Consider these two methods of collecting "rake"for the house:

1. Traditional rake of $X flat per hand (i.e, $5 per hand if a flop is seen)
2. Tax the winners of the game X% of their net profit for the session, but no rake/hand.

So, in case 2, the winners of the game will be paying all the rake to the house at the end. The losers will feel like they at least didn't pay any rake.

What are the pros/cons with each methodology? Obviously, the consistent winners of the game would prefer case 1. But, to entice the losers to keep playing, or attract new losers to the game, what is the tipping point that the winners could accept in case 2 to keep playing? What level would the winners tax have to be set at to allow the winners to maintain their current win rates? Is having one donkey in the lineup enough, or do the winners need 4 or 5 guys dumping off cash each week? Does average stack depth people are playing with influence this calculation? Short handed vs full ring? PLO vs NL Holdem? Any thoughts on this would be appreciated!

I think your question is great, but I am not sure that the Probability Forum is the best place for this thread. Seems to me to be a "general" poker topic that many people could/would express opinions on.

Let me know if you'd like me to move your thread to another forum. My first thought is NVG (News, Views, & Gossip).

I don't think this would be even remotely workable. Consider that at venues with reasonably high rake (i.e. most live venues), the rake is so much that in an 8 hour session you might only expect 1 or 2 people to win any money, from a pool of say 15 people. Those 15 people plus you roughly paid the same in rake. To ask the 1 winner to pay all the rake means that he'd pay 16x as much rake. The rake taken by the casino in that period probably dwarfs his profit, I think it could easily be 2-4x.

Like, if a casino rakes $5/hand at a 1/2 NL table and there's 25 hands/hour that's $125/hour. I don't think many people are making 125bb/hour (500bb/100) at 1/2 NL.

If the rake is evenly distributed then each player at a 10 person table is paying $12.5/hour. If a decent player is making $20/hour post rake then he's making $32.50 pre-rake, so for him to pay the full $125 would be impossible. You'd need 4 people winning at that rate to do it, and each of them would walk away with almost nothing.

sorry if this is the wrong forum. I put it up in the Home Poker thread. I guess I'd rather not post it in NVG as some of the guys in the game might see it, and quite frankly would be upset at me even asking this question publicly. Also, I thought my best chance to get a serious, well thought out answer or comment would be here. You know how things end up in NVG. If its not appropriate here, feel free to take it down.

This could also create collusion situations against the casino where two friends are playing, one is up $1000, and the other is down $1000. Let me dump the $1000 to you so we both break even and we can settle off the table.