I am sure being a professional football player is so much easier, lol.

Go ahead, start a crowd-sourcing project. You as micro stakes poker player are for sure much better at managing a poker business than all those crooks who built up a billion dollar company.

Dont talk, act!

Poker has changed a lot over the years. If you go back more than 11 years (Moneymaker WSOP win) you might have been playing limit cash games. Or you might have been playing SNG's where you clicked on a specific seat to fill a table. Poker will change more in the future. And in the case of PS, don't forget some of their changes have come in response to other poker sites. FTP came up with fast poker, not PS. So in the future maybe a Zynga or Yahoo will come up with a rake method that forces the issue.

The rake method can change over time too. And at several sites it has changed. And can change again. Just for grins let's list a few methods...dealt, contributed, weight contributed, winner take all, custom rake (like monthly subscription) and time collection rake. I find time collection rake method an interesting possibility for online poker. This method is rarely if ever used online but can sometimes be found in live casinos. Each player is charged a set amount per unit of time. So for example every player at the table may have to pay say $x every hour (or half hour) while they are seated at the table. Imagine tweaking the time collection rake method for online play. Instead of "time" it would be per hand. I'm sure most everyone here has seen or played an ante game where the ante is collected at start of hand. Imagine a rake ante collected at start of every hand.

For illustrative purposes (I'll tweak/correct it later) I'll give an example at $0.50/$1.00 NLH...

$0.50/$1.00 NLH, a small blind rake ante is collected from each player at beginning of hand. With 6 players dealt into the hand that would be 6 times $0.50 equalling the $3.00 most people are accutom to. At 5 players dealt in it would be $2.50 rake collected, etc. And of course the rake caps at some point so it isn't a case of high stakes with higher blinds paying too much. If there is no flop, then there is no drop and every one gets their ante rake back.

This type of per hand collection rake method based on blinds would fix a lot of the problems. For example, PS's currrent "percentage method" where they cap a $0.01/$0.02 NLH game at $.30 is as everyone has pointed out too much. In a small blind ante rake per hand collection rake method the rake at a 6 max game would be $0.06 instead of $0.30 !!! Pokerstars' percentage method/rational is clearly flawed and my method shows why PS is raking some of these lower stakes up to 5 times higher than they should.

Now let me bring up the flaw (and correction) in my method some may have not noticed. In my $0.50/1.00 NLH example, I said to have the rake ante at a small blind. In a full 6 max game it would be 6 times $0.50 for $3.00 every hand which is currently the max-ish rake at most sites. So my example so far is maxing the rake every hand no matter the pot size. My example was only for illustrative purposes using stakes and rake number everyone is use to seeing. The correction is simply to use a more effective ante amount of say 1/2 or 1/4 of small blind. This method could also solve the problems with the differences between NLH and PLO. The ante rake at Pot Limit games could be half that of No Limit games.


Per hand rake collection method with current $3/$5 caps implemented in some way for mid/high stakes (tweaks/suggestions to the small blind fractions are welcome)


1/2 small blind rake ante per hand per person at no limit
1/4 small blind rake ante per hand per person at pot limit
1/8 small blind rake ante per hand per person at limit

The obvious problem at the moment are the amounts being raked at each level. Solution = rake each level or stake in proportion to that stake. Everyone will benefit, voila. As long as business people can get away with over charging you for a service, they simply will carry on doing so.

People need to wake up and complain more, we need something like a poker club of some sort. A Union that looks after poker players. Let these crooks know we will not stand for this kind of **** no more.

It will be my 1st post on 2+2 so hi to all of you
Rake is to high on those stakes, that 100% sure, but in my opinion most of regs on those limits are focused on complaining, when they should just work harder. Im playing PLO something like 14-15 months, and during this time i achived ~7bb/100 ev winrate on plo25-100, so beating those stakes with 2bb/100 should be easy as hell. I am still playing plo100 because of variance, atm I am something like 400bi belowe EV, another reason of still playing low stakes are cashouts.




rake is 12,5bb/100 with 30/21/9




ATM i have only those hands in my database, but i was beating those stakes on bit higher samples I am not feel like pokergod because beating low stakes, i have lot of leaks, some mindset problems (probably i am one of the most speawy regs on lowe stakes )

I think you are missing the point somewhat CrazyRussian. A lot of recreational players that are somewhat competent turn into massive losing players because the rake is so high. They stop playing eventually and do not even realise that they are losing because of the crooked rake system.

