Quote:
Originally Posted by zica
I want to make as much money as I can. If I owned a poker site, once money got deposited I would want to get it all. If someone else took some of it I would work to stop them in the future. Anyone who withdraws money would receive scrutiny. If he's not cheating and seems to be a steady winner I would ban him or get rid of him some other way. I want players to push the money around until it's all gone to rake. I would probably offer free poker instruction to make everyone more even so that no one can beat the rake in the long run and I would thank god for 2+2.
Isn't it a zero sum game, if a player withdraws(is a winning player) the site operator will make that much less money? I don't know why a winning poker player would think he's doing the site a favor. Is it just because poker tracker tells him he's paid X in rake? But the site could have made all that money eventually and the profit the player withdrew as well if only the withdrawing player didn't exist.
The danger is they discourage players who mistakenly think they are good enough to win but aren't. This is why a hand-per-week limit would be better. Players who loose money probably don't put in high volume anyway, also get rid of micro stakes - that's probably coming - to force people to gamble off their last dollars on the casino games. They will probably raise the rake cap all the way up and drastically. I would. $5 at $100/$200? No way.
Let's use a simple example. A Supernova Elite pays around ~150K$ in rake per year. A substantial amount is given back as RakeBack ofc. However, on the other hand you have Steve, a mid stakes donk who deposits 200$ everyone now and then to play on the weekends when his wife is out with her friends. Obv the SNE is a much more worthwhile customer. He is continually contributing his rake, day in, day out. Steve loses his stake quickly, and goes away, paying as little rake as possible. While it is true that winners take money out of the poker economy, they are also a pillar of that same economy. A poker room derives revenue through
rake, not deposits.
In this sense, the poker economy, as it stands, needs winners. Winners grind losers deposits into rake, and losers attract good players.
The level of play above the micros is quite good. Bad players, even those with a remedial understanding of the game, lose
quickly. This creates a rather predatory environment where poker hasnt become an enjoyable past time; it has become an uncomfortable transaction. You pay a heavy price for wanting to play poker. I believe this is the big problem online today.
Winners are not an evil, they are a natural part of the game. Take all the best players off stars, and you will still have winners, and losers.
Somebody wins, somebody loses, and Amaya takes the rake.