$60 in rake?!

[ArcadianRock]

Just going through my trial version of PT I found something interesting. I don't know if it's correct or not but does having $60 in rake at the $2NL after this many amount of hands seem normal or is there something wrong with the software.

[jyms]

You know how rake is calculated right?

[Sir Pawnalot]

Rake is what makes most players losing money. After getting RB I was shocked at the amount of rake I had paid, but at the same time very proud of how I had been able to maintain very high winrates without RB.

First day with RB, with a modest amount of play I paid 150 USD in rake. Lets assume a year of play (365 days) and this equals to about 55K USD in rake...

[ArcadianRock]

I had an idea of what the rake was going to be but I guess I underestimated it, I thought it would be around the $20 range. This is good and bad. Good once I get RB, bad...until I get RB.

Once an account is made it's too late isn't it...

I should researched this more before jumping in.

[gn2056]

Yeah it sucks, especially people like me who have no rake back anywhere... That is the reason for all the conspiracy theorys about online poker, my mom who is a genious (graduated highschool with a full scholarship at 14) and a computer engineer how easy it would be to design an algorithm a slightly higher amount of playable hands, thus increasin rake. She tells me that its absolutely stupid to play online anyways, sometimes I dont know if its her just being a mother or if she is right, I mean I dont see the same stuff live... anmyways im off on a tangent.

I would really feel better about it if sights took a rake per hand like the live casinos vs. based off the rake as five ten cent table makes more then a live casino with two four dollar blinds, without any overhead. Also, imagine the disadvantage you face at full tilt at the high stakes table where the sponsored pros get %100 rake back and get paid for playing there.

[ArcadianRock]

Too many people make a living off poker for it to be a bad idea in my opinion. I play 4-6 tables at a time at the $.02 right now and my winnings aren't shabby, slowly growing but with RB it would speed up the process quite a bit so I might have to play on a network now that offers rake.

[TonyB73]

I don't know if I'm ruining the joke here or something, but you do realize that the ~$60 refers to the total amount of rake taken from the table during those hands (not the amount of rake you've paid yourself)?

[amir is cool]

Yeah it sucks, especially people like me who have no rake back anywhere... That is the reason for all the conspiracy theorys about online poker, my mom who is a genious (graduated highschool with a full scholarship at 14) and a computer engineer how easy it would be to design an algorithm a slightly higher amount of playable hands, thus increasin rake. She tells me that its absolutely stupid to play online anyways, sometimes I dont know if its her just being a mother or if she is right, I mean I dont see the same stuff live... anmyways im off on a tangent.

I don't think an established top poker site (ex: pokerstars) would be willing to risk their reputation+getting shut down for a little bit extra in rake. There are so many tables and player on at a time they already make tons of cash in rake, so why ruin a good thing.

[gn2056]

well ive deposited over fifteen k over my lifetime in online poker never believing it was 100 percent random, which by the way is impossible, a computer programs algorithm can never truly be random like it or not. But anyways I would hope not, but I will feel better about the whole thing the day it is made legal (completely) by the US and regulated by the US cuz right now who do they answer too, I mean I think its rigged and it dont stop me from playing... But your proabably and hopefully right I would like to think that its just the bad players, but I play against bad players live and there cards dont hit like online, I do think pokerstars is the best site though, I would think that the merge network is the most suspect.

[gn2056]

also, keep in mind this is coming from a guy who lost 2600 with one card to come filled up to lose to a two outer on absolute poker only to find out a few months later there had been cheating on the highstakes tables.

[Micro2Macro]

of course poker is rigged. that is the reason why the majority of the poker population loses. it has absolutely nothing to do with how much effor you put into improving your game whatsoever. in fact, fuck bankroll management, that's a big scam too. i suppose you've already figured that one out and just opted to forget it about it anyway.

