Bet-Sizing and the Rake

I had a fun realization today while playing, and after spending some time exploring the idea a bit, I think I've found something small that could possibly help our win-rates a little. I've developed this idea around $0.50/1.00 no-limit hold'em games at Pokerstars based on their specific rake structure. Other games will need adjustments to produce any effect.

First a warning: this is going to seem retarded at first, and maybe it is retarded, but it also might be worth consideration.

The first scenario we'll examine is what happens when we open raise 4x from the button, the big blind calls, the big blind checks, and we make a continuation bet. The pot will be $8.50 ($8.10 due to the rake). Now suppose we'd like to make a continuation bet of $7.50. The times we're called, of that $7.50, $7.10 will go into the actual pot since $0.40 will be taken in rake.

However, if we bet $7.45, $7.10 will also go into the actual pot since $0.35 will be taken in rake.

The point is that if we avoid even-dollar amounts and instead set up the pre-rake pots to be something like $x.90 instead of $x+1.00 then everyone involved will save money on the rake.

Another example could be found in 200nl open raise sizes. Instead of raising to $8.00, if you raised to $7.95, then everyone who calls (or uses a script to raise) will avoid losing an extra $0.05 to the rake each hand.

Even if you're right, you then have to consider whether saving that 5 cents per pot (or wouldn't it be per bet?) is worth the time/bother it takes to type in your bet size, as opposed to just using your slider. I'm not sure it is.

Possibly there's a macro somewhere that can subtract 5 cents automatically from your bet?

Originally Posted by deacon_bluez

Even if you're right, you then have to consider whether saving that 5 cents per pot (or wouldn't it be per bet?) is worth the time/bother it takes to type in your bet size, as opposed to just using your slider. I'm not sure it is.

Possibly there's a macro somewhere that can subtract 5 cents automatically from your bet?

+EV is +EV. And of course there is, but that's beside the point.

I admit I didn't read too thoroughly but doesn't BetPot already have this implemented to do this?

Originally Posted by kmind

I admit I didn't read too thoroughly but doesn't BetPot already have this implemented to do this?

Not that I'm aware of.

Seems like a waste. You're better off just getting to the cap instead. Or size your PFR so the pot is just under the next rake point. Say at .50/1.00 you raise to 4 normally and a non blind calls and blinds fold, your pot is 9.50 -.45 rake= 9.05. If you make PFR 3.70 with the same action your pot is 8.90 - .40 rake = 8.50. If you Cbet and take it down you win .55 less and pay .05 less.
You're probably better off PFR to 4.20, then with same action and cbet win, your pot is 9.90 - .45 rake = 9.45. You win .40 more and pay the same rake as a PFR of 4.00.

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Originally Posted by deacon_bluez

Even if you're right, you then have to consider whether saving that 5 cents per pot (or wouldn't it be per bet?) is worth the time/bother it takes to type in your bet size, as opposed to just using your slider. I'm not sure it is.

Possibly there's a macro somewhere that can subtract 5 cents automatically from your bet?

+EV is +EV. And of course there is, but that's beside the point.

write me a script that works for 16 tables and ill do it.
But personally i like my fpps

Originally Posted by FeltOntheTable

Seems like a waste. You're better off just getting to the cap instead. Or size your PFR so the pot is just under the next rake point. Say at .50/1.00 you raise to 4 normally and a non blind calls and blinds fold, your pot is 9.50 -.45 rake= 9.05. If you make PFR 3.70 with the same action your pot is 8.90 - .40 rake = 8.50. If you Cbet and take it down you win .55 less and pay .05 less.
You're probably better off PFR to 4.20, then with same action and cbet win, your pot is 9.90 - .45 rake = 9.45. You win .40 more and pay the same rake as a PFR of 4.00.

A potential problem I've been thinking about with basing this off of only pre-flop bets is that if we get multiple callers then our idea of setting up the pot to "just miss" the next $0.05 take is blown all to shit (the pre-flop raise to $3.70 was my original idea, but I decided to make a more general case for the purposes of this post).

