This site uses cookies to improve your browsing experience. By continuing to browse the website, you accept such cookies. For more details and to change your settings, see our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy. Close

rakeback vs stars

    • belthazorrrr
      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
      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
      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
      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
      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.