Yes that seems likely. But I wonder, what kind of algoritm would come up with the suggestion, that two identical tournaments with or without bounties should have a different rake? If nothing else it seems like overthinking it quite a lot, weather its a computer or a human doing the thinking. Also it was no more than around 18 month ago, that they brought back 6-man SnGs, which was well received by players. But now they want people to stop playing them by assigning them an obscene rake? If so then why bring them back in the first place?puzzlefish said:
This seems more likely. But then why not just remove them, when they removed the other regular speed formats a few weeks ago? Letting one regular speed format stay, but then raking it so high, it will die slowly, seems overly complicated. 888 Poker just killed all their SnGs in one cut. So if the end goal is to move players to Spins or casino games, why dont PokerStars just do the same?puzzlefish said:
puzzlefish
👆 the guy who's opinion you would trust on this!
Loyaler
We have no way of seeing all of the data that they see, but I will go out on a hunch and say that it is done to maximize profit by letting players continue to play games that they like while paying more to play them.fundiver199 said:
Probably yes, but as you say, if it will work for them remains to be seen. Without being to harsh it is a fact, that they have massively lost market share to GG Poker for several years. So it does not seem like, every single "business decision" has been spot on 😉puzzlefish said:
"Flutter Entertainment said its pretax loss widened, hit by an impairment at its PokerStars business and despite strong growth in the U.S."
"Flutter Entertainment rises on 30% core profit forecast"
We already have an agreement! Soon, we will see the group fully incorporating Pokerstars.
Below, the mantra at the Flutter Entertainment office in Dublin, Ireland.
"Flutter Entertainment rises on 30% core profit forecast"
We already have an agreement! Soon, we will see the group fully incorporating Pokerstars.
Below, the mantra at the Flutter Entertainment office in Dublin, Ireland.
Yes that has been a gradual process going on, since the temporary boom caused by the pandemic in 2020-2021 ended. That is also true for other sites like 888 Poker and ACR Poker, who have also lost a lot of their players. During the peak of the pandemic there would often be like 5-6 on the $4.5 On Demand games running with late registration open at the same time, each with 100 or more players. Now a $5 On Demand game at most start twice an hour, and often they only reach 20-40 players.Marshmalo1994 said:
Now the new rakes have been implemented, and as a service to the community here is a complete table of rakes for SnGs on Stars excluding heads-up, Spins and On-demand bounty builders, since these are more like regular MTTs.
6-man hyper (with or without KO)
$1 9%
$2 9%
$5 9%
$10 8%
$25 6%
$50 6%
$100 3,51%
6-man turbo
$2 15%
$5 15%
$10 12%
$25 10%
$50 10%
$100 6,75%
$200 5,9%
Fifty/50 turbo
$2 8%
$5 8%
$10 7%
$25 4,6%
$50 4,6%
9-man turbo
$0,5 16%
$ 1 15%
$2 15%
$5 12%
$10 10%
$25 9%
$50 9%
$100 7,2%
9-man turbo KO
$1 13%
$2 13%
$5 11%
$10 9%
$25 7,4%
$50 7,4%
9-man regular
$2 16%
$5 16%
$10 14%
$25 10%
18-man turbo
$2 12%
$5 9,6%
$10 7,8%
$25 7,4%
$50 7,2%
On demand
$0,25 8%
$0,5 10%
$1 9%
$2 9%
$5 9%
With these new rakes people playing micro stakes ($2 games and below) should clearly focus on the On-demand games. Maybe 8% for a Fifty/50 is also sort of ok, but everything else is pretty obscene and should be avoided, unless you are purely playing for fun or practice and dont care, if you lose. For low stakes players ($5-10) the On Demand and 18-man games are the ones to play, and maybe you can also add in a $10 9-man turbo KO now and then. Everything else should be avoided. For mid ($25-50) and high ($100-200) stakes players you are lucky to even find games running, and none of the rakes are that obscene, so just play, whatever you can get into, which is not completely filled with regs.
