$6 rake in the game I play in. When the casino first opened I decided to be a non-chopper but then a bunch of regs from the casino I worked at started playing in the game and I decided to be a chopper. Now, basically all those regs quit coming and I quit my job anyway, so I find myself rethinking it again.

I've never done any math on this situation but I know I PREFER to play. Whether or not that makes financial sense, I'm not sure. I don't know how big of an edge I would need to make it profitable long term, but my gut tells me I should not be chopping.

Pros and cons?

The main pro (that most people underestimate) from not chopping is you learn how to play bvb so when you move up to a limit where nobody chops you don't get crushed bvb. You didn't mention what stakes you play. With a $6 rake I would probably play at 40-80 and possibly 30-60 if the game is very soft but certainly chop at 20 and below

At 20/40, I guess you have to think you can beat the average player for >15BB/100. I would chop.

In addition to experience, the advantage to not chopping is you don't have to deal with anglers that chop based on their cards, if the people next to them are chopping or the skill of the players next to them.

A pro for chopping is that it creates a more friendly environment when everyone else is chopping. I think this can be a pretty big deal. If most people are playing, this isn't really relevant.

I did mention the stakes in the thread title. I think the experience factor is a pretty good argument for not chopping. I certainly don't plan on peaking at 20/40.

The game I play in I don't think most of the the players care if you chop or not, but a game like the 20/40 at the Peppermill would make sense to chop in because it was very recreational.

Chop in rake.

Chop AINEC

Chop chop?

It's a flat $6 on the flop or is $6 max rake? Def chop I'd it's $6 flat.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

One more for chop.

Chop raked games and play timed games is the best combination IMO even though I am sometimes tempted to play in raked games it just doesn't seem worth it.

Basically. Although in reality if I don't think the guys next to me are very good I'm going to be tempted to not chop if others aren't just out of boredom

Also I may sometimes not chop out of spite

i always play. My 20-40 game has a $5 rake

The high cost of not chopping in a rake game for me is ofset by 3 things:

1) Im an action junkie and playing is more fun than not playing
2) added educational benefit of learning to play bvb
3) the other players are really, really bad

^ I'm inclined to agree with that mindset.

Part of the problem is that while 2 and 3 are very good reasons, 1 is a terrible reason and in fact related to the most common poker leak, indiscipline.

So if you are honestly getting a lot of value out of 2 and 3, that's one thing, but if those are secondary reasons and the real reason is 1, better that you learn to be more patient and stop playing bvb.

What if you're good at playing the blinds and being able to play one or two extra hands a lap keeps you from doing things like opening QTo utg?

I think (1) is a perfectly reasonable reason for not chopping. People come to the casino to have fun, playing hands is more fun than not playing

+1

Used to rarely chop live back when Stars, Tilt, Absolute/UB was legal but I stopped started always chopping when taking into account how terreble my BB/100 was BvB online. Still do not chop when there is significant rake reduction such as 5 handed or less though.

However, found 2 benefits of NOT chopping when I used to rarely chop.

1). Can significantly tilt fish, nit, TAG, or LAGTAG.

2). Generally, live players are terrible BvB and in turn, your BB/100 BvB should be higher than a typical LHE game online.

For those that still do not chop BvB: In a rhetorical world where you can get your BB/100 live filtered for BvB, what would you want your BB/100 to be at to consider NOT chopping live?

My regular game is a 20/40 full kill with a $6 rake (4+2).

About 10 months ago 2 of my favorite players in the game decided they weren't going to chop anymore. That encouraged a few other players to start playing in the blinds as well. So I decided to play in the blinds myself. The reasons I like to play are,

1. I have much more experience playing BvB than my opponents from the million hands I played online.

2. My opponents are very unfamiliar with BvB play and I feel like I have a pretty big edge.

3. They're just plain bad.

Side note: when I tell my neighbors that I don't chop, I say, "I always play." I don't like to frame it negatively by saying "I don't chop" or I "never chop."

I agree. I feel very comfortable playing heads up in the blinds and I'd be surprised if my edge isn't large enough to offset the rake in the long run.

Also, I'm not really a rake nit. I've played in live short-handed games with my wife where we don't chop BvB - when it happens to work out where we can't seat change to alter the situation. Obviously only the house wins in this situation but we enjoy the competition and I'm sure it makes other players more comfortable playing with us, even if they can't quite wrap their heads around it.

Phil Ivey can't beat the rake

There are too many angleshooters out there so I always play. If I was worried about the rake I would invest in a 401k instead of playing a high variance minimal edge game.

I hear this argument a lot, but it doesn't make much sense to me. (1) I don't think this is common at all. I've never been victim to, nor seen someone else victimized, by this type of angle shooting before. And before someone says, "you don't necessarily know it because they might just not have gotten a good hand," I mean that the only people I have ever seen suddenly decide to not chop have been oblivious, inexperienced players that didn't understand they were doing something wrong.

(2) The harm you suffer if you get angle shot is so low, who cares?

Assuming chopping is +ev in your game, you're losing nearly infinitely more money by refusing to chop with literally everyone in an effort to protect yourself against nearly no one.

The more interesting question in my mind is how to handle shorthanded situations in raked games with a significantly reduced rake. A lot of people conflate not chopping when fewer than X people are dealt in with "selectively chopping" and get really upset. Typically I'll still chop if it is clear that we are only going to be short for an orbit or two, but play (and make clear to my neighbors that I'm doing so) when it seems we will be short indefinitely.

Maybe he doesn't play at the same casino you do