Rake Rape - Page 3

Marm · #21 (**permalink**) 05-14-2006, 05:59 PM

It's aalllllll automatic now for stars

Beavis68 · #22 (**permalink**) 05-14-2006, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve-O

remember, if they take $.50 at $5 and you saw the flop to make the pot $5, you contributed to the rake, win ir lose. so for every flop/4th street you see you are paying $.10 or so. And PT isn't gonna subtract that from your win rate for all those hands you mucked before the showdown but it needs to be added in.

No, it doesnt need to be added in. When you lose 4bb on a hand. you lose everything including rake. Only the rake taken from the pots you win affects your winrate. It doesn't matter how much you contributed too the rake, what matters is how much is taken from the whole pot.

If ATs (or whatever the hand is) is a .1bb winner for you, it isn't negative after rake, it is .1bb after rake (this is assuming you have enough hands to caclulate a real winrate that is).

But your point (Ithink) is that marginal hands can be made unprofitable when the rake is too high, they may be winners without rake, but they are loser when rake is accounted for. This affect is the most extreme in tight split games, and I think I am raising when I don't have value and killing myself.

Beavis68 · #23 (**permalink**) 05-14-2006, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gryff

I've logged over 40k hands in S8b now, and playing weak one way hands sucks - you can only play them in position and its better to complete with them.

I changed a few hands recently in my starting hands for S8b, basically dropping weaker lows that needed three cards to make a straight that didnt contain an ace, and replacing with stuff like 556 that I had been folding before.

I'm also playing more big pairs in position and completing on 3rd when 1 player limps. If they catch low you ditch it and you havnt lost much - but you make on it when you find a donk who will call when he bricks 4th because you have so much more equity than him, this is also great because they start copying the holdings you play - but doing it out of position in the wrong situations which bleeds off even more money.

The standard across 1/2, 2/4 and 3/6 seems of a muchness although you can get tougher tables.

Played 3k hands since I moved up to 1/2 earlier this week ( finally and way overolled lol ), running at 5.52PTBB/100 at the mo, with a rake of 1.7bb/100, so I'd be running at 7.22 PTBB/100 if not for that.

Yes this is what I am finding, and I think I am actually moving back to how I played when I first started.

You have a time advantage on me. The S8b games seem a lot looser daytime US - more tables going to. They get rock tight in the evening though, maybe one pot in 15 will count as a raked pot for FPPs. I played quite a bit 1/2, but the .5/1 games were so much looser it seems like I rack up points faster when the time of day is right.

Steve-O · #24 (**permalink**) 05-14-2006, 06:28 PM

PT calculates just as a rakeback site would, this is not 100% accurate just simpler

Marm · #25 (**permalink**) 05-14-2006, 06:30 PM

Not sure how RB sites do it, but PT calculates by only charing you rake for pots you won.

Beavis68 · #26 (**permalink**) 05-14-2006, 07:19 PM

to steve's point about tight player paying less.

avg rake/player was $2.11/100 I think.

I payed $1.37 at 25NL.

What is sick, I won $72 and payed almost $40 in rake. but fuck, I cleared more than 155 in bonus. This is why I will not play on party w/o bonus.

Gryff · #27 (**permalink**) 05-15-2006, 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beavis68

No, it doesnt need to be added in. When you lose 4bb on a hand. you lose everything including rake. Only the rake taken from the pots you win affects your winrate. It doesn't matter how much you contributed too the rake, what matters is how much is taken from the whole pot.

I disagree with this btw.
If its taking $50-100 off my table per 100 hands then yeah, it affects my winrate.

Plus it may get some players to quit because they are positive players without rake but negative due to it.

Steve-O · #28 (**permalink**) 05-15-2006, 06:13 AM

Quote:

avg rake/player was $2.11/100 I think.

I payed $1.37 at 25NL.

this is my pont, PT is showing you overall rake and the amount of rake taken from the pots you WON. However, you're paying rake from virtually every pot you PLAY not just WIN.

So, PT is showing you a hands win rate minus the rake from the pots you won with it and not accounting for all those pots you played and contributed to the rake. Every time there is rake to be paid and you are involved in the hand you are paying.

As Beavis's stats above show, as a tightish player he pays less rake than the avg player but it still doesn't take into account the pots he played and didn't win. It's not a huge difference from what PT is showing but it's enough to turn slight winning hands into losing hands.

Like I said in my first post, if you see the flop with 4 other people and $.50 is taken in rake you have just paid $.10 to play that hand. That hand has to have a long term expectation to overcome the amount of rake you personally pay each time you play it to show a profit.

Irexes · #29 (**permalink**) 05-15-2006, 07:12 AM

But won't PT still be accurate as whether a hand you lose is raked or not is irrelevant to your win/loss. If I contribute 50c to a $5 pot I lose and it's raked I lose 50c. If I contribute 50c to a $4.50 pot I lose and it's unraked, I lose 50c.

Unless I'm missing something.

Beavis68 · #30 (**permalink**) 05-15-2006, 08:07 AM

exactly Irexes.

when you lose a pot you lose the whole thing for your WR it doesn't matter where it goes.

of course, when you have a small sample size of hands, your win rates will not be accurate anyway.

Gryff, I know what you are saying, but that affect on your WR is hard to quantify.

Steve,

I realized that was your point that is why I said "to steve's point about tight player paying less. " then demonstrated how I was paying less than average.