More Rake Might Be A Good Idea

#1 October 29th, 2019, 7:13 PM

More rake is better for microstakes players, what do you think about that statement?
I think is true cause when an specific % in rake is required to be able to cashout the first time,
usually it means you have to play alot to get there but if the rake was higher we would only need to play a few games to meet that requirement right. Hopefully some clients like N8 and a few others take more rake in the near future, for us microstakes players might actually be good after all...
Of course would be even better not to be forced to meet any requirements at all and just make deposits and withdrawals easier and faster but probably asking too much...

#2 October 29th, 2019, 7:47 PM

I do not like more rake. Less rake is better as we pay less in fess to play our game and there is money to be won.

But I do understand your point sometimes these playthrough amounts are hard to clear to get bonus it can be frustrating.

Originally Posted by nextsit

More rake is better for microstakes players, what do you think about that statement?
I think is true cause when an specific % in rake is required to be able to cashout the first time,
usually it means you have to play alot to get there but if the rake was higher we would only need to play a few games to meet that requirement right. Hopefully some clients like N8 and a few others take more rake in the near future, for us microstakes players might actually be good after all...
Of course would be even better not to be forced to meet any requirements at all and just make deposits and withdrawals easier and faster but probably asking too much...

#3 October 30th, 2019, 4:35 AM

I dont think, the major poker sites like Stars or 888 prevent people from withdrawing the money, they deposited. You might lose a pending bonus, but that is not quite the same as not being able to withdraw your deposit.

A bonus is a kind of rake-back, so asking for more rake to get more bonus is like feeding the dog with its own tail. As consumers we pay to play poker, and as with everything else it is of course better to pay less.

#4 October 30th, 2019, 7:20 PM

Originally Posted by fundiver199

I dont think, the major poker sites like Stars or 888 prevent people from withdrawing the money, they deposited. You might lose a pending bonus, but that is not quite the same as not being able to withdraw your deposit.

A bonus is a kind of rake-back, so asking for more rake to get more bonus is like feeding the dog with its own tail. As consumers we pay to play poker, and as with everything else it is of course better to pay less.

Actually they do, on stars you can't withdraw your deposit at least not immediately, it used to be like that some time ago but not anymore, now if you deposit you have to play not sure how much in order to be able to withdraw, but still it's easier than other platforms

#5 October 30th, 2019, 11:14 PM

So let me get this straight. You want poker rooms to take more of your money to let you play. That does not make any logical sense at all. It is hard enough to beat the rake at the micro limits anyway. Even at the lower limits. I can't see anyone that would be in favor of this.

#6 October 30th, 2019, 11:28 PM

the only good reason for this I think is that, I play a lot more Omaha HI/LO and it might slow down the players that bet with half the hand. Beginners usually will do that, not realizing that the nut high is not going to fold, so you chop the pot and give way too much to the rake.
But nah, that won't slow them down. lol

#7 October 30th, 2019, 11:30 PM

Originally Posted by nextsit

More rake is better for microstakes players, what do you think about that statement?
I think is true cause when an specific % in rake is required to be able to cashout the first time,
usually it means you have to play alot to get there but if the rake was higher we would only need to play a few games to meet that requirement right. Hopefully some clients like N8 and a few others take more rake in the near future, for us microstakes players might actually be good after all...
Of course would be even better not to be forced to meet any requirements at all and just make deposits and withdrawals easier and faster but probably asking too much...

I do see your point here, I was just playing to make my bonus one night. I ended up making more than I ever had on the cash table. I was sitting back and collecting points, then I would play some real good hands only, ended up being very good for me.
I did play a lot longer than I wanted because it took a while with the rake.

#8 October 31st, 2019, 3:56 AM

I hope the bozo that wondered about that has his rent doubled . more rent is better I say !

#9 October 31st, 2019, 6:34 AM

More rake means more losers. Nothing else to add.

#10 October 31st, 2019, 7:02 AM

Originally Posted by nextsit

Actually they do, on stars you can't withdraw your deposit at least not immediately, it used to be like that some time ago but not anymore, now if you deposit you have to play not sure how much in order to be able to withdraw, but still it's easier than other platforms

Ok did not know that. Typically it also makes no sense to deposit and then withdraw a few days later, so I have never been in a situation, where I wanted to do that. Guess it could also depend, if you used some deposit code and got some kind of reward?

