rakeback vs stars

    • belthazorrrr
      belthazorrrr
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.02.2011 Posts: 1,334
      I would like to hear your opinions when you are playing 7 tables 9 man 6.50$ turbo sit n gos which site is most profitable for rake between full tilt and pokerstars and how big is the difference between them
  • 4 replies
    • Classified181
      Classified181
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.03.2011 Posts: 111
      I dont think you can beat the loyalty program at Stars and they also provide a lot quicker and realiable customer service than FT. There wont be much difference in the 2 sites being a SNG player, as your rakeback wont be major anyhow at that stake.
    • Bigniux
      Bigniux
      Bronze
      Joined: 09.01.2009 Posts: 2,098
      To get better rakeback on Pokerstars than at FTP, you would need Supernova status, which means that you need to pay ~18,2k$ rake in a year. So, for rakeback at 6$ sngs, FTP wins.

      Another thing is that FTP is softer, meaning that at same limit you earn more. As much as i've heard 6$ sngs at FTP are same as 3$ sngs at Pokerstars (speaking about field skill level). So, this is another win for FTP :D

      And generally, if i had to make a choice where to play STTs, i would choose FTP, unless i'm going for Supernova Elite status on Pokerstars :)
    • goldchess
      goldchess
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.02.2010 Posts: 641
      Full Tilt games are waaaaaay softer, and you get higher rakeback at the micros. Sure, the software is worse, but $wise it's really a no brainer
    • conall88
      conall88
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 1,715
      until you hit $22 limit, I think FTP has the advantage. after that its pretty close until you either play big volume or move up.