The benefits of a time charge are obvious (more conducive to a loose game since the LAGs don't get raked more than TAGs), and there aren't any of the drawbacks that a time charge presents in live games (i.e. making it more obvious how much $$$ is coming off the table), so I don't see why going to a time charge wouldn't do a heck of a lot of good in the online world, particularly in the lower limits.

Thoughts?

Fish : I'm not paying money every hour just to play poker when I can play for free at other sites!

The sites want to maximize rake, not lower it. They won't even consider it.

It doesn't have to be a traditional time charge, it could be a per-hand charge, or something similar. It could be just as non-intrusive as online rake.

There's no reason the total amount raked couldn't stay the same. They'd just have to average the previous rake totals to figure out at what rate they wish to "time-charge" the players.

No way would they ever do this. Got a better chance at getting your period.

Jesus Christ NO!!! If a local card room does that I won't play there. Let the fish play lots of pots and they pay the rake. Thats the whole benefit of paying by the hand. Your going to tell me Player A (vpip 10-13) should pay the same rake as some jackass Player 2 (vpip 85)?

well considering the person WINNING the pots pays the rake currently player A could be paying more rake now since he will win all the big pots and let all the small pots go

it will also cut down on the 9 vpip players a lot because they won't be leaching RB from other players since now they're just getting part of their own rake back

this idea will work with ante tables
just ante 5 cents (for 50NL I think) and put 4 cents into the pot from each player or w/e and don't take any rake so it's always 9 cents at 9 max, 6 cents at 6 max, etc.

They won't do it I tell you.

I PROP AT A FEW SITES.. PLAY FOR FREE.. JUST NOT A TON OF PLAYERS

BUT HAVE WON 30 K BETEEN BOTH SITES I GET 100% RAKEBACK

MIKE

Why shouldn't they pay the same amount? They're playing the SAME GAME. You do realize that all high stakes games (live) use a time charge, right?

Time charge is definitely the better option between the two, and the only reason it isn't used is because it's blatantly obvious how much is coming off the table, and this is something poker rooms want to avoid. Being online though, you can avoid the fish realizing they're paying to play. Just (as iopq stated) have the $0.05 or $0.25 or whatever come out with the ante. The fish are none the wiser, and it makes the game so much better.

The current rake structure favors one style of play over another, and this is never a good thing. Even up the playing field! It might even keep the 80% vpip players playing a little longer!!

Its not going to happen.

But keep the argument up.

So how's that working for ya?

I'm assuming you're in favor of some sort of time-charge/hand-charge, but just think it'll never happen?

How big of an effect do you think it would have on stakes where the rake is a major concern?

.

Got Nutz?, it's pretty obvious that rake favors the tighter players. A player playing 10/9 pays significantly less rake than someone playing 33/20 (based on an equal # of hands).

As far as the 80% vpip players go, if I had to choose between giving them money, or giving the edge to some 10/9 robot, I'll choose the 80% guy everytime. I'm sure you would too. But you're not giving them any portion of any pot, or anything out of your pocket, you're just leveling the playing field, making sure everyone has to pay the same regardless of playing style.

As an analogy, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't consider it fair if tournaments did the same thing and based their rake on VPIP and propensity to build large pots, having the 10/9 guy pay $24+1, while the megafish has to pay $24+3. Don't you see how these would hurt the tournaments? You're intentionally busting the bad players faster than the nits.

If you want to level the playing field, cut out SS, PTR and bought hand histories. But I am not paying by the hour, to help some idiot stay in the game longer.

Well, the things you listed are for a different thread entirely, so I won't comment (I agree though). You probably wouldn't pay by the hour, it would be per-hand fee more than likely. And most importantly, it would INCREASE your winrate (assuming you're not a 7/6 nit). More bad players would have money, and in turn, the nits would have less, so YOU would have a higher winrate!! Win/Win

rotflmfao

jesus, like 20 out of your last 30 posts have some form of "lol" in them, how about actually contributing something?

[x] in before quote, and lol

Things are often funnier then they are serious.

i can just hear the complaints now...

Dear ftp support,

THIS ****IN REG IS TAKING FOREVER TO PLAY HIS HANDS. HE TIME BANKS EVERY HAND. YOU CHARGE ME EVERY HOUR TO WAIT FOR HIM TO FOLD?

Well, yea a loose player pays more rake. That's not the issue. The problem is that the loose player gets a lower share of rakeback compared to the tight player (on most poker sites). You should advocate for a contributed system, one where you get rakeback only on the rake you pay. Wouldn't favor the tight players.

Happens all the time in Live play. But it does stop the Deck Changes

1) Like I said, it probably shouldn't be a time-charge, but a per-hand charge. I didn't think of the issue until after I posted the OP. It should also be as non-intrusive as possible, either coming out with the antes or with the blinds. This way, the fish are unaware of any money being paid out (or at least as unaware as they are of a rake).

2) Your second argument is (much) more fair than the current system, but the high VPIP guys would still pay more rake than the tight players, and this isn't right.

Why the **** is it not right? They pay more to hit their flush draws. They pay more to hit their gut shots. I play a certain way to minimize what I pay out, they do not. Why should I have to pay more rake?


*** Have you ever played regularly in a game where they charged by time?

You have got to be kidding me. You play a certain way to maximize your +EV versus other players. You SHOULD NOT have to play a certain way to maximize your +EV against a poker site.

This isn't really a debatable point. A time-charge/hand-charge is by far the most fair solution. End of story. The only issue is a practical one, will fish feel "cheated" by a hand-charge whereas they might not notice the rake? I think this problem is solved by methods discussed earlier and would be just as non-intrusive as the rake currently is.

OK sure. I can see all the sites changing by next week. May be Real Deal could use that a "new gimmick" as the old gimmick did not work. Seriously, have you ever played in this type of situation.