6-man hyper (with or without KO)
$1 9%
$2 9%
$5 9%
$10 8%
$25 6%
$50 6%
$100 3,51%
6-man turbo
$2 15%
$5 15%
$10 12%
$25 10%
$50 10%
$100 6,75%
$200 5,9%
Fifty/50 turbo
$2 8%
$5 8%
$10 7%
$25 4,6%
$50 4,6%
9-man turbo
$0,5 16%
$ 1 15%
$2 15%
$5 12%
$10 10%
$25 9%
$50 9%
$100 7,2%
9-man turbo KO
$1 13%
$2 13%
$5 11%
$10 9%
$25 7,4%
$50 7,4%
9-man regular
$2 16%
$5 16%
$10 14%
$25 10%
18-man turbo
$2 12%
$5 9,6%
$10 7,8%
$25 7,4%
$50 7,2%
On demand
$0,25 8%
$0,5 10%
$1 9%
$2 9%
$5 9%
With these new rakes people playing micro stakes ($2 games and below) should clearly focus on the On-demand games. Maybe 8% for a Fifty/50 is also sort of ok, but everything else is pretty obscene and should be avoided, unless you are purely playing for fun or practice and dont care, if you lose. For low stakes players ($5-10) the On Demand and 18-man games are the ones to play, and maybe you can also add in a $10 9-man turbo KO now and then. Everything else should be avoided. For mid ($25-50) and high ($100-200) stakes players you are lucky to even find games running, and none of the rakes are that obscene, so just play, whatever you can get into, which is not completely filled with regs.
Changes are live and they are even WORSE than we thought
Feeless withdrawals in EURO are GONE at least for me.
Okay lets try to swap back to USD
Thank god still feeless
Okay now lets try withdrawal
They swapped free Euro withdrawals to free USD withdrawals for me
Holymoly, new policy change to try to trick you into costly withdrawals and possibly deposits? Or could be a just a bug?
I did withdraw my entire Stars balance right before the changes rolled out, over 400€. They could have changed it immediately after that for me personally to try to trick me?
Feeless withdrawals in EURO are GONE at least for me.
Okay lets try to swap back to USD
Thank god still feeless
Okay now lets try withdrawal
They swapped free Euro withdrawals to free USD withdrawals for me
Holymoly, new policy change to try to trick you into costly withdrawals and possibly deposits? Or could be a just a bug?
I did withdraw my entire Stars balance right before the changes rolled out, over 400€. They could have changed it immediately after that for me personally to try to trick me?
Attachments
So I played the first few SnG sessions now under the new rake structure. First impression is, that activity does not seem to have been affected much. I suspect some recreational players have not even noticed, a $5 6-man SnG is now $4,25+$0,75 rather than $4,56+$0,44 as before. Or maybe they just dont care. The regs do seem to have adjusted a bit though avoiding the most heavily raked games to some extend.
If I am to say anything positive about this, then I guess, PokerStars have simplified my game selection a lot. Before I basically played all the different formats including all different speeds. But now I can set the lobby to only show turbo games, because there is really no reason at all to play either hyper or regular speed games with the new rakes.
I have mostly played 18-man games but also added in a few Fifty/50, since even with 7-8% rake (before it was 4,6-5,6%), they are probably still the least bad single table format to play. The KO 9-mans are also still ok from $10 and up, but they dont run that often. So all in all Stars have increased the rake for games, you can also play on other sites, to a level, where it makes no sense to play them on Stars. This is a very weird decision, but I will follow the wish of PokerStars and no longer play 6-man or 9-man SnGs on the site. Instead I will play them on ACR, until I possibly find another site, which also run them 🙂
If I am to say anything positive about this, then I guess, PokerStars have simplified my game selection a lot. Before I basically played all the different formats including all different speeds. But now I can set the lobby to only show turbo games, because there is really no reason at all to play either hyper or regular speed games with the new rakes.
