Party Responds - Hilarity Ensues

[MicroBob]

Well...you don't actually JUST want a higher rake structure.


It's just that you would prefer to get the same amount in rake-back than you would an equivilent rake-reduction.


I an just nitting against those who say, "that site's rake is 10% less....and that's just as good as 10% rake-back" because it isn't.


Obviously you don't JUST want a higher rake (especially if you aren't getting rake-back).
And you shouldn't really PREFER that a site have more rake just to get more rake-back returned.


I'm just saying that reduced rake is NOT the same as just getting rake-back.

The only way it would be the same is if they directly returned the rake to you on only the pots that YOU won.


Think of it this way:
100% rake-back would be better for you then a site that didn't have any rake at all (which would be a 100% rake-reduction I guess).


You could make a profit by just playing super-tight and collecting the full MGR of all the hands you are not involved in.


Hypothetical:
Lets say the rake on every hand on a 10-player table is $1 and you are getting 100% rake-back.
Thus, you are earning $0.10 per hand in rake-back.

After 100 hands you have won 8 pots.
So the house took away $8 in rake from those pots that you won.

but in rake-back you are earning $10 returned in the same 100 hands.

you will be doing this over and over.


as a TAG you are not winning your fair-share of the total number of pots (you are playing tighter, and winning less than 1/10 of the pots on a 10-player table).

So rake-back on the pots that everybody else is contesting is preferred to just getting reduced rake on the pots that you win.


Hope I cleared up my position on this a little bit.