Never had any problems withdrawing money. On Stars it takes two banking days, and the money goes in my bank account. On 888 its 3 banking days, and the money goes in my credit card.

#11 October 31st, 2019, 7:28 AM

Originally Posted by nextsit

More rake is better for microstakes players, what do you think about that statement?
I think is true cause when an specific % in rake is required to be able to cashout the first time,
usually it means you have to play alot to get there but if the rake was higher we would only need to play a few games to meet that requirement right. Hopefully some clients like N8 and a few others take more rake in the near future, for us microstakes players might actually be good after all...
Of course would be even better not to be forced to meet any requirements at all and just make deposits and withdrawals easier and faster but probably asking too much...

I've never really understood this argument. It's like saying to your government "please tax me more" for no additional benefit. Do you enjoy getting taxed more from your income as well?

#12 October 31st, 2019, 7:07 PM

Some of you guys are missing the point here, I'm not talking about bonus specifically but about cashing out, let's say you made 100euros freerolling and you haven't deposit once so you are required to make a deposit and also rake so you pretty much have to risk it all and play alot and you might end up winning more money or losing everything, the issue is you can't just deposit and cashout your winnings a few clients actually do allow it but some others want players to meet some rake requirement, which means playing at least 50 to 100 games, cause rake is too low, so wouldn't it be better if rake was bigger so you don't have to risk it all ? how is that a bad thing ?

#13 October 31st, 2019, 8:08 PM

Originally Posted by roger perkins

So let me get this straight. You want poker rooms to take more of your money to let you play. That does not make any logical sense at all. It is hard enough to beat the rake at the micro limits anyway. Even at the lower limits. I can't see anyone that would be in favor of this.

no i dont want them to take more money to let me play i want them to take more rake to let me cashout faster and cheaper, cheaper how you might think well i said it before low rake it means to play alot and more rake would mean play less to be able to withdraw, now you see my point.

#14 November 3rd, 2019, 2:33 AM

Originally Posted by nextsit

no i dont want them to take more money to let me play i want them to take more rake to let me cashout faster and cheaper, cheaper how you might think well i said it before low rake it means to play alot and more rake would mean play less to be able to withdraw, now you see my point.

but your point in the long run cost more to play poker. that would be true if you only cashed once. but after you have met your cashout requirement they would be still taking more rake on every hand you played. More is a horrible idea. example lets say i have to equal $10 rake to withdraw and its $1 per hand rake. i play 10 hands im good, But what if i play 10 more now ive paid $20. Now lets say the rake was .50 and the payout was after $10. I play the same 20 hands and im good. now i can play 20 more at a cost of $10 where 20 more under more rake would cost me $20 more dollars. the lower the rake the more profit I can make.

#15 November 3rd, 2019, 2:43 AM

Originally Posted by nextsit

no i dont want them to take more money to let me play i want them to take more rake to let me cashout faster and cheaper, cheaper how you might think well i said it before low rake it means to play alot and more rake would mean play less to be able to withdraw, now you see my point.

Daniel Negreanu, is that really you? I am a big fan

#16 November 3rd, 2019, 3:12 AM

Originally Posted by BUSB0Y

I've never really understood this argument. It's like saying to your government "please tax me more" for no additional benefit. Do you enjoy getting taxed more from your income as well?

this statement was made by daniel negreanu. the meaning is that in higher stakes, when they would raise the rake, pros would stay away because of that. so there would be more recreationals playing who dont care for the high rake. this means the games would be better because of less pros and more recs.

#17 November 3rd, 2019, 4:10 AM

Originally Posted by nairolph87

this statement was made by daniel negreanu. the meaning is that in higher stakes, when they would raise the rake, pros would stay away because of that. so there would be more recreationals playing who dont care for the high rake. this means the games would be better because of less pros and more recs.

I understand, but Negreanu is also a PokerStars shill who gets paid to say whatever PokerStars wants him to say, so you gotta down that with a fat grain of salt.

The problem is that in society, you think rich people don't live in a country just because it has high taxes? No, they just bend the rules and create their companies off shore, but they still live there.

So perhaps the high-stakes pros get some kind of behind the scenes rakeback deal that you don't know about, so you're still playing with high stakes pros.

Just because a famous person says something doesn't mean you should believe it 100%. I think it is a valid argument but weak at best.

