Indeed this is the difference between the charts. 5.5 VPPs is given for <6max; 6 VPPs is given for full ring. As Steve pointed out, tournaments give 5.5 VPPs as well.

Thanks for writing.
I agree, at low levels tournament entries are better value than the small bonuses. From time to time there are also insta-cash bonuses too, which have better value too.

Difficult to translate in terms of rakeback, but yes, there are plenty of perks.

Kudo.

Your guess is wrong, you'll always get the 27% flat basically, with bonuses you just loose 27% of the bonus value (or the equivalent rakeback sum), also some bonuses do not hit rakeback (EOY bonus from Ironman). If you are a low volume/limits player that plays on FT continusly (so you make Ironman each month), you can actually get around 60% rakeback overall. For higher volume players I think overall is still around 30-35% if you count everything.

The table is not OK.

You forgot Stellar Rewards for example...

My chart.. Couple notes:

1) Assumes the player started the year as SN.
2) Does not include any freerolls.
3) Gave 25k to SNE in Milestone (10k Cash, 10k WSOP, 5k WCOOP)
4) Assumes FPPs are worth 0.016
5) $150 is the reload bonus
6) Milestone includes Stellar Rewards
7) I'm a tourney player so I used the 5.5x/$ VPP rate.


Not sure how helpful this is, but I figured I'd post it anyway. I enjoy the VIP system much more over standard rakeback. My only complaint is that I wish 2M/3M VPP earners had a little more incentive. Maybe a 6x FPP multiplier?

Well since we've got two already, I'll post mine as well, geared towards getting SNE and starting as SN w/5.5 multiplier

Simplicity8 table is better since it considers the stellar rewards and the reload bonus (although I would sugest a column "RB without bonus" since someone may not take advantage of it.... although surely most 100K+ players will!).

If you want, you may include the January Salue added value, which is $150 too on the $650 and $1500 discounted bonus that will be available this month (see related topic). Thats already a total of $300 "bonus" during January...

Mine does have stellar rewards in there, but not the bonuses. $300 doesn't make much of an impact on VPP value or RB% when you're talking about $100k+ in rakeback. I made the chart more so for learning how much is actually required to attain some of the goals.

Well, it has an impact of 4% already on his total rewards for a 100K player. And probably it will improve through the year...

Not counting with $300 (as for the moment) is tha same as not counting with the first 10 stellar rewards because they have not a "great impact" too.


They are cash.

By the end of the year a 100K supernova will be likely above 40% instead of 37.4% (it is already at 39%... a couple of promotions during the next 11 months and it will get past 40%).


For a 500K (for example) it will increase very lightly, though. Anyway, as I said before, its a cash. And likely by the end of the year something like 1K cash...

And my chart starts at 800k....... The exact total value can't be determined until the end of the year, so is it really worth nitpicking $300 when the tourney value can vary by as much as 3-5k anyway? Should I go back and remove 19 FPP from each value for stellars as well?

I was answering to your 100K+ argument, not to a 800K+ argument (I must say I did not pay much attention to your chart, I just was answering to your post that I believe it was meant to me).

I am talking about cash (I thing I said it twice on the previous post). Tourney Tickets are not cash (I for one almost never play them - as many SN as far as I now - but I take advantage of all "cash promotions" whatever they are).


About "nitpicking"... well, they are cash (yeap, thats the fourth time I say it) and what is nitpicking for one, isnt for others: for a SNE 1.25M+ I guess the 1K stellar rewards would be "nitpicking". Much more "nitpicking" than $300 is for a 100K SN I would say. Anyway, $300, $1K, $10K... its all cash!

(yeap, five times)

If they bring RB equivalent for a 100K SN to 40%+ by the end of the year, instead of 37.4%... then I see no relevant reason to not consider them all since people around are giving so much importance to RB% (although I sugest a column "RB without bonus" also).

Its not for me. I dont use others tables, I have my own. I made my calculations already.



I am just point out things because someone reachs here to find what they get and they will see different things here and there and some are not very correct (or they are incomplete). For example, first table ITT doesnt even consider Stellar Rewards. Thats incorrect, incomplete and misleading information... we started with 32% for a 100K SN ITT and now we are at 39%. Sorry for "nitpicking" 7% RB in cash!


And sorry for the long post too...

oh just a misinterpretation then. I assumed you were comparing mine vs. his since you responded after mine, but you were comparing his vs the OP.

What games/stakes/tables will you be playing to hit those MGR/hr #s?

you can sign up at cake and get right at 37% for doing absolutely nothing.


Also as far as I know there are no deductions from rake back.

