Rake Taken - Cash Games - How it affects Edge

[katiekat29]

Hi,

Something I've always been confused by is how the Rake Taken affects the edge.

I've seen graph comparisons in the past but that doesn't seem to help what I'm trying to work out.

For example, when I've done some Sports Betting. The Bookmakers were always taking about a 8% edge. For example, offering odds (put into %'s) of 55.5% when they believe the odds to be 51.5%.

Meaning you'd need to have over an 8% edge on any bets you'd make to actually be plus ev.

1) Is it as simple as a 5% Rake, means they're taking 5% edge away from you, so you need to beat the game by more than 5%?

2) How does this affect the pot odds when we look to call or make a raise?

 

[fundiver199]

Rake mean we need more equity to profitably call. If no money was in the pot already, then in a rake-free game we should call, if he have more than 50% equity. This situation never quite exists, because there is always blinds, but if hypothetically someone open jammed for 100BB, it would be close. With 5% rake we now need 100/(200*0,95) = 52,6% equity. Note that no rake is collected for pots, that end preflop, and there is also a maximum dollar amount per pot.

 

[ventrolloquist]

Note that no rake is collected for pots, that end preflop, and there is also a maximum dollar amount per pot.

This is a good reason to always raise and to 3 bet more often than you think you should.

 

[katiekat29]

Rake mean we need more equity to profitably call. If no money was in the pot already, then in a rake-free game we should call, if he have more than 50% equity. This situation never quite exists, because there is always blinds, but if hypothetically someone open jammed for 100BB, it would be close. With 5% rake we now need 100/(200*0,95) = 52,6% equity. Note that no rake is collected for pots, that end preflop, and there is also a maximum dollar amount per pot.

Thanks that makes sense, I still struggle to get an actual sense of the math all of the time.

Feels like tighter is better and "nitting off" is actually going to prove to be better.

 

[katiekat29]

This is a good reason to always raise and to 3 bet more often than you think you should.

That makes sense.

Seems to be more and more the convention anyway since I've returned.

 

[fundiver199]

This is a good reason to always raise and to 3 bet more often than you think you should.

It is certainly also part of the reason, why online cash games have all this 3-betting and 4-betting preflop. Its difficult to find enough skill edge postflop to justify a 5% rake, especially as you move up, and the average opponent makes less blunders

 

[arenaci]

Rake is actually huge in the long run. That's why it is a good idea to get a good rakeback deal.

 

[UkoChebuko]

If you want to know exactly, then just rake/2 = equity. Let's say you are in borderline spot, you need 45% equity. You have 47% equity. If the rake is 5%, you can't call (-2.5% equity). And also the rakeback matters. But very rare you will think about that. Postflop very rare you will be in such borderline spot.

Preflop you must call less and also bet, if the rake is huge and no rakeback. You must use tight range for open raise. Let's say some hand with 0.20bb EV (in a long run). Let's say ATo from UTG. You think about the average pot postflop. Let's say average pot 20bb. If this hand is "optimal" for 5% rake, then with 6% rake will be borderline , zero EV.

I mean, if the rake is big, no rakeback, your ranges must be tight, narrow. You must fold the very bottom of your range. For call from the BB, for open raise. Postflop for call and bet. Tight range = smaller win rate. What's why you must avoid the high rake. If the field is not weak. Or if there is not a good rakeback. The rakeback is just "small rake". Let's say you pay 6% rake and the rakeback is 50%, then the rake is 3% in reality. And you choose your hands "for" this 3% rake. And your decisions postflop.

The cap also matters. If it is "real". You know, the rake always have a cap. But for NL5, NL10 this cap is not "real". Only "in theory" the rake is capped, but in reality no cap.