the rake in poker
 

since most regular players play at least above average, it follows that the rake is the biggest deternination of why people lose in games. bad players lose to the rake and good players. medium good players tend to go broke after some time as the rake catches up to them and depletes their starting bankroll.
expenses are the main reason more players dont win and the winners dont win alot.
players that put in major hours pay between ten thousand and fifty thousand dollars a year just in rake depending on what and how much they play. you have to win that just to be even. so any cut in the rake adds that amount plus to your bankroll. the plus comes fom additional money that stays on the table instead of dissapearing.

Re: the rake in poker
 

Is norake.org paying you for that post?

On a less cynical note, it would be nice to see a rakeless future for online poker. At the same time, PartyPoker is unfortunately far more profitable (for experts and smalltime winners alike) than any low rake alternatives.

Re: the rake in poker
 

[ QUOTE ]

players that put in major hours pay between ten thousand and fifty thousand dollars a year just in rake depending on what and how much they play. you have to win that just to be even. so any cut in the rake adds that amount plus to your bankroll. the plus comes fom additional money that stays on the table instead of dissapearing.

[/ QUOTE ]

With online poker those numbers are tiny in comparison. I paid 4k in rake over the last 3 weeks of June and I'm sure there are those paying a fair bit more than that.

Re: the rake in poker
 

players that put in major hours pay between ten thousand and fifty thousand dollars a year just in rake

With the ease of multitabling, paying 100k a year in rake is fairly easy. I'm sure a few people on these boards pay over 200k.


Cup

Re: the rake in poker
 

I pay over $50/hr in rake. It sucks.

Re: the rake in poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure a few people on these boards pay over 200k.


[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt it. Most of the 6-8 tablers go skimpy on the hours. I cannot blame them for it, it's very grueling and trying, yet monotonous at the same time.

Re: the rake in poker
 

Is there a follow up coming? If not thanks for the rake for beginers lesson. Can you explain the small and big blind to me?

Re: the rake in poker
 

You mentioned "expenses", and I understand that's what drives the rake up in B&M cardrooms. Dealer pay and floor space, etc. How can online cardrooms justify the same rake? They charge that much only because they can. If they charged a higher rake, players would just stick to live play. I believe they could charge a helluva lot less, but they can also get the same $3, so why not?

I wish I could find the overhead day to day cost of operating an online cardroom. I would like to see portion of the rake is actually justified by those expenses.

Re: the rake in poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is there a follow up coming? If not thanks for the rake for beginers lesson. Can you explain the small and big blind to me?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is harsh, but completely true.

When I read this post, I was thinking about how this topic has been discussed 100 times, yet this thread will probably get 100 responses since Ray Zee started it.

-- Homer

Re: the rake in poker
 

It's "justified" in that if you don't like it you can take your business elsewhere. Which at the moment means a single on again, off again 2/4 game at a site that could go belly up at any time.

Re: the rake in poker
 

Maybe I wouldn't have taken it as insulting if it didn't come from one of the better players in the world? My brother is a national champ kickboxer, he doesn't punch me in the face every time I walk by.

Re: the rake in poker
 

I know you were being condescending but "justified" wasn't the best choice of words for me. A much more appropriate phrase would have been "markup".

Re: the rake in poker *DELETED*
 

Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

Re: the rake in poker
 

Why does everyone think having "zero rake" is a step in the right direction? If Best Buy started giving away all of their store would that also be a step in the right direction? Why shouldn't card rooms charge the equilibrium price for rake?

The market is quite advanced and moves quickly to adjust to various conditions in the world such as technological changes, droughts, etc. Prices we see in stores are not just arbitrary guesses by business managers. They are an indication of the supply and demand of various services.

Most people here would know that in plotting demand we will have price on the y-axis and quantity on the x-axis. Given an increase in demand then, holding supply constant, we will see an increase in price and an increase in quantity. This is exactly what has happened with Party Poker in the last years. As people flocked to the site given a pretty stable amount of quality cardrooms, rake went up. It is inevitable. It isn't Party Poker screwing us over. The rake reflects the true conditions of the market.

If they were to decrease their rake, they would find an excess in demand which they may not be able to handle with their current software (we've even seen tournys crash due to an excess of people! Imagine if they decreased the rake of these tournys). Likewise if they increase it more, there would be an excess of supply. It's Econ101 people!

Edit to include that I am now an old hand! Yeeeaaah

Re: the rake in poker
 

[ QUOTE ]


When I read this post, I was thinking about how this topic has been discussed 100 times, yet this thread will probably get 100 responses since Ray Zee started it.

