Quote:
Originally Posted by Warder
Rakeback is essentially just a worse method of lowering rake as far as quality of games go. Rakeback encourages mass multi tabling by allowing players to calculate, to an exact dollar amount, how much they'll be guaranteed to earn on their volume of play. Where as with lowering the rake, it benefits everybody without giving them a guaranteed income.
You do understand, I hope, that if it's flat rakeback based on rake paid, then it's the exact same thing. There's no reason one should encourage more multi-tablers than the other.
What
does encourage multi-tablers is a tiered system, where more volume means a higher RB %.
Rakeback/VIP programs can be used one of three ways. A flat rakeback system can be exactly the same as lowering the rake. A tiered rakeback system that rewards volume can be used to entice regs. And a different rakeback/VIP/rewards/bonus system could be created to encourage rec players. Lowering rake has no flexibility. So really, I think the objection shouldn't be to rakeback itself, but how it is implemented. Of course, if a site has no rakeback in the conventional sense, but is giving out a lot of money in other forms (freerolls, bonuses, etc.), then that is a targeted form of the same thing.
All of that, of course, doesn't address the issue of certain games/stakes being unbeatable. Sometimes certain formats require a different rake treatment, and changing the rake itself is the only realistic way to address this. Although I suppose it's also possible through a VIP system that gives more rewards at those games and/or formats.