I'm totally on board with Global's business philosophy of not tailoring the site to professional poker players. However, I think it would benefit everyone to drastically reduce the rake for shorthanded games.

Right now you can see that frequently all the tables are full at various limits. Sometimes there is a table with one player waiting but it is hard to get new tables started. I think this is for two reasons: first, many rec players do not like to play shorthanded, but second, pro and smart rec players are aware of the huge rake they pay for shorthanded play.

I think it is best to look at rake paid per player per table per hour. In a six-handed game at 2/4, right now I'm looking at five full 6-handed tables and one full 9-handed table. There are no seats open. At the 6-handed table, about 60% of the hands see a flop and they are averaging 71 hands per hour. At $3.50/flop seen the table makes about $150/hour or $25 per player.

Heads-up play typically sees many more hands per hour, maybe 150, with maybe 75-85% flops seen depending on how much the SB raises. at 80% that's $360/hr at the $3 cap or $180 per player per hour!

I think a reasonable philosophy is to aim for a desired rake per hour per table per player and set the caps accordingly. But you can see that the per-player rake is incredibly high for heads-up action. Even rec players will feel the pain because they will lose money too quickly and grow unhappy with the site.

So if I were VP of operations for Global I would crunch the numbers and adust the shorthanded rake caps to yield my desired per-player rake. Say that's $30/hr per table for mid-to-high limits. Then the rake cap should be $.50 for heads-up play (which, not coincidentally, is what it actually was back in the old Full Tilt days). Similar calculations should be done for 3- and 4-handed action.

This will result in more revenue for Global as both pros and rec players are more willing to start games and play shorthanded. I consider myself a "smart rec player" and I love playing shorthanded but won't at the current tariff.

That's my 2+2 cents. Thanks for reading.

QL

Yeah been brought to their attention, but they've essentially given a big **** you similar to what Bovada did. They lowered heads up rake by like 50c or something. The 3-4 handed rake needs to be lowered as well as heads up further. I've stopped starting tables without a "rec" player and will typically sit out if 3 handed as well.

even the rec players notice the HU rake. it really needs to be changed

Agreed. I've had Rec players (I'm talking limp utg, stack off any flush in plo etc) type in chat that rake is too high so they won't play heads up.

agree with your philosophy but you need to learn to do math properly mate. Your assuming rake cap is always hit, that's only really true at 10/20 when everyone is 3xing. The rake is lower than you say it is, and global arn't going to take you seriously if your calculations are incorrect. The only way to convince them to lower rake is to show its in their best interest. There still is short handed action at all stakes so you will never convince them to lower rake as long as this is true. When short handed action becomes unprofitable for all regs, it will be in their best interest to lower rake.

That's what I get for dropping out of Harvard. Hopefully my main point still stands.

QL

Hey guys,

Appreciate the feedback in this thread. I have passed this on to the powers that be.

There is one other way to reduce rake actually. we could simply band together and refuse to play 10/20 reg vs reg, while the rake is this high. There are only like 20 of us at 10/20 so if we simply stopped HU battles for the time being, it might work in our favor. I would be willing to give up 10/20 HU action and reduce my profits if others did this with me.

My crosspost from a different rake thread:

I'm not saying that global needs to copy ACR's exact rake structure, but having 2-5x the rake is pretty ridiculous. Global reps seeing these numbers can't call their rake competitive without it being a complete lie. I'll give Global the benefit of doubt and would like to think that they aren't trying to fleece customers in this case. I believe that the current rake structure for shorthanded games stems from a lack of understanding of how high the rake actually is and how it impacts players / games.

^^This.

It's been apparent they don't have seasoned poker people advising them from the get go, the rake issue just being another piece. Hopefully with all the feedback posted here they will make some informed changes. They do listen to these threads at least!