Stars VIP FREEROLL changes = major letdown thread - Page 2

nation · #11 12-31-2006, 04:18 AM

goofy i heard it was like 40%

iH8poker · #12 12-31-2006, 04:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
goofy i heard it was like 40%

[/ QUOTE ]
NL$200 has about the lowest rake back value, probably still more than 27% though...and if you play seriously, you should hit one of the teirs...and I think they games should be softer at stars...and the software works great...what are you complaining about again?

I don't jerk of Lee Jones, but I'm also not going around saying 'when stars leaves the US' (I don't know where these guys are coming from).

Thinking of it, Party should have never banned US, just the deposits...winning US players should have been allowed to stay, oh well.

goofyballer · #13 12-31-2006, 06:11 AM

[ QUOTE ]
goofy i heard it was like 40%

[/ QUOTE ]

SHOW ME MATHS

I didn't actually calculate a rb% for Stars since I don't have any data about how much MGR per hand is generated at Stars 1/2 NL but I did calculate the BB/100 added to your winrate from a.) supernova cash bonuses (0.76bb/100) b.) concierge service (0.84bb/100) c.) FTP 27% RB (1.01bb/100)

ImsaKidd · #14 12-31-2006, 04:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
goofy i heard it was like 40%

[/ QUOTE ]

SHOW ME MATHS

I didn't actually calculate a rb% for Stars since I don't have any data about how much MGR per hand is generated at Stars 1/2 NL but I did calculate the BB/100 added to your winrate from a.) supernova cash bonuses (0.76bb/100) b.) concierge service (0.84bb/100) c.) FTP 27% RB (1.01bb/100)

[/ QUOTE ]

FR or 6m?

It depends on your playing style too. If you post some data in this thread I can do the math for you.

goofyballer · #15 12-31-2006, 07:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
FR or 6m?

It depends on your playing style too. If you post some data in this thread I can do the math for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

6max. Why would it depend on playing style?

51cards · #16 12-31-2006, 08:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FR or 6m?

It depends on your playing style too. If you post some data in this thread I can do the math for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

6max. Why would it depend on playing style?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you pay very little rake personally (because you are tight) but play at a table where lots of rake is generated (by loose players) you get the same reward for paying less rake compared to others at the table. Thus higher %rb.

goofyballer · #17 12-31-2006, 08:36 PM

Um, that's not how RB% is calculated.

I get 27% RB on Full Tilt, but I only paid like $500 in rake last month despite generating $760 in MGR. So when you take the RB that I got relative to how much rake I paid, then it's more like 40%.

I guess technically, you can say that "oh well I got 40% of the rake I paid returned to me through Stars' awesome VIP program!", but to then compare that to 27% MGR-back on other sites is ridiculous, and I suspect that most of you guys don't understand the difference, as evidenced by the initial guy I quoted saying "lol go back to your 27% RB on Full Tilt." 40% RB on Stars? lol.

MicroBob · #18 12-31-2006, 08:37 PM

For purposes of rake-back calculation on Stars we usually look at it as the dealt-hand method (like how it is on Party), not the contributed method.

So whether YOU play loose or not doesn't make a difference.

mbpoker · #19 12-31-2006, 08:41 PM

Of course rb is calculated as you say. That means if you play very tight you will get a higher % back of *your* rake on both Stars and FTP.

goofyballer · #20 12-31-2006, 08:43 PM

Obviously I agree with that. The point I'm making is that from my brief time in this forum I see a lot of people quoting ridiculously high rakeback %'s for being a Supernova on Stars as if it's directly comparable to 27% on FTP or whatever, when it's not, and the 27% on FTP is probably more than they're earning on Stars.