Long term online poker success with winning strategies – register for free!

The best strategies With the correct strategy, poker becomes an easy game. Our authors show you how to succeed, one step at a time.

The smartest thinkers Learn from and with internationally successful poker pros, in our live coaching sessions and in the forum.

Free poker money PokerStrategy.com is free of charge. Additionally there is free poker money waiting for you.

You are already a PokerStrategy.com member? Log in here!

Join PokerStrategy.com for free

FREE POKER MONEY

Play poker for free

$50 free poker money for every new member to play poker without a deposit

Join now for free

FREE TRAINING

Learn to play poker

Learn to win with top coaches, free videos and strategy articles

Join now for free

FREE POKER TOOLS

Get free poker tools

Take your poker game to the next level with our free poker tools

Join now for free

POKER SUCCESS

Join the worlds largest poker community

Build on the experience of the world's largest poker school and community

Join now for free
 
PokerStrategy.com Forum » Poker Forums » General Poker Discussion » Rakeback Vs No rake
Last Post | First Unread Post Add Thread to Favorites
Pages (2): [1] 2 next »
Go to the bottom of this page Rakeback Vs No rake
Author
Post « Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Reanimater
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 12 Nov 2008
Posts: 148

Thread Starter Thread Started by $starter
Rakeback Vs No rake

A friend of mine thinks that having rake on the sites is good because of rakeback/bonuses etc. He says this helps breakeven players get something at the end of the month.

I tried to explain to that guy that with no rake you would have 60-70 percent more compared to the 30 percent rake, as no rake means more money in the pots you win.

So which is better? Rakeback or no rake?
New Post 15 Jan 2012 19:21 Search for Posts by Reanimater Add Reanimater to your Buddy List
Castle93
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 06 Jun 2011
Posts: 1,309


no rake for sure, rakeback is like 30%, no rake = 100% rakeback, its that simple, with no rakeback breakeven players would be winning players, simple
New Post 15 Jan 2012 19:26 Search for Posts by Castle93 Add Castle93 to your Buddy List
MarkasKR
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 15 Mar 2008
Posts: 100


No rake would mean, no money for the site. So the site would not have money to invite the fish. (advertising).
New Post 15 Jan 2012 19:29 Search for Posts by MarkasKR Add MarkasKR to your Buddy List
Reanimater
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 12 Nov 2008
Posts: 148

Thread Starter Thread Started by $starter

thats a good point but zynga does not charge anything and has tons of players?
New Post 15 Jan 2012 19:32 Search for Posts by Reanimater Add Reanimater to your Buddy List
Xeonz123
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 22 Aug 2011
Posts: 255


No rake would be the most profitable however the poker site wouldnt survive without it!
New Post 15 Jan 2012 19:32 Search for Posts by Xeonz123 Add Xeonz123 to your Buddy List
Gerv
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 07 May 2008
Posts: 17,663


quote:
Originally posted by Reanimater
thats a good point but zynga does not charge anything and has tons of players?


They don't offer real money games so have different regulations than a site like PokerStars

The way Zynga makes money is:
  • From the sale of so-called virtual goods, which are used as currency within Zynga's online games and are items that help the player in the game,
  • and
    From advertising, both in and around its games.


Source: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011...

Pokersites main income is ofcourse the rake and 888 recently started to brand their tables with other brands (heineken etc.)

- Gerv

This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by Gerv: 15.01.2012 19:44.

New Post 15 Jan 2012 19:43 Search for Posts by Gerv Add Gerv to your Buddy List
lynius
Silver
Silver

Registration Date: 15 Jan 2011
Posts: 372


Surely if you pay a dollars rake and then go busto the next hand you still keep 27 cents you'd otherwise have lost.
New Post 16 Jan 2012 00:32 Search for Posts by lynius Add lynius to your Buddy List
Jan217
Gold
Gold

Registration Date: 02 Jan 2009
Posts: 618


quote:
Originally posted by lynius
Surely if you pay a dollars rake and then go busto the next hand you still keep 27 cents you'd otherwise have lost.


yes, if you lose EVERY hand then rakeback is better...
New Post 16 Jan 2012 00:53 Search for Posts by Jan217 Add Jan217 to your Buddy List
fuzzyfish
Gold
Gold

Registration Date: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 849


Surely this is a spoof thread. No?
New Post 16 Jan 2012 08:23 Search for Posts by fuzzyfish Add fuzzyfish to your Buddy List
CallumN
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 04 Jan 2012
Posts: 1,141


on most stakes if you break even you are actually beating the game for around 6bb/100.

The rake is pretty killer
New Post 16 Jan 2012 08:48 Search for Posts by CallumN Add CallumN to your Buddy List
Heave112
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 27 Mar 2009
Posts: 433


your friend is completely clueless, I payed like $900 last month rake @ 888 poker and only got something like $81 back cuz of my fail rakeback, didn't deposit money there so only had 9% rakeback. My total profit for the month is 550$, so I mean if there was no rake my total profit would be $1550 which is pretty god damn sick, so I make $550, and pay $1000 RAKE. So tell me how fair is that, 888 poker sit there while I play 5 hours a day, and they MAKE more MONEY than me for just sitting there ROFL. I wish there was no rake, I'd be grinding like a BAWS
New Post 16 Jan 2012 09:04 Search for Posts by Heave112 Add Heave112 to your Buddy List
lynius
Silver
Silver

Registration Date: 15 Jan 2011
Posts: 372


quote:
Originally posted by CallumN
on most stakes if you break even you are actually beating the game for around 6bb/100.

