|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 8/20/2008 5:00:42 AM PACIFIC |
 Time vs. Rake, Michael C, 2. Oct 2003 18:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi - the B&M poker room I play has a time charge instead of a rake. They do take $1 for the jackpot. I got that money back already on a bad beat. Anyway, my question is which is better - rake or time? $3-6 is $4 every 30 minutes. I read somewhere that you should play a little looser when paying time. The 3-6 games are pretty loose. I was in a 6-12 (time $5/30m) and I was playing tight. Another place to play has a $4 rake no jackpot. The button also posts a $1. (3/2/1). Thanks | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Time vs. Rake, 4 POKER, 2. Oct 2003 19:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi, Depending on where you play, (as I know every state, country, etc., has different procedures.....), but where I play, the $10-20 hold-em games are time collection games at $5 for every half hour. So to me, collecting $4 every half hour for a $3-6 game, sounds awfully steep. If you're a pretty tight player and you don't enter that many pots, then a raked game would be better for you. 4P- | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Time vs. Rake, Angel, 2. Oct 2003 21:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Alrighty, while we are on the subject... Individual time or a collection pot? Instinctively I would say a collection pot is the way to go for a tight player - time for a loose one - but I play rather tight and I do hate collection pots. When I find a hand to play and come out swinging the last thing in the world I want to see is $100+ going to the house out of MY pot. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Time vs. Rake, 4 POKER, 2. Oct 2003 22:28 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi Angel, I understand what you're saying, (I play pretty tight myself and I don't enter as many pots as the average player does), but in the long run, I believe time pots will benefit the tighter player. (note: "Time pots" do not refer to the collection that the house takes from each individual player after every half hour. I know you're aware of that Angel, but there will be some players who are not). A time pot, or a collection pot is when the table (or a good majority of the table,) agrees to, whoever wins the first pot after (each) new dealer who sits down, has to pay for everyones time for that half hour. If the usual time collected for that particular game is $10 per half hour, (for example)....than if there are say 8 players who have agreed to being part of the "time pot", and one of them wins the first pot...then they will pay the time for the 8 players, for a fee of $80. Any player who choses to pay their own time, (which has to be mentioned ahead of time), would simply just pay the $10 every half hour...nothing more.....and nothing less, either. For players who play very tight, and/or, are a little more selective when the time pot is in play, or even if it's just due to not getting palyable hands in that spot .....can wind up never paying for any time at all during their session. (that's the advantage side of it). Now....I know it sucks to have to give up a chunk of your pot when there's a time pot agreement, but what is more likely going to occur, (on average)...is that you won't be playing enough hands in that spot to make the time pot a losing proposition. ('Just as paying for your 'own' time being a loose player, would benefit them.) Keep in mind though.....it's not just about entering pots in this spot .....you also must win the pot as well to be effected by it. All in all, it's been worth it (for me) to be a part of it. But If you're not comfortable with time pots, then simply pay your own way. 4P- | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Time vs. Rake, Michael C, 3. Oct 2003 08:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks guys - Good input. I just feel that when I am on a winning streak then the time each half hour does not bother me at all, but when I am on a losing streak then the extra time charges get to me because of the extra cost. I like the B&M where I pay time (SF Bay Area) and do not like the B&M where there is a rake and an extra chip on the button (atmosphere mostly). I guess if you are a winner over all it does not matter too much but it will affect your hourly rate. Say there was a $4 rake per hand vs a $8 time charge (3-6). Then if you won 2 pots per hour you would pay about $8 either way; I guess. So if I am paying time and I am losing then it is just one other thing for me to consider when deciding when to quit the game. I have only been playing seriously for 6 months; some concepts are still new to me. Like why my check raise did not phase the guy in 6-12 when he had Q3 and I was bb with a pocket pair? I have been reviewing that play to see where I messed up. "Never represent a hand that the other player can not put you on". | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Time vs. Rake, Schuster, 3. Oct 2003 12:11 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > A time pot, or a collection pot is when the table (or a good > majority of the table,) agrees to, whoever wins the first pot after (each) new dealer who sits > down, has to pay for everyones time for that half hour. If the usual time collected for that > particular game is $10 per half hour, (for example)....than if there are say 8 players who have > agreed to being part of the "time pot", and one of them wins the first pot...then they will pay > the time for the 8 players, for a fee of $80. Ok Dave, I must be missing something, but it seems to me that no one in their right mind would play the first hand after each dealer sits down, since they would have quite a few bets raked out of their pot. Where am I wrong? Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Time vs. Rake, 4 POKER, 3. Oct 2003 12:54 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 3. Oct 2003 12:11 Schuster wrote: > > A time pot, or a collection pot is when the table (or a good > > majority of the table,) agrees to, whoever wins the first pot after (each) new dealer who sits > > down, has to pay for everyones time for that half hour. If the usual time collected for that > > particular game is $10 per half hour, (for example)....than if there are say 8 players who have > > > agreed to being part of the "time pot", and one of them wins the first pot...then they will pay > > > the time for the 8 players, for a fee of $80. > > > Ok Dave, I must be missing something, but it seems to me that no one in their right mind would play > the first hand after each dealer sits down, since they would have quite a few bets raked out of > their pot. Where am I wrong? > > Lee Hey Lee, You're not exactly wrong by thinking that, but it still doesn't mean that you wouldn't play a hand if you got a really good hand to start out with. You could still yield a profit for that hand, even with the time pot that is taken out of it. For me, time pots are great because 'on average', I'm probably not going to be entering that many pots anyway, so in the long run, I'll benefit from it. There are some players though that may neglect the time pot and chose to still play hands that are somewhat questionable. A couple of reasons: either they don't care about their pot being raked for the time....OR, they feel that even if it is a time pot hand, they can still make a profit.....OR, they are recreational types, or tourists, or 'whatever'......and actually have no concerns about the time pot. They just want to play their game. And that's fine because that's what poker is about. But when the limits are high, (imo), I would pass on playing anything that was marginal in that spot, but I would definitely play, and/or raise with a hand that was worth playing. Time pots are great for tight players, and for players who are a little bit more selective before they enter that particular pot. It has worked for me thus far, and I have no quams about it at all! Dave | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Time vs. Rake, Schuster, 3. Oct 2003 13:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| So it's similar to strategy when you're entering a pot with the half kill button. Anything that is marginally profitable goes out the window because you're going to get raked out of it, so only premium type hands play. Maybe $80 just seems like a lot to me cause I play mostly 3/6, I guess it's not so much in comparison if you're playing high limits. Thanks for clearing it that up for me Dave! Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Time vs. Rake, 4 POKER, 3. Oct 2003 13:14 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 3. Oct 2003 13:01 Schuster wrote: > So it's similar to strategy when you're entering a pot with the half kill button. Anything that is marginally > profitable goes out the window because you're going to get raked out of it, so only premium type hands play. > Maybe $80 just seems like a lot to me cause I play mostly 3/6, I guess it's not so much in comparison if > you're playing high limits. Thanks for clearing it that up for me Dave! > > Lee Hey Lee, Yeah, when I said $80, that was an example $ amount because time pots occur when the limits are higher. (so actually, it's not as steep as it may sound, but it is enough $ imo, to avoid playing certain hands in certain positions against certain opponents!). In the lower and medium limits though.....all players pay their own individual time, or rake. (at least that's how it works in AC). Anything under $10-20 is a raked game, and at $10-20 and above it's individual time, and usually....depending on the players who are at the table, limits at $75-150 and up,is a time pot game, but you're never obligated to be a part of it either. You can always chose to just pay your own individual time. It does however make it faster when the dealer just takes out all of the time from one pot as opposed to having to get individual time from each player....make change....and stuff like that. Anything to save time and to keep the game moving faster, is what most players want to achieve. It may only save a couple of seconds each time, but hey....that's poker! Dave | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Time vs. Rake, Angel, 3. Oct 2003 18:58 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| In the game in question, I was playing $80/$160 and the collection was $96 which is slightly better in a mathematical comparison then $4 rake out of a $3/6 pot. The difference is that at the end of the hand there are usually quite a few less bets in the pot in an typical $80/$160 game than I see in the typical $3/$6 game. Regardless however, it's not a terrible loss - just an unfortunate one and one needs to remember that pot odds are adjusted accordingly. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Time vs. Rake, noiseboy, 3. Oct 2003 16:36 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hello, the place I play has the same deal with time. I think you should play the 6-12 whenever the game is good. The 3-6 is beatable, as players can be really loosey goosey at that level, but with the tips, j-pot drop, and $4 hour time, you can't really make much. 6-12 games in my experience are often just as loose as the 3-6, but tend to be a little bit more aggressive. Overall, if you are comfortable dealing with a loose aggro game, it will be MUCH more profitable. Make sure you have the bankroll, however. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Time vs. Rake, Michael C, 3. Oct 2003 18:43 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks - I have the BR - I am working on the skills. The time for the 6-12 is 5/30 min. and the 3-6 is 4/30 min. so the 6-12 would seem to be more profitable. The 2-4 is 3/30 min. 2-4 7stud is a .25$ ante with a $1 bring in for low card. | ||
| 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 |
|