The myth of PS rakeback

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]

It is obvious that if you play SnGs PS is much better (lower rake and higher Rakeback), but if you play low volume, low stake ring games, and you are in no way every going to get to be a supernova, and you have full tilt rakeback, its not even close.

[/ QUOTE ]


This might be true for much or all of NL. I really don't know.

First, on SNG's you need to make it to SN to get a good RB benefit. If you are just silver or gold level then your RB on SNG's at Stars is going to be lousy.

For limit though I strongly disagree and also think it's incredibly obvious but evidently not many people seem to realize.

At 1/2 full-ring limit I estimate about 32-35% RB just for a gold-level player at Stars. I can show you the calcs I just did if you like but I've already shown how to do that and some people seem to have a problem with showing the truth behind the numbers.

This estimate is not including any freerolls or other stuff and is also counting FPP's at the lower rate of 1.5 cents.

At 2/4 limit full-ring I estimate around 21% RB as a gold.

At 3/6 limit full-ring I estimate around 23% RB as a gold.

Gold is super-duper easy by the way. It's just 4k VPP's a month. To make 1k VPP's a week one would need to play 4 or 5 hours of 4 or 5 tabling at some stakes.
Can you fit in a 4 or 5 hour shift just once in the week? Doesn't seem too high-volume to me.


IMO, it is not very hard to make it to platinum in a month.
It's only 10k VPP's.
This should be do-able for many multi-tablers at just 10 hours per week. That's not THAT high-volume is it?

Anyway, if you made platinum then your RB% would be even higher of course AND you would make it to Supernova by October at which point it would be higher still.

Yes. 10 hours a week would be an easy SN by October for some multi-tablers.

I think some people are really exaggerating the supposed difficulty of attaining platinum or SN.