Which is Better??? Bonus Whoring or RakeBack?

[Talk2BigSteve]

Which in the long run is a better???

Big Steve [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[billyjex]

Both.

Learning, Laughing, Masturbating,

Billyjex.

[Talk2BigSteve]

[ QUOTE ]
Learning, Laughing, Masturbating,


[/ QUOTE ]

That is just wrong!!

Big Steve [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[k000k]

[ QUOTE ]
Which in the long run is a better???

Big Steve [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends what limits you play.. .5/1 players get way more out of bonuses. 20/40 players get a lot more from rakeback.

[Chiron]

What he said. If you are playing very low stakes, stick to whoring.

[KingOtter]

Kitten murderer!

[a rebours]

depends even if you are a 20/40 player. a typical rakeback is 25%. assuming the rake is capped in every pot, that means on average you get back 25%*30 cents per hand, about 7.5 c/hand. Party/Empire reload bonuses for example give you about c14/hand.
I think the common agreement is that most bonuses are better than most rakebacks. correct me if I'm wrong.
wish all poker sites just lowered their rake for all players though instead of feeding an army of leeches-affiliates.

[ZBTHorton]

You are right. But bonuses are capped.

You can make 2-5K a month in rake back. No one site is ever going to offer that to you in bonuses...except this gamesgrid place.

[Chiron]

True, but I think the point is if you have the choice of one or the other, low stakes players will get more from bonus-whoring. If you run out of bonuses to whore, then by all means, getting rakeback is better than not. But there is an opportunity cost associated with playing ONLY for rakeback at low stakes when there are decent bonuses available.

[Emmitt2222]

micros = bonuses
small stakes = rakeback with a few good monthly bonuses
mid/high = rakeback and maybe the occasioanl party skin reload