| Author |
Message |
|
Posted: Mon, 03 Dec 2007, 2:23pm Post subject: RAKE - % of pot and % of winnings |
|
|
Two Pair
Joined: 03 Jul 2007
Posts: 49
WPP: 131
|
|
I was just thinking how much of a killer rake can be at lower levels. I've played 22.5k hands at $25NL, winning $855 but paying $450 in rake on top of that, so may ratio of profit:rake is 1.9:1. For all pots played at that level, the average rake taken was 4.39%. I've also played 17.5k hands at $50NL winning $1180 but paying $540 in rake so the same ratio is 2.19:1. For all pots played at that level, the average rake taken was 4.33%
I'm thinking of moving up levels to $100NL and am hoping rake will become slightly less of an issue because I figured more pots would be breaking the $60 mark at which the rake is capped at the site I play. Does anyone have any figures for rake %s or profit:rake ratios at different levels (I realise the 2nd is heavily dependent on how well you're doing generally). Thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 03 Dec 2007, 3:25pm Post subject: |
|
|
Two Pair
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
Posts: 28
WPP: 29
Location: In a floating casino somewhere in the sea
|
|
FIsherman where are u playing?
Look if there somehow trade points into cash, or into 'prizes' that u can sell afterwards, o even use them to join events.
Some site give in this way your Rakeback, not a so good way, but works too. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 04 Dec 2007, 5:42am Post subject: |
|
|
Two Pair
Joined: 03 Jul 2007
Posts: 49
WPP: 131
|
|
| I play on Everest. They don't offer Rakeback but I have got a $75 Bonus each month since I signed up there about 6 months ago after clearing so many points in a month. It's not bad but I would like something more consistent, and I'me reluctant to look elsewhere because Everest is a great site, much better than all the American ones anyhow |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 30 Dec 2007, 12:10pm Post subject: |
|
|
Strike 1
Joined: 24 Sep 2005
Posts: 2079
WPP: 108
Location: Winston-Salem, North Carolina
|
|
| The rake is pretty killer at 100nl and below for most online poker sites. At 200nl I think is where it typically starts slowing down a bit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 31 Dec 2007, 5:04pm Post subject: |
|
|
Straight
Joined: 23 Sep 2006
Posts: 170
WPP: 153
|
|
Rake is the number one reason I want to move up to 200NL ASAP.
The difference between 50NL and 100NL was nice to see, but the difference between 100NL and 200NL should be even greater I believe.
Some recent numbers for me.
14989 hands 50NL +$356 2.38 BB/Hour $569 rake
6609 hands 100NL +$563 4.18 BB/Hour $370 rake.
If you normalize my BB/hour to 2.38, 100NL gives me 321 profit:370 rake, while 50NL is 356:569.
This works out to me paying $1.18 in rake per $1 won at 100NL, versus $1.59 per $1 won at 50NL.
Thankfully I'm getting some Rakeback, but it's still pretty brutal at these stakes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
