Re: I think rake by the hour sux
Bottom line, with a pot rake a nit can sit a whole hour and not pay any rake (fold every hand). With a timed rake he will pay $12 for that hour on top of the blinds. His blinds are the only thing that helped generate rake for the pots that he wasn't in.
On the other hand, a player who plays every hand in one hour and never wins a pot (helped generated rake that the winner took down) paid $12 more with a timed rake vs. a raked pot.
You can say the loser who never won a pot is paying rake at a raked pot structure, but comparing apples to apples he loses $12 more with a timed rake vs. a raked pot in my scenario.
Furthermore, you can figure out what you need to win in terms of BB/hour from my original post to break even.
It will cost you $33/hr to play at the table. You need to win 7BB and hour (gross) to break even assuming a couple dollars thrown in for tips. Even 10BB is only $15/hr. This is also assuming not playing from your blinds. If so, that number would be lower for the same hourly rate. Obviously pot size will be a big factor too.
I still believe a timed rake is worse than a pot rake. The casino is doing it because they know this too.
|