The myth of PS rakeback

[syncmaster]

Looks good microbob, I did the math a while back and figured about the same numbers at $100NL.

I don't know what it is but one of these posts comes up every week. Its like people complain and have problems with them giving something extra back. Plenty of people played there a year ago before this was introduced. Sure you might complain having to wait for your rakeback. Then again if your not playing enough hands/mo to get a good vip level and bonus, your not going to make much in RB anywhere.

OP just stay and enjoy whever you get your rakeback, no reason to bash another site. Pokerstars is the only site who gives me something for playing, and they have kept me happy ($$$). Full Tilt told me they couldn't do a thing and I have got 5 decks of cards, a stress doll, and a $75 bonus from them.

[Komodo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I joined Full Tilt and like an idiot i knew nothing about Rakeback.

So i'm playing $50 HU sit n gos and don't have rakeback.
(i never play cash games)

Would stars be more beneficial for me?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. However I have no idea how the HU SNG game conditions are at Stars (could be better or worse, probly about the same).

How much you would benefit would depend on how much you play. Playing $50+$2.5 SNG's you'd get 13vpp per tournament.

To achieve the various VIP levels you would need to play the following number of tournaments:

Silver: 116/month
Gold: 308/month
Platinum: 770/month
Supernova: 7693/year
Supernova Elite: 76924/year

Once you achieve each of the levels above, you would receive rakeback in the amount of (per tournament):

Silver: $.2223 (8.892% rakeback)*
Gold: $.2964 (11.856% rakeback)*
Platinum: $.4225 (16.9% rakeback)**
Supernova: $.6825 (27.3% rakeback)***
Supernova Elite: $.975 (39% rakeback)***

*$.0114/fpp
**$.013/fpp
***$.015/fpp

Differing fpp rates used to reflect different bonuses available for purchase by the various VIP levels. You can sometimes do better buying merchandise instead. Used Gold bonus rate for Silver even though Silver doesn't have a bonus available. You'd need to use other resources (tournament tickets) if you were only Silver.

Does not include value of VIP freerolls. Supernova and Supernova Elite do not include milestone bonuses and other awards and promotions.


Actually, the real comparison is the net fee you would be paying per tournament at Stars vs FTP. Which is as follows:

Silver: $50+$2.2777
Gold: $50+$2.2036
Platinum: $50+$2.0775
Supernova: $50+$1.8175
Supernova Elite: $50+$1.525

You're paying $50+$2.50 at FTP so you can see based on the chart above vs the amount of tournaments you play just how much you would be saving per tournament.

Just to take this one step further. If you played the exact number of tournaments (on a monthly/yearly basis) to make the listed VIP level you would save:

Silver: $25.7868/month
Gold: $91.2912/month
Platinum: $325.325/month
Supernova: $5250.475/year
Supernova Elite: $75000.90/year


(Boy I hope all the math is correct here!)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but if Im playing just cashgames and only SNG or tournaments very rarely, is there only reason why I should choose stars over a fulltilt rakeback account?

[Butcho22]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why is everyone with this shaking hands avatar so silly? seriously. what's the deal with that.

[/ QUOTE ]

i made a post in the atf chatroom about this very topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

link?

[Sciolist]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me that PS employs several people to post on this forum in any way they can to push PS and criticise other sites

[/ QUOTE ]
PS does not pay anyone to post here. I think the closest to anyone we do pay is me: Part of my job involves collating what people are saying on the forums. There're a couple other people who work for PS here, but they have that marked on their accounts (e.g, HostJacob). I can prove this by saying - anybody who worked for PokerStars and was paid to post here could easily come forward and make me look like an idiot/liar. More importantly, anyone who USED to do that job could do the same.

[KSOT]

Pokerstars offered me money to stop constantly bashing them but I rejected it because I enjoy it too much.

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i made a post in the atf chatroom about this very topic.

[/ QUOTE ]
link?

[/ QUOTE ]

Exhibit A & B

Exhibit C

Exhibit D


[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but if Im playing just cashgames and only SNG or tournaments very rarely, is there any reason why I should choose stars over a fulltilt rakeback account?

[/ QUOTE ]
Let me re-state this, seriously. No levelling, sarcasm, or anything else.

If you have access to rakeback on FTP, in the long-term, the difference financially between FTP and Stars is likely to be very marginal. Therefore, you need to consider other factors:
a) Player base
b) Quality of games
c) Quality of support
d) Stability of Company
e) Reliability of funds being protected
f) Ease of cashout
g) Other things you value

Since I'm not American, I also have the choice of other sites, such as Party, which I prefer. If I was constrained to choosing between FTP and PS, and if I had rakeback at FTP, I would choose PS primarily because of issues (c), (d) and (e) above.

[That Foreign Guy]

[ QUOTE ]
Pokerstars offered me money to stop constantly bashing them but I rejected it because I enjoy it too much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Prove it.

[KSOT]

No you prove it didn't happen!

[Josem]

KSOT is angling for the new subtitle of "Internet Gambling Forum Professional"

[RoundTower]

[ QUOTE ]
PS does not pay anyone to post here. I think the closest to anyone we do pay is me: Part of my job involves collating what people are saying on the forums. There're a couple other people who work for PS here, but they have that marked on their accounts (e.g, HostJacob).

[/ QUOTE ]
scottyy? I assumed he got paid to post here, at least in the same way as you do.