As far as "you're better off just getting to the cap instead" goes, you're missing the point entirely if this thought crossed your mind.

Would you rather pay $1 to put $0.95 in the pot, or just pay $0.95 to put $0.95 in the pot?

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

A potential problem I've been thinking about with basing this off of only pre-flop bets is that if we get multiple callers then our idea of setting up the pot to "just miss" the next $0.05 take is blown all to shit (the pre-flop raise to $3.70 was my original idea, but I decided to make a more general case for the purposes of this post).

As far as "you're better off just getting to the cap instead" goes, you're missing the point entirely if this thought crossed your mind.

Would you rather pay $1 to put $0.95 in the pot, or just pay $0.95 to put $0.95 in the pot?

I didn't miss your point. You or your opponent can come out ahead .54 per pot at the most (.49 in bets and .05 in rake saved) with betsizing instead of BB sizing.
This would really apply more to micro limits where the amount gained is a larger number of BBs

Originally Posted by FeltOntheTable

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

A potential problem I've been thinking about with basing this off of only pre-flop bets is that if we get multiple callers then our idea of setting up the pot to "just miss" the next $0.05 take is blown all to shit (the pre-flop raise to $3.70 was my original idea, but I decided to make a more general case for the purposes of this post).

As far as "you're better off just getting to the cap instead" goes, you're missing the point entirely if this thought crossed your mind.

Would you rather pay $1 to put $0.95 in the pot, or just pay $0.95 to put $0.95 in the pot?

I didn't miss your point. You or your opponent can come out ahead .54 per pot at the most (.49 in bets and .05 in rake saved) with betsizing instead of BB sizing.
This would really apply more to micro limits where the amount gained is a larger number of BBs

That doesn't really make sense but ok.

And obv this applies more the lower the limits.

Anyway, the point is that ideally, all of our pots before the rake that are under $60 should be in the form $xx.95 or $xx.99.

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Originally Posted by deacon_bluez

Even if you're right, you then have to consider whether saving that 5 cents per pot (or wouldn't it be per bet?) is worth the time/bother it takes to type in your bet size, as opposed to just using your slider. I'm not sure it is.

Possibly there's a macro somewhere that can subtract 5 cents automatically from your bet?

+EV is +EV. And of course there is, but that's beside the point.

I think deacon_bluez makes a good point. Because of the time dedicated to betting such a specific amount, we are creating an opportunity cost. ie. hands played, opportunities exploited etc.

Originally Posted by BankItDrew

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Originally Posted by deacon_bluez

Even if you're right, you then have to consider whether saving that 5 cents per pot (or wouldn't it be per bet?) is worth the time/bother it takes to type in your bet size, as opposed to just using your slider. I'm not sure it is.

Possibly there's a macro somewhere that can subtract 5 cents automatically from your bet?

+EV is +EV. And of course there is, but that's beside the point.

I think deacon_bluez makes a good point. Because of the time dedicated to betting such a specific amount, we are creating an opportunity cost. ie. hands played, opportunities exploited etc.

This matters about as much as taking into consideration how far away the fold button is from your mouse compared to how far away the call button is from your mouse when deciding whether or not to call a raise.

Seriously, is this you guys' best response? Omfg it takes time to type a bet.

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Originally Posted by BankItDrew

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Originally Posted by deacon_bluez

Even if you're right, you then have to consider whether saving that 5 cents per pot (or wouldn't it be per bet?) is worth the time/bother it takes to type in your bet size, as opposed to just using your slider. I'm not sure it is.

Possibly there's a macro somewhere that can subtract 5 cents automatically from your bet?

+EV is +EV. And of course there is, but that's beside the point.

I think deacon_bluez makes a good point. Because of the time dedicated to betting such a specific amount, we are creating an opportunity cost. ie. hands played, opportunities exploited etc.

This matters about as much as taking into consideration how far away the fold button is from your mouse compared to how far away the call button is from your mouse when deciding whether or not to call a raise.

