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

[Ronaldadio]

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 Pstars.

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.

 

[Chevren]

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.

 

[reglardave]

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.

 

[aliengenius]

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.

 

[wsorbust]

Yes, the higher rake in these games is probably unbeatable long term.

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

 

[Crummy]

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

 

[DetroitJimmy]

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.

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

^ 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.

 

[Ronaldadio]

I only play Ladbrokes and Pstars 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?

 

[Chris_TC]

Yes, the higher rake in these games is probably unbeatable long term.

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.

 

[Chris_TC]

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.

 

[wsorbust]

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.

 

[OzExorcist]

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

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.