We've had worse. A few years ago, it was almost impossible to beat FTP's microstakes because the rake gobbled up everything. Now that the rake is up again, thanks to the rakeback changes, we may be back there.

rake is terrible

Do It Right, maybe you've had less problems, that doesn't mean the post-UIGEA public perspective on poker hasn't changed. Advertising has been reduced. Depositing IS more difficult. Until this year, I don't remember friends and friends of friends asking me to send them $50 because they can't figure out how to get any money on the site anymore.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. At least as far the direct effect on people trying to build a roll or make a living from the game.

Why anyone uses BB for nl is beyond my comprehension, but anyway...

Going with your 4.7BB number and assuming rb + ftp numbers. I'll use base rakeback + 3.65% for ftp points with no ironman. Total RB is ~30%. Further, I'm just going to use 4.7BB/100 rake and assume your quoted winrate is for 6max and JH1's chart is for FR because the rake figures too low to me to be for 6max and this figure is pretty close to what I'm paying ... its just a coincidence that it's the same as the WR.

So if you pay half of your winnings before rb, you pay .50 - (.50)(.30) = 35% of your winnings postrb and not counting any added value... I don't know about you, but I can definitely live with this as an acceptable price for the service I'm being provided.

I'm not going to say much about the effects of the rake on the player pool because I'd just be speculating. I seriously doubt recreational players care about the rake, and I doubt most of the posters in this thread think they do either or it probably wouldn't exist in the first place. So if the fish don't care and the sharks can still win, then it would seem to me that the issue at hand impacts mostly marginal players. This is not to say they aren't an important part of the poker economy. I would be interested to see a study or even some insight from someone who sees farther than I on the role marginal players play in the poker economy and the impact of rake on them. Although it would be quite difficult and somewhat subjective: I would also like to see growth numbers for recreational players, marginal players, and skilled players independently.

Except a point comes when people get sick of seeing threads about the same topic over and over again and start tuning them out.

Just because sites don't all use rewards the best way doesn't mean they're a bad idea. Fish are more likely to notice rewards available to them that are worth 2.5% of the rake than they are to notice the rake has been reduced to 2.5%. Rewards can be tailored to whomever the site likes - fish, grinders, low stakes, high stakes, whatever they want. Rewards allow different skins on the same network to differentiate themselves; rake reduction doesn't. Rewards are much more marketable than rake reduction.

Not long ago, people claimed any nit with a hand chart could beat the micros for 3BB/100. You knew you were a good player if you were crushing the tables for 20BB/100+.

You don't see the contradiction?

It seems most of the guys in this thread (and in the RB related threads in general) are taking the rough estimate of ~35% as given. Think about what that means.

A company can consistently give away 35% of their revenue and still make a massive profit.

Do the math. (NOTE: not everyone gets the full RB; you can still bet the sites make sure a non-sponsored player doesn't cost them money.)

I know we all have big egos but even 2nl these days is kinda rediculous. I play 50/100nl and it's incredibly hard to get someone to move up from 2nl and get him started in the game. The games are tougher and the rake is still incredibly huge. Something needs to change.


If u look at the rake, you need to crush before you can actually have a positive winrate. It's all a nice illusion.

Join in and add some educating text to whatever avatar you use or make new ones. Let's just do this first step good for now.

<----- First avatar

Posting again for pretty colour sequence.

Great initiative op and beautiful avatars compared to the one I did a while ago.

more colours

in the minority maybe, but not alone

I think it's a bargain but I don't play for a living.

I will make some more soon. Hopefully others join in. If anyone has any text ideas on the avatars let me know I will turn it into an avatar.

Thanks for all the support so far guys! Glad to see some are using the avatars. Ask one or 2 people you know frequent here to do the same also I guess.


If someone really doesn't want to change their avatar. I suggest adding a small rake banner thingy to the bottom of it or so. "Rake too high" "too much rake" etc

Animated avatars would be even better.

+1, let's show some support in here

I apologise in advance if this point has been made already but it's sunday morning here and i'm too lazy to read all 8 pages of the thread.

Sites are constantly trying or are under pressure to attract new players and not poach from other sites within the same Network.

A large proportion of these will be 'recreational' players, or 'fish', as the sites like to call them.

They feel that if they have a large population of fish then their site/Network will become more popular all round.

However, if the site sat these 'fish' down and explained to them that after a month of their recreational play, you have paid, lets say, $100 in rake BUT we will let you keep any money you have won PLUS we'll even give you $30 back for free, the players would still think it's great.

The sites are actively seeking these types of players because they lose the most and it is these very types of players that don't give a toss about the rake.

You're doing it wrong.

Of course we would all prefer less rake but the trouble is that it is not so bad that it stops people playing. If I was running a site I would want to charge the most I could to make the maximum profit.

Jh1 - $5 max rake on nl200 would run off practically every player at that stake to a different site. Pretty ridiculous proposal. And I've never heard of a site that charges 5 max rake at nl400. Not sure why you want to completely kill the midstakes game but your proposal makes absolutely no sense to me...and you make it woth the belief that it would somehow be helpful.

I'm pretty sure that the solution to high rake does not involve making it even higher.

I think there is a very slim chance that any actions from the community could cause lower rake because it is so hard to realize. At least at the mammoth s ites.

First of all the question is how many poker players are organized in communities at all.
Second question is how many would take part in a project like a no-play-day or maybe even a no-play-week. Even if many will participate there is still a big chunk of players who would probably think: Hey, juicy tables today. I r sneaky and play. gnihihihi..

Anyways look at the situation now. Stars and FTP have still the best rake structures and yet people are complaining. I think, it's legit and it might be good if rake is lowered, but what should they think of any threat if they are seeing tens of thousands of players playing on Entraction and iPoker, Microgaming, <Poker Room with Multi Currency Rake Structure> and paying like 30% more rake. Maybe people should make a statement and force smaller sites to adjust their rake at least so it is compared to $3 max first. Especially at Entraction the advanced players, who are almost always active in a community can have a huge impact and they would probably react very quickly.

The animated one cant be used...lame. Seems it is too big? 500kb.



EDIT:



You might need to save and upload it from 2+2 itself. I had to. Would not work with link. This one is 248kb. (250kb, 80x80pix limit)

Great avi's!

Good players are the sites rake, we remove money from the accounts where $$$ circulate the gaping pokersite plug hole, so can we atleast establish they wouldn't give a sh** if we had a day off, this is why making 2+2's good players aware of rake is utterly pointless and has been done a million times to no end.

Being aware that you're being f***ed isn't enough! If you want change, the sites need a very persuasive reason to give up 100's of millions in profit a year.

I realise it's easier to rally up support in a fricken morg than on here, but apart from a sharp decline in the player pool ie the death of online poker, protesting in some form that disrupts their multi-million dollar business day on a regular basis could maybe be the persuasive reason to lower rake. Sites could do without the hassle.

I don't understand the people ITT arguing against this. The rake needs to drop, it's ridiculous. I agree we need to make it more beneficial for the site to drop rake, so lets do something. Have a set day for sitting out. If not that, have a day where all of 2+2 emails PS + FTP about it. Come on guys, something!

Can I get a rake Mii and I will use it.

i like both