#18 November 3rd, 2019, 3:39 PM

Originally Posted by nextsit

Some of you guys are missing the point here, I'm not talking about bonus specifically but about cashing out, let's say you made 100euros freerolling and you haven't deposit once so you are required to make a deposit and also rake so you pretty much have to risk it all and play alot and you might end up winning more money or losing everything, the issue is you can't just deposit and cashout your winnings a few clients actually do allow it but some others want players to meet some rake requirement, which means playing at least 50 to 100 games, cause rake is too low, so wouldn't it be better if rake was bigger so you don't have to risk it all ? how is that a bad thing ?

Cant say I find this particularly unfair. Freerolls are intended as a reward for paying customers, not as a way for someone to take money out of the poker eco system. If you want to be a net withdrawing player, you have to learn to beat the regular games. Which honestly is not that difficult, as long as you stick to the micros More Rake Might Be A Good Idea

#19 November 3rd, 2019, 9:53 PM

Originally Posted by fundiver199

Cant say I find this particularly unfair. Freerolls are intended as a reward for paying customers, not as a way for someone to take money out of the poker eco system. If you want to be a net withdrawing player, you have to learn to beat the regular games. Which honestly is not that difficult, as long as you stick to the micros More Rake Might Be A Good Idea

not sure what you mean, so you are saying players winning freerolls should not be allowed to cashout?

#20 November 3rd, 2019, 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by roger perkins

but your point in the long run cost more to play poker. that would be true if you only cashed once. but after you have met your cashout requirement they would be still taking more rake on every hand you played. More is a horrible idea. example lets say i have to equal $10 rake to withdraw and its $1 per hand rake. i play 10 hands im good, But what if i play 10 more now ive paid $20. Now lets say the rake was .50 and the payout was after $10. I play the same 20 hands and im good. now i can play 20 more at a cost of $10 where 20 more under more rake would cost me $20 more dollars. the lower the rake the more profit I can make.

I didn't think of it that way, but you're right would be bad in the long run

#21 November 3rd, 2019, 10:20 PM

Its already too high but if you like anal who am I to judge?

#22 November 4th, 2019, 7:44 AM

Originally Posted by nextsit

not sure what you mean, so you are saying players winning freerolls should not be allowed to cashout?

I am saying, that its understandable, if poker sites demand people to make a deposit and generate a certain amount of rake before being able to withdraw freeroll winnings. Look at it this way: If you have never played regular poker games, now you have 100 EUR to play and practice for, and the worst, that can happen is, that you come away empty handed. That is basically a freeroll, as far as I am concerned.

#23 November 5th, 2019, 11:29 PM

Originally Posted by ChickenArise

Its already too high but if you like anal who am I to judge?

I see your point. Some people are masochists and enjoy pain. Other people avoid pain. To each his/her own I guess.

#24 November 5th, 2019, 11:34 PM

Yes, when gambling you always want the worst odds possible.

#25 November 12th, 2019, 4:47 PM

the only room i know that ask for some rake to cashout is Intertops, i have played in many poker rooms and no problem with that.

#26 September 28th, 2020, 1:23 PM

Originally Posted by BUSB0Y

Daniel Negreanu, is that really you? I am a big fan

LOL!
Thought the same thing when I read it.
I used to rate Negreanu but now I can't stand his play or his views on just about anything.

#27 September 28th, 2020, 3:51 PM

If I made a Deposit,I will still play.If I win,I'll meet the wagering requirements, but I won't win here...

Similar Threads for: More Rake Might Be A Good Idea
Thread	Replies	Last Post	Forum
Join a team. Good or bad idea?	6	July 14th, 2020 4:59 PM	General Poker
$2 NLHE 6-max: Is a good idea to bluff recreatinal players?	6	December 31st, 2019 2:42 AM	Cash Game Hand Analysis
Donk Betting, when is it a good idea?	8	September 21st, 2019 5:35 AM	Cash Games

Similar Threads for: More Rake Might Be A Good Idea > Texas Hold'em Poker
Thread	Replies	Last Post	Forum
Join a team. Good or bad idea?	6	July 14th, 2020 4:59 PM	General Poker
$2 NLHE 6-max: Is a good idea to bluff recreatinal players?	6	December 31st, 2019 2:42 AM	Cash Game Hand Analysis
Donk Betting, when is it a good idea?	8	September 21st, 2019 5:35 AM	Cash Games

More Rake Might Be A Good Idea

Why more than 330,182 poker players have joined CardsChat