|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 8/30/2008 2:20:14 AM PACIFIC |
 Admission Fee, 3Kings, 27. Jun 2003 07:15 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| The poker room that I play at will be charging a flat fee of $30 to play M-F and $50 to play S-S. The normal rake was $5 (10% up to $50). The new rake is now $2 (10% up to $20). My question. Is charging the admission fee and dropping the rake to $2 a better deal then just having a $5 rake? There is usually 25-30 hands per hour at a ten-handed table. Theoretically, you should win 1 out of 10 hands. If you save $3 per hand because of the rake (assuming the max rake) you would save approximately $9 an hour. So if you play for three hours, and win 9 hands the admission fee has been paid and now you can start taking advantage of the cheaper rake. Weekends you would have to play at least 2 hours longer. Is this thinking logical or am I missing something? 3Kings | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Admission Fee, stdioh, 27. Jun 2003 08:16 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Depends on how long your sessions are. I usually only like to play for about 5 hours at a time, but I know true truckers of the poker variety who can put in 30 hour sessions. Obviously this will change the value of it all. I wouldn't like it though because I like the freedom to get up and leave after 10 minutes if the game isn't any good. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Admission Fee, gary ford, 27. Jun 2003 09:48 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 27. Jun 2003 07:15 3Kings wrote: > The poker room that I play at will be charging a flat fee of $30 to play M-F and > $50 to play S-S. The normal rake was $5 (10% up to $50). The new rake is now > $2 (10% up to $20). > > My question. Is charging the admission fee and dropping the rake to $2 a better > deal then just having a $5 rake? > > There is usually 25-30 hands per hour at a ten-handed table. Theoretically, > you should win 1 out of 10 hands. If you save $3 per hand because of the rake > (assuming the max rake) you would save approximately $9 an hour. So if you play > for three hours, and win 9 hands the admission fee has been paid and now you can > start taking advantage of the cheaper rake. Weekends you would have to play at > least 2 hours longer. > > Is this thinking logical or am I missing something? > > 3Kings Winning hands is different from winning money. if you are at a loose table and plaing solid top ten poker,you wont win one hand an hour, but you will probably have larger pots and pay the max rake.The cardroom probably didnt establish this new policy for the benefit of the players but the benefit of themselves. Gary | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|