Re: if rakeback is so important how come PokerStars is a major player?
 

except that their $100 still probably last longer at Party in the first place.

they don't analyze the rake. the players are generally worse at party.
there is also something to be said for brand-loyalty.

your posts make it seem like the average fish actually cares about rake-structure...which they don't.


To imply that so many of these party players are going to look at other sites, and when they see what they're missing will NEVER return to party, is incorrect.

They'll go to the other site, and if they win they'll stay because the 'cards run better for them there'. If they lose at the other site, they'll return to party, because more fish at party playing bad hands helps everyone feel like they have a chance to win.

Re: if rakeback is so important how come PokerStars is a major player?
 

Pokerstars is a major player because a large majority of people don't know or care about rakeback.

As for grinders? I imagine the tourneys, the software, and some decent games have to do with it.

I get your point though I think, I whine hardcore about not having RB on certain sites and even avoid playing at them but then I log on PS without thinking about it for whatever reason.

Re: if rakeback is so important how come PokerStars is a major player?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If sites where willing to return a portion of my rake directly to me (without an affiliate), they could keep the affiliates profits for themselves.


[/ QUOTE ]

If only party would do this, life would be so easy [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: if rakeback is so important how come PokerStars is a major player?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Vast vast majority of players don't know about rakeback. Personally, I don't play at Pokerstars specifically due to their lack of rakeback. It doesn't matter how good a player you are, rakeback has the same absolute effect and that is very large indeed.

Say I 5 table the 10/20 short. I pay $180 an hour in rake. Even at 30% rakeback I am paying $54/hr more to pay at Stars, which just isn't worth it, even more so bcs I am on way more than 30% with a variety of sites. If I ever move up to 30/60 or higher I might play a bit at stars as though rakeback becomes more important in absolute terms, it becomes less important in relative terms, so I would consider playing at Stars if I found a good game.

[/ QUOTE ]

How many hands an hour do you average 5-tabling?

M