Click here for great deals at PokerSource!
Pokersource offers extra bonusses, gifts and rakeback deals on various pokersites. Having used Pokersource myself, I can really recommend them for boosting your bankroll.
Please use 'Astafas' as referral.

Thursday, October 8, 2009

What's the rake like?

Rake is kind of a weird thing (for me): if you loose the pot, you don't have to pay rake and if you win the pot, it's just a tiny peace of it so it doesn't really matter, right?

I had been reading on differences in rake structures across the sites and that you shouldn't play on Full Tilt at 10NL or below or in live games any game below 5-10 is pretty hard to beat because of the rake etc.

So I took a look at my rake and noticed a few interesting points. Anyway, for some of the levels I probably don't have a sufficient sample size, but here are a few numbers and conclusions (all 6max):

2NL: 12.8 bb/100
5NL: 13.2 bb/100
10NL: 15.5 bb/100

Everest Poker: 16.3 bb/100
Party Poker: 12.0 bb/100
Pokerstars: 9.1 bb/100
Full Tilt: 15.3 bb/100
Titan Poker: 15.9 bb/100

Overall: 14.9 bb/100

Obviously, the effective rake is affected by the play: loose tables = more and bigger pots = more rake. I guess that's why Everest has the highest number.
Full Tilt rake > Pokerstars rake: I don't think there's a big difference in looseness here, and you can see the result of a better rake structure at stars (for these levels). Also, and again pretty logical, rake at full ring is less than 6max.

I was surprised to see these numbers to say the least. Being only slightly better than your opponents clearly isn't going to be profitable. I guess this also means that every 100 hands almost and entire stack is taken off the table because of the rake. Hence the huge profits of Stars and company.

Sure, the rake in bb/100 drops down at higher stakes because of the cap, but achievable winrates probably drop down even faster.


Laterz.

No comments:

Post a Comment