-- Homer

[/ QUOTE ]

Who the hell is Ray Zee? What has he done for us lately? No one plays stud anymore. Hes just a gun toting Montana weirdo.

Re: the rake in poker
 

[ QUOTE ]

If they were to decrease their rake, they would find an excess in demand which they may not be able to handle with their current software (we've even seen tournys crash due to an excess of people! Imagine if they decreased the rake of these tournys). Likewise if they increase it more, there would be an excess of supply. It's Econ101 people!


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think them offering a multi that is 150+11 instead of 150+12 is going to make one person decide to play it who normally wouldn't. Or even 150+5 for that matter.

Likewise, I do not think relating rake costs to economic models about supply and demand is totally fair and accurate. Where as most people who go out to buy a new television generally know what the "going price" of a TV is, new poker players are unaware of rake and its implications on the game. We've been through it many times already that a new player does not understand how 20 cents taken out of a $10 pot is going to effect their long term results versus 25 cents from a $10 pot. You cannot measure supply vs demand when the customer is unaware and clueless.

Re: the rake in poker
 

Don't be so hard on "Losing All". He must be an affiliate and realizes that he is about to go through some very tough times and is feeling stressed at the moment. The livelihood of bottom feeding off the rake of his sign ups is about to be swept right out from underneath him. He's "losing all" as one might say. Just try to have a little understanding for the poor guy [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: the rake in poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
You cannot measure supply vs demand when the customer is unaware and clueless.


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually the law of supply vs demand has very little to do with whether or not the consumer has a clue.

Jimbo

PS: And for those insulting Ray Zee, they are truly the clueless.

Re: the rake in poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If they were to decrease their rake, they would find an excess in demand which they may not be able to handle with their current software (we've even seen tournys crash due to an excess of people! Imagine if they decreased the rake of these tournys). Likewise if they increase it more, there would be an excess of supply. It's Econ101 people!


[/ QUOTE ]I don't think them offering a multi that is 150+11 instead of 150+12 is going to make one person decide to play it who normally wouldn't. Or even 150+5 for that matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the contrary, it is the people on these borders who influence price the most. Best Buy sells millions upon millions of DVDs every year. If say the price is $20 and no one would change their buying habits if the price was booted up to say $20.10, they should go ahead and do it.

As for your second point, it is pretty much entirely accurate. Economic models do typically assume perfect information and you are right that the average poker player doesn't really have any idea of the prices elsewhere. That being said, I think a lot of the model still holds...I will think about this further, though.

Re: the rake in poker
 

I'm not an affiliate, prop, or shill for any site. Not even UB. Thanks for looking out for me, though.

Compare the rake to gasoline prices....
 

Im my town, gas is about $2.03 a gallon. There are 50 different stations and the prices vary by less then .03 If you drive a few exits up the interstate, you can find it a $1.90/gal. In other states, I hear of it as low as $1.70/gal. So, if selling gas is still profitable at $1.90, wtf happened to the competion in my area?

Why arent the gasoline prices driven down by competition within each region. Why does every cardroom whether they have a 100 players or a hundred thousand still charge the same rake?

I think its a little bit of an implied price fixing. No one wants to lower the rake now because once they do, there will be no turning back.

Re: Compare the rake to gasoline prices.... *DELETED*
 

Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

Re: the rake in poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
You cannot measure supply vs demand when the customer is unaware and clueless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, you can. The customer doesn't have to know all (or any) of the alternative prices to be able to decide whether he finds one particular price worthwhile. Once a competetor makes his lower price more widely known, it could have an impact on demand, but the principles still apply.

It's a fairly open market, so there is little to regulate Party's rake except their motivation to make a profit. Their overhead cost is irrelevant, so there's not much hope for arguing for a "fair" rake.

That said, I hear Absolute might relocate to Cuba where their rake will be only high enough to cover food and housing costs.

-2kF

Re: the rake in poker
 

You can buy DVD's at Best Buy for $20 or you can get them for $9 at Columbia House. You get that price because you agree to buy at least 7 DVD's. It's a matter of knowing what your options are. Not a lot of people realize how much better deal they can get at Columbia House.

However, It shouldnt be too hard to get the word out to the poker community. Once a site with no rake is the biggest cardroom, everyone will go there if for just taht simple reason alone.

Re: the rake in poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I wouldn't have taken it as insulting if it didn't come from one of the better players in the world? My brother is a national champ kickboxer, he doesn't punch me in the face every time I walk by.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh... My.. God.. I almost pissed myself when I heart that. Something about Punching IN THE FACE is funny. In the Face...

