Time to compare the rakes on all the sites?

[theblitz]

Seeing all these threads caused me to look at the rake on Absolute.
It is 10 times worse there.

Didn't realise it was so bad.

Think I am going to write a program to compare all the rakes for all the sites.

Would be VERY interesting to see how the numbers come out.

Will probably take a few days and maybe I will build it on top of PT so that I can take the data directly from there.

If I can get it to work then each of us would be able to run it on our own PT data to see what rake we would pay for each site on the same data.

Pointers to the rake structures fro each site would be useful.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

If you include bonus which is nearly unlimited, Absolute beats all other sites on 1/2 to 3/6.

[playersare]

[ QUOTE ]
Seeing all these threads caused me to look at the rake on Absolute.
It is 10 times worse there.

[/ QUOTE ]
compared to what? Absolute has a standard 5% max just like the majority of sites out there. while AP does have an issue about raking too EARLY compared to what is on their published chart (for example - the say they rake 50c for every $10 on $2/4 LHE, but in actuality it's 25c for every $5), the do not have an issue with raking too MUCH like this change at pokerroom.

only bad rake sched that people have tolerated over time is the 50c/$5 and $1/$12 at the party skins. this is because the higher vig is completely offset by the bonus structure, and also due to the super soft games. the combination of a poor rake/bonus ratio on pokerroom now coupled with a horrible rake schedule which INTENTIONALLY impedes bonus clearing ability is what caused the pot to boil over.

if other sites got out of line then the zoo would react accordingly as they did today. there is no immediate need for a wide scale witch hunt of sites whose rake scheds have stayed the same for years.

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
Seeing all these threads caused me to look at the rake on Absolute.
It is 10 times worse there.

Didn't realise it was so bad.


[/ QUOTE ]

Are you smoking crack. Get the bonuses at $.10/hand and you are paid to play there.

[yoshi_yoshi]

hey uglyowl (or anyone else),

can i ask what rake in terms of bb/100 you pay at 2/4 (6-max) as compared to 1/2 (6-max)? i am in the process of moving up, and in my first few hundred hands i was disappointed to see that so far, i am getting jacked for the same 3bb/100 i was paying at 1/2. that was fine at 1/2, but i'm not as confident i can overcome that at 2/4.

anyways, if you have any PT stats on how much rake you pay at the Absolute tables, i would appreciate that very much. (i ask because i see you posting about Absolute often)

thanks a lot,
john

[Uglyowl]

Yoshi,

It is all about bonuses. That should offset the rake you pay.

If you are not utilizing bonuses and/or rakeback at poker sites you are still living in 2001 dude [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Tony Corbett]

I haven't done the math but on pure rake without bounses or rakeback I think Pokerstars will win the "Rake "War". I would be interested to know if I'm wrong.

It would also be cool to know how much of a difference rakeback and bonuses make to the bottom line, my gut feeling is that rakeback on some sites is not as good as it first seems when you take into account the rake structure they use.

[LoveDub]

There is a site out there which lists links to all of the rake pages on most of the popular sites. Please don't ban me if this is not allowed! It might help to work out comparative rake prices...

rakereport.com/rakePages.php

[mbpoker]

What is needed is a table where there are rake amounts for typical 1,000 hands on main sites side by side for each limit. Is such table available?

[Uglyowl]

Cool site.. that will help. Over the weekend, I will fire up some simulations. Have two job interviews tomorrow so it will be later on this weekend.

Nice work [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]