Is this rake excessive?

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

I gotta say, I've played with Dave/Al Capone Jr., and nothing says "elitist" more than having to go to the Bellagio gift shop to buy a touristy t-shirt that fits the dress code better than the muscle shirt you are wearing (and which incidentally does a much better job of covering the A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] tattoo on your shoulder). Yeah, Dave's an elitist all right [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img].

Sorry I missed the jamboree, Dave. It would have been an honor to have been kicked in the nuts by you.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

Thanks a billion, man. Yeah, the jambouree kicked ass, and there will be more, so next time you're coming let's get one together in advance.

I think I was a "little tipsy" when I went off last night. But screw it, everything still stands anyway. I gots me a reputation as an insane criminal genius to maintain, and apparently now another reputation as an arrogant elitist!

al

p.s. Feel free to kick whomever you want in the nuts, tell 'em Al sent you. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[A_C_Slater]

Dear Al Capone Jr,

In regards to unreasonable rake, at my local casino there is a $6 half hourly time charge for the 1-2 NL. The maximum buy in is $100 and there is a $50 minimum buy in. There is no rake, but $1 is taken from each pot for the bad beat jackpot.

The players are usually terrible, but sometimes I'll sit at a tight table. Mostly though, it's a $12 open raise and 4 cold callers. People betting $15 into $80 pots when they have top pair on a 2flush board and 4 opponents. Yesterday, I saw pocket 6's open raise UTG to $15 and get raised all in too $80 by ATo and eventually called by the 6's (after a long, drawn out, and pretend "thinking" process for dramatic effect, because you know he ain't gonna fold them sixes, ever.) This happended twice with the same hands, though in reversed positions.

No one has really been able to answer my question on these forums about whether this game is beatable or not.

I figure that on average I have to win the blinds twice every half hour just to keep up with the rake. If there is about 15 hands per half hour. Then I have to win the blinds roughly, every seven hands on average.

If I'm playing 20% of the hands dealt to me and only winning on 70% of those, then is this even possible?

What would be a good winrate for this game, if any?

Most of my experience has been with limit, so I don't know the answer to these questions.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

This game is probably beatable, but not by much because that time charge is pretty high for the stakes. I can't give you any definitive answer here because such material doesn't exist in print that I am aware of, and I haven't kept very good records since the no limit craze, so I can't say from that either.

You gotta figure a typical no limit game with 10% to $4 max with a buck for the jackpot takes anywhere from $100-$150 or so off the table in an hour, so your time game is probably comparable to the total amount being taken off the table per hour. However, if you are tight like me [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] then you won't really be paying your fair share of rake, because you wont be in many pots. In a time game, you will pay equally as much as the loose players, which hurts you more than paying rake.

al

[chief444]

I've only had the pleasure of meeting Dave once but I can say with great certainty that he's neither elitest nor someone who would hesitate to tell you anything to your face that he would type here. And he's probably correct, certainly about the win rate you mention being unsustainable at least.

[pipster]

btw, winning 70% of the flops you see is thinking a little on the high side. I play limit instead of NL, but my Showdown Win % isn't even as high as 70% (a good day it is around 60% Showdown win and 35% Flopp seen win) So if you are seeing 3 hands per orbit (2 VP$IP and 1 BB) and win 1 in 3 of those hands you are running pretty darn well. And being up 0.5 BB/orbit (Big bet is 2xBig blind)would be 5 BB/100 which would be a VERY nice win rate at limit. I understand at NL it is big blinds so 10 BB/100 would not be to unsustainable but that is just to break even! Expecting a win rate of much more than 10 BB/100 at NL over the course of time is probably stretching it. With $2 blinds to get to $20/hr you need to win 10 BB/30 hands which is a nice 33 BB/100 win rate on top of the 10 BB/100 win rate.. So 43 BB/100... Whee!

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
And he's probably correct, certainly about the win rate you mention being unsustainable at least.

[/ QUOTE ]

That part's probably correct, I don't doubt it. The bigger question is whether to berate everyone who comes onto this forum with misconceptions about what's a sustainable winrate, or if we can get as far maintaining a civil tone and educating people when they show ignorance.

But he said it was the alcohol, so I take that to mean this isn't a new forum standard for newbie treatment that I have to comply with. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
btw, winning 70% of the flops you see is thinking a little on the high side. I play limit instead of NL, but my Showdown Win % isn't even as high as 70% (a good day it is around 60% Showdown win and 35% Flopp seen win) So if you are seeing 3 hands per orbit (2 VP$IP and 1 BB) and win 1 in 3 of those hands you are running pretty darn well. And being up 0.5 BB/orbit (Big bet is 2xBig blind)would be 5 BB/100 which would be a VERY nice win rate at limit. I understand at NL it is big blinds so 10 BB/100 would not be to unsustainable but that is just to break even! Expecting a win rate of much more than 10 BB/100 at NL over the course of time is probably stretching it. With $2 blinds to get to $20/hr you need to win 10 BB/30 hands which is a nice 33 BB/100 win rate on top of the 10 BB/100 win rate.. So 43 BB/100... Whee!

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, but that applies to limit hold em games going to the river. When playing against these people it's raised about 6x the BB every hand, so when I do enter the pot it's always with a premium hand and I am usually way ahead when going to the flop. 70% doesn't just have to be on the flop but preflop as well when I reraise and everyone folds.

But yea, 70% I just tossed that figure out there to see if even at that number it's possible to win.

[Origami]

This means absolutely nothing, but last night I saw a guy take over $1000 off a $40 max buy-in NL game. Blinds are 1-1.

[RRRRICK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And he's probably correct, certainly about the win rate you mention being unsustainable at least.

[/ QUOTE ]

That part's probably correct, I don't doubt it. The bigger question is whether to berate everyone who comes onto this forum with misconceptions about what's a sustainable winrate, or if we can get as far maintaining a civil tone and educating people when they show ignorance.

But he said it was the alcohol, so I take that to mean this isn't a new forum standard for newbie treatment that I have to comply with. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Good to see someone understands. I didnot question what Dave said just the manner in which he said it. I also found it very amusing that Dave felt he had to give me his resume when I called him an elitest it shows a lot of insecurity as does his need to berrate anyone he asks something thats not up to standard. That is what an elitest does, spends there life climbing the mountain so that they push anyone off who tries to do the same. I have not posted at this site for over 3 months and Dave reminded me why.

Thanks Dave

As for your macho kick me in the nuts. I would love to give you my resume Dave which includes 3 national open age Karate Kumite titles.And I'd also love to tell you all about the 15 years it's taken me to reach 3rd Dan Sensei status, but I know I don't need to.
Maybe be next time your in Australia we can catch up for a beer and I will tell you all about it. Maybe you can give me some poker lessons in exchange for some fighting tips.