Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem

03-17-2013 , 07:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by POW
I'm just saying 'maybe' these things helped grow the game online, In 2006 I remember player numbers between 20k-40k on the big sites, 5k on smaller sites, now its pushing 300k at peaks.

The point of this thread is the games have got to get pretty damn fun if players are going to spend many hours mastering the game only to find out 0.1% are winning over a smallish sample. THAT is unsustainable.

If most of the newbie fish leave the game, which is inevitable, the bad players putting in hours of study to still be losers in the game NEED to win for good samples before donking it back and some, then rinse and repeat. These player types will need to be retained for the future of online poker to survive in its mature state, but as it stands, 0/100 OF AVERAGE-SKILLED PLAYERS ARE LOSING OVER 60k hands.
The game is dying already, simple article:
http://www.splitsuit.com/are-todays-...ore-aggressive

Sure splitsuit took pretty small sample but for me numbers are almost the same. In 2010-2011 according to his data 1.2 milion hands were played by 43k people while in 2012-2013 almost the same number of hands was played by less than 10k people. Don't have enough data but for me the numbers are pretty close so on every miningful sample the number of players is 1/3-1/4 of what it used ot be in 2010-2011.

What people don't realise that in reality we lost already like 60-70% of active players. the reason why numbers on pokerscout or elshwere aren't that bad is because regs play way more tables (and sites like pokerscout count only seats). Currently even at nl50 table with 1 fish is a good table nad higher it is even worse.

Current system is unsustainable. don't get me wrong guys I would also love the rake to be lowered but I also understand that it is no go.
The game without the regs would survive but the games without recreational players won't.
there are ******ed myths here considered as truth most notably posted by Do it Right that people like and try to push. We have had arguments like that for 2 years or so. Did it change anything??? For the sake of argument lets pretend that the rake is the biggest problem however it was already proved that there isn't any room that would conisder rake decrease. Moreover we have exactly opposite direction.
Stop being so focused on a solution that wont happen and lets be realistic on what can be done.
I can easily prove to a site that an idea that would increase the population of recreational player would benefit everyone can you do the same with rake decrease??

Instead of focusing on a thing that won't happen I'd rather focus on something that is way more realistic.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 07:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gargamel_fk
The game is dying already, simple article:
http://www.splitsuit.com/are-todays-...ore-aggressive

Sure splitsuit took pretty small sample but for me numbers are almost the same. In 2010-2011 according to his data 1.2 milion hands were played by 43k people while in 2012-2013 almost the same number of hands was played by less than 10k people. Don't have enough data but for me the numbers are pretty close so on every miningful sample the number of players is 1/3-1/4 of what it used ot be in 2010-2011.

What people don't realise that in reality we lost already like 60-70% of active players. the reason why numbers on pokerscout or elshwere aren't that bad is because regs play way more tables (and sites like pokerscout count only seats). Currently even at nl50 table with 1 fish is a good table nad higher it is even worse.

Current system is unsustainable. don't get me wrong guys I would also love the rake to be lowered but I also understand that it is no go.
The game without the regs would survive but the games without recreational players won't.
there are ******ed myths here considered as truth most notably posted by Do it Right that people like and try to push. We have had arguments like that for 2 years or so. Did it change anything??? For the sake of argument lets pretend that the rake is the biggest problem however it was already proved that there isn't any room that would conisder rake decrease. Moreover we have exactly opposite direction.
Stop being so focused on a solution that wont happen and lets be realistic on what can be done.
I can easily prove to a site that an idea that would increase the population of recreational player would benefit everyone can you do the same with rake decrease??

Instead of focusing on a thing that won't happen I'd rather focus on something that is way more realistic.
I am willing to listen to your ideas. On my site I already have random seat assignment, table cap of 6 for cash games and global wait lists / less lobby clutter. Totally new heads up lobby. These have all been detailed elsewhere and you can see the thread in the software forum.

You can even test the software now at test.*******************.com

I am still trying to come up with rake figures and want to lower rake but after calculations it seems rake would need to be lowered far too much for the kind of thing people in this thread are talking of.

If anyone has some sample figures to use for rake %, cap and for what game/limit I would be willing to try it.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 08:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by borg23
Im not derailing the thread you absolutely refuse to look at the real problems that make the game unsustainable. Rake per hand is actually significantly lower than it was a few years ago.Everything I said is completely on topic because your main premise is wrong.

