[Timer]

[ QUOTE ]
This 10% number is made up to make the people that loose feel better about themselves and to make the winners feel superior. It is more than 10%.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
If you play at a table with 1 bad person the bad person takes care of the rake. That leaves the rest of the players to fight for the rest. And it is pretty rare to play at a table with only 1 bad person. Mt guess would be 75% lose and 25% win.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
The 10% is a myth that is created to make people that win feel like they are superior to 90% and people that lose feel like hey at least no one wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
The bad player that will lose their stack is giving away to the table an amount that is equal to the rake. This in effect nullifies the cost of the rake even if the person is not putting it directly into the rake collection. This is why I dont post on this site very often.. too many people that cant use common sense and try and make up for it with secret reports and such. I am not saying tons of people make money. Just that is it more than 10%

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, where to begin. First of all, it doesn't make any difference if you're a bad player or a good player EVERYONE contributes to the rake.

Of course, I understand the point you're trying to make, but it's flawed. I have proven before that it takes more than one player (good, bad or indifferent) to make up for the rake, and I'll attempt to do it again here.

You see the rake is cumulative. It's impossible for too many people to win. In my opinion the correct number is actually closer to 5%, but that's neither here nor there. The main problem is to try and correct your thinking. I'll give it one shot.

Take a hypothetical 10-20 hold'em game. In one month at $3 rake per hand in 160 hours of play (a 40 hour week) at 40 hands per hour (B&M style) $19,200 is raked off the table. Now you and I are winning players and we each make one big bet per hour. So in this 10-20 game we each make $3200 per month. This means a total of $25,600 has to be lost in one month by the other 8 losing players (10 handed game) to cover the rake and our profit. So the other eight players each lose $3200 a month apiece. How long can this go on? In order for there to be four winning players the six losing players have to lose $5333 each per month. Do you see where this is going?

When $19,200 is raked off the table in one month that is the equivalent of SIX winning players! This money never returns to poker economy. It doesn't make any difference how many people come and go over a period of time, because the rake never stops. Eventually the games will dry up and become populated by a group of very tough players.

In fact, it's possible for there to be one VERY bad player in the game and everyone can still be a loser! Let's say that there is one horrible player in the game who loses $10,000 per month. That's a lot for a 10-20 game wouldn't you admit? All of the other nine players are tough winning players. Regardless of who wins and who loses $19,200 is still raked off the table. It takes one month of time for that bad player to lose his $10,000 and for the good players to chop it up. But since $19,200 was removed from the table in the form of rake, $9,200 was lost by the tough players trying to get it. Yes, the bad player ended up paying for more than half the rake but it wasn't enough to cover the deficit, and the good players end up paying for the other half.

So here is a situation where everyone lost at the end of the month even with a really bad player in the game! The good players chopped up $10,000 and the rake gobbled up $19,200 for a total of $9,200 missing from the table. That $9,200 has to come from somewhere. $10,000 gets put back in play but that $19,200 is never seen again. Without a rake that $19,200 would be money still in action, and everybody but the bad player would figure to make about $1100 for the month, but because of the rake the good players lost an average of $1022 for the month even though a moron blew 10K!

The rake is insidious, and most people don't have a clue how insidious it really is.