I understand exactly how rakeback and profits at the table work and I stand by everything I've said. We'll find out this year how all these players who made SNE in the past playing 50bb max NLHE and 20bb PLO games will fare THIS year. Count me as one player not impressed in the LEAST by any player who makes SNE with break-even to losing proifts at the table. The only players who put in a ton of volume that I respect are players like Nanonoko and JustforFunds who play lots of hands AND make money at the table.

I just want to put out a few more examples, only using well known guys:

CharismA3 - Pokerstars online team pro. Currently negative ROI on the year, but very positive profit due to rakeback.

DaWarsaw - Pokerstars online team pro. Not currently beating $1/2 NL according to ptr. But paid $75k+ in rake and so positive profit from the game.

Jorge Arias - Pokerstars online team pro. Nuff said

Chiren80 - Pokerstars online team pro. 5 million hands barely any profit. Obviously most of his profit comes from rakeback or he wouldn't be playing so much.

----------

I'm pretty sure these guys don't care too much if they breakeven. What they do care about their bottom line, and whether or not that line is in the black.

I didn't look up all the pokerstars team pros, but just as an example I have found 4 of them who are between slight losers and slight winners in terms of ROI or bb/100. In terms of profit, they are ahead because of rakeback.

There are many, many other well known players going for SNE that are breakeven or losing (ROI wise) but will come out with a nice profit on the year.

LOL. So you say he is down 14k and then you try to tell us how skillful he is. Did he make money? Sure. Did he have a good winrate? No. You see it is a persons winrate that shows how skillful he is not their hourly.

if ih8money had any skill whatsoever this change wouldnt bother him at all
the fact he says he has to learn to play 30 blind plo shows what a joke he is

and if youre really impressed with chiren lmao thats just sad

they should care about breaking even because if they honestly think the current system is in any way sustainable theyre in for a rude awakening

Well that's fine if that's your opinion. I'm just telling you as a fact that many players do this, including pokerstars online team pros.

To continue my devil's advocacy, I pose you this question:

If pokerstars reduced their rake by 50% and removed their VIP program, all of these guys would be "profitable" in your eyes. Would you now be impressed?

Again, you will not find many players who agree with you here. 30 tabling $500 SNG's for 10 hours/day and breaking even is insanely skillful. You are simply wrong if you don't believe so.

And I must pose you this question then: if pokerstars reduced their rake by 50% and removed their VIP program, would you then say this player is skillful?

Hint: this is what SNE is.

Never said I was, never followed him much, only saw a few of his youtube vids. I don't really have an opinion on him.

My point was to find examples of breakeven well known players who profit solely or mostly from the VIP program.

He is skillful if he has a high winrate. The fact that he can mass multitable does not make him skillful. Bots can mass multitable. Would you say that they are skillful?

dude, your logic is so bad I'm not going to even bother after this. We're talking about human players, not bots. I never said mass tabling makes a person skillful. I said 30tabling $500 online SNGs for 10 hours/day and breaking even is insanely skillful. (how many HUMAN players in the world can do this? Hint: less than 100). WTF does a bot have to do with this? Nothing. No, I wouldn't say a bot is skilled because it can multitable. WTF stop and think before clicking the submit reply button. Your posts are so mindbogglingly illogical.

Evidently you feel a player with -.00000000000001 ROI is not skillful even if they are playing $500 online SNGs. That's fine if you feel that way. You won't find many people to agree with you there.

Good. Since it doesn't.
You lost me. Is the bolded part not masstabling?
Well if the guy masstables, loses and plays insane hours then that seems a little botlike to me.

You keep posting like we don't know there are some people who make SNE and who are losing money at the table. We DO know this. We think it's lame, NOT SKILLFUL or something others should aspire for, and the only reason they get away with it in most cases is because of an exploit and most of those players don't have any talent and that is WHY they do it. Most players WITH skill don't focus on lame ways to try to circumvent the system and make money. They sit at the table and own newbs, not "win" with a 0.001 bb/100 win-rate over a zillion hands or -1 bb/100 losing rate and think they have poker "skill".

Surely the winrate is related to the rake though?

For example if they raised the rake to 20% per pot, but gave everyone back the extra 15%, everyone would still make the same amount of money, playing exactly the same, but in your eyes (because everyones winrate on the table is now negative) everyone would be unskilled now somehow?

Conversley if they just lowered the rake, these unskilled breakeven SNE players would now be slight winners at the table and somehow more skillful? Allbeit less skillful than people with a higher winrate.

I could be wrong, but this just seems logical to me.

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle. There's rarely much middle or gray area for these "what if" scenarios. You don't accidentally put in 5 million hands, get SNE, and lose money at the tables. It takes a concerted effort, focus, and PLANNING to do that. Most of these players tried to win at the table, couldn't do it, and turned to other ways to "profit". And, that was the best plan they could come up with. They found a loophole and leeched it for every ounce of blood they could squeeze. Now, the well is dry and they're NONE too happy about it because the players who lack the skill and now don't have the loophole are left out in the cold saying RIDICULOUS things like they will go to Full Tilt now where (a) they don't have the loophole either (b) have a worse VIP program in terms of rakeback %. Players who have legitimate skill are either already winning or will move to a game where they can.

