see that currently in NLH100, 100$ are raked for each 200$ in net winnings of winning players. While in PLO100, 110$ are raked for each 100$ in net winnings of winning players. This could be taken to mean that pokerstars is taking 2 times too much rake in PLO100, so rake percentage and caps should be halved, or bonuses should be adapted appropriately. In fact, this can be a decent algorithm for setting rake in all micro and small stakes games: look at how much winning players are netting, and set the rake so that stars takes, say, 50% of that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by joeri View Post
It's also very possible that pokerstars doesn't want to chance the rake, but wants to alter bonusses. That would not be my first choice, but maybe something can work from there.
Yes, based on things Steve wrote in his meeting report I'm pretty sure that's the case. Do we have any way to prepare for this? What would agreeable solutions look like? Should we ask the community in advance?


Quote:
Originally Posted by joeri View Post
Flat rake in terms of bb/100.
I obviously agree with this line of thinking. Only problem is that the level of play increases dramatically as the stakes get higher. You should have some form of a decreasing rake in bb/100 if the stakes get higher.
Yes, completely agreed. Rake in bb/100 should decrease with stakes. Playing style.


Quote:
Originally Posted by blopp View Post
I also think your overthinking this and I think this is the wrong focus to bring to any meetings unless you beforehand have community support for it tbh.
Sure. If there isn't support for it I just won't bring it up.


Quote:
Originally Posted by chinz View Post
There's nothing wrong with current rake system, why even try to fix something that isn't broken?
Under the current rake system eventually become unbeatable. If and when we get stars to lower the rake on PLO or increase bonuses, the same fight would have to be fought again a year or two later.
eldodo42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 09:56 AM   #22
ProEvoStar
grinder
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 556
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

So I play with the old system and a friend of my uses the new system.

He won quite a bit and asks me to cash out for him, he sends me $1K I can cash out without paying 50%, because I use the old system.

Whole player transfer has to be removed in your proposed system. I see a lot of problems in it, some of them already mentioned in the thread.
ProEvoStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 10:03 AM   #23
Praetor
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Coaching/staking
Posts: 11,805
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

I really dislike this idea, mostly because I think recreational players would hate/not understand it and would be absolutely turned off by getting taxed 50% when they do go on a heater and want to cashout, it could turn tons of fish off poker which is the last thing we wnat

+1 to please dont go suggesting ideas like this to Stars without the community backing them
Praetor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 10:12 AM   #24
joeri
old hand
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: bemyguestbud/l0ve2playu
Posts: 1,238
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldodo42 View Post
No disrespect taken. And you're entirely right: I definitely consider myself more of a stats guy and think my primary purpose in the meeting is to understand the numbers. I'll happily defer to joeri, Shane and the others in terms of possible solutions and what to bring up for discussion; I'll be perfectly content to avoid mentioning this proposal at all if it seems that there's lack of interest in it from the community (which seems to be the case right now).

I think this rake-on-winnings idea can also be used to define what "fair rake" is: suppose we do the math and see that currently in NLH100, 100$ are raked for each 200$ in net winnings of winning players. While in PLO100, 110$ are raked for each 100$ in net winnings of winning players. This could be taken to mean that pokerstars is taking 2 times too much rake in PLO100, so rake percentage and caps should be halved, or bonuses should be adapted appropriately. In fact, this can be a decent algorithm for setting rake in all micro and small stakes games: look at how much winning players are netting, and set the rake so that stars takes, say, 50% of that.




Yes, based on things Steve wrote in his meeting report I'm pretty sure that's the case. Do we have any way to prepare for this? What would agreeable solutions look like? Should we ask the community in advance?




Yes, completely agreed. Rake in bb/100 should decrease with stakes. Playing style.




Sure. If there isn't support for it I just won't bring it up.




Under the current rake system eventually become unbeatable. If and when we get stars to lower the rake on PLO or increase bonuses, the same fight would have to be fought again a year or two later.
You deserve no heat for posting these ideas at all, so glad you don't take it.

Your idea to use rake-vs-winnings ratio to set a new and more fair rake is really good, especialy if we take the higher plo variance into account. It is a way of showing that plo is raked way larger compared to nlh, even if you take into account the so called "softer plo games". But offcourse we have to wait what kind of changes stars is willing to make.

I do think however that we should be realistic about things we would like to get out of the meeting. Radical changes to the business model won't happen anytime soon. Also the idea of discussing with the communitee what we can agree with is a bit silly. Its our job to convince pokerstars that action is needed and to make sure that the maximum change for the better is being done and that the change results in the improvements in the right places. We however can't demand or negotiate anything, it al depends on the willingness of pokerstars to change.
joeri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2013, 10:55 AM   #25
Hoopman20
veteran
 
Hoopman20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,366
Re: Suggestion: A new rake system -- rake only on winnings

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeri View Post
You deserve no heat for posting these ideas at all
This. I think your idea is crap but I give you infinitely more credit than anyone with no ideas at all or anyone with ideas but too scared to post them. Throw ideas out there, shoot the bad ones down, improve ideas, etc... that's always going to produce better results than just assuming the position of a pure critic with nothing else to add.
Hoopman20 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online