Seriously, is this you guys' best response? Omfg it takes time to type a bet.

actually this is very legitimate as im studying economics. time is money regardless of what your doing. the question is... is preventing the uncessary rake efficient enough to make it worth while? the answer to this question is prolly gonna be made with what stakes your playing and the amount of rake taken.

Its not really that relevent, because someone could probably modify bet-pot to do it in like 15-30 min(or far less) and then everyone could use it. Not to mention typing probably isn't actually much more effort than sliding at all. I usually type instead of slide when not using a script. Many tournament players do this type of thing a lot, and they even make up varying amounts. Altho not while 12-16 tabling probably.

Dunno a ton about how rake works, and the idea seems half-baked...but it sorta makes sense. Take down so many pots with a c-bet it could really add up; try it over a decent sample and compare the numbers?

Originally Posted by reDZill4

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Originally Posted by BankItDrew

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Originally Posted by deacon_bluez

Even if you're right, you then have to consider whether saving that 5 cents per pot (or wouldn't it be per bet?) is worth the time/bother it takes to type in your bet size, as opposed to just using your slider. I'm not sure it is.

Possibly there's a macro somewhere that can subtract 5 cents automatically from your bet?

+EV is +EV. And of course there is, but that's beside the point.

I think deacon_bluez makes a good point. Because of the time dedicated to betting such a specific amount, we are creating an opportunity cost. ie. hands played, opportunities exploited etc.

This matters about as much as taking into consideration how far away the fold button is from your mouse compared to how far away the call button is from your mouse when deciding whether or not to call a raise.

Seriously, is this you guys' best response? Omfg it takes time to type a bet.

actually this is very legitimate as im studying economics. time is money regardless of what your doing. the question is... is preventing the uncessary rake efficient enough to make it worth while? the answer to this question is prolly gonna be made with what stakes your playing and the amount of rake taken.

Nevermind, you're all retarded except reprisal. GG.

So I'm still kind of new(ish) but what are all of these scripts you are talking about? Are they legal and how do they help you in multi-tabling?

Originally Posted by johnnyBuz

So I'm still kind of new(ish) but what are all of these scripts you are talking about? Are they legal and how do they help you in multi-tabling?

http://www.overcards.com/wiki/moin.cgi/BetPot

omfg yes

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Nevermind, you're all retarded except reprisal. GG.

LoL, spoon. You need to stop holding it all in - tell us how you really feel.

I'm intrigued. I'm going to do some work with typical 10nl hands, think about how they play out, and see if I can think of optimization framework that makes sense. It ought to be a fun mathematics exercise.

BTW, it's not as time-consuming as folks are suggesting. We don't get to set the bet amount on every hand, and we don't play every hand. So this affects maybe 5% of total actions? But it could earn $.04 every time it's tried? At 10nl it should very + EV.

Edit: at 10nl, now that I've had time to think, it can only $.01 each time, but that's still worth discussing (see below).

I'll check back in with what I find out after some mathematics work.

Using 10nl, we cbet a penny less and find the pot reduced by only $.01, not $.02. So the savings (on Absolute, according to their rake structure) is again 1/20th of a BB. Unlike 100nl, however, we are never going to see a pot exceed to the rake limit.

The basic rule is this: if you're thinking of betting an amount with an even tens digit (examples: $.60 or $.80 or $1.20), you should bet one penny less ($.59 or $.79 or $1.19).

Calculating what % of the time this saves money is harder, but I'm thinking about it. Also, multiplayer action complicates the scenario slightly, but still makes money.

I like this - I am going to keep thinking about it until I have some more clarity about how to best estimate how often it would profitable to change the betting amount and when.

Thanks, spoon - I needed a good math problem to keep me from doing work tonight.

Also Robb, note that this works better in games where the big blind is an even dollar amount since the pot is raked by each dollar put in and not a straight percentage.

If I'm understanding this right, you'd only need to do this on one street.

Am I wrong?

Originally Posted by Hawkfan79

If I'm understanding this right, you'd only need to do this on one street.

Am I wrong?

No, you're right.

Anyway, the point is that ideally, all of our pots before the rake that are under $60 should be in the form $xx.95 or $xx.99.