Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfection
1126 out of my 28949 hands at 100NL FR this year have been > 66BB which is 3.89%
Thus 3.89% of the hands experience no reduction and 96.11% of hands get a 10% reduction. So an estimate might be that rake at 100NL will reduce by 9.611%. I have no data for 200NL+ so someone else will have to run that filter in HEM (though bear in mind we are interested in pot size of $66, so for 200NL it will be > 33BB etc..)
Im also not sure whether that is in fact an estimate or a true figure. It certainly doesnt take into account the rounding, but I think that will be negligible anyway. It doesnt account for pot sizes 66BB+ but I mean they are all getting raked the same so what does it matter? Either way, I think itd give a pretty accurate idea at least.
Great. Thx. Initially I immediately agreed with what you posted, but now I'm having a bit of a "brain freeze" and I'm not sure.
Does HM calculate your rake paid as the total rake from the pots that you won? Or does it calculate it the table average?
Do we only need to look at the pots that we VP$IP? e.g. Imagine we folded all hands when the pot became larger than $60, then our rake paid would be reduced at the same rate as the rake %age was reduced. However, for that same sample, if we looked at the percentage of hands that we played that reached the cap, it would be a non-zero percentage- as other players would continue with the hand and it would become a capped hand.
Regardless, I think it has to be a good estimate (especially for the "average" player, if not the individual.)
Also, why is it >66/33 BB? Max rate is $60, so wouldn't it be >60/30 BB. Am I missing something?
Cheers.
Last edited by ROM Amnesty; 01-04-2012 at 03:37 PM.