Rake at different levels

by **Yliherra** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:40 pm

I was looking at my stats and I noticed that 8500 hands of NL200 had the same amount of rake as 11500 hands of 100NL.

Therefore at 200NL you pay substantially less rake (relatively) than at 100NL. I was wondering how it goes as you go up. Even less or more rake at 400NL? Does 100NL have the biggest rake?

by **redhouse** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:45 am

by **Kuso** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 7:21 am

by **k3nt** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 2:25 pm

by **Yliherra** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:50 pm

by **black_knight6** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:49 pm

by **excession** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 3:03 am

This is why HU 50NL isn't really profittable.

Remember you just play the new Stars HU SnG's that don't have escalating blinds if you really want to minimise rake HU. You pay fixed total rake of 4.5% or so -- eg $21 + $1 - if you get in a HU battle at say $50 ring - you can easily see 30% of the chips disappear in rake..

by **black_knight6** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:32 pm

by **AlexMR** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:12 pm

by **phytopath** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:53 pm

From my stats, % at NL50 and NL100 are about the same.

it also depends some sites rake to the penny, others to the nickle and some to the quarter. This makes a big difference in the long run.

by **black_knight6** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 9:28 pm

Rake at 200NL is MUCH higher than 100...since the rake structure is the same, this is to be expected.

by **Stoneburg** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 5:09 pm

I played some 7CS heads up at a ring table. We started with equal stacks, when we finished he had all my chips and his stack was slightly smaller than when we started. GG.

Rake at different levels

Rake at different levels

Re: Rake at different levels

Who is online

Who is online