Rake at certain levels is over 20bb/100 hands, that's crazy high. Beginning players and those transitioning from NLHE are getting murdered by the rake. If you half the rake, you would see such a massive improvement in PLO games, players that are 5bb losers become 5bb winners, players that are 10bb losers become break even etc etc.

There is no doubt in my mind the rake should be at least HALVED if not more at the lower limits, if we want to have a healthy poker ecology.

If I read it right: 4268.29 rake paid for 65.3K hands ==>> Hotel Ritz Paris is cheaper!

Yep. 85 FULL 100bb buyins in rake in 65k hands at PLO50. Welcome to SSPLO, enjoy the stay.

Wanna play a 1000 hand session? Sure, just pay the 150bb rake for it..................

not sure where you got 30/21/9 from (looking at your stats pic), and with those stats rake is certainly not as low as 12.5bb/100

That's disgusting

And you people really think that by presenting and maybe discussing those calculations to the "board" on that meeting that it might change anything?

A company that was accused of money laundering and so on.....

Without a boycott there will nothing be changed imho.

Poker players are highly addicted to their "hobby" (in general) and I ' ve never heard of something they organized before.
So what should they be afraid of???

Yes, sounds a bit to optimistic, because I reckon there would be a lot to do and by just opening a site player for players does not mean it will be successful.
You still need a lot of marketing and so on....but this would be the only way. I would start with a pure PLO site, because they suffer the most in the moment.

Yeah man, there are totally bots that can break even at PLO100.................

What happened to OP?

Tried emailing him but no response. Very strange because at the IoM meeting he was full of plans.

wasnt fulltilt from players for players? yeah great idea.....zero change of any wrongdoing there

What about eldodo42, that's the more interesting question.

Hey guys how is it going? I Haven't been following the thread or 2p2 lately... Passed by to check urubu's thread and saw that this thread was still alive. Any good news??

Joeri, I have not seen any e-mails from you, are you sure you got my e-mail? but I have you on skype, you can send me a message there or maybe a PM here!

Gui,

I'm very sorry. I had eldudo in mind when i made that post, and i wasn't even drunk. Sorry for dragging your name into something. I did not try to contact you in any way, so you didn't miss anything.

But since your back, how are you nowadays and how do you feel about your OP nowadays?

u forgot the rakeback or dont u?

u forgot the rakebackgrinder-aspect or dont u?

They would also benefit from lowered rake so I have no clue of why you are asking that in this thread

Rake is 6.5% in PLO (HE too) at PS.fr, it's only 4.5% at PS.com at midstakes (made the math on some Urubu's HH, don't know if it's not higher in percentage at micros stakes).
I would be absolutely thrilled if the rake was 3% and 0 rakeback.
I know for PS.com 3% rake would be 4.5% rake in which you get 33% rakeback (so if you're more than a simple Supernova it's better to rake 4.5% and get RB).

But yeah im sure even SNE would rather have 2% rake and 0 rakeback than 4.5% rake and SNE rakeback at CG.
Maybe it's slightly less profitable for them (i don't know how much rakeback SNE equals, i would guess around 70% so with 4.5% rake at the end you end up paying less than 1.5% rake with 70% rakeback) but you don't have the obligation to make that much volume, and most important general economy would be better (bad players would lose at a slower rate) improving anyone winrates (whether they are positive or negative).

Bumping because I want to play PLO again but won't because of the rake.

Don't do it unless you play higher than 100PLO, the rake is huge on micros/small stakes.. im paying arround 3.3k $ rake per 100k hands on 25PLO which means a bit higher than 13bb/100 for rake. Poker sites needs to adjust their rake system for different games.

I'm assuming that is Stars because that is pretty reasonable by comparison.