Why PP regs are literally making themselves poor.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rational Madman
  • Start date Start date
R

Rational Madman

Legend
Platinum Level
Poker Chips
0
Casino Coins
0
Foreword: Anyone who can play on PP can play on PS, they are outlawed in the same nations as far as I know. If you can't play PS but can play PP then I'd say be an 888 grinder because the caps are lower but rates are pretty identical to PP. https://www.888poker.com/poker-software/limits-and-rake/

For the following argument I use 2 sources each supplied by the own sites. Neither site is to be assumed fraudulent without proof. Especially not PS because they are sexy.

PP: https://www.partypoker.com/how-to-play/software/rake-blind-structure.html
PS: https://www.pokerstars.uk/poker/room/rake/

First of all, before you people bring up their rakeback system that seems "oh so much better" for long-term medium-high stake grinders let's put into perspective why they can afford a much better rakeback system than PS and why they actually owe you more if you are a long-term grinder if they want to keep you loyal.

To explain just how huge the rake between the two sites is to a long term cash game grinder (and also tournament but since I don't play PP I can't find the exact stats but i'm 99% certain they will be taking at least 150% of what PS takes from you proportionally for tournament buyins.

Now let me explain the combined things that make PP end up making you so much poorer for each win you get compared to Ps...

To save the best for last I'll begin going into PP's system and bring up the PS alternative after each point. I will also bring up the least significant points first building up to the bigger difference points later.

Point 1: .5 is half profit? NOT WITH PP
In mathematics rounding .5 is always assumed to be upwards but in reality .5 is neither up nor down no matter how you look at it. The reason that .5 is rounded up is purely to stop a logically unsolvable issue when needing to round. PP uses this method whenever the rake is calculated. So if the rake is mathematically $0.035 to the nearest .001 what they do is take 4 cents every single time. The issue with the physical nature of money is that this means that .5 is not really being considered half in terms of profit and that's literally unfair on the player.

What PS does to solve this unfair issue is they make all .5 scenarios go to the nearest even number (if they did it to nearest odd this would be just as fair) so that .5 in profit really only goes to PS half the time and the player half the time. You may scoff at one cent here or there but imagine playing million hands how many BB's suckout the site has gotten purely because all .5 scenarios are 100% of the time biased to the site.


Point 2: Combining levels

If you think I am lying, you are reading the wrong stats chart. PP's no-limit grinder should be looking at their bottom chart. The top one is for limit holdem.

So, just let me put this idea into your brain...

A micro grinder playing .01/.02 is charged the SAME RATE OF RAKE with the SAME CAP as a .02/.05 and a .05/.1 grinder...

A .10/.25 grinder has to deal with the same rake rates and caps as a 10/20 grinder... And it's not lowered down for the higher stake at all it's definitely only what is reasonable for the higher staked player the cap and rake.

do you know how huge a gap there is between .10/.25 and 10/20? This is not just unfair it's plain idiotic by them to do... How can you even think this is remotely reasonable?!

The higher stakes still group huge amount of BB levels together at totally unreasonable rates for anyone on the middle or lower end of the spectrum of each 'band' of rake.

Ps only groups $0.05/$0.10 to $0.08/$0.16 for no limit holdem and $0.04/$0.08 to $0.05/$0.10. They also group above a certain maximum BB level but that actually helps the high stakes grinders as it means they are paying the same rate and caps as the lowest-of-the-high.

Just seriously please look at PP's grouping and laugh at it. LITERALLY LAUGH AT IT, it is hilarious how unreasonably it's done.


Point 3: BEFORE THE FLOP IS FREE IN PS
I cannot explain this better than that. If the hand ends before the flop in Hold'em or Omaha YOU PAY 0 RAKE and this doesn't just mean when everyone folds to the BB it means when a 3-bet makes everyone fold too or 4-bet etc preflop (stud etc is different but also has its own discounts, feel free to read on the site linked at beginning).

PP has a minimum of .01 for the player to earn so unless everyone folds in .01/.02 you pay rake preflop (this matters much more in higher stakes where even a SB folding to a BB where everyone folded is being charged rake).


Point 4: The caps and rates are just far lower
Read for yourself on the sites, imagine any huge potted hand and how much more the player wins on PS than PP.


Thanks for reading.
 
