It's a misconception that Party's rake is higher.

[Beavis68]

According to PT, I pay virtually the same rake on UB and party, but I have tons of bonus bucks on UB, so I only play party for reload bonuses.

[AncientPC]

So you play on UB because of the fact that the bonuses take forever to clear? [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[og5]

If you get rakeback isn't it actually better that party's rake is higher? That way you get rakeback from every raked pot, even if you folded preflop (I think)

[DanS]

[ QUOTE ]
If you get rakeback isn't it actually better that party's rake is higher? That way you get rakeback from every raked pot, even if you folded preflop (I think)

[/ QUOTE ]

No... would you want the rake to be $100/hand just so you could get $30 back, and get stuck paying $70/hand rake?

I'm just saying that the rake's the same or lower at the limit(s) I play, so 30% of it back is just gravy.

Dan

[Thythe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you get rakeback isn't it actually better that party's rake is higher? That way you get rakeback from every raked pot, even if you folded preflop (I think)

[/ QUOTE ]

No... would you want the rake to be $100/hand just so you could get $30 back, and get stuck paying $70/hand rake?

I'm just saying that the rake's the same or lower at the limit(s) I play, so 30% of it back is just gravy.

Dan

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure of the overall validity of the argument, but maybe you would want it to be as high as possible under a huge amount of assumptions. If they paid rakeback for every hand (not just the ones you won), then you might want it to be raked $100 a hand. You fold preflop everytime, and get $30. Clearly this is ridiculous that I even typed this, but oh well....

[Vern]

Lower rake is better unless you get way more than the traditional ~25-30% rakeback deal. The extra rake you pay when you win is not offset by the extra rakeback you earn. I will put together an excel sheet with this later, this is off the top of my head for now, don't sue me for math errors.

Party Ring Table, 10 handed $1/$2, cost for 10 hands is $1.50 so $0.15/hand for the blinds. Average Pot is 6.5BB ($13) so $0.50-0.75 rake, I will use $0.625 per hand. You play conservatively and see ~25% of the flops, you see SD about 30% of the time you see a flop and win about 60% of the time you show down. So your winning .25*.30*.60 which is .045% so you pay $5.63 in rake over the course of 200 hands ($0.625 * 200*.045). Assuming 75% of all hands are raked, the rake generated at the table total is ($0.625*200*.75) or $93.50, $9.35 which is your contribution. Assuming you get 25% you make $2.34 in rakeback. Net effect of rake -$3.29 Now, lower that rake to a more traditional $0.25/$5 pot and the average pot size of 6.5BB means a hand is raked on average will be $0.45 about 75% of the time. You still win 9 hands out of 200, so you now pay $4.05 in rake, but the total rake payed is now ($0.45*200*.75) 67.5, 6.75 which is your contribution so $1.69 in rake back, net effect of rake -$2.36, so you save $0.93 for 200 hands or $0.0046 per hand paying the lower rake, even with the rake back.