Testing the rake at .25 -.50 limit on FTP

[formula72]

I am putting aside $200 dollars to test out the lowest limit to see if i can beat a 5% rake with poor players and if so how much. I plan on 4-6 tableing 9 handed games and play until I reach 50,000 hands. I know it sounds fullish but is is a cheaper way to find out. I plan on it taking me about two months. Has anybody ever tried this? Any sugggestions?

[tyler_cracker]

you're right; that does sound fullish.

[formula72]

Post deleted by OziBattler

[kerowo]

Why? If you can't beat the rake you aren't a winning player, so it's easy to see. Is your WR > 0? The last thing to worry about at the micros is the rake. Maybe if you are playing live and have a choice among card rooms it will come into play, but other than that, why bother?

What you are doing goes by a different name, it's called Playing Poker.

[Smurph64]

bottom line the rake is around 4bb/100 +/- .75bb if you play $1 6 max at 28% VPIP.

FR I think should be slightly lower but its been so long I have never done a direct analysis.

[teampursuit]

[ QUOTE ]
The last thing to worry about at the micros is the rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the rake is the *worst* in the micros, because you almost never get pots that cap it. Also, FTPs NL micro rake is 10% (!), not 5%. Same with micro tourneys...the 'fee' is an outrageous percentage of the entry, at least by internet standards (e.g. $1 + $.25).

[kerowo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The last thing to worry about at the micros is the rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the rake is the *worst* in the micros, because you almost never get pots that cap it. Also, FTPs NL micro rake is 10% (!), not 5%. Same with micro tourneys...the 'fee' is an outrageous percentage of the entry, at least by internet standards (e.g. $1 + $.25).

[/ QUOTE ]

It's the last thing to worry about at the micros because generally at this level you are starting out and have a ton of other problems with your game that you can fix. You can't fix the rake at Stars or FTP only mitigate it so listening to people whinge about it is just boring. Or they are in such deep denial about their ability that they'd be winning players if it wasn't for that damn rake.

[neurotiq]

[ QUOTE ]
Has anybody ever tried this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Many people on this site have successfully beaten $0.25/$0.50, especially before moving up to higher levels.

[DavidC]

1) totally retarded idea, in terms of $/hr

2) I admit, my curiosity about these things is eating at my soul, seriously (you'd have to know me to know that I'm telling the truth here)... so I'd like to know the results of your experiment. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Good luck, have fun, and please don't stop at like 5,000 hands. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

---

Actually, on second thought, yeah, I've beaten like 3.5bb/100 rakes in the past for extended periods, so I'd say it's beatable.

If it was 5% of pot uncapped, that'd be interesting... You'd probalby have to play pretty tight, both preflop and post-flop.

[Bulletproof Monk]

THIS IS VERY FULLISH