Your ignorance is truly astounding and your inability to read rake tables is amazing and the lies you are peddling are blatantly false.

point 1 : Please show where Party poker increase the rake by rounding up as you claim. If you look at the party rake table for 2,5,and 10 nl nothing is taken as rake until the pot has $0.2 in it when 1 cent is taken until there is .40 in the pot when the rake increases to 2 cents. No rounding whatsoever .And for 2 nl players if the pot is less than .20 no rake is taken.
By contrast PS charge a true % so on a pot of .19 @ 3.5% rake comes to .006 which is then rounded up to 1 cent.

point 2: As shown above although the rates difer for 2,5,10 nl , the fact that the rounding occurs means that the effective rate is different to their published rates.
with regards to CAP levels , stars cap is lower on 2nl , same on 5nl and higher at 10nl . 2nl rake cap is unlikely to be hit on stars let alone PP at 2nl .


point 3 - most sites including party and pokerstars operate no flop no drop policy so this isn't a point at all. heres a hand history for you

***** Hand History for Game 16504118320 *****
$0.05/$0.10 USD NL Texas Hold'em - Sunday, October 01, 20:02:54 BST 2017
Table Ashfield (real money)
Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 2/6
Seat 2: Leisureathome ( $10 USD )
Seat 4: Player4 ( $10.10 USD )
Leisureathome posts small blind [$0.05 USD].
Player4 posts big blind [$0.10 USD].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to Leisureathome [ 5d 4c ]
Leisureathome folds
Player4 does not show cards.
Player4 wins $0.15 USD
Game #16504119056 starts.

if it was raked as you claim , player 4 would only have won $0.14

point 4 .

As shown above the effective rates differ due to the rounding pokerstars does to the publicised rate. The caps on some stake levels are lower on party than on stars , and for the higher micro stakes the caps are unlikely to be hit
anyway and the much higher rakeback at party means that those playing stakes where the $3.00 rake is hit are likely to be getting 25-30% rakeback which negates the difference to starsand if they get the 40% rakeback rate at 100nl+ their rake cap after rakeback will be lower than at stars for a similar sized pot.
 
Keith_MM said:
Your ignorance is truly astounding and your inability to read rake tables is amazing and the lies you are peddling are blatantly false.

point 1 : Please show where Party poker increase the rake by rounding up as you claim. If you look at the party rake table for 2,5,and 10 nl nothing is taken as rake until the pot has $0.2 in it when 1 cent is taken until there is .40 in the pot when the rake increases to 2 cents. No rounding whatsoever .And for 2 nl players if the pot is less than .20 no rake is taken.
By contrast PS charge a true % so on a pot of .19 @ 3.5% rake comes to .006 which is then rounded up to 1 cent.

point 2: As shown above although the rates difer for 2,5,10 nl , the fact that the rounding occurs means that the effective rate is different to their published rates.
with regards to CAP levels , stars cap is lower on 2nl , same on 5nl and higher at 10nl . 2nl rake cap is unlikely to be hit on stars let alone PP at 2nl .


point 3 - most sites including party and pokerstars operate no flop no drop policy so this isn't a point at all. heres a hand history for you

***** Hand History for Game 16504118320 *****
$0.05/$0.10 USD NL Texas Hold'em - Sunday, October 01, 20:02:54 BST 2017
Table Ashfield (Real Money)
Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 2/6
Seat 2: Leisureathome ( $10 USD )
Seat 4: Player4 ( $10.10 USD )
Leisureathome posts small blind [$0.05 USD].
Player4 posts big blind [$0.10 USD].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to Leisureathome [ 5d 4c ]
Leisureathome folds
Player4 does not show cards.
Player4 wins $0.15 USD
Game #16504119056 starts.

if it was raked as you claim , player 4 would only have won $0.14

point 4 .

As shown above the effective rates differ due to the rounding pokerstars does to the publicised rate. The caps on some stake levels are lower on party than on stars , and for the higher micro stakes the caps are unlikely to be hit
anyway and the much higher rakeback at party means that those playing stakes where the $3.00 rake is hit are likely to be getting 25-30% rakeback which negates the difference to starsand if they get the 40% rakeback rate at 100nl+ their rake cap after rakeback will be lower than at stars for a similar sized pot.

15<20

Run any hands where pot gets really big esp at 5nl and you will see how much fairer the caps and rates of ps is.

No flop no drop isn't playing the 15 you showed is less than 20.

So to force you to need to play many hands giving extra rake the rake back system being better makes pp better??? Os doesn't owe you as much as they took far less overall from a many hand playing grinder. Use brain.
 
Rational Madman said:
Foreword: Anyone who can play on PP can play on PS, they are outlawed in the same nations as far as I know. If you can't play PS but can play PP then I'd say be an 888 grinder because the caps are lower but rates are pretty identical to PP. https://www.888poker.com/poker-software/limits-and-rake/

For the following argument I use 2 sources each supplied by the own sites. Neither site is to be assumed fraudulent without proof. Especially not PS because they are sexy.

PP: https://www.partypoker.com/how-to-play/software/rake-blind-structure.html
PS: https://www.pokerstars.uk/poker/room/rake/

First of all, before you people bring up their rakeback system that seems "oh so much better" for long-term medium-high stake grinders let's put into perspective why they can afford a much better rakeback system than PS and why they actually owe you more if you are a long-term grinder if they want to keep you loyal.

