Ok I have started playing poker again and decided to grind up my bankroll on FT playing $10nl.

But I have no rakeback, Should I switch sites and if so any recommendations? I hear Titan is not bad for cash games but they dont offer rakeback at the moment.

On FT I am currently about 2.5k hands in and doing good so any suggestions or thoughts would be good.

Ta.

I have the same problem... but for 10NL I don't think it's worth it, unless you're really multi-tabling full time or something. If you're just playing a couple of tables for a a couple of hours a day, how much are you really paying in rake, and what would rakeback work out to per month?

Now, I'm playing 30$ HU games... even if I'm playing only 10 a day, that's $15 in rake, so let's say 4$ in rakeback * 365 days = almost $1500 a year, which is probably worth it, or will be soon. At some point I'll probably look to change sites, though I'll really miss the Rematch button. Also, I seem to remember that PokerRoom at least charged the usual 10% SNG rake even for heads-up, which is BS. FullTilt only charges 5%, so if 10% is normal, I'm doing better at FT even if I got rakeback elsewhere. I'll do some research.

Originally Posted by MJPerry

Xopods, the rake is far higher at microstakes than at anything else (in proportion to the size of the pot obvs) so it's worth getting.

Yeah, but you're not really playing 10 NL to make money, you're playing it for experience. If bankroll was all that was holding you back from playing 50 NL, it wouldn't be that hard to find some money to play with. The reason you build it up from smaller stakes is just to get a lot of hands in, and to make sure you're profitable at the micros before you start trying to tackle tougher games.

Anyway, it's not a whole lot of work to register a new account and getting rakeback can't hurt*... it just depends on whether you like one site a lot more than the others.

*: Well, I suppose it can, in the sense that overcoming a high rake to build your BR means you have to be really KILLING the micros and playing a lot of hands before you move up, whereas with rakeback, you might go up a bit sooner and less prepared.

I am playing $10nl to make money, I started with a BR that is technically not large enough to playing at that level and even after doubling it I am still "technically" playing higher than my BR should allow.

As far as I can see there is no downside to rakeback, the only negative would be having to change poker sites, but thats life I guess.

I think that if the amount of money you can win or lose at 10NL has any significant impact on your non-poker finances, you shouldn't be gambling at all. Like, really... go out and get a job for minimum wage and you'll be making way more than 10NL, without the variance.

Thanks for the advice but you have no idea what your talking about.

The amount of money I win or lose at poker has a significant impact on my poker finances, nothing else, I have a job also, thanks again.

What was your point exactly? Do you even remember?