[MrMon]

After thinking about how to model it, I've come up with the answer to whether or not high rake is good or bad for a player playing tigher than the table. It ain't gonna be pretty...

Net = [(1-T)(Pot)(R) - (RB)[(Pot)(R) - ((T)(Pot)(R))/N]]/N

Where:

Net = Cost per hand to player
T = Tightness as a % of tightness vs. the average player
Pot = Average Size Pot
R = Rake %
RB = Rackback %
N = Number of players

Running some rake numbers through the equation, assuming I got it and the spreadsheet correct, the only time you benefit from a high rake structure is if you play at 95% tightness, or you're contributing 5% of the rake of the average player. This is impossible simply because of the blinds.

Why is this true? Because you are also part of the equation. The less you contribute, the less you'll get in rakeback. Sure, contributing less is somewhat of a benefit, you do wind up letting others pay for your play somewhat, but an overall rake reduction far outweights the benefits of tightness. The lesson seems to be, go for the cheapest place to play.

All subject to revision of course.