Here I stand -
corrected AND amazed.
- Oh, and grateful
I see '06 as the year I give NL a hard look.
Is the quoted WR of $70/hour for 4 tables of NL 100 before or after rake rebate ?
BTW, what do you find yourself paying in rake per 100 hands at this level ?
*
One of the reasons - perhaps the major reason - I decided that whatever future there was for me playing online lay with mid-high limit was the obscene role the rake played at the lower limits; I get nauseous when I think of the 1/3 of my income that goes to Uncle Sam but the thought of going 50-50 with the a poker site would lead to projectile vomiting. Sadly, most good or even VERY good 2-4, 3-6 players do leave half their winnings on the table due to the rake.
I'm no communist; I do not think the sites should provide a service and not expect to earn a profit but 50-50 is obscene and it is this aversion to working 40 hours and getting paid for 20 that led me away from small NL - a choice I am beginning to question.
I can play 10-20 or 15-30 online and for all intents and purposes ignore the rake - at least in terms of its % impact. "Ignore" is not the best word - unless one is accustomed to ignoring an expense that is often larger than my mortgage payment; what I meant to say was I have never even considered the rake when choosing where, when or if to play 15-30. These three factors are huge when planning a session of 3-6.
I am also speaking of live games - something I played far too little of this year (or last).
East coast rakes/time fees are an atrocity - second only to California - but $12 hour plus tips is still a steal compared to what one must pay to play small stakes whether they play online or live.
Be aware I am not advocating one "cut off one's nose to spite one's face"; I used to play in (and crush) a PL draw game with a 5% rake and NO CAP, and if this group reassembled tomorrow I'd beat a path to the game but in that case my options were limited; here they aren't. I have never sought out the game with the lowest rake but I have always considered it a major factor at the lower limits while attaching virtually no significance to it as I move(d) up.
*
Again, thanks for your detailed response. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
*
Have a wonderful holiday and a prosperous New Year.
Sincerely,
- Chris
|