What has party done to 2/4?!

[pleyya]

Just running some numbers quickly and making a rough calculation, accordig to my pt db about 74% of the hands i have at 5/10 are raked (this seems low i think......?). Assume i win about 9% of all hands at the table (since i play fewer hands than the table average).... So of 100 hands i win 9 and 74 % of them are raked = 6.66 hands
6.66 * .5 $ = 3.33 $
So it would seem i lose about .33 BB/100 at 5/10, thats still pretty brutal. Did i eff this up anywhere?

[Hielko]

O Rly? Do you think 100% of monster rake is going to the freerolls?

[HoneyBadger]

[ QUOTE ]
I think we can safely say that the cost at 2/4 is somewhere beween .5 and 1BB/100 - which is a substantial increase.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I agree. I feel pretty stupid anyhow, it seems everybody is making a fortune except for the poor people who actually play the game. All this trouble with bonusses and rakeback etc. And more money is made because of you than you make yourself.

Party is probably just being extremely smart here. The fish don't even know what rake is, all they care for is getting a freeroll in a multi-million tournament. They play on their dreams of one day also being on tv in a big tournament. They hook the fish... the sharks will (have to) follow. This is very typical and happens with all sorts of companies; the people that love the game/product and make the community are ignored, because the average joe brings in the most money. The fanboys will start their own sites, promising the world and to make it all better ... but there's no support from average joe, because he really does not care. And so it happens again [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
Just running some numbers quickly and making a rough calculation, accordig to my pt db about 74% of the hands i have at 5/10 are raked (this seems low i think......?). Assume i win about 9% of all hands at the table (since i play fewer hands than the table average).... So of 100 hands i win 9 and 74 % of them are raked = 6.66 hands
6.66 * .5 $ = 3.33 $
So it would seem i lose about .33 BB/100, thats still pretty brutal. Did i eff this up anywhere?

[/ QUOTE ]
Seems right. I think 5/10 hands are raked quicker than 2/4 hands tho. So that evens it out a little bit. 5/10 pays relatively less, but more often. The added cost will still be higher for lower limits though. On average you could probably say this costs "a player" about 30% of his profit (1BB for low limit, who make more BB/100, 0.5 or so for higher limits, who make less BB/100) Come to think of it, I didn't realize it was that bad. Maybe we did "f" up somewhere [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
O Rly? Do you think 100% of monster rake is going to the freerolls?

[/ QUOTE ]
Part of it is going to the prizepool of the final tournament (Obviously something many of us will not participate in. Though I'll give it a shot) A freeroll is only worth about $50 I believe, so don't jump in the air when you win one...

[Xhad]

[ QUOTE ]
I really just care about the skill level of my opponents being similar to Party, the software not being horrible, and being able to get rakeback. Could care less about MTT structure or some other things.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would recommend checking out Full Tilt. I eventually left FT for stars but they would be my second choice if this monster thing is as bad as people think it's going to be.

[Mr. Orange]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I really just care about the skill level of my opponents being similar to Party, the software not being horrible, and being able to get rakeback. Could care less about MTT structure or some other things.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would recommend checking out Full Tilt. I eventually left FT for stars but they would be my second choice if this monster thing is as bad as people think it's going to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? I've always heard the limit games on FT weren't that great.

[Whitewash]

[ QUOTE ]
I would recommend checking out Full Tilt. I eventually left FT for stars but they would be my second choice if this monster thing is as bad as people think it's going to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't it a good day when Fulltilt has three 2/4 tables running before peak hours?

[Whitewash]

[ QUOTE ]
This is totally OT, but I wonder why Party chooses to add more rake to games when most sites (like WPEX) are choosing to lower it or not have it at all....

Haupt_234

[/ QUOTE ]

Because the average knowledge of overall online poker among Party's clientelle is well, low.

[Xhad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would recommend checking out Full Tilt. I eventually left FT for stars but they would be my second choice if this monster thing is as bad as people think it's going to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't it a good day when Fulltilt has three 2/4 tables running before peak hours?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah you pretty much have to play multiple limits, but there are enough atrocious fish (at least when I was there) that you could be playing every available 2/4 and 3/6 game and still be in decent shape.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
Is that accurate? Do you really win 8 raked hands?

[/ QUOTE ]

I win about 10% of my full ring hands overall. It would stand to reason that 2% or so of those aren't raked.

[Harv72b]

One night is not nearly enough to draw any conclusions (although there are plenty of people trying to draw conclusions from no nights at all), but I put in about 2500 hands last night/this morning on Party, primarily on 3/6. I haven't played a lot of 3/6 recently so I don't know how unusual this is for a Tuesday night, but I had several tables go over a 30% VPIP and stay there for hours. This also isn't nearly enough hands to draw win rate conclusions, but mine was about two thirds of a BB lower than normal, which would pretty much fit in exactly with the effect of the increased rake. But I also ran like crap for much of the morning and didn't play all that well at times.