To explain just how huge the rake between the two sites is to a long term cash game grinder (and also tournament but since I don't play PP I can't find the exact stats but i'm 99% certain they will be taking at least 150% of what PS takes from you proportionally for tournament buyins.

Now let me explain the combined things that make PP end up making you so much poorer for each win you get compared to Ps...

To save the best for last I'll begin going into PP's system and bring up the PS alternative after each point. I will also bring up the least significant points first building up to the bigger difference points later.

Point 1: .5 is half profit? NOT WITH PP
In mathematics rounding .5 is always assumed to be upwards but in reality .5 is neither up nor down no matter how you look at it. The reason that .5 is rounded up is purely to stop a logically unsolvable issue when needing to round. PP uses this method whenever the rake is calculated. So if the rake is mathematically $0.035 to the nearest .001 what they do is take 4 cents every single time. The issue with the physical nature of money is that this means that .5 is not really being considered half in terms of profit and that's literally unfair on the player.

What PS does to solve this unfair issue is they make all .5 scenarios go to the nearest even number (if they did it to nearest odd this would be just as fair) so that .5 in profit really only goes to PS half the time and the player half the time. You may scoff at one cent here or there but imagine playing million hands how many BB's suckout the site has gotten purely because all .5 scenarios are 100% of the time biased to the site.


Point 2: Combining levels

If you think I am lying, you are reading the wrong stats chart. PP's no-limit grinder should be looking at their bottom chart. The top one is for limit holdem.

So, just let me put this idea into your brain...

A micro grinder playing .01/.02 is charged the SAME RATE OF RAKE with the SAME CAP as a .02/.05 and a .05/.1 grinder...

A .10/.25 grinder has to deal with the same rake rates and caps as a 10/20 grinder... And it's not lowered down for the higher stake at all it's definitely only what is reasonable for the higher staked player the cap and rake.

do you know how huge a gap there is between .10/.25 and 10/20? This is not just unfair it's plain idiotic by them to do... How can you even think this is remotely reasonable?!

The higher stakes still group huge amount of BB levels together at totally unreasonable rates for anyone on the middle or lower end of the spectrum of each 'band' of rake.

Ps only groups $0.05/$0.10 to $0.08/$0.16 for no limit holdem and $0.04/$0.08 to $0.05/$0.10. They also group above a certain maximum BB level but that actually helps the high stakes grinders as it means they are paying the same rate and caps as the lowest-of-the-high.

Just seriously please look at PP's grouping and laugh at it. LITERALLY LAUGH AT IT, it is hilarious how unreasonably it's done.


Point 3: BEFORE THE FLOP IS FREE IN PS
I cannot explain this better than that. If the hand ends before the flop in Hold'em or Omaha YOU PAY 0 RAKE and this doesn't just mean when everyone folds to the BB it means when a 3-bet makes everyone fold too or 4-bet etc preflop (stud etc is different but also has its own discounts, feel free to read on the site linked at beginning).

PP has a minimum of .01 for the player to earn so unless everyone folds in .01/.02 you pay rake preflop (this matters much more in higher stakes where even a SB folding to a BB where everyone folded is being charged rake).


Point 4: The caps and rates are just far lower
Read for yourself on the sites, imagine any huge potted hand and how much more the player wins on PS than PP.


Thanks for reading.

We have to quote this so RM's brilliance isn't edited or lost.

LMAO, this is precious. It's like watching my dog trying to do calculus.😀
 
Rational Madman said:
15<20

Run any hands where pot gets really big esp at 5nl and you will see how much fairer the caps and rates of ps is.

No flop no drop isn't playing the 15 you showed is less than 20.

So to force you to need to play many hands giving extra rake the rake back system being better makes pp better??? Os doesn't owe you as much as they took far less overall from a many hand playing grinder. Use brain.

5c blind + 10c blind = 20 cents... apparently. 🙄
 
***** Hand History for Game 16565246728 *****
$0.10/$0.25 USD NL Texas Hold'em - Thursday, October 19, 18:08:19 BST 2017
Table Washington D.C (Real Money)
Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 3/6
Seat 2: Player2 ( $32.35 USD )
Seat 5: Player5 ( $39.84 USD )
Seat 3: Leisureathome ( $25.27 USD )
Player2 posts small blind [$0.10 USD].
Leisureathome posts big blind [$0.25 USD].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to Leisureathome [ Qc 8c ]
Player2 folds
Leisureathome does not show cards.
Leisureathome wins $0.35 USD


oh look ........ 35 cent pot and no rake taken i.e no flop no drop
 
so, do you think eveyone play cash? when people talk about rake or rakeback that is a stuff that ONLY cares to cash players. i don't play at cash tables and i know there are several people like me in this forum.
 
canabero said:
so, do you think eveyone play cash? when people talk about rake or rakeback that is a stuff that ONLY cares to cash players. i don't play at cash tables and i know there are several people like me in this forum.

