I said "I am kind of assuming that WTA is a lost battle".

Why on earth are you writing this to me?

You are not one of the reps but I bet you have your own opinions, dont you?

Paraphrasing the discussion here since this is a quote of a quote of a quote type conversation:

1. Steve claims winner-take-all is not a good idea since there would be too much variance in players' day to day VPP results.

2. It is shown that won hand % actually converges very quickly which seems to directly contradict Steve's claim.

3. ant's argument is then that while won hand % does converge very quickly, the pot sizes won - and thus VPP generated - surely do not converge very quickly.

I believe this is once again incorrect and it can be easily shown, but it is slightly more involved than adding a single stat. Here's how you do it:

That figure will give you a rough approximation of the rake you individually pay per 100 hands you win. My exact figures in this case once again have extremely marginal variance. The biggest outlier in any of my sessions I could find was about 36% off the mean, and that was for a 27 minute 6 tabling session.

wta would be awesome
the exception is for heads up bum hunters
people who sit in the lobby all day and only play the trash of the world hu generate exactly 0 rake for ps and should get credit for 0

Playing 20/18 100NLSH CAP: 0.31 VPP/hand, no happy hours. Was about 0.33 last year. Not really 'the end' of CAP imo...

Inaccurate: I said it does not do so so fast. (#2111)

Also, I noted that it has to be taking in account not only one player pattern but several. There are players styles (and even games/variants) that imply more variance and moreover players are not all high-volume players playing 5K+ per day or whatever, casual players may happen to play as little as 1 hour and not multitabling much. That is also part of the argument. (#2118,#2119)

There you have it: there are players around that this is close to what a daily session is (and some even less, lets take as an example a casual player playing for 1h at 2 tables). It is even less than that...

@Do It Right, yep thanks for that math. Not a lot of variance to worry about then. I doubt recreational players are aware of their usual VPP/session, checking their VPP count mid session, and getting concerned about fluctuations that small. Worth bringing up at the IoM imo, even if it doesn't get implemented until later years.

I guess I am just a nit because I will be getting 15% less VPPs even though I have a 30% vpip.

Guys... Don't lose time with arguing about WTA method.
Can't you really see that Stars isn't interested in (additionally) rewarding grinders, good players, winners? There's a reason why they switched from dealt to WC...

That is my opinion but then again apparently I cant have opinions cause jspill doesnt let me (seems just only reps may express opinions).





PS1: No worries, jspill, it's all in good spirit (really).

PS2: If it was up to me, I would chose WTA.

curious what stakes you play and how nitty you are?

I have 20% vpp reduction on my humble 4k sample size.

Playing CAP SH 24/21.

Total hands this year : 35764
6 max, 40bbs strategy, 22/20

MGR = 1219.6
WC = 978.78

Conclusion WC = 80% * MGR

I GOT A REDUCTION OF 20% OF MY DEALT RAKE.

buy in full then

Uploaded with ImageShack.us


Why should I ? Don't you like this graph ?

It has a happy ending, for sure.

Weird, whats your PFR ? It may be if you're like 30/29 since most pots are going to be folded PF.

And I did not play during happy hours.

exactly
theoretically someone could be a 80/80 and if they never got called pre they would never pay a nickel in rake

Look, you buy in for 40BB and got equal credit for all the 200BB pots on your table under dealt. You were leeching. You probably hit and run which is something fish hate. You reduce every regs WR because you decide to 3b 10%+ of the time because of your stack size. Theres plenty more things I could say about 40BB 'strategy.'

I have no sympathy for you. In fact, part of the reason Ive come round to this change (although with the rake reduction or something else in addition) is because it might make all the 40BBers leave.

Can anyone tell me which site offers best rakeback and decent software?

PokerStars?


This is what you can usually get:
iPoker 60%
Ongame 50%
Party VIP program
Entraction 40%
Merge 50%
...

ok but with WC system why do they only give 5.5 vpp per 1$ rake at 6max and 6vpp per 1$ rake at fr?

totally unfair.

also , did the rake cap change?

i think the WTA system should be used for stakes above say $100nl and stakes from $2nl to $50nl can be WC.

players who play at $100nl and above are likely to be a bit more experienced, a bit better at managing their bankrolls and not so bothered about getting a consistent amount of fpps per session so they can buy a t-shirt at the end of the week.

think something like this can work?

obviously you can't have an opt in/opt out system with players playing each other even though they want their vpps awarded differently.

and you could have WTA tables but i suspect these would be reg infested and not work well.

so i think have WTA starting at either $100nl or $200nl and up and the equivalent stakes for plo, sngs + limit.

thoughts?

I don't know if it was explicitly stated as such before, but there was either speculation or an indirect implication a couple of years ago or so that the multiplier difference was there because 6max games run more hands per hour than full ring and it offset that "cost" - cost meaning that more hands per hour require more resources such as support, server power, and the like.

The merits of that could be debated, but I think that was a prevailing explanation and no matter which raked method used wouldn't change that.

losing around 10-15%, the pace bonus will hopefully make up for some of it.

but I don't see it continuing next month.

I'm off to buy a TCOOP ticket discounted by whopping 50 fpps! (oh wait there are no $33 ones in stock)

For those whe have been following for the last couple of years, Stars have been making an effort to turn the system more simple and transparent.

At first, the VIP system was a big mess and it has been worked out to be more clear, now there are even charts around with % rakeback equivalent and even so, most players dont get the system entirely at first and still there is some confusion (VIP multipliers, FPP multipliers, stellars, milestones, etc).

This would go on the opposite direction: one method here of calculation, another one there. Seems to me that it is pretty clear that it wont happen.

I dont even believe that in the short term they "touch" again on this. WC is to stay because they introduced it and announced it in many places (site, client, etc) just now and they are not going to retract from that so soon.

Maybe with 2013 changes, who knows...

That's my thought.




PS: For SNGs (and MTTs btw) neither the WTA or WC applies, the "rake" is the "fee", there is no question or debate about it.