A union won't work for several reasons. To start with for the most part poker players are self serving and can only think of the short term. The reality is everyone would have been better off in the long run if they just left things the way they were- ie playing 2-3 tables, keeping the games fun for the fish etc but instead thinking short term and only of themselves people figured i make x playing 3 tables I'll make 5 times that if I could play 15-20 (which would actually be true if you were the only one who could do it. )Or they think crap like table ninja and all these scripting softwares are the greatest things in the world when once again the truth is that stuff is really only great if you're the only one using it.When the hell in online pokers history have the vast majority of winning players thought of anyone but themselves? It's not gonna change now.

Good unions are well organzied and make short term sacrifices for long term gains.Thats never going to happen with poker players. I mean sure they'll be some people who refuse to play but it will never be enough to make a real dent on the site. People complain now about paying all this rake but they're still in many cases making their living from online poker. As many people showed after black Friday most poker players arent exactly saving their money.Most young kids who come into a lot of money are terrible at saving it. They just assume it will last forever. I know so many people who made a ton of money when a monkey could have made 150k a year playing 20 hours of poker a week who saved nothing. Apparently they thought the gravy train would never end and buying fancy depreciating shiny **** was more important.How many poker players can really all the sudden go with 0 income for a while? And even if it started working the games would be a lot better because all the pros werent playing that lots of people would break the "picket line" to play in the super juicy games. I mean you have tons of players who refuse to play against anyone who can count to six, these people won't be sitting out when lots of good players are.And the majority of the players who can afford to go without income for a while are the really good players, which something like this would benefit the least.They're gonna be at the top of the food chain no matter what.

Another thing about unions- they work a lot better when there is social and societal pressure not to break the picket line. It's a lot more intimidating breaking a picket line in person when you're getting yelled at and cursed at and knowing if the strike is over and you continue to work there all of your coworkers will hate and harass you.There are no such negative consequences with breaking a picket line with online poker.

The sites will still have tons of people playing if there is a "strike" and be printing money hand over fist. A good strike in the real world creates work stoppages and companies are no making 0 (and actually losing money because of fixed costs) This is another advantages to unions you won't have.It's a lot easier to wait out a union when you're still making a lot money and you know that you have them by the balls.

And to the people saying take 1 % or whatever rake in pots after a certain amount of hands- sites are getting away from catering to mass multitablers because that is a bad long term business strategy. You need an influx of new money coming in every month so to give incentives to those taking money off the site does nothing to help the sites profitability.

The players who leave the sites that play purely for the money are the ones who over time will break even or lose money. But realistically nobody is going to leave who still makes decent money because they think they pay too much rake and the sites know this. I mean there arent too many ways to make good money sitting on your ass at home.

I'm actually baffled over how many stupid things sites have done over the last few years that caters to little to no revenue generating players that just suck money out of the poker economy and hurt the site's bottom line.The sites seem to be realizing this and reversing course.
ty for taking the time to write this out among so much non-sense.

What is really annoying to me is how so many regs are wasting their time and energy with these topics because they simply ignore or refuse to understand what the bigger picture actually looks like.
Grinders these days have close to non leverage vs the sites because they at most games/stakes simply serve no valuable purpose. If some group go on strike there will be other oppurtunistic regs right behind them more than willing to take their place.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 08:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dean_nolan1
I am willing to listen to your ideas. On my site I already have random seat assignment, table cap of 6 for cash games and global wait lists / less lobby clutter. Totally new heads up lobby. These have all been detailed elsewhere and you can see the thread in the software forum.

You can even test the software now at test.*******************.com

I am still trying to come up with rake figures and want to lower rake but after calculations it seems rake would need to be lowered far too much for the kind of thing people in this thread are talking of.

If anyone has some sample figures to use for rake %, cap and for what game/limit I would be willing to try it.

