Time vs Rake

[octop]

I think it does hurt the tight player a little
I also like t leave on my big blind and sometimes the button would just pass me and then time was being collected so I just payed my blinds for nothing

[Jeffage]

When games are time charged, players pay a charge on the dealer change instead of having every pot raked (this typically is collected on the half hour). The charge depends on the stakes: in AC, it's 5 for 10-20, 6 for 15-30, 7 for 20-40, 8 for 40-80, 10 for 80-160.

Jeff

[Jeffage]

A time pot is sometimes used in games that have a time charge rather than a rake. One player puts up the time for the entire table (say, $80 in a 40-80 game). Then, the winners of the first two pots of at least $400 pay half the total time each. So, first winner pays 40, second pays 40, back to the person who put it up. In bigger games, it is usually paid in one pot. Those who don't want to participate or are away from the table pay separately.

Jeff

[VBCurtis]

[ QUOTE ]
My question then is this:

If you are playing 30 hands per hour, how many hands do you win? Is it 10%? 3 Hands per hour.

If all are max raked you are paying 12 bucks an hour to play aren't you?

Just a thought

[/ QUOTE ]
If you're at a full table, an average player would expect to win 10% of his hands; obviously, a tighter player less than 10% and looser more than 10%. That's the reasoning for tight players liking rake more-- if you win 7% of pots, you're paying more like $8.50/hr, while a LAG might pay more like $20/hr, and really hope for a time charge.

Your reasoning applies to an average-looseness player, which is why the casino doesn't really care which happens.
-Curtis

[lefty rosen]

I hate time charges on small games such as 1/2 NL. It really squeezes a rockish player who gets a bad beat or two. If your ace king or ace queen doesnt hit the board and you put some cash in the pot. Your almost forced to play 10/10 or 9/9 like a hero the next time you are dealt it. As you lose ten percent per hour which is total garbage......

[rchandra]

time wins by a large margin

[poker327]

I don't blame a casino for charing time for 1/2 NL. Not as many hands are played, thus the rake collection will be smaller. Plus, NL games make the bad players broke faster, so the casino won't get their business in the future

[Gandor]

[ QUOTE ]
I hate time charges on small games such as 1/2 NL. ... As you lose ten percent per hour which is total garbage......

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a couple easy solutions, don't play short, or don't pay time out of your stack.

[lefty rosen]

If a bad player is going broke from busting his 100 dollar buyin he shouldn't be at the casino period. I always here this comment about why casinos don't like nl. But have you ever watched roulette, the tilters all go bust with a minutes. Every casino has that game though? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[KenProspero]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are playing 30 hands per hour, how many hands do you win? Is it 10%? 3 Hands per hour.

[/ QUOTE ]

I probably win 7% of the hands I play -- maybe a bit less.