[amir is cool]

I will feel better about the whole thing the day it is made legal (completely) by the US and regulated by the US cuz right now who do they answer too

You understand if that happens, the tax you will pay will far outweigh any bad beats you might have misconceived as "rigging"

They answer to their players. Their reputation is what keeps them in line. If proof came out as to some sort of deviation in all the hands dealt they would lose so much business they would go broke over night. If you think about it from a business point of view, there is really no up side to rigging the dealing, you risk losing everything for absolutely minuscule amounts in the long run.

[LuckySlevin]

@gn2056: I hear you friend, it can often seem that the probabilties are not what they should be, but when you think it all through logically you realise how incredulous any poker rigging on stars for example, which you mention, actually is. 1.The largest site in the world has too much to lose by not operating fairly, if it was ever discovered that their site was not fair they would be finished almost over night.2 If the site did not obey the law of probabilities, it would be impossible for the high stakes regulars to earn the consistent profits they do, yet they do just this time and time again.

A phenomenon of online poker is it can often seem that you are getting too many improbable hands draw out against you. This is due to the number of hands you are playing when you play online, the number of hands means you are more likely to eventually witness unlikely hands win against your likely favourite hands. The other factor is a psychological one. We tend to remember those things that have a reason for sticking in our memory. Losing a large pot to an improbabale draw would stick in your memory then the next time you witness a similar outdraw it reinforces that memory. We tend to forget the times that the cards obeyed the likely outcomes to perfection or those hands that we occasionaly suckout with ourselves. At times it can seem strange that you may witness 4 or 5 suckouts in consecutive hands, granted. Yet for some reason it does not seem strange that a winning hand may win 20 times in consecutive hands, when according to the law of probabilities it should only be winning a little over eight out of ten times. Again we tend not to notice this unless we look for it.

The only sure way to beat the variance is to practice sound BR managment. Of course with your AP experience you can hardly be blamed for having no faith, but I think you're about as safe as you are when you play in your own house, when you play on PS - in terms of fairness of cards being dealt.

[amir is cool]

text

right on the money

[Sir Pawnalot]

Arcadianrock-

Maybe it would be a good idea for you to sign up on a new site with RB and grow a bankroll which you can later move back to Pokerstars and then earn enough action points to get Supernova.

This is sounds like a good longterm plan for anyone. I also think smaller sites have more fishy players in general, but this is just my guess.

[Keith]

But anyways I would hope not, but I will feel better about the whole thing the day it is made legal (completely) by the US and regulated by the US cuz right now who do they answer too, I mean I think its rigged and it dont stop me from playing....

Oh come on ... wake up and smell the coffee..... Who says that just because the Americans regulate anything its going to be ok. Haven't you seen whats happened lately because of the disastrous way that they have regulated their own sub prime mortgage market?In fact all the governments are just as culpable. They were all quite happy to slacken off the controls that were in place in order to make extra tax revenue.
The sites are regulated now , just not by the US government and the main thing that will prevent corruption is that any scandal discovered will decimate their future income from a lucrative source. They have their 5% of every dollar wagered and some of the larger sites will have greater income than some small countries tax revenues.

[ArcadianRock]

Sorry for being such a dote here, but can someone tell me how much I paid in rake right now?

Did I give FT $60, $40, $20, I'm not sure really.

At the $2NL I never really thought about rake.

Plus I am still new to this online thing.

[jyms]

Rake is taken from won pots. You only pay rake when you win the pot. Online you don't contribute to rake on a hand or time basis.

[ArcadianRock]

Where in PT can I find out how much I paid for won pots?

[mormannorman]

I'm on a PT3 trial too.

Under the "sessions" tab there is a column called "Rake" that tells you the total rake you paid for that session, and (at the bottom in bold) how much you paid in all your sessions.

[jyms]

Rake is only paid from won pots. You don't pay rake when you fold or lose

[ArcadianRock]

Phew...$60 scared me.

[ArcadianRock]

Ok, I have rake now with UB which is 30%. So here are some new stats but I'm still confused on how much I would be getting back. I heard that the 30% would be for the Rake column and sometimes it's more like the MGR column.

How much would I get back based on these statistics?