Pounds -vs- Dollars (Analysis of the .5/1 NL Crypto Games)

[SwordFish]

I was going to wait until I had 20K hands at each level to make this post, but there seems to be a lot of debate about this subject lately.

Disclaimer: I am posting these PokerTracker stats to help draw a conclusion. It's not about having a pissing contest or seeing "whose is bigger".

The Question: Is it more or less profitable to play at the Crypto Pound(GBP) tables ?

Numbers: All of the data comes from the .5/1 Blind (100BB Max Buy-in) No Limit Games. I play these tables during European prime time (which is the afternoon/early evening EST).


Dollars: <ul type="square"> Hands: 17,112

Amount Won: $3796 ($.22 per hand)

BB/Hr: 4.62

(Note: In PokerTracker NL stats, BB refers to Big Bet which is equal to double the Big Blind)

BB/100: 11.09

Total Rake: $1357 ($.08 per hand)[/list]
Pounds:

<ul type="square"> Hands: 19,256

Amount Won: $8087 ($.42 per hand)

BB/Hr: 4.93

BB/100: 11.62

Total Rake: $2606 ($.135 per hand)[/list]

The first thing that jumps out at me is the remarkable similarity in win rate between the two levels. This indicates that contrary to what most people believe, when played during the same time of day, the skill level of players seems to be comparable.

So why pay more rake at the GBP tables?

When looking at raw numbers, I won more playing at the GBP tables, but I also paid more rake.

Breaking this down further, I paid 69% (.135/.08) more rake per hand on the GBP tables. However, I won 91% (.42/.22) more money per hand.

The argument can be made that moving to a higher level at a Dollar table would accomplish the same thing while paying less rake. The problem with this theory is that the skill level of the other players increases at each level. While still profitable, win rate decreases. In addition, there is not much game selection at the higher levels on Crypto sites.



Conclusion: Even though I am paying more rake at the GBP tables, they are clearly more profitable.

If you decide to play at the GBP tables, just keep in mind that you are playing nearly double the stakes and you need to have the appropriate bankroll. Then, keep an eye on your win rate and be sure you are beating the rake by enough to make it worthwhile.


If anyone has a reasonable sample size for Limit, I would be curious to see if the results are the same.


SF

[WSOPWinner2005]

Great post, thanks for the stats ... I dropped $100 pretty quickly the first time I tried a crypto skin maybe I will try again this afternoon (european prime time) and see how I do this time. God knows I need some kind of break from this boring grind at the party nl tables..

[PokerNoob]

Ok, I don't understand. If the rake structure is the same (this is my assumption), why does it matter whether the betting structure is denominated in dollars, GBP, euros, donuts, marbles or toothpicks? You pay proportionally the same rake vs. bets won.

[sumdumguy]

It is not proportional because of the 3 unit rake cap!
3USD is the max rake on a USD table.
3GBP is the max rake on a GBP table.

10/20USD max rake is 3USD for 140USD pot
5/10GBP max rake is 3GBP for 70GBP pot
1.85USD = 1GBP
Make sense?

Playing in smaller games, not likely to hit potsizes that exceed the rake cap, mostly look for best game. When in games where pots are likely to exceed rake cap, you have to compare game quality eg., if 10/20 US game is only marginally tougher than 5/10GBP game.. you might be better off playing 10/20USD to save on rake.

[SwordFish]

PokerNoob-

As sumdumguy pointed out, the key here is the max rake charged. It is 3 units no matter which currency you are using. So the make rake (in USD) at a dollar table is $3, while at a GBP table it is $5.55 (3 x $1.85). So when you are playing NL or a mid/high stakes Limit game where the cap is likely to be reached, you need to be beating the game for more money to compensate for the higher rake.


SF