Exactly.

What is the average rake and fees at the games you usually play?

RB% by it self means NOTHING.


Rakeback is what you get back from what you payed in advance. Sites dont take the same in advance (happens that Stars takes less than industry average in almost every game/format). In some cases, much much less...

If you play SNGs with a fee of 10% and get 40, 50 or 60% when similar SNGs have a 4% fee at Stars, that rakeback is meaningless, totally misleading. Even with a tiny 10% RB you would be better at Stars.


And talking about this, its important to note that even if effective rake/fees are the same (similar) after all math, it still is preferable for obvious reasons to play at the one that has "low rake/fee - low rakeback".


Almost everytime that someone talks about a great rakeback outside stars, they are talking effectively about a worst deal!

They "just bought" the high rakeback thing forgetting to check how much they are still paying (and thats what really matters).



It depends on what you play (format, stakes, etc) though...




Note: May not be the case of Cake Poker, I dont know that poker room very well, never player there for other reasons than rake/rakeback.

People care way too much about that stuff. Just pick the site you're most comfortable playing on. RB figures are approximately the same on every site anyway.

I would say that in most cases and as for now, thats a terrible policy. Kind of "blind" one.

Conditions when it comes for rake/rakeback are far from approximately the same on every site, you are plain wrong. And with the improvement of average online poker quality, it gets more and more relevant. In some cases/stakes/formats this is more important than your winning rate at the tables.

Moreover, rake/fee taken in the first place affects directly your winning rate anyway. And it is not the same everywere!

Ofc there are diffenrences. What I meant is you get around 20-30% as an industry standard. If you're a high volume player you can get ~50% by reaching the highest VIP levels. (like Supernova; even FTPs Ironman can be worth quite a lot if you play long enough)

But there so many factors that determine the money you win. Softness of the games, hands per hour (even such ridiculous small details like how big is the timebank). Also for lots of RB calculations to be correct you have to play an exact amount of hands because any additional dollar of rake won't buy you anything. Therefore it seems pointless to choose a site because you get 3.29% more RB in a vacuum.

Also the idea of planning your poker year based on RB seems crazy. What if you suddenly want to play PLO or HU in June. Your whole calculations would be off because you didn't factor that in.

Maybe the games you play are really tight or you will get looser. Suddenly the numbers are nothing more than a rough estimation on a site which uses the dealt rake method.

etc etc

You get the idea.

Anyway, I went to check and with no surprise, there are differences for worst at Cake.

Some examples:


> If you are playing at NL50 SH and there are 5 players dealt (common) the rake cap at cake is $3 and $2 at stars;

> If you are playing at NL20, rake is calculated in $0.01 increments at Cake (worst) and in $0.05 increments at Stars (better);

> If you are playing at a $10 doubleornothing/doubleup SNG at Cake you pay a 7% fee, at stars you pay a 4% fee;

> If you are playing at $0.5/1 FL the rake cap is $1 at Cake and $0.5 at Stars.

Etc, etc...


So Cake Poker is another poker room that rakes/fees more than Stars in advance.


Links to check:

http://cakepoker.com/en/PlayPoker/Re...ames/Rake.aspx

http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/room/rake/

and the lobby of both poker rooms for the SNG example.

Been averaging $120/hr 12-tabling 2/4-5/10 6-max limit holdem. eek limit.

For my volume I get about 45% at Stars and about 35% at FT (including iron man). Thats the first difference. The second one is that FT takes more rake and fees in advance in the games I usually play. I am much better at Stars. And then there are other poker rooms where the situations is even worst. Part of my play I am making at SNGs (the other at cash). Other sites "promising similar rakeback %" take more than twice the fee in advance in some cases (of games that I actualy play)...

So, you are plain wrong when you say that is everything more or less the same. Do you get why now?

Avicenna, if i make SN (100k points) this year, what would be the value of being SN next year assuming I make it @ 7.5k point a month (and pstars makes no changes).

I play 6max NLHE

also, is your chart assuming a player starts from bronze level?

thanks, im a FTP noob who is still abit confused by this.

His chart is considering that you start as SN already.

If you start as Bronze, thats 105.625 FPPs less by the time you reach 100K VPP, what worths $1690.

I left my spreadsheet on my computer in the office, so I cannot even correct the small mistakes in it.
But basically the point was to make it clear that the old way to see the thing, i.e. the vpp/hand figure, was not required any more, to calculate rakeback equivalent.