I have mostly played 18-man games but also added in a few Fifty/50, since even with 7-8% rake (before it was 4,6-5,6%), they are probably still the least bad single table format to play. The KO 9-mans are also still ok from $10 and up, but they dont run that often. So all in all Stars have increased the rake for games, you can also play on other sites, to a level, where it makes no sense to play them on Stars. This is a very weird decision, but I will follow the wish of PokerStars and no longer play 6-man or 9-man SnGs on the site. Instead I will play them on ACR, until I possibly find another site, which also run them 🙂
Exactly. When they made the announcement, they justified themselfes by saying, that it has been 8 years, since they increased rake last time. But this is completely missing the point, since a rake is a percentage. Its not a price, which need to be adjusted for inflation. So this is not like your local pizzaria saying:10gerka said:
"its been 8 years, since we increased our prices, but now our costs have gone up so much, that we have to do it - we hope our valued customers will understand this".
This is more like a government saying:
"Its been 8 years, since we increased taxes, so now we are going to increase them with up to 100% and still deliver the same public service".
When PokerStars increased the rake for micro and low stakes MTTs from 9% to 11% 8 years ago, their justification was, that these games have a guaranti, so sometimes there is an overlay. Ok then. But there is never any overlay in SnGs, so why do we need to pay 15% rake to play a $5 6-man turbo or 16% rake to play a $5 9-man regular? These rakes are way higher than those for MTTs, which are already higher than, what any other site charge for MTTs.
It had been way more reasonable, if PokerStars had gone the other way and capped SnG rake at 9%. SnGs have become less and less popular in recent years, and this is no wonder, when they are basically being raked to death. Instead, as others have suggested, they should have tried to make them more attractive by capping the rake, introduce new exciting formats and perhaps introduce some sort of leaderboard.
Its been one week now since the rake increases, and so far the 7 day average cash volume has dropped from 3.300 to 3.000 or around 10%. They did only bring their rake for micro stakes cash games in line with the competation. But it might still not have been the smartest move in a situation, where they were already losing market share to GG Poker for years. There is no similar tracking of SnG activity, but I can only imagine, that this has declined even more.
www.pokerscout.com
Best Online Poker Sites for Real Money in 2026
Find the best real money online poker sites with live online poker traffic updated daily. Compare bonuses, rakeback, poker games and more.
www.pokerscout.com
Looks a bit weird though, since that is a drop from 3k to 2k in just 3 days, and its supposed to be a 7 day average. This would mean, that the last 3 days almost nobody were playing, and when I checked the cash lobby, there was decent activity. But if they actually lost more than 30% of their cash players in 9 days, that is quite dramatic and definitely make the decision to raise rake in the micros look like a poor one.qko911 said:
The ranking is by 7 day average for number of players on cash game tables. Before the rake increase this number was 3.300 on PokerStars. 3 days ago it was still 3.000, but now it has apparently dropped to 2.000. The rake increase only affected 2NL-10NL regular tables (not Zoom). So basically it seems like, those games have completely died out, which makes me wonder, if something has changed with the way, the data is collected from PokerStars. A while ago tracking of WPN stopped completely.Andyreas said:
Ah, that makes sense in this screenshot indeed. My view looks like this but I think the columns are wrongly labeled for some reason:fundiver199 said:
(In landscape mode it looks fine though.)
Maybe they do not update the 7 day avg. each day? At least the rake was implemented on 2nd, so about week where the increase was in place already. But yes, that decrease looks very dramatic. They say there are currently about 1.3k players playing cash with a 24h peak of only 1.5k but the online numbers don't show in the mobile App.fundiver199 said:
I have to correct myself:Andyreas said:
They show but not very convenient.
I added them up (incl. zoom and variants) and they sum up to 1.7k if I'm not mistaken, which would be higher than shown on PokerScout and exceed the 24h peak.