I can't even imagine how there is a debate between time and rake games, its not close. Even if it were about the same for 9 handed poker (its not) assuming that you are going to get to play a fair amount of short handed poker at some point in time, and bigger games that are time raked will often be short, time games are going to be significantly better.


And that's only from a pure rake point of view, there are other important points that make time games way better
(1) when you pay time you get to play bvb 100% which should also add to your winrate
(2) you don't have to pay any stupid bbj drop which nobody would ever really want (which you probably lose 20% of your equity in anyways
(3) if you do chop, you dont have to pay $1 to do so

Take the LA 40 game. If they switch to a time charge I suppose it would be $10/down. Currently the rake is what, 5+2+1 or something, lets just call that an even $6. If you win a mere 2 hands per down, then time is significantly better. When you factor in sh spots it is infinitely better.

(4) You won't end in spots 7 handed where the drop gets maxed out.
(5) Dealer breaking change every hand for drop
(6) Dealer makes mistake on how much to drop because players are in and out
(7) 95% of the time people are playing vs 95% of the time people are chopping

I was surprised to find out we probably get 40-45 hands/hour on average in the time game. The actions is very fast and rarely any Hollywooding. If the game move to a rake at say $7, that would be pretty terrible.