Re: Time vs Rake
My thoughts -- all other things being equal. Rakes should be better for tight players and time charges for looser players.
In general, with a max rake of $4/hand, and 30 ish hands being played an hour, the house can take 90-110 an hour from the table. With a time charge game of $5/half an hour, they make the same $100 an hour with a full table. The difference is that those who win more hands pay a disproportionate share of the rake.
However, all things are never equal. Even though I'm a relatively tight player, I prefer the rake. For example, in a $1/2 NL timed game, I find myself getting annoyed at the Jackash who delays and fumbles as if he's at the final table of WSOP (and let's face it, he's really fooling nobody). We're playing fewer hands for our drop. Yeah, I should be as upset when he's farking around in a raked game, since I'm expecting my profit to be based on the number of hands I play. Also the more hands I play, the lower variance I will have. But it seems to irk more in a time-charge game.
|