#1
|
|||
|
|||
stars 16s vs FTP 12s w/rakeback
Which do you think would be better for me?
I 5 or 6 table and will play around 200-500 per month. but i am hoping to play around 1000 or so in the future. I have been picking a random 12 on ftp and a random 16 and sharkscope the whole table and the stars players are by far better/more winning players. But i wonder if the 15+1 rake will make up for the difference in player pools? Also if i were to be playing more tables 8+ would that affect the decision as to where to play? Any suggestions, comments, advice is welcome. Thanks a lot. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: stars 16s vs FTP 12s w/rakeback
I would stay at stars. The extra rake sucks
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: stars 16s vs FTP 12s w/rakeback
With you getting the 27% rakeback at FullTilt, the rake you pay will be basically the same as the 15+1 at Stars. Ok, some of that will be offset by FPPs, but definitly not enough to offset the few % pts higher ROI that you think you could achieve at FullTilt. So, my choice: FTP
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: stars 16s vs FTP 12s w/rakeback
stars 16s are soooo soft, they also run more frequently than the FTP ones. Also, if you are playing 500 a month that puts you at what...silverstar? The FPP benefits of a silverstar probably equate to 18%ish RB? im not sure but FPPs are underrated
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: stars 16s vs FTP 12s w/rakeback
youd be getting to goldstar first or second month easily.
you can get the $285 bonus for 25000fpps which comes out to 11.4% rake back. With platinum you get $650 for 50000fpps for for a whopping 13% Once you get supernove it jumps to like 26.25% and grows even more for every milestone bonus you get.\ Stars ftw |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|