Are low stakes games a suckers play at Full Tilt?

[ajml]

I would imagine 99.9% of the people who play these games are oblivious to it so FT can continue to charge what they want and it doesn't affect business.

[_dave_]

Suckers or oblivious, yes indeed.

Thankfully if people playing these $10nl games on FTP ever try to learn and post a hand in the 2p2 uNL forums, usually someone will let them know of this injustice and advise to play elsewhere until rolled for $25nl+

Respect to uNL [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[DJSHAD0W]

Totally agree with everyone - the excessive rake works out to like 7PTBB/ 100 hands or something like that even with playing like a rock.... that was FR too, I would imagine it be even higher for 6 max, and terrible for Hi/Lo Games...

[CheckCheckFold]

[ QUOTE ]
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?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is called the poor man's tax. Very standard.

[ibluffoldladies]

[ QUOTE ]

This is called the poor man's tax. Very standard.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is also called rich man's greed.
[X] Standard

[BradleyT]

They should have enough data to determine if they make more by raking 10% and having nearly everyone lose instead of 5% and having a small percentage of those players break-even/small winners who may eventually move up and pay higher rake.

I would think they'd want every micro player to do well so they could move up and pay more rake per hand but maybe not enough of them end up moving up.

[Komodo]

[ QUOTE ]
Totally agree with everyone - the excessive rake works out to like 7PTBB/ 100 hands or something like that even with playing like a rock.... that was FR too, I would imagine it be even higher for 6 max, and terrible for Hi/Lo Games...

[/ QUOTE ]

10% rake has to be far more than that.
I would guess at least 15BB/100 hands

[RobTheDuck]

I have logged 19.7k hands of PL$10/NL$10 at FTP (all 6-max hold em).

The total rake, according to PT, for those hands is $567

That means I have paid 5670 ptbbs in rake.

19700/1970 = 100
5670/1970 = 28.7

Therefore the rake = 28.7ptbb/100

Is my math correct here? That is an outragous amount of rake. Thank god I've moved up to PL$25 since then (where I am only paying 14ptbb/100 in rake [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[apefish]

If you play for full stacks at .05/.10 it takes an extra dollar out of circulation every time that happens.

Every $200 wagered in raked pots takes an extra stack out of play at nl/plo10 at Tilt.

The average pot is somewhere around $2 at that level.

Every 100 hands on a table a stack that could be going into a bankroll leaves play.
On the "better tables" that actually happens faster.

That's a serious drain at that level to moving up via playing your way up.

obv the numbers aren't exact - but thats a close enough overview of what happens.

[elrudo]

Move up where they respect your rakes