Rake vs Time Charge

[imthaifool]

Which one is better for the player?

[NoRakeBackHere]

[ ] Post Delivers
[x] WTF???

[emerson]

[ QUOTE ]
Which one is better for the player?

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends. If the average rake is $5 per hand and they deal 30 hands per hour, they are taking $150 off the table per hour. That's $15 per person at a ten player table. If the time charge is $7 per half hour or less that is probably a good deal. If the time charge is much more than that then the rake is probably better.

[AaronBrown]

It also depends on how you play. If you play loose and put $1,000 into pots in order to win $1,100; a 5% rake costs you $55, or 55% of your proft. You'd much rather pay a $20 time charge. But if you play tight and put $100 into pots to win $200, the same 5% rake is only $10, or 10% of your profit.

[OnTheRize]

[ QUOTE ]
It also depends on how you play. If you play loose and put $1,000 into pots in order to win $1,100; a 5% rake costs you $55, or 55% of your proft. You'd much rather pay a $20 time charge. But if you play tight and put $100 into pots to win $200, the same 5% rake is only $10, or 10% of your profit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where do you play that rake isnt capped? 55$ rake is unheard of.

[kav]

He doesn't mean 55$ in one pot, dude. If you play loose you are obviously playing more hands and consequently the rake you pay is bigger [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]