The rake is pretty killer


That's cheered me up after I've been a b/e player for too long. Looking forward to getting my grind and study on however smile
New Post 27 Jan 2012 00:23 Search for Posts by lynius Add lynius to your Buddy List
vmarqui
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 25 Jan 2010
Posts: 4,812


people have no idea of how they are being raped by rake. breakeven microstakes players would win@5bb/100 (or something) if there was no rake. people who win at 2bb/100 are actually winning at 7bb/100, but 80% of their profit goes to the poker room.
New Post 29 Jan 2012 17:40 Search for Posts by vmarqui Add vmarqui to your Buddy List
Tarhonya
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 18 Jul 2010
Posts: 693


There is some (or at least one) poker site which is not taking any rake on the tables, but if you withdraw some money, they'll take 10% (or something like that) of that money every single time you withdraw money.

Before it opened I had good hopes for this site, but their population is literrally 0.

I think this proves that the vast majority of the players have absolutely no idea about how much they pay in rake. And anyone who prefers to receive their weekly/monthly/etc flat rakeback over not paying rake at all is.. well, a recreational player at best and nowhere near to be a winning player because that requires common sense.

Sorry to be harsh, but that's the truth considering how ridiculously high the rake is.
New Post 29 Jan 2012 18:25 Search for Posts by Tarhonya Add Tarhonya to your Buddy List
vmarqui
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 25 Jan 2010
Posts: 4,812


quote:
Originally posted by Tarhonya
There is some (or at least one) poker site which is not taking any rake on the tables, but if you withdraw some money, they'll take 10% (or something like that) of that money every single time you withdraw money.

Before it opened I had good hopes for this site, but their population is literrally 0.

I think this proves that the vast majority of the players have absolutely no idea about how much they pay in rake. And anyone who prefers to receive their weekly/monthly/etc flat rakeback over not paying rake at all is.. well, a recreational player at best and nowhere near to be a winning player because that requires common sense.

Sorry to be harsh, but that's the truth considering how ridiculously high the rake is.


yup
people is getting raped by rake. they don't realize that they are paying thousands a month (probably more than what they earn in a their job) to use a service.

unfortunately, things aren't likjely to change unless regs really get together and protest. and that's unlikely

This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by vmarqui: 29.01.2012 21:27.

New Post 29 Jan 2012 21:26 Search for Posts by vmarqui Add vmarqui to your Buddy List
supeyrio
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 11 Nov 2009
Posts: 3,104


quote:
Originally posted by Tarhonya
There is some (or at least one) poker site which is not taking any rake on the tables, but if you withdraw some money, they'll take 10% (or something like that) of that money every single time you withdraw money.

exactly why the recreational players dont wanna play there. fishes dont mind giving $3 as tips if they win $200 pot, but cringe at the idea of having to pay 10% of wtv amounts they luckbox since they phyiscally see a lump sum of $ going out. same reason y ppl choose to pay installments knowing they end up paying way more
New Post 29 Jan 2012 21:57 Search for Posts by supeyrio Add supeyrio to your Buddy List
Tarhonya
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 18 Jul 2010
Posts: 693


quote:
Originally posted by supeyrio
exactly why the recreational players dont wanna play there. fishes dont mind giving $3 as tips if they win $200 pot, but cringe at the idea of having to pay 10% of wtv amounts they luckbox since they phyiscally see a lump sum of $ going out. same reason y ppl choose to pay installments knowing they end up paying way more


Well yes, obviously, I just thought at least some people would play there since they could gain money from even only slightly weaker opponents where they couldn't before due to the rake.

Maybe it's just poorly advertised, I don't know.

Funny thing is that nowadays we (non-recreational players) don't care about the rake difference between sites as long as we can play against fishes...... so we can overcome the rake.
New Post 29 Jan 2012 23:22 Search for Posts by Tarhonya Add Tarhonya to your Buddy List
harry121
Basic
Basic

Registration Date: 01 Feb 2012
Posts: 6

RE: Rakeback Vs No rake

.com helps you save money and earn more by getting cash back on online poker table rake and tournament fees.
PayNoRake is that they are giving away 100% rakeback to their most loyal players.
New Post 02 Feb 2012 06:36 Search for Posts by harry121 Add harry121 to your Buddy List
slipkn6t
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 27 Jun 2011
Posts: 5,096


quote:
Originally posted by vmarqui
people have no idea of how they are being raped by rake. breakeven microstakes players would win@5bb/100 (or something) if there was no rake. people who win at 2bb/100 are actually winning at 7bb/100, but 80% of their profit goes to the poker room.
I'm currently at nl2 and my rakerate is 4-5bb/100. I always thought this bullshit ends somewhere near nl50 and the rakerate is around 1bb/100 there?
New Post 03 Feb 2012 05:45 Search for Posts by slipkn6t Add slipkn6t to your Buddy List
slipkn6t
Bronze
Bronze

Registration Date: 27 Jun 2011
Posts: 5,096

RE: Rakeback Vs No rake

quote:
Originally posted by harry121
....com helps you save money and earn more by getting cash back on online poker table rake and tournament fees.
PayNoRake is that they are giving away 100% rakeback to their most loyal players.
we are not allowed to advertise affiliate sites other that pokerstrategy.com here.

This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by slipkn6t: 03.02.2012 05:47.

New Post 03 Feb 2012 05:47 Search for Posts by slipkn6t Add slipkn6t to your Buddy List
Pages (2): [1] 2 next » « Previous Thread | Next Thread » | Add Thread to Favorites
Jump to:
PokerStrategy.com Forum » Poker Forums » General Poker Discussion » Rakeback Vs No rake