Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

I am putting aside $200 dollars to test out the lowest limit to see if i can beat a 5% rake with poor players and if so how much. I plan on 4-6 tableing 9 handed games and play until I reach 50,000 hands. I know it sounds fullish but is is a cheaper way to find out. I plan on it taking me about two months. Has anybody ever tried this? Any sugggestions?

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

you're right; that does sound fullish.

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP *DELETED*
 

Post deleted by OziBattler

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

Why? If you can't beat the rake you aren't a winning player, so it's easy to see. Is your WR > 0? The last thing to worry about at the micros is the rake. Maybe if you are playing live and have a choice among card rooms it will come into play, but other than that, why bother?

What you are doing goes by a different name, it's called Playing Poker.

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

bottom line the rake is around 4bb/100 +/- .75bb if you play $1 6 max at 28% VPIP.

FR I think should be slightly lower but its been so long I have never done a direct analysis.

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

[ QUOTE ]
Has anybody ever tried this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Many people on this site have successfully beaten $0.25/$0.50, especially before moving up to higher levels.

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

1) totally retarded idea, in terms of $/hr

2) I admit, my curiosity about these things is eating at my soul, seriously (you'd have to know me to know that I'm telling the truth here)... so I'd like to know the results of your experiment. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Good luck, have fun, and please don't stop at like 5,000 hands. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

---

Actually, on second thought, yeah, I've beaten like 3.5bb/100 rakes in the past for extended periods, so I'd say it's beatable.

If it was 5% of pot uncapped, that'd be interesting... You'd probalby have to play pretty tight, both preflop and post-flop.

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

THIS IS VERY FULLISH

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

Brag: I beat .25/.50 rake !

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

Just get rakeback at full tilt and the rake won't be so harsh.

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

oh yeah, I think the rake back is 27%.

But OP, what other sites have you played? What's your winrate?

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

[ QUOTE ]
I am putting aside $200 dollars to test out the lowest limit to see if i can beat a 5% rake with poor players and if so how much. I plan on 4-6 tableing 9 handed games and play until I reach 50,000 hands. I know it sounds fullish but is is a cheaper way to find out. I plan on it taking me about two months. Has anybody ever tried this? Any sugggestions?

[/ QUOTE ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am putting aside $200 dollars to test out the lowest limit to see if i can beat a 5% rake with poor players and if so how much. I plan on 4-6 tableing 9 handed games and play until I reach 50,000 hands. I know it sounds fullish but is is a cheaper way to find out. I plan on it taking me about two months. Has anybody ever tried this? Any sugggestions?

[/ QUOTE ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

[ QUOTE ]
The last thing to worry about at the micros is the rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the rake is the *worst* in the micros, because you almost never get pots that cap it. Also, FTPs NL micro rake is 10% (!), not 5%. Same with micro tourneys...the 'fee' is an outrageous percentage of the entry, at least by internet standards (e.g. $1 + $.25).

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

[ QUOTE ]
I am putting aside $200 dollars to test out the lowest limit to see if i can beat a 5% rake with poor players and if so how much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since nobody's asked, why? I mean, unless you're Dave's car-decal-peeling long-lost twin, or his gimmick account, I can't see any purpose to this "experiment" (and even then it'd just be to make sure your Nit Club points keep you in contention for the season-end trophy).

Re: Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The last thing to worry about at the micros is the rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the rake is the *worst* in the micros, because you almost never get pots that cap it. Also, FTPs NL micro rake is 10% (!), not 5%. Same with micro tourneys...the 'fee' is an outrageous percentage of the entry, at least by internet standards (e.g. $1 + $.25).

[/ QUOTE ]

It's the last thing to worry about at the micros because generally at this level you are starting out and have a ton of other problems with your game that you can fix. You can't fix the rake at Stars or FTP only mitigate it so listening to people whinge about it is just boring. Or they are in such deep denial about their ability that they'd be winning players if it wasn't for that damn rake.