Loose/Tight theory at NO RAKE sites

[The_Bankroll]

[ QUOTE ]

Example: 8 people fold, 2 people go all-in, and $3 is raked out of a $200 pot, payed by player 8, who won the pot.

In a contributed system, player 8 gets credit for $3 rake, and the rest of the table 0.


[/ QUOTE ]

wow, maybe i've been confused about contributed rake systems, but I always thought it was based on the percentage of raked money you put in. for example, I thought player 8 and whoever he stacked would get credit for $1.50, and the rest of the table gets nothing. is this incorrect?

[LongTimeLurker72]

You are correct. The previous poster was referring to the way the he thought the term <font color="green">contributed rake </font>SHOULD be used (the money should be go back to the person who it was taken from). But the way the term <font color="green">contributed rake </font>is commonly used is to refer to where the money that makes up the pot CAME from (i.e. all the players who <font color="green">contributed </font> money to the pot, either from posting blinds or betting/calling.

In rakeback paid by <font color="red">attributed rake</font>, the amount of rake is divided evenly by the total number of players at the table (not counting anyone sitting out). In rakeback paid by <font color="green">contributed rake</font>, the rake is given back in direct proportion to the contributors of the pot (i.e. if $1 was raked from a $25 pot, a $0.50 BB that folded pre-flop would get 4% of that back, or his 2 cents' worth [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]) Whereas in a true <font color="orange">no rake </font>situation, the entire $25 pot would be paid to the winner, rather than $24 to the winner and the $1 in rake being either kept by the house or distributed to the other players.