There is one thing that probably is the biggest but I doubt that any non shaddy site will make it (due to regulation etc.).
There is a huge underground market of pokersites mostly mafia related. They are not well known in the 2+2 world but they are both fishy and very big (would be easily top 10 for com site at pokerscout). How they did it?
they let fish to pay and play with cash. Most people underestimate how inconvinient it is for recreational when they have to register to a site, have credit card etc. It take some time and is boring (+you underestimate for how many potential fish it is too difficult to register with a site )

The site I think now did it completely different. For example you go to a internet cafe/bar/casino you give them cash the agent of site instantly create for you nickname and load your account with the money. If you win something he pays you exactly the same. You can also go to a bar drink a beer and play poker on a machine simmilar to slots.
Moreover many of the sites like that allow recreational players to play on credit.

What you need to understand is that it is not only about the software and solutions you are willing to offer. You need to bring player and it is really difficult.
We had some legit people that tried to do it ( most notably highpulsepoker) and failed because they struggled to bring liquidity on.

Additionally if it was up to me I would start with casino instead of poker simply because the liquidity isn't so important there.

When it goes to poker You can have great solutions but you need marketing etc for your site not to be a ghost town.
Look at this even here on 2+2 people complain on almost every site but they won't switch cause there has to be a liquidty. We had some no rake sites (betshark?)that collapsed because they struggled to bring new players.

Your software solutions,etc aren't that important what is the most important is how do you plan to bring the players on.
the way current poker enviroment looks you can treat your players like **** as long as you have the liquidity they will stick with you.

So if it was up to me I would focus on how to bring as many players as possible and then I would focus on the software, solution to improve the poker ecology etc. Cause in order to improve the poker ecology you need to have the ecology (so players/liquidity) in a first place.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 10:46 AM
The online game has become too difficult for average joe to enjoy. The target market people are trying to bring back to the game are slight losing regs. Think about that for a second.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LT22
The online game has become too difficult for average joe to enjoy. The target market people are trying to bring back to the game are slight losing regs. Think about that for a second.
Is your point that the sites need to encourage and retain these players? Or that the deposits won't be there? Because I agree with the former, and think the industry would actually grow again if they allowed average-skilled players to go on confusing heaters.

This also means forums such as 2+2 will have a lot more power, so these threads are important.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 02:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by POW
Is your point that the sites need to encourage and retain these players? Or that the deposits won't be there? Because I agree with the former, and think the industry would actually grow again if they allowed average-skilled players to go on confusing heaters.

This also means forums such as 2+2 will have a lot more power, so these threads are important.
The former, the days of fish infested games are over. Online poker has become insanely competitive. This competitiveness has become a huge barrier to entry for new players; even at micros. The only thing we can hope for is to somehow convince slight losing players to continue to burn money at the tables.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 04:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LT22
The former, the days of fish infested games are over. Online poker has become insanely competitive. This competitiveness has become a huge barrier to entry for new players; even at micros. The only thing we can hope for is to somehow convince slight losing players to continue to burn money at the tables.
Well my view is that reducing rake to 1BB/100 would convince a lot of losing players to burn money as most of them wont have a clue that's what they're doing. Just look at the difference in swings from the OP graphs. The sites have got to start realizing that their future potential market/customers are not going to invest the time and money into a game they KNOW they are all massive losers in because they never have a winning month/year, and a game that has such dim prospects even at the top of the food chain.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by POW
Well my view is that reducing rake to 1BB/100 would convince a lot of losing players to burn money as most of them wont have a clue that's what they're doing. Just look at the difference in swings from the OP graphs. The sites have got to start realizing that their future potential market/customers are not going to invest the time and money into a game they KNOW they are all massive losers in because they never have a winning month/year, and a game that has such dim prospects even at the top of the food chain.
Do you actually think a player like this could go on a sustained heater?.....http://www.pokertableratings.com/ong...er-search/RCAG These are the micro/ low limit donks that have become near extinct online these days...
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 04:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lefty rosen
Do you actually think a player like this could go on a sustained heater?.....http://www.pokertableratings.com/ong...er-search/RCAG These are the micro/ low limit donks that have become near extinct online these days...
this isn't the type of player I'm talking about, think small single digit loss rates
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 05:06 PM
Okay how about this guy? He is losing at 2bb a hundred but without rake he would be a marginal winner? I'm not sure you would want a home game winner on your table either?...http://www.pokertableratings.com/ong...rch/Mr+Drinkie
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 07:41 PM
Seems like lower rake makes sense from a long term perspective. Its hard to generate new players when you have to beat the game by upwards of 10bb/100 at small stakes to breakeven. I played some small stakes omaha last fall and I was paying 25 dollars an hour for the privilege, and I was profitable before rake.

