Quote:
Originally Posted by oneselfishguy
100-120% rakeback is better than 6-8bb winrate on pokerstars( zoom games, regular tables is a different topic)
What winrate have top regs NL50-100z, 200z on big sample?
Simple math to calculate hourly/$: PROFIT/ HOURS.
The amount of %rakeback influence A LOT what PROFIT you have so its a big part of the ecuation when playing on partypoker.
What do you play on partypoker?
I recently was thinking this about Stars, Party, WPN and some other places and perhaps Winamax and it seemed to me that it might be pretty much the same, the tougher games having lower rakes (higher rakebacks).
Stars used to be a tougher site when they still offered rakeback and it hasn't made any difference at the reg tables if there is a rakeback or not, other than the lower rakes/caps in PLO, and those games got even better with the table caps. The exceptions are some, like the zoom games at Stars; I don't think it makes sense to play them there when the rake is too high.
The Party deal generally starts earliest somewhere at low limits, though not sure about the quality of the regular low limit games there.
GG will have fast omaha about now, if gets players, as a third place that might have enough fast PLO action also (and the rakes there tend to be lower than at the regular tables, so might be playable).
Winamax has fast NLH, but the site rakes 5.75% at their cash games and I don't think it should be played as fast there.
WPN has fast NLH (with the 27% rakeback, or some higher in big cases) but PLO doesn't get action there (but at about PLO10 during the high times) in spite of being a big site. Should drop the PLO fast rakes.
The winrates at regular tables (vs. rapid) can be like 10 bb/100 higher in PLO (like zero at rapid and 10 bb/100 at regular). That depends on limit (and rakes). A lower rake/rakeback makes a vital difference in rapid games.
The more hands one gets in per hour at the regular tables, the worse they are, and the better the fast tables are. The fast tables have the edge they get more hands in per hour (at Stars); the cost is they are tougher (at Stars) and the variance (this meaning) as so is higher.