There's a simpler point that "rathole skill defenders" are missing. The REASON they were able to put in so much volume is because it didn't take much skill to break-even with the abc games they were playing. The REASON players like him are mad is because NOW those simplistic, devoid of skill games are being removed and NOW you HAVE to utilize skill. Once you have to start utilizing real skill, all of a sudden, guess what? No more 5 million hands of break-even poker ... unless you have REAL skill like Nano and guys like him who can actually play 24 tables AND make money. Again, playing 24 tables of 20bb poker folding/pushing according to a chart/HUD configuration and then leaving the table after a double-up never impressed me and never will. There's not enough VIP levels or rakeback that will ever change that.

But, hey, different folks, different strokes. If you admire that behavior, aim for mediocrity ... although, in today's poker landscape, it's getting tougher and tougher.

Oh I didn't mean to say or suggest that I agree with or admire ratholing. In fact I feel quite the opposite, and I agree with you that it was a loophole. I also agree with you that the 24 tabling (or just sheer volume) strategy is not a good way to improve or even maintain your skill level relative to the average skill level.

My query was purely winrate based, and I think my point is valid mathematically.

It is!

Skill = beating your opponents

Winrate = Amount you beat the field MINUS rake

Cash surplus = Winrate + rakeback (or in other terms = amount you beat the field - the amount of rake the pokersite keeps)


So when talking about skill then talk about how much some one is beating the opponents. Has nothing to do with rake, rakeback or anything. So skill of a player depends on the strength of the playing field but shouldnt be connected to rake structure or rakeback.


And bottom line is, that NO PLAYER can make money without beating the field as long as he doesnt get more than 100% rakeback. I dont think (even with dealt rakeback method) that any of the rakeback-pros loose more money on the tables than they pay in rake, so after all they at least have the skill to beat the field.

the only reason these break even clowns can turn a profit is because of a flawed system
the losing players arent players playing 24 tables
they also play and win a lot more hands than the break even hud bots
not only do the break even hud bots get a higher percentage of rakeback (ie supernova gets a higher % back than gold or whatever) but stars still uses the rediculous dealt method which gives them this higher % back on rake they havent even paid (ofcourse when tilt switched to a much fairer system all of the leaches started crying about it-instead of apprecaiting the free money tilt had given them for years)

If ih8money had any POKER skill he would find the deeper games to be more profitable, instead of this ******ed 20 blind ******** he claims to be poker

Just so I understand, you think bb/100 is a better measure of a poker player's skill than hourly rate? So you would consider an 8-tabling 1bb/100 winner less skilled than a single tabling 2bb/100 winner?

Do you think most serious poker players would prefer a higher number on their ptr page/hem reports, or a higher hourly earn?

If mass-tabling is not a skill, why can some people do it successfully and others cannot?

Also, why would a bot being able to do something possibly affect whether it's a skill or not? Bots can keep up with the best players in the world at HU LHE. Does that mean that game does not require skill? Bots can beat most anybody at chess, is chess no longer a game of skill?

It is obviously a skill. That is proven because the vast majority of people who think they can mass-multitable, fail miserable at keeping up with simple pre-flop play. Unless, they think all the people at their tables like watching their light blink and are doing it for the benefit of the other players.

Do you have any knowledge about PLO games?

Just to be fair, Ih8money and many of the shorter PLO players are more on the loose and for sure aggressive side of the game, so most of them contribute MORE rake than they get accounted for rakeback with the dealt system (at least on levels like 1/2 and up, where even shorter stacks are good enough to produce pots with max. rake).

Maybe its different in NL Holdem (dont know!) but in PLO there are not many shortstacking nits and the few are mostly (if not all) loosing players even after rakeback.

i have a lot of knowlege about plo games
i actually play plo not this trash he plays (lmao at him in tears bc hes gonna have to play gasp 30 blinds deep)
id be stunned if hes actually getting less rakeback based on dealt than he would based on contributed

OK I am pretty confident that actual numbers would stun you then or at least be close

But I don´t know for sure...

hi guys

how many of you arguing against breakeven med/highstakes players even play anything over 1/2? (or its equivalent in tourneys). phatty... you play 50nl. get real... any breakeven mid/highstakes player would totally crush your games. that is 100% given.

the only thing that matters is hourly. a player who breakeven in bb/100 and makes SNE decimates anything a micro-donk could make. you can call them less skillful, but they're using their abilities in a productive way. that shows some intelligence at least. they might be more ballsy to actually play $2/4 and face swings you nerds can't even dream of.

the other side, ih8money:
please stop whining. just nit it up and breakeven at any other form of poker you choose. you'll be able to manage that fine. full ring is probably the best choice for you; it's pretty hard to lose any money when you only pay big blind 1/9 hands, so quit crying and get earning those fpps. PS never owed you anything for playing in those games. shortstacking is not something you're "owed" and if you get the games to play it, be grateful. since plo cap didn't come to fruition, you just have to accept it and move on. i'm a guy who used to shortstack the 20-50 games and now plays cap. yes, i got a better deal, but no i didn't feel like it was owed to me.

who even gives a crap on the actual amount of rake paid... anal donks.

/thread

id love to see them

id love to see him trying to play actual post flop poker even more

id love to see your ptr