However no site is going to lower the rake. Pokersites profits are falling and their response has been to try take more money out of the player pool by lowering rakeback, bonuses and seperating winning players from losers. In all honesty, I expect to see net rake to rise as player levels fall and Pokerstars has some time to take advantage of its monopoly.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 08:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LT22
The online game has become too difficult for average joe to enjoy. The target market people are trying to bring back to the game are slight losing regs. Think about that for a second.
Yes,

and there can only be one reason why that is: rake. We have to figure out how to make it work for everyone.

There is no way of fixing online poker without solving the way rake is structured.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-17-2013 , 08:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gargamel_fk
The game is dying already, simple article:
Current system is unsustainable. don't get me wrong guys I would also love the rake to be lowered but I also understand that it is no go.
So,

I agree with your first statement. Look at FT as a wonderful example.

But why are games unsustainable? Rake. In todays games a good player makes 3bb while paying 6bb in rake. So he wins 9 but pays 6 or 60%. A normal winning player likely wins less than 6bb and thus is a loser. I am not surprised that we are losing online players with this structure and will until this is changed. And i am also convinced that it will.

I personally pay about 10 times as much rake as i win, effectively only winning via rake back at 50nl.

For me to win $100 and make maybe 200-300 in rakeback someone has to lose 3k. That is why the game is unsustainable. No other reason. Everyone else talking about Huds, reg to fish ratio or whatever, are just are talking out of their rear and looking at this from a personal perspective.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-18-2013 , 05:00 AM
Knircky I understand way you think the way you think (it might be different for me cause I still win close to rake I pay so overall I get like 60%+ of my winnings).

Would lower rake benefit us at least in a short term?? For sure. Is there any chance for it to happen?? There is none moreover sites treat regs like **** nowadays and it gets significantly worse almost every month.
I think that even for sites it is a poor idea however it is that way.

It doesn't matter what I want or what you want. The only thing that matter is what ca be done and I'd rather focus on that.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-18-2013 , 05:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by knircky
So,

I agree with your first statement. Look at FT as a wonderful example.

But why are games unsustainable? Rake. In todays games a good player makes 3bb while paying 6bb in rake. So he wins 9 but pays 6 or 60%. A normal winning player likely wins less than 6bb and thus is a loser. I am not surprised that we are losing online players with this structure and will until this is changed. And i am also convinced that it will.

I personally pay about 10 times as much rake as i win, effectively only winning via rake back at 50nl.

For me to win $100 and make maybe 200-300 in rakeback someone has to lose 3k. That is why the game is unsustainable. No other reason. Everyone else talking about Huds, reg to fish ratio or whatever, are just are talking out of their rear and looking at this from a personal perspective.
Maybe at supermicros. At ssnl+ the rake is not as big as you make it out to be
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-18-2013 , 01:38 PM
10bb on 50nl not high?
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-18-2013 , 03:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gargamel_fk
Knircky I understand way you think the way you think (it might be different for me cause I still win close to rake I pay so overall I get like 60%+ of my winnings).

Would lower rake benefit us at least in a short term?? For sure. Is there any chance for it to happen?? There is none moreover sites treat regs like **** nowadays and it gets significantly worse almost every month.
I think that even for sites it is a poor idea however it is that way.

It doesn't matter what I want or what you want. The only thing that matter is what ca be done and I'd rather focus on that.
With the skill-entry barriers being set so high in online poker these days, sites can either start focusing on retaining their slightly-losing reg customers or very quickly fleece the quickly dying game for all its got.

The reg community needs to start discussing the future of online poker with the sites as its in both our interests for online poker to be around in 10 years time.

Once the reputation of online poker being 'dead, bot-infested, solved, rigged, impossible to beat' is the common perception, there is going to be barely any interest for new players to learn the game and so much harder to fix in the future.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-18-2013 , 04:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by POW
With the skill-entry barriers being set so high in online poker these days, sites can either start focusing on retaining their slightly-losing reg customers or very quickly fleece the quickly dying game for all its got.

