Rake %

[MrMon]

Don't know if this is the place for these, but I find them interesting. I'm going to work on figuring in the effect on bonuses later, but I'd like to see what others have come up with.

These are all $1/$2 and $2/$4 games, a mix of full and 6-max tables.

PokerRoom 4.43%
Absolute 4.24%
PartyPoker 4.10%
Bet365 (Prima) 3.71%
PokerStars 3.66%
Paradise 3.64% - Limited Data

Looks like there's a definite correlation between amount of extras and rake, e.g. Paradise & PokerStars have few extras - low rake, Absolute & PokerRoom have big extras and big rake.

[MrMon]

Okay, figured out the effect of Bonus on the numbers. Since I basically played only the required number of hands to clear bonus, this should be pretty accurate. (I did find one Crypto site, PokerPlex that I did play beyond the clearing number, which would skew things. That raw rake number is 4.06%)

Here's the table again, second number is after I take my bonus into account (I can't account for anyone else at the table.)

PokerRoom 4.43% - 4.12%
Absolute 4.24% - 3.80% - 3.54% (with unmentionable)
PartyPoker 4.10% - 3.84%
Bet365 (Prima) 3.71% - 2.60%
PokerStars 3.66% - 3.18%
Paradise 3.64% - 2.90% - Limited Data

Now to account for game quality...

[Sniper]

MrMon...

At Absolute 1/2 - 2/4, if you deposit enough to always have an active bonus and you have rakeback, you are receiving more than 100% rakeback (for up to about 250,000 raked hands this year) [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[MrMon]

[ QUOTE ]
MrMon...

At Absolute 1/2 - 2/4, if you deposit enough to always have an active bonus and you have rakeback, you are receiving more than 100% rakeback (for up to about 250,000 raked hands this year) [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless you are playing very tightly, I just don't see +100% as a possibility. Using my PT stats and assuming they correlate to how Absolute will calculate my MGR (always a risky assumption), I figure it's about 75%.

I suppose it's possible to get to +100% if you're super tight, but that's not poker, that's being a machine. What's your BB/100 playing that way?

[Sniper]

Mr Mon,

You are likely not calculating your MGR properly, as your VPIP% has nothing to do with MGR at Absolute.

Rounded for simplicity, here is what play at Absolute 2/4 looks like...

MGR/Raked Hand = .12
Bonus/Raked Hand = .10
RB/Raked Hand = .03

So, you are getting back .01/raked hand more than Absolute considers your share of the rake [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
(Note without rounding the actual number is slightly higher)

[MrMon]

You must play in games with rocks. In the 6 max 2/4 games I play at Absolute, I see my share of rake as .235/Raked Hand. Average pot is $22.33. Even full ring is going to be .207/Raked Hand.

You're going to have to explain where those numbers come from, because I can't see it.

[Sniper]

I'm talking full ring limit 2/4 (data from summary tab in PT)...

Avg Pot = 21.99
Avg Rake = 0.93
Avg Player = 7.92
Avg MGR = 0.93/7.92 = ~0.12

Based on your numbers, I would say that you didn't update your PT to the latest version and delete and reimport Oct hands when rake calculations were screwed up.

[MrMon]

No, my PT is up to date and I didn't play any Absolute hands why the whole rake issue was in flux. I only played in October after the issue was resolved.

Based on your numbers, I see Absolute's rake as .93/21.99 or 4.22%, which is in line with what I got. Where we diverge is your Avg MGR number. For full ring, I get 1.11/7.00 or .159/player/raked hand. But if I look at those numbers on the Summary page in PT, I can't get them to make sense. Try it on yours. Can you get Total Rake/Raked Hands to equal Avg. Rake? Wait, they calculate Avg. Rake by using HWF, not the raked hands number. Hmmm.

Try this. Take the Total Rake for any given level on the General Info tab and divide it by the HWF number. Multiply by the Avg Player number and you probably won't get the Avg Rake number. It seems to indicate I'm paying higher than the average MGR. But which is correct? And which does Absolute use?