$1 buy in SNG, Pokerstars - are you always going to struggle because of the rake???

Hello.

A few of you will have noticed my post about the Ferguson challenge that I am trying. I`m bumping along at moment, making a bit then losing it

What I have noticed, however, is that playing at these levels and trying to build your bankroll, you are at an immediate disadvantage playing at Pokerstars.

I`m not sure if it is refered to as the rake in SNG`s, but on pokerstars when u pay a $1 buy in you pay $1 + 0.20 = $1.20. So the rake represents 20% of the buy in. Normally the rake represents 10% ($2+0.20)

For the guys who are big on this kind of thing, does that put you at a disadvantage over a period of time???

I`m guessing it must do, but let me know.

Yes it absolutly does, for every 11 buy ins at pokerstars you could have 12 at a site like ultimatebet that has a 10% rake at the same buy in, but you can also have a much higher itm rate at the low level buy ins than at much higher levels so it is possible to overcome.

The .20 "entry fee" at PS only applies on their $1 SnGs, $1 MTTs are subject to the standard 10% just like the rest of their tournaments. Why is a bit of a puzzler. In truth, I never gave it any thought until I read your post. And, my wife plays in a lot of these, so I should have been aware of it before now.

It's hard to imagine there being a lot of administrative expense involved in setting up dollar SnGs, but I'm guessing that would be their answer if you asked.

Yes, the higher rake in these games is probably unbeatable long term. FullTilt has a similar rip off at (25%) as does Absolute (20%) for their $1 tournaments. Ultimatebet is by far the best site for small bankroll sngs, with tournaments as low as $0.50 (10% standard rake of $0.05), and you can play six handed, multi-table (up to 100 player), or standard stt-- lots of options.

All-in-all, you shouldn't be playing the min. micro level long term either way it goes. The rake, along with not cashing, will kill you, or you will move up a level, on conquest to building your BR. You certainly don't want to stick down there for profit's sake, if you're doing well.


-WS

As crappy as the .10 or 20, .25 "rake" is, that is how these sites make money on their SnG's.

The $1.20 sng's do have a very high rake comparably,but the skill level of the players is in the most part terrible.If you have the patience to take an hour and a half to clear $3.30(which i found I don't),you should be able to overcome the extra 10%.I find these games horribly boring and chose not to play them anymore.I only have like 5 bucks left there,and I'm going for broke in a $3.40 sng until I get some real money to deposit there.If I lose,back to Bodog and their unbelievably long withdraw process.

^ Yes, the awfulness of the players probably makes up for the rake somewhat.

I don't really see how you can cite this as a Stars-specific issue though - last I checked 25% rake on micro donkngos was not uncommon (FT, Party, etc). All sites tend to rake micro games higher to try and tempt people to move up.

[quote=Dorkus Malorkus;658933
I don't really see how you can cite this as a Stars-specific issue though - last I checked 25% rake on micro donkngos was not uncommon (FT, Party, etc). [/quote]

I only play Ladbrokes and Pokerstars at this level, so I was not aware it was so common (the minimum SNG on Party seems to be $3 + 0.60)

I`ve dropped down to try out this Ferguson challenge thing, so I`m finding out things I was not aware of!!!

But my origional point, it seems, is correct. The rake does play a part?

It's certainly beatable, but you'll lose out on a lot of profit.

Let's give a $1+10 player an ROI of 25%.
This means he'll earn 0.25 * $1.10 = $0.28 per tournament

If this player now plays a $1+20, he'll earn 10 cents less per tournament (due to the fee being 10 cents higher) and end up with $0.18 per tournament which equals a profit loss of 36% compared to a $1+10.
This profit loss is lower the higher your ROI and higher the lower your ROI.

Just an addendum:
If your ROI is lower than 10% then the fee cannot be overcome.

With an ROI of 9% you'd make less than 10 cents of profit in a $1+10. Deduct the additional 10 cents for a $1+20, and you're making a loss.

I suppose you could also note that Stars doesn't have $2 sitngos, forcing you to jump up to $3 turbo 6 or 10 seater's. There's not even a 9 seater option. They're probably making a great deal off of people who falter attempting to make it past $1, not to mention the fact that they're giving $5 to people.

Definitely.

Done the figures on my last attempt - at 10% rake, I'd be about break even. But at 25% rake (Full Tilt SnGs) $12 got ground back down to zero over about five weeks.