[memphis57]

I don't think that analytically it's correct to say that only winners pay the rake. The rake cost should be equally shared among all players in proportion to your contributions to the pot - if the rake averages 5%, you must pay the house 5c to put 95c in the pot. This is consistent with the idea that in post mortem evaluations of your play, you should not simply tally wins and losses, but take a share of each pot where you had a definitive drawing chance to win (e.g., if you win a $25 pot but hitting runner-runner quads, the true post mortem value of that hand is less than if you lost a $15 pot by missing consecutive flush draws). This, in turn, is consistent with the idea that all you can control is your play and your reads - you cannot control the luck of the draw, and thus should seek to eliminate it in evalutating play.