But to put you on the right track: If you play 6max you'll get 5.5 VPPs for each $ raked. If you are SN, you'll get 3.5 FPPs for each VPPs, and each FPP is worth 0.016$, roughly. Add the Stellar Rewards all the way, and you have your numbers

All in all, my chart is an under-estimation, for all the reasons contributed by the other members.

Why is two lovers never enough? Well, once I played for a while I fell in love with Stars and loved her dearly, then one day I saw a pair of sexy legs of full tilt across the road and lusted for her body and dumped stars. Then I realised that I could have both these ladies satisfying my needs and I share my love with them both. Believe it or not I’ll willing to share my passion with another, but who could that love lady be?

OK, so I’m not a faithful man but why? Well love is a two way thing and I want the best of all worlds. Firstly, I’m a low stakes player who really enjoys the game but as I don’t really play holdem my choices are limited. Secondly, I like to get value from the game so will take the best offers going and feel no need to stay faithful to any site as we never married but just love fooling around together. Note game selection and others factors are important.

So I’ve looked into the new Stars VIP program:

This is formed of 4 main levels Bronze, Silver, Gold, Supernova (there is a platinum, but these people usually get to Supernova after 12 months so are not included here). Everybody is award Bronze VIP and to achieve the others you need 750 VPPs per month, Gold 3,000 a month, Supernova 100k per year. There is now a stellar reward program where you get cash bonuses when you hit certain milestones throughout the year.

The attached spreadsheet gives the returns for a silver VIP assuming a reload bonus throughout the year of $600.

http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?k...la1VOQkE&hl=en

Without taking into account freerolls the RB for these levels given the certain amount of reload bonus at the current clearance rate is:

Reload 0 150 300 450 600 750
Bronze 21.6% 47.6% 49.6% 46.3% 47.1% 47.6%
Silver 23.4% 32.4% 41.4% 51.1% 53.4% 52.4%
Gold 26.4% 28.4% 30.9% 33.4% 35.9% 38.4%
SN 45.6% 46.5% 47.4% 48.3% 49.2% 50.1%

As soon as the reload bonus is introduce we see that a Bronze VIP does better than gold or silver. However, once the second reload is introduce then the Silver has the best return (they actually get a better return at $500 reload than $600).

So a Silver VIP does well and maybe worth doing during the reload times.

Now full tilt is a bit more complex.

Basically, you get a point for each dollar of rake taken and 1k points is worth about $5.

Secondly, you can become a bronze (50pt for 20 days), silver (50pts for 25 days), Gold (100pts for 25 days) or Iron man (200pts for 25 days) member. You get medals compared to how long you have been playing and member status. Each medal is worth $0.2, you also get additional medals for not playing in the freeroll event.

Thirdly, you get a mid and end year bonus Bronze $300, Silver $600, Gold $900 and Iron Man $1,200

Finally, you can get 27% RB of remainder of MGR. Though you can add in other benefits such as RB freerolls, rakerace, happy hours, free training site access and other one of promos which I haven’t included as you can get most of these at all levels.

The RB you get for these grades is as follows based on 13, 25 and 37 months play:

1 2 3
Bronze 48.0% 51.5% 57.6%
Silver 56.9% 61.8% 70.9%
Gold 51.3% 55.7% 62.7%
IM 45.3% 48.8% 55.8%

What is most odd here is that again silver gives the best rewards and you need to double your play to reach the next level. Of interest here is that after 13 months the rakeback on the additional play between silver and gold is just under 46% and between gold and ironman is just under 40%.

I can probably make silver without a problem and the same goes for Gold, though would be willing to play more sites if they also had as good a deal. Making Gold isn’t a problem either.

However, moving from gold to Ironman seems a big more of a commitment and one I’m not sure I want to make with this lady while there are other beauties around. So my first $5k I give tilt I get returned 50%, yet the second $5k I get less than 40% and if I fail to make it then this is less than 30%.

So I both stars and tilt rewards silver very well but then give less and less, though to be fair at Stars is you become a very high volume player (I never will) then you can get your rewards back. Both these systems encourage me to play around and as such I have both these as my lovers.

However, there will be times when I’ve been satisfied by both these ladies but lust for more. Some I’m after a bit on the side with a cheap little lady who’ll let me use her as and when I feel like it. Anybody have any ideas?

By the way this does highlight that the design of rewards systems aren’t the best and secondly you should just keep you play at one site. We are consumers and we need to keep a competitive market so let’s make best use of what’s available and let the market place complete more competitively for our business and so take the best deals out there for your level of play. Of course never losing sight the rake that a site may charge or the softness of the tables.

PS: sorry about the bad formatting of the tables, if somebody tells me how I'll edit this section.