Oh I crack myself up.

Re: Compare the rake to gasoline prices....
 

well, that went right over your head

Re: the rake in poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is there a follow up coming? If not thanks for the rake for beginers lesson. Can you explain the small and big blind to me?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hahaha, very funny and very true. I myself have already posted here twice while staying out of the debate up until this point.

facts
 

Fact: partypoker's rake is too high
Fact: people play there anyway
Fact: people(including myself) will continue to play there, regardless

I play low limits so a big percentage of my pots go to the rake. I only continue to play party because of the players. If any site(rake free or not) can even compare with the quality of low limit players at party, I would switch. But I'm not going to sit at a game with a bunch of rocks just because of the lower rake.

Re: the rake in poker
 

"Is there a follow up coming? If not thanks for the rake for beginers lesson. Can you explain the small and big blind to me?"


There sure seem to be a lot more mouthy posters on 2+2 these days than there used to be.

Re: facts
 

[ QUOTE ]
Fact: people(including myself) will continue to play there, regardless

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
If any site(rake free or not) can even compare with the quality of low limit players at party, I would switch.

[/ QUOTE ]

What happened to "regardless"?

Re: facts
 

i agree completely. play where the games are best. but be aware that worse games at lesser rakes can be more profitable. hope dearly that those new places develop and provide competition. thats what will help us all.
my post was basic but i saw a few people saying in the zero rake thread that it didnt matter and a low or no rake site wasnt better. it is way better and would make each winner much more each year. there are many readers of this forum that dont play four tables at a time and ten hours a day. i was directing my comments to them mostly as i thought the more experienced would know that.
i am totally surprised to see from players that i mistakenly thought had a good grasp on poker such resonses and indifference to the rake. i am not talking about you sun devil.

Re: the rake in poker
 

Got an investment in ZeroRake.com? [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

Re: facts
 

while i agree with what you are saying as a whole, i think there is a big difference between a fish's general indifference to the rake....and my indifference to a totally new and unproven site that is promising to save every player hundreds (or thousands) of dollars.


i have not read all of the other threads regardinmg the new site....so maybe there really are a number of players around here who are indifferent to the influence of rake.

but i suspect that many of the players who are indifferent to this new site are merely skeptical of its chances of succeeding.


however, your point about slightly tougher games with no rake being more profitable than slightly fishier games with a brutal rake is obviously accurate.

to that end, i hope the new site takes off....i'll happily sign up once i hear reports of reasonably decent games and hassle-free cash-outs.
but right now, i'm not entirely convinced that the fish will find their way.

Re: facts
 

RakeZero.com at2:01 EDST has 6 players at 1 1/2$ holdem table.

Average pot $5.71.

Re: facts
 

getting to be laggish up to$5. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
82 at 2:15 EDST

Re: the rake in poker
 

I don't know. I try to get along and show respect to everyone here. I've had a few problems, but thats mostly because I'm set on my ways(re politics), and have a pretty sick sense of humor.

If he was trying to add something new or help someone out with his post, I was out of line. At first glance it seemed like he was talking down to "us" in a very smug manner. I was most likely wrong, and I'm man enough to eat crow. In the future I'll do my best to keep my opinions to myself.

Re: the rake in poker
 

I don't see why there wouldn't be more fish at a free rake site potentially. The losing players will lose their money slower and the break-even players, who are drained by the rake will stay longer. I couldn't believe that any person would participate in a site that had a standard rake instead to one that was cheaper to play on, excepting the player base issue. Eventually, I predict that the free rake sites will be considerably more profitable than the standard ones.

Re: the rake in poker
 

Even many educated players can't make a difference between a good game and a bad game, not to mention a good rake and a bad rake.

To most (tighter or not) players the rake is just a small percentage taken from the pot (you can go to the table and see this fact yourself; it's only a tiny piece taken from the pot), and so has an insignificant effect.

I see a huge amount of (new or some sort of savant idiots) educated players playing at tight sites and tight tables and paying up to double rake.

Re: the rake in poker
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see why there wouldn't be more fish at a free rake site potentially.

[/ QUOTE ]


because they cant figure out that 30 bucks a month is a better deal then the house taking a buck or 2 from each pot.

Re: the rake in poker
 

No, really ...

http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=inet&Number=471685 &Forum=All_Forums&Words="who%20the%20hell% 20are%20you"&Searchpage=0&Limit=25&Mai n=471497&Search=true&where=bodysub&Nam e=83&daterange=1&newerval=10&newertype =y&olderval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post 471685

-2kF