Paying By the 1/2 Hour

[five_deuce]

First time poster but pretty regular lurker.

Here is my question. The local casino is soon going to be starting to deal poker with a $5 and $8 collection every 1/2hr in a 5-10 / 10-20 game. We have been playing local home games for several years and the competition is weak and I have been winning traditionally about 70% of my sessions, although the rake is lower than what the casino is offering.

I play a reasonably tight game compared to my competition and I'm wondering if I'm going to have to loosen up somewhat as a result of having to pay *time* vs having to pay a *rake*.

Suggestions????

Thanks gang.

[Easy E]

1) What was the rake structure before?

They'll be taking $100/$160 an hour off of the table, divided by 30 hands per hour = $3.33/$5.33. Is that a reasonable rake for these games?

[five_deuce]

The house game was generally raking between $2-$3/pot with about 28-30 hands/hour.

[Louie Landale]

With no actual rake the pot is actually bigger, and so you generally play a little looser: there are times you will call a $14 pot but would not call an $11 pot.

That has little to do with your overall expectation. The $/hour leaving the table is an excellent indicator, but keep in mind that you are paying your fair share of a collection, but if you play selectively you are paying LESS than your fair share of a rake, since you are winning less hands/hour than your looser competition.

- Louie

[SunTzu68]

I'm a little confused by this series of posts, so I am probably missing something. I can understand changing your play because of a change in ante structure (ie. larger antes/blinds play a little looser), but why would a change in the rake affect how tight you play? Even if it is a higher rake, and done on an hourly basis, it is the same amount of money you are playing for in the pot (unless the rake is based on winnings, ie. 5% of the pot goes to the house). Can someone clarify this for me?

[Easy E]

Time charge, you're paying for playing, not winning. small pots are as "cheap" as big pots

Rake, you pay when you win. Therefore, winning less, but with bigger pots, is the adjustment for a rake... and therefore, you play tighter to win less OFTEN but more MONEY... When you pay the same rake to win $40 or $80, but pay double rake to win 2 $40 pots vs. one $80 pot...

make sense? It's not the be-all and end-all of strategy, just something to be aware of.

[SunTzu68]

That makes sense. I play 3/6, 5/10 w/kill (both with a rake), and 20/40 that uses the pay per dealer scenerio and I have never adjusted. Good to keep that in mind, if you have any specific examples it would help.(ie. mid-position, passive table, 8 7 suited hole cards........would play in a pay per time table however in a rake game better to throw away.)

[M.B.E.]

The changes really come in situations where there's going to be two or three players in with no preflop raise. In a fairly loose game, it will make almost no difference to your playing decisions whether the game is raked or time-charged.

Otherwise, here are some specific rules for adjusting (all other factors being the same):

1. Pre-flop in late position when it's folded to you: raise more in a time-charged game, fold more in a raked game. (Note this is true even though no rake is taken when your steal is successful pre-flop. Much of your profit from the play comes when one of the blinds calls your raise preflop and then folds when you bet on the turn. It's in that specific scenario that you'll win significantly less in a raked game.)

2. Pre-flop in the blinds when someone has open-raised from late position and no one else is in: call more in a time-charged game, raise and fold more in a raked game.

3. On the flop when the pot is small and it's one bet to you, fold more in a raked game (marginal decisions only).

4. On the turn when there was no preflop raise and it was checked around on the flop: bluff more in a time-charged game, and if it's one bet to you then fold more in a raked game (again, marginal decisions only).