The reg community needs to start discussing the future of online poker with the sites as its in both our interests for online poker to be around in 10 years time.

Once the reputation of online poker being 'dead, bot-infested, solved, rigged, impossible to beat' is the common perception, there is going to be barely any interest for new players to learn the game and so much harder to fix in the future.
The slight loosers stopped playing well because they were losing, pretty logical right?? With lowered rake they would become winners so sites wouldn't make more money that way (cause former losers would become winners). They would just be getting way less money from their current database.
the thing that most of you miss is that they just look at this from profit point of view; for them when it goes to their margins it is like casino>>>sportsbetting>>bingo>poker. They don't owe you anything so they don't have to send you fish to play poker with you.
You overestimate how much fish wants to play poker they just want to gamble.

Most of you here in this thread refuse to see the bigger picture. You see only your perspective. None of your solution will be ever addopted because it will cut sites profit which is no go.
If they aren't able to profit with big enough margin from poker they will just shut it down and become only casino/bet on sports sites where they already make way more money. They will lose some traffic but way less than you think. You just overestimate how much fish want to play poker, fish wants to gamble and it can do it in many ways that sites preffer (due to higher margins)
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-18-2013 , 09:20 PM
Gargamel u said u have a solution, care to explain?

Imagine u could do whatever u want, how would u set up a site in order to maximize profits. I.e u build a new site, or own an existing site.

Do u think u can maximize profits without a sustainable ecosystem? If not how do you balance profits with sustainability and how would u set it up to dominate the existing market and have a system that ultimately makes the most profit?

Last edited by knircky; 03-18-2013 at 09:27 PM.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-18-2013 , 09:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiego
Maybe at supermicros. At ssnl+ the rake is not as big as you make it out to be
sure if u consider 200nl micros than yes this is only a micro stakes problem.

At 1000nl the rake is effectively gone or a non factor. At 200nl only a pro can beat the rake. I am not sure how it is in between as I have not seen much data. I am a 50nl player, i've never really won at these stakes and I have never played any stakes where I was not a huge winner before rake.

Just to be sure I consider 50%+ rake ( vs of money won/lost) unsustainable and i think 10%-20% is optimal while 30-50% I think is really bad and probably unsustainable.

At 100NL + 200NL i have seen 100k plus hands of pros who win 4.5bb and they pay something around 60% of their winnings in rake. This is in line with the data posted in this thread.

So if a good pro has to pay 60%, then good players will pay close to 100% and decent winners will be losers (pay more than 100%). Causing all but the pros and few fish to remain. Hence the games we have today. According to that logic I am a good player at 50nl.

It does not really matter if its "only" low stakes and lets consider 200nl micros as the rake is similar and its the lowest stakes in casinos. The trouble is that 90% of players play these stakes and if u fxxxxx up the game for 90% u fxxx it up for all. Poker economy is a pyramid and needs feeder stakes.

If your numbers are better congratulations. (I have never seen better numbers so i challenge u to show). But it does not matter if the top 1% are doing ok.

Again if u can provide other numbers please show me, if my numbers are wrong please say so and explain how.

Last edited by knircky; 03-18-2013 at 10:20 PM.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-19-2013 , 01:19 AM
well it all gonna be repeated once again, but if poker is in a wrong state, there is either not enough fish, or the rake is too damn high. If thats the case, poker tables become a very fish-unfriendly environment, where every player who intend to win fights for every cent like there is no tomorrow.

Also if there is not enough fish, it can be looked at in the other way - there is too much regs. While regs are obviously interested in having a sustainable ecosystem, what about pokersites? From their point of view there allways gonna be just enough regs as long as there is some fish to generate the rake from, and they are obviously more happy having 1 24-tabling botlike guy than 6 4-tabling people, even if those people are forced to leave the game..

The only thing site can be concerned with is if that unfriendly environment turns fish off of their site and changes the money income which can be turned into rake. The only ones who got such statistics are the sites themselves.

Party already answered that question, first they announced that there are too much regs (reward system cut), then they said fish doesnt like too much regs either (segregation). But will it work for them? Fish is segregated, but most of them gonna have to leave the paradise and then they will be thrown into the same pool of regs they dont like, will donk their roll away and still gonna leave the site sooner or later unless they are thrown back in the pool with their next deposit, then its win/win for both i guess, but it will cut Party revenue for sure, as reg pool tables wouldnt run as much without the fishes, so the could aswell just cut the rake and get the same result without being shady and not trustworthy.

