# How to beat the rake?

• Bronze
Joined: 25.09.2010
Hi,

I have read a lot of discussions on why someone wouldn't be able to build a large enough bankroll to move up, and keeps playing at NL2. I just think the 6% rake is really huge, and it is a lot easier to beat other players than to beat the rake.

If you consider (at NL2) an average pot of \$0.30, then there is a \$0.02 rake on it. If you play 100 hands, that is \$2. There are 9 people at the table, so you pay about \$0.22. That is 11 BB!!!

I have heard that someone who can make on average 5 BB / 100 hands, is a good player. But if I make 5BB, and the rake is 11BB, then I actually lose -6BB/100 hands!

Another painful example: Suppose you just play 2 hands, you start with \$2, you go all-in (against \$2), and win. Then you actually get (\$4-rake)=\$3.76. The the next hand you go all-in again (against \$2), but this time you lose. Then you are left with \$1.76. You actually lost 12% of your capital, although you have played all right... That is a huge loss!

This makes me also wonder if all the formulas we learn in all the articles are correct or not. They do not consider the rake. It actually does not seem to be profitable in the long run to go all-in when I have 51% chance of winning. In fact, it seems to me that I need at least 56% chance to be able to beat not just my opponent, but the rake too!!!
• 9 replies
• Bronze
Joined: 11.11.2009
play NL5 done
• Bronze
Joined: 15.05.2010
Rake is really bad at the micros but you will have a HUGE edge at NL2 if you do even a small amount of study and you would be able to beat the rake comfortably. I played my first 10,000 hands at NL2 and had something like a 10BB/100 win rate after rake.

Rakeback deals will certainly help your bottom line too. Don't worry too much about trying to factor in rake - just learn to play solid, make +EV moves and try to move up. Nobody plays NL2 for very long so learning the game is way more important than profit.
• Bronze
Joined: 25.09.2010
supeyrio: NL5 has the same rake (in percentage) as NL2. So it doesn't help.
• Bronze
Joined: 16.06.2010
Move up to where the rake respects you.
• Bronze
Joined: 04.02.2008
I treat it as a serious question...

Stay at Nl2 until you beat it regardless of the rake. People play there for lolz so you should beat it easy unless you make some serious errors.

Gl
• Bronze
Joined: 29.06.2010
Originally posted by feketepok
I have heard that someone who can make on average 5 BB / 100 hands, is a good player. But if I make 5BB, and the rake is 11BB, then I actually lose -6BB/100 hands!
Beating game by 5bb means he is already beating it by about 15bb, so 66% of his profit is in rake. (Imagine poker without rake, every breakeven player would beat game by 10bb/100)

About that %, of course for 35% u must have pot odds about 40%, but most times u also have chance of being against weaker hands, there is fold equity, implied odds etc.
• Bronze
Joined: 04.02.2008
Or just put some \$\$\$ in and start at NL10.
• Bronze
Joined: 02.07.2008
rake at the micros is awful and it's your worst enemy. rake never tilts, rake never spews, rake always has a solid winrate.
but the players are way worse so it's easily beatable. if it wasn't everyone would have started at the midstakes.
• Bronze
Joined: 12.01.2010
Originally posted by supeyrio
play NL5 done
You meant NL400?

Cause I don't think there's a large difference up to that one.