Are low stakes games a suckers play at Full Tilt?

[jonny quest]

At the lowest stakes (.05/.10) Full Tilt takes a rake of %10 of the pot. Seemingly insignificant, but look what happens often in a game like omaha hi/low...

Players #1-5 enter the pot for .10, so $.50 pot preflop . The flop comes and hits player #1 hard for the low and he pushes all his money ($4.75 into the center)....everyone folds to player #5 who has a lock to the high and so he calls with the rest of his stack (also $4.75) The cards play out so the outcome is just as anticipated: player #1 takes the low, #5 wins the high. However, the $10 is now raked at %10...so both “winners” get to split a pot of $9...$4.50 each...which means they each lost $.35 on the hand!!!!! And the other 3 players in the hand each lost $.10. Full Tilt makes $1.30

So, unless one scoops, how can such a game be profitable?

[dlk9s]

Well, if two players massively overbet the pot with almost no other dead money out there, [censored] like this is going to happen in high/low split game.

[ibluffoldladies]

OP makes a good point imo.

edit: How does full tilt make 1.30 if they only took 1 from ten?

[Bobo Fett]

[ QUOTE ]
edit: How does full tilt make 1.30 if they only took 1 from ten?

[/ QUOTE ]
They don't. OP's math needs some work.

[jonny quest]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
edit: How does full tilt make 1.30 if they only took 1 from ten?

[/ QUOTE ]
They don't. OP's math needs some work.

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad (to coin some phrase.) $1.00 for FT.
But the point makes some sense?

I realize in my example there was a massive overbet made by both players, however from my observation, plays such as these are quite common at the very low stakes.

More subtle betting involving multple players on 4th and 5th street could easily lead to a similar outcome. So perhaps, my question really should be...does a %10 rake make for a profitable game?

[ibluffoldladies]

[ QUOTE ]
So perhaps, my question really should be...does a %10 rake make for a profitable game?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I think you make a good point. That's too high at small stakes, and I wouldn't play that particular game. Imagine if three people are all in and you get quartered. You "win"! [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[MicroBob]

I think 10% in nickel-increments is indeed a pretty sucky rake and might be exaggerated for a hi/lo game.

Note that Stars, and I assume many other sites, rake at 5% for such games. Yeah, that double-rake stuff at FT really sucks in comparison. Better be a really good freaking game to justify playing such games over there instead.

[Bobo Fett]

Yeah, 10% definitely sucks and certainly makes it tougher to come out ahead. I think many people (myself included) don't pay enough attention to this issue...sometimes a higher bonus or rakeback can be negated by a higher rake.

[apefish]

The nickel dime games at Full Tilt are rarely good enough to overcome that rake differential.

Play .1/.25 nl/plo or the .25/.50 limit games or sngs or somewhere else.

They should change that rake configuration. It's ridiculous.

[hime]

Scoop more.