Guess Stars are not taking any action because game condition is fine for them(yet).
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-19-2013 , 01:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiego
Maybe at supermicros. At ssnl+ the rake is not as big as you make it out to be
You recently posted:

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiego
...Assuming I can keep at least a 3bb winrate that would be some silly moneys for the year....
You're aiming to keep a 3bb+ winrate. What exactly do you think the rake is at $100NL, for instance?

It's around 6bb/100 give or take. In other words earning 3bb means you are actually earning 9bb/100 on the tables but giving 66% of your winnings to the site in rake. $200NL? You're still looking at about 4bb/100 meaning about 60% of your profits end up going straight to the site.

For a solid winner to still end up having to pay more than 2/3 of his profits in rake to the site - yeah that's big, very big. The unfortunate thing is that the only reason the sites are able to charge so much is people like you. I don't mean that as an insult either. Rake is incredibly deceptive and it's very easy to assume that just because you can still make a fair amount of $ in the games that surely rake can't be that big of a deal. Hah, it's only $2 or $3 per $xxx pot anyhow. Unfortunately you're being fooled by the very deceptive micro-method through which rake is collected. For a skill based game of relatively small edges, the rake is ridiculously high.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-19-2013 , 04:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by knircky
sure if u consider 200nl micros than yes this is only a micro stakes problem.

At 1000nl the rake is effectively gone or a non factor. At 200nl only a pro can beat the rake. I am not sure how it is in between as I have not seen much data. I am a 50nl player, i've never really won at these stakes and I have never played any stakes where I was not a huge winner before rake.

Just to be sure I consider 50%+ rake ( vs of money won/lost) unsustainable and i think 10%-20% is optimal while 30-50% I think is really bad and probably unsustainable.

At 100NL + 200NL i have seen 100k plus hands of pros who win 4.5bb and they pay something around 60% of their winnings in rake. This is in line with the data posted in this thread.

So if a good pro has to pay 60%, then good players will pay close to 100% and decent winners will be losers (pay more than 100%). Causing all but the pros and few fish to remain. Hence the games we have today. According to that logic I am a good player at 50nl.

It does not really matter if its "only" low stakes and lets consider 200nl micros as the rake is similar and its the lowest stakes in casinos. The trouble is that 90% of players play these stakes and if u fxxxxx up the game for 90% u fxxx it up for all. Poker economy is a pyramid and needs feeder stakes.

If your numbers are better congratulations. (I have never seen better numbers so i challenge u to show). But it does not matter if the top 1% are doing ok.

Again if u can provide other numbers please show me, if my numbers are wrong please say so and explain how.
The rake cap is too high at 50NL paying 3 dollars now 2.8??(I don't play on Stars anymore) is way too high if the games are going to be rock gardens. The games should be capped at 75 cents. Obviously the sites will never give that rake, but Ongame used to cap the levels below 100NL at 1.50 US which is much better.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
03-19-2013 , 06:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Do it Right
You recently posted:



You're aiming to keep a 3bb+ winrate. What exactly do you think the rake is at $100NL, for instance?

It's around 6bb/100 give or take. In other words earning 3bb means you are actually earning 9bb/100 on the tables but giving 66% of your winnings to the site in rake. $200NL? You're still looking at about 4bb/100 meaning about 60% of your profits end up going straight to the site.

For a solid winner to still end up having to pay more than 2/3 of his profits in rake to the site - yeah that's big, very big. The unfortunate thing is that the only reason the sites are able to charge so much is people like you. I don't mean that as an insult either. Rake is incredibly deceptive and it's very easy to assume that just because you can still make a fair amount of $ in the games that surely rake can't be that big of a deal. Hah, it's only $2 or $3 per $xxx pot anyhow. Unfortunately you're being fooled by the very deceptive micro-method through which rake is collected. For a skill based game of relatively small edges, the rake is ridiculously high.
im not on my grind computer now so cant check rake numbers but ill try to remember this thread when i get back home, def not 100% sure about the numbers myself
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote

      
m