Stars New Rakeback Values for $100NL and $200NL Full Ring

[mbpoker]

Supernova gets higher rakeback than 27% for practically all games, especially if you include VIP freerolls value and the fact that Stars doesn't deduct anything from your MGR.

[AJackson]

[ QUOTE ]
Supernova gets higher rakeback than 27% for practically all games, especially if you include VIP freerolls value and the fact that Stars doesn't deduct anything from your MGR.

[/ QUOTE ]

For me freeroles are worth another couple percent and the bonus at 200K, 300K, 400K, 500K is worth a lot more. That's another 14K, but you have deduct $3K in FPP's they take, but that still leaves a net of 11K. For me, that's another 12%.

[pokergame66]

I think they should reduce their rates foe people paying $300 a month or more in rake ..

[_dave_]

[ QUOTE ]
I just dont get it.... people are saying that for 6max NL games, FPP are better than FT rakeback in some cases. I jsut dont see it. A supernova only gets ~20% at 400NL, I think 27%>20%

[/ QUOTE ]

Without any data to base it on, I'd assume 400nl 6m is the absolute worst case scenario for rakeback % comparisons - the lowest level where 1st point requires $1 rake, rather than 40 cents.

At 600nl+, almost any hand that sees a flop will hit the $40 pot threshold, and at 200nl there will be loads more single point hands (and much less MGR over all).

It is true that Stars FPP system is inverted to the MGR method - FR players generate much lower MGR = lower RB, whereas on Stars FR players get extra FPPS = greater RB %.

Changing the 6m to $2 rake threshold did a lot to alleviate the difference tho, before that 6max players were getting a very rough deal.

dave.

[Dazarath]

[ QUOTE ]
I just dont get it.... people are saying that for 6max NL games, FPP are better than FT rakeback in some cases. I jsut dont see it. A supernova only gets ~20% at 400NL, I think 27%>20%

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that a lot of people calculate it incorrectly, or they make assumptions that don't fit everyone. Also, I never said my calculations are 100% correct. I'm just pretty sure they are.

Here are some examples. People factor in the Supernova milestone bonuses into RB. But this differs for different people. Like for me, in 2007, I'll get up to the $4000 bonus if I'm lucky. That's a maximum of $9000 in extra bonuses - $3000 in FPPs to get those bonuses. But let's say a person gets 200,000 base FPPs vs getting 299,999 base FPPs. Either way, they get the $2000 bonus, but it affects their effective RB differently. I prefer to leave these out of the calculations, but they shouldn't be ignored completely.

Factoring in the freerolls is just stupid. To someone who might play 25/50 NL, the freerolls are sooo -EV to play it's not even funny. Hell, I play midstakes and I'm pretty sure the freerolls are -EV to me. I say "-EV" because I'm factoring in the opportunity cost of playing some other game when one plays the freeroll. Obviously, from a purely monetary standpoint, a freeroll can't be -EV.

Also, people like to count the free tourney buyins (the big ones, I forget which they were) as part of the RB. But then they add them in at the supposed market price. This is incorrectly calculating it because to different people, the buyins are worth different amounts. To a person who would've gone to the tournaments anyways, they're probably worth close to the listed value. To a player who hates tournaments, they're worth $0. To most others, they're worth something in between. Because in almost every case (for myself), I'd rather take money over the tournament buyin, I just set them as $0 and don't add them to the RB calculation.

If you want to calculate the equivalent rakeback for other stakes, just take the SQL query I posted above and change all of the "NL ($4)" to $6, $10, $20. As written, the query will only correctly calculate NL 6-max for 2/4, 3/6, 5/10, 10/20. If you want to make it work for 1/2 or FR, you need to tweak it a little.

[TheProdigy]

n/m

[BigPoppa]

[ QUOTE ]
POST YOUR TOTAL AVERAGE MGR RAKE FOR THE LEVEL YOU WANT FROM THE POKERTRACKER/100 HANDS. ALSO POST THE NUMBER OF VPPS YOU GET FOR 100 HANDS ON THAT LEVEL AND IT IS THE EASIEST THING TO FIND WHAT RAKEBACK YOU GET. WHY ALL THESE POSTS WITHOUT RESULT?

[/ QUOTE ]

STOP USING [CENSORED] ALL CAPS

The vpp system doesn't work the way that you think it does:

1) The system doesn't tell me how many vpp's I got for a specific 100 hand block

2) If it did, that number would be highly variable based on the table conditions.


So quit demanding people do something they can't do and wouldn't be of much use if they could.

[Dazarath]

Naw, dude. We totally forgot about the FPP/100 stat in PT. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[freecard4all]

[ QUOTE ]
POST YOUR TOTAL AVERAGE MGR RAKE FOR THE LEVEL YOU WANT FROM THE POKERTRACKER/100 HANDS. ALSO POST THE NUMBER OF VPPS YOU GET FOR 100 HANDS ON THAT LEVEL AND IT IS THE EASIEST THING TO FIND WHAT RAKEBACK YOU GET. WHY ALL THESE POSTS WITHOUT RESULT?

[/ QUOTE ]
last time I respont to crying: I play more levels
I would have to calculate it manually how many VPPs I got for each level.

[mbpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
Factoring in the freerolls is just stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. It depends whether one will play there or not. As quite a lot of people do play then they should calculate their EV in these tourneys and add it their rb calculations. If you don't play tournaments then, yes, don't add.