WPEX, One reason for low earn rates

[fep]

I've started an analysis of net cost to play at various sites (I've edited so as not to show the banned topic in the spreadsheet). The Rake at WPEX for the games I play is very high, so part of my earn is actually sitting in my rakeback (I hope I can say that word in the context of WPEX, I've seen it all over this forum):

(And yes I know WPEX doesn't have short 2/4 tables but I always start on the 10 handed tables that only have 2,3,4 or 5 seated so I have PT data for short tables at 2/4 WPEX)

Take note of the Average Rake Per Player Column

[balkii]

very nice work

[DING-DONG YO]

Good work, but I think you need to re-work this with the rakeback from the other sites factored in. Absolute and Interpoker both have a nice rakeback setup that almost everyone uses.

Obviously Party and Stars would be the same since neither offer or allow rakeback (no cute comments about "unmentionable" please)

[fep]

[ QUOTE ]
Good work, but I think you need to re-work this with the rakeback from the other sites factored in. Absolute and Interpoker both have a nice rakeback setup that almost everyone uses.


[/ QUOTE ]

I actually "re-worked" it to remove the Absolute and Interpoker rakeback to post it here.

I don't want to get banned.

[DING-DONG YO]

I'm pretty sure the word "rakeback" is not banned in this forum. Posts about rakeback and nothing else or posts soliciting rakeback offers are banned. I think a post about the cost in rake to play at different sites is fine even though rakeback is a component of that.

My point was your analysis is not comparing apples to apples. You can't compare WPEX with rakeback to abolute (for instance) without rakeback and draw the conclusion that WPEX is superior.

Does it make sense to you that you could talk about WPEX rakeback but not absolute rakeback? The purpose of the rakeback rule in the zoo is to prevent affiliates trolling for customers or players trolling for affiliates. You're not doing either.

[fep]

Okay, your an old hand, I'll take your word for it. Here is my original "real" spreadsheet which was apples to apples as you suggested:

[awayfromjay]

Wow, Party with no bonus is costly.

Do you have the data to do this for PokerStars 10 handed, and other networks? I was looking at Pokerroom and Hollywood and their rake seem horrible to me. I was wondering what their cost is.

Thanks for the info!

[DING-DONG YO]

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, your an old hand

[/ QUOTE ]

That and $2 will buy you a cup of coffee.

Nice work, OP. Pretty eye-opening analysis.

[bobbyi]

So on Absolute without rakeback it costs you three times as much per 100 to play 6-handed as it does to play 9-handed? Am I reading that right? That seems strange.

[Webster]

One thing you have to factor in is size of pots, not just rake.

I play sites WITH rake that average 7BB/pot (full ring) but places like WPEX and Stars are closer to 5BB/pot, makes a huge difference. Close to 2BB/100.