The myth of PS rakeback

[ClubChamp04]

[ QUOTE ]
Here are two small examples

Turbo SNG events
FT $11 + 1
PS $15 + 1


[/ QUOTE ]
I'll agree with that.

[ QUOTE ]

FR Limit tables
FT 9 handed
PS 10 handed


90 players playing on each site, the site with the extra table will drop more rake.

Scotty

[/ QUOTE ]

That example isn't necessarily true. What if the extra person on the 10 man tables add a % chance that the pots get bigger and therefore drop more rake?

What does that all mean for the individual anyway? As far as I can tell the NL and PL rakes are identical between the two with the exception of Full Tilt only raking 50 cents if it's HU and PS raking $1. Actually, it looks like FT has a better rake structure after looking it over.

PS Rake

Fullt Tilt

[apefish]

[ QUOTE ]
WAIT LOL i just died laughing .. SNL jeopardy?

[/ QUOTE ]

bingo. French Stewart wagers it.

transcript


I also whole-heartedly agree with this comment...

"For me FTP rakeback in a myth. I get 0% rakeback on FTP because I signed up directly through them shortly after they opened."

I get benefits at stars and not at Full Tilt for this reason.

[Rek]

Stars have the best software and service bar none and that is why most people are loyal to them and stick up for them.

However, blindly sticking up for Stars on this issue is mad. I think 99% of regular Stars players would sooner have rakeback than the convoluted FPP/VIP system. Everyone is trying to work out if this equates to good rakeback and for the majority it doesn't.

I appreciate Scottyy coming on here and trying to justify it by way of smaller rake and the VIP system. But seriously, if it equates to rakeback just change a system that you say is costing millions and give us what we would really like and that is rakeback. Would that not make sense.

[CharlieDontSurf]

Stars is never going to offer normal rakeback so stop whining like a bitch about it...simply go play elsewhere.

[Scottyy]

------That example isn't necessarily true. What if the extra person on the 10 man tables add a % chance that the pots get bigger and therefore drop more rake?

I think we would agree more rake is taken per player from a 6 max game vs FR. I'm sure we would rake more per person if all games were changed from 10 to 9 handed, of course there might be a couple exceptions.

-----if it equates to rakeback just change a system that you say is costing millions and give us what we would really like and that is rakeback. Would that not make sense.

There are many advantages doing it the way our current program operates.

Scotty

[apefish]

[ QUOTE ]

However, blindly sticking up for Stars on this issue is mad. I think 99% of regular Stars players would sooner have rakeback than the convoluted FPP/VIP system.


[/ QUOTE ]

I hear what you are saying and for many people the merits that FT is a better deal on the rakeback issue may be correct.
In my case however it's not so much blindly sticking up for a site as much as it is one site gives me something and one gives me nothing. Just because the site that gives me nothing gives others something doesn't make their argument that they get a better deal than I do mean anything for me.

I'll flip it around here. If Full Tilt allowed me to switch to a rakeback account I would be more willing to split my time instead of spending 90+ percent at Stars. They don't.
I'd be willing to explore a better deal from either site as someone who doesn't play for their livelihood but plays a reasonable amount.
But only one currently gives me anything.


That's all.

[Rek]

"There are many advantages doing it the way our current program operates.
Scotty" - For PokerStars yes - you pay less rakeback.

apefish - I can see it is better for you obviously.

The first site out of FTP and Stars to do something right for their players would gain significantly. If FTP allowed everybody rakeback many would switch from Stars. If Stars allowed rakeback many would switch from FTP.

And why do neither do anything - may I suggest they perhaps have an agreement between themselves not to. After all, they don't want their customers to benefit too much.

[hime]

[ QUOTE ]

FR Limit tables
FT 9 handed
PS 10 handed

90 players playing on each site, the site with the extra table will drop more rake.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but I'm way more comfy at a 9 handed table.

[Cry Me A River]

[ QUOTE ]

Why didn't you get the FT rakeback when they had that 1-2 week period where they were allowing non rakeback accounts to receive rakeback? I'm not trying to be a smart ass, I'm just wondering since it's obvious that you are a serious player so I'm just surprised you didn't take advantage of that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because amazingly, a lower rakeback rate was not enough to woo me over to FTP from Stars. Perhaps I should have been thinking more ahead that I might someday want to play at FTP. But there was never an announced deadline either, they just stopped allowing it one day. The assumption was that if I ever got around to wanting to play at FTP they'd just switch me over.

I cleared FTP's initial deposit bonus more than a year and a half ago and it was a miserable experience. Rock garden plus doomswitch. Never thought I'd go back, I'm happy 12 tabling at Stars.

However, earlier this year FTP offered me a reload so I decided what the hell and I gave 20 tabling a try... 12 at Stars and 8 at FTP. Worked out pretty well.

However 20 tables is considerably more work than 12. At the end of the day playing 20 I'm drained. 12 is far more casual. So both on principle and because it's not worth the extra work without rakeback I only play FTP when they offer me a reload.

The only reason I would play regularly at FTP would be to exceed the 12 table limit at Stars. (FWIW I can't do this at Party or Ongame because the software is crap and won't work the way I multi-table - with tables stacked, not tiled.)

I'm sure FTP don't give a crap about me playing an 8 or 10 or even 12 extra tables at their site full time, but how many hundreds of us Stars regs are there that would throw some business their way if they'd only come up with a system that benefited everybody?

You know, like Stars does...

[AJackson]

I am a PS shill and I'm not paid to do so, at least not directly.

I support PS because I admire thier business model and philosophy and I like seeing them rewarded.

Their program may not be the best for every player, but I don't think anyone is claiming that. But for any player who consistantly plays a decent number of hands, they are going to recieve more of their rake back by playing at Stars.

You also have additional benefits like having your emails answered in hours, not days and a site that doesn't crash every couple of days.