Don't be fooled!! The Rake is ...... - Page 14

Synergistic Explosions · #**131** 05-12-2005, 05:03 PM

Rake is the ultimate grinder.

Ten people get together with a thousand bucks each.

They play for 50 hours over five days, no rebuys allowed.

They play 15-30 with normal online rake charges being applied.

After 50 hours, the ten thousand they bought in with collectively now equals one thousand.

Rake just took 90% of the funds bought into this 50 hour game.

Is that fair?

This is what is now going on while you play online each and every day.

Rake is taking that type of money out of the player pool. It is grinding it away with no chance to lose.

Eventually, rake will always get most of the money put into the game, unless people win and leave quickly never to return again. If you stick around and play full time, rake will take much more than your starting bankroll each year. Sometimes rake will take much much more than your starting bankroll each year, or even each month in some cases.

You may be winning, and you may be happy even, but rake is taking away a large portion of your profits.

Rake is a cancer, no doubt about it.

Mr. Graff · #**132** 05-12-2005, 05:47 PM

As stated above most people, even 2+2'ers don't care about the rake. So naturally the sites have no incentive to lower it. Rake free sites have been tried before and they have failed miserably. No, if only competitive sites with lower rakes could persuade the players that rake matters in their advertising that would be the only way to change the current situation. But the thing is no site want to discuss rake because many players are not even aware they pay it.

Wyers · #**133** 05-12-2005, 06:03 PM

Rake is a cancer, no doubt about it.

I agree, SE. 100%

The problem is the following:

How do you sell the concept of a rake free site to the casual player? This player does not realize they are being raped. I don't know how you sell them on the idea of a monthly fee or a reasonable monthly cap if they believe you only pay rake on pots you win. That's if they are aware of the rake at all....

I know rake is the cancer but I don't see a cure on the horizon.

grimel · #**134** 05-12-2005, 06:13 PM

Rake is a necessary evil. Some sites (PARTY) take way too much. The key is to get a POPULAR site to set a reasonable rate (the site has to make $$ or it will fold) and take some of the business from the big rake sites.

kdog · #**135** 05-12-2005, 09:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If they were tipping it must have been a live room. There are no pro B&M 3/6 players. Can't be done.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure it can. You just have to not mind living in your car and only eating the one sandwich a day that you can get with your comp points. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

eastbay · #**136** 05-12-2005, 10:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]

What I meant was, "If the site didn't charge you money, they wouldn't be in business, if they wern't in business, you would make zero money."

[/ QUOTE ]

That's absurd. They could charge 1/10th and still be getting fabulously wealthy.

eastbay

Dave H. · #**137** 05-13-2005, 12:03 PM

Yes, I HAVE to agree with you there...it should have been made clear. However, and I'm not going to spend the time looking, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if, somewhere, it isn't stated that they have the right to raise it at their discretion and without informing us directly.

LinusKS · #**138** 05-13-2005, 01:07 PM

The answer is to support sites that offer rakeback to the player, and bonuses.

If you're not paying attention to the rake you're paying - minus rakeback and bonuses - you're just throwing your money away.

[ QUOTE ]
Rake is a cancer, no doubt about it.

I agree, SE. 100%

The problem is the following:

How do you sell the concept of a rake free site to the casual player? This player does not realize they are being raped. I don't know how you sell them on the idea of a monthly fee or a reasonable monthly cap if they believe you only pay rake on pots you win. That's if they are aware of the rake at all....

I know rake is the cancer but I don't see a cure on the horizon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Folding Pete · #**139** 05-13-2005, 01:52 PM

The rake we pay is ridiculous. I must be paying $4,500 a month to online sites in rake. This is what the monthly charge is for the service of supplying poker games.

Is it good value for money - no. People are comparing it to B&M poker and saying internet poker rooms charge less rake. If you play only 1 slow table on the internet that's fine. However most winning players are multi-tablers and you can't compare the two.

Bascially tremendous improvements in technology has allowed poker to be played at a much faster rate than in the B&M casinos. Instead of 40 hands an hour players, like me, are playing 250 hands per hour. The cost of an additional internet played hand is close to zero.

In many other business the impact of technology over the last 30 years has led to a much lower price to the consumer. Not, however, in the internet Poker market.

The efficiencies and savings generated by the new technology (computers & the internet - elimination of dealers, casino space etc...) are not being passed to the consumers.

Instead the internet poker site have used the new technology to reduce their costs exponentially (the cost of opening an additional table is virtually nil) passing virtually none of these savings on to the consumer.

For the consumer it's like puchasing a 2005 Dell PC and having to pay the price of a 1960 Cray Supercomputer.

Always be folding

Folding Pete

iluzion · #**140** 05-13-2005, 02:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The rake we pay is ridiculous. I must be paying $4,500 a month to online sites in rake. This is what the monthly charge is for the service of supplying poker games.

Is it good value for money - no. People are comparing it to B&M poker and saying internet poker rooms charge less rake. If you play only 1 slow table on the internet that's fine. However most winning players are multi-tablers and you can't compare the two.

Bascially tremendous improvements in technology has allowed poker to be played at a much faster rate than in the B&M casinos. Instead of 40 hands an hour players, like me, are playing 250 hands per hour. The cost of an additional internet played hand is close to zero.

In many other business the impact of technology over the last 30 years has led to a much lower price to the consumer. Not, however, in the internet Poker market.

The efficiencies and savings generated by the new technology (computers & the internet - elimination of dealers, casino space etc...) are not being passed to the consumers.

Instead the internet poker site have used the new technology to reduce their costs exponentially (the cost of opening an additional table is virtually nil) passing virtually none of these savings on to the consumer.

For the consumer it's like puchasing a 2005 Dell PC and having to pay the price of a 1960 Cray Supercomputer.

Always be folding

Folding Pete

[/ QUOTE ]

While yes, I entirely agree the amount we pay is outrageous, I do not agree it's not worth it. Sure, technology in this case leads us to higher costs, but it, overall, leads us to being MUCH more profitable (atleast with FAR less risk). Some internet players are capable of eight tabling 3/6 to 5/10. If they can consitantly beat those games at any rate, they are going to make a LOT more than most B&M players, even if they are paying more in rake. Still, I do believe our rake should be capped, but either way, its worth what I pay.