I'm not sure if this was discussed before, but I'm disgusted at how PS advertises: "7% / 5% / 4% rake", when the actual numbers are: "7.56% / 5.56% / 4.56%". However, the rake is decent. A good reg can easily have an edge in games like these.

Going more on the math of the equity side, it is obvious that rake imposes an equity penalty on all players. So the starting (default) equity of a player will drop from 33.33% to 30.8% / 31.4% / 31.8%.

As many others have stated, edge-wise they seem pretty grindable, given the massive amount of fish and their subsequent poor play in minimum prizepool games. However, the variance is so huge that it might take tens of thousands of games to start showing profit. This is the part which needs tweaking.

Have you considered that top 3 tier 2nd and 3rd place finishes also gets 10% equivalent of 1st place prize money?

I thought the 10% for 2nd and 3rd is a sort of ICM balance, where the prizepool becomes: "80% 10% 10%". Am I actually wrong, and it is "100% 10% 10%" ?

That's right. The top 3 tiers in buyins paid are actually

1000/100/100

200/20/20

100/10/10

That's 83.33% / 8.33% / 8.33%

Then the rake is even smaller!

Spin 'n' go rakes: 7% / 5% / 4%
Default player edges: 31% / 31.66% / 32%
Edge required to break even: DEFAULT_EDGE < BREAK_EVEN_EDGE < 33.33% (depending on your rakeback percentage)

Sounds like a pretty pure game to me. As I said earlier... shame it has such insane variance

Yep, it's 7% / 5% / 4% to be exact.

Yeah, I did some bad math on both levels. Thanks for the correction. I guess PS is honest in the end

According to my calculations 34.7% is breakeven winning percentage for 4% rake games (pre rakeback).

These games truly have an amazing amount of casual players right now and the 3 handed thing adds interesting dynamics imo. Interested in when they will introduce 60/100s. hopefully we may see more favourable payouts...

Even though 2nd and 3rd both get paid one-tenth of 1st, there's only three entrants, so everyone is guaranteed the same basic payout before a hand is dealt. With the winner taking the rest of the money, it's still effectively a WTA structure

So there's still no ICM.

This makes no sense to me. Break even rate would be 33.33% if there was NO rake.

he already told that he was bad in math

lots of conflicting math itt
any posts that explains the variance in these?

How about you search around or use max cuts excellent simulator instead of just asking to get it served on a silver platter...

Correct. And thank you. Based on that, the final correct percentages are:

Spin 'n' go rakes: 7% / 5% / 4%
Edge required to break even: 33.33% < BREAK_EVEN < (35.66% / 35% / 34.66%)

- the lower the rake, the more mistakes you can make and still show profit in the games.
- depending on your rakeback level, BREAK_EVEN may be closer to the left (SNE) or the right (BronzeStar)

I could be fun to likely it expect different contibutions from the top 3 jackpots to your ROI after different amount of games.
If any body is up for the task.
Like how likely is it that you won 100 or more buy inns from top 3 jackpots after 5000 spin and goes if wee say you expect 33,33% winrate in then.
And same with 300 500 1000 2000 3000 buy inns for a 5000, 10000 20000 40000 60000 100000 200000k samble

Deals are not possible but how about deals for 3 highest jackpots. Is it really such a big deal for PS to bring tournament host for a such unlikely events?

How about making private deal in a chat between players (when tournament host is not supervised). According to PokerStars' Tournament Rule #23, part f. "chat records alone will not necessarily validate an agreement. However, PokerStars may enforce a deal if it was clearly agreed to by all parties."

Having guaranteed chop 33.3% for 3 highest prizes would reduce variance a lot and your profit only a bit if you are strong player.

Played about 200 of these games. Built roll from $15 to $200 than seen the true nature of these games, and it's ***** sick..the suckouts ive witnessed are amazing. Seen alot of ppl on tilt. It's unreal. I really try not to play majority of opponents play by going all in.cuz they know theyre lucky.I'm not kidding even with AQ I'm hesitant (lost 4 AQ in a row to **** like 83o. Last hand I played, my AA lost to k8. Fckr got a straight, how the *** do you get a straight out of k8. If you get AK, and opponent has 59o,You better say a prayer. Fun games anyways.

First off, i dont think it makes much sense in all but the highest or 2nd highest multiplier to deal - kinda depends on your volume really.. If you plan on playing 100k of these a year, then you can deal with variance a lot better...

Second, why would you chop 33%. If i´m a winning reg i´m not gonna give you 33% each - that would be stupid.. if you wanna deal, sure, but not at the rate you wish for..

And lastly, all this and your citation of rules is pretty useless, as i really want to see how you enforce a chat agreement when the table clearly states "NO DEALS POSSIBLE"...

IMO PS disallows deals for a reason, maybe to avoid some collusion but maybe i´m wrong. Fact is, the PS platform is kinda lol bad to handle deals.. FTP is 100x better in this regard but i guess implementing that would take effort for them, and if you havent noticed, atm PS cannot be bothered alot about what regs want or wish for...

Lol, just played another, guy shoves and im holding AK, i broke my rule and call, he shows 10 9, entire stack on 10 9, thought to myself if i lose this im done,not playing with all-in psychics anymore. He gets his straight. Lol.

You say nothing about stack sizes, were you HU or 3-handed? Did he open-shove T9o BvB on a 11bb stack? Because that's a really good move, and you're a weak player if you waste your time with this kind of stuff.

You lost a 62% - 37%, so what? If you are going to pursue your poker career, this is as sweet of a spot as they come. Wait 'till you see the hard decisions. Stop complaining, play more, play well, maintain your edges and ... don't cry like a fish. If you're really good, when you're losing, you're losing less, and when you're on a winning streak, boy, you're winning hard, baby!

Wait you regularly fold AK 25bb and shorter to a shove AIPF?

please sit me..

go and play PLO instead

with more cards already dealt, and therefore dead, your opponent will have fewer outs on average, and you will have a better chance when it comes to the big all-ins

omg, imagine if stars offered PLO spins