They take more per tournament for same buy-in too I'm very sure.
 
Rational Madman said:
But with ps you, the grinder, make more of a living.

RUBBISH.

you are now talking about playing for a living . This means that you will be playing at stakes where you will be generating enough rake to get the 40% rakeback at party and still stuck at 5% on stars chests.


lets make it simple ( maybe you will be able to understand it then ) and say 100nl

stars 5% rake with 2.50 cap- post 5% rakeback means effective rake is 4.75% with $2.375 cap
party 5% rake with 3.00 cap - post 40% rakeback means effective rake is 2% with $1.20 cap .

Surely even you can see that in this situation the party grinder is paying half the rake of a stars grinder.
 
Keith_MM said:
RUBBISH.

you are now talking about playing for a living . This means that you will be playing at stakes where you will be generating enough rake to get the 40% rakeback at party and still stuck at 5% on stars chests.


lets make it simple ( maybe you will be able to understand it then ) and say 100nl

stars 5% rake with 2.50 cap- post 5% rakeback means effective rake is 4.75% with $2.375 cap
party 5% rake with 3.00 cap - post 40% rakeback means effective rake is 2% with $1.20 cap .

Surely even you can see that in this situation the party grinder is paying half the rake of a stars grinder.
100Nl is 4.5% with cap of 3 dollars on PS but 5% with same cap at PP at tables of 5 or more

That .5% means that after many hands you're losing .5% of pots again and again with party poker. 🙂
 
Rational Madman said:
100Nl is 4.5% with cap of 3 dollars on PS but 5% with same cap at PP at tables of 5 or more

That .5% means that after many hands you're losing .5% of pots again and again with party poker. 🙂

LOL , proving yet again your inability to read and understand a simple rake table.

Xba5NNh.jpg


and you conveniently ignore the effect of rakeback , returning a proportion of your rake back to you , because your beloved stars shafts grinders by giving hardly anything back.

why do you find it so difficult to admit that your lack of knowledge makes most of your statements to be untrue.
 
Last edited:
Keith_MM said:
LOL , proving yet again your inability to read and understand a simple rake table.

Xba5NNh.jpg


and you conveniently ignore the effect of rakeback , returning a proportion of your rake back to you , because your beloved stars shafts grinders by giving hardly anything back.

why do you find it so difficult to admit that your lack of knowledge makes most of your statements to be untrue.
Take the least and you owe the least back,
 
Keith_MM said:
You can't admit that you are wrong can you .
I thought you talked about 10/20 where the different of .5% makes a more significant benefit in PS you are talking of .5/1 and that's the ONLY stake where PP caps lower for same rate. 🙂
 
even a 3 year old could pick this up quicker than you . at 10/20 stars
charge 4.5% but still give 5% rakeback . At 10/20 on party a player is most likely going to be on the 40% rakeback range so that the effective rate will be 2% and effective cap will be 1.80.

You really should try to learn about rakeback and the effect it has on players profitability and then you will understand why grinders are so pissed off with stars current chest rewards that they continually run them down and play on alternate sites.
 
Keith_MM said:
even a 3 year old could pick this up quicker than you . at 10/20 stars
charge 4.5% but still give 5% rakeback . At 10/20 on party a player is most likely going to be on the 40% rakeback range so that the effective rate will be 2% and effective cap will be 1.80.

You really should try to learn about rakeback and the effect it has on players profitability and then you will understand why grinders are so pissed off with stars current chest rewards that they continually run them down and play on alternate sites.
Goodbye grinders all the more fish for me.
 
Rational Madman said:
Compare the buy-in percentages

What you're talking about ? 😕
You come with some statement without knowing what kind of bullshit you're spewing around.
You are probably getting not so well informed members on the wrong track.
Stop that Guru behaviour and come with facts instead of ridiculous ungrounded statements and some annoying pathetic youtube shit.
 
10058765 said:
What you're talking about ? 😕
You come with some statement without knowing what kind of bullshit you're spewing around.
You are probably getting not so well informed members on the wrong track.
Stop that Guru behaviour and come with facts instead of ridiculous ungrounded statements and some annoying pathetic youtube shit.
Reported [emoji23]
 
This thread is like watching humans trying to teach calculus to a dog.

Keith_MM said:
You can't admit that you are wrong can you .

Madman is a creative and driven person who thinks a lot about poker. Unfortunately he comes to some absurd conclusions. Also unfortunate is the fact that he needs to believe he is the greatest of all time, just to be able to look in the mirror each morning.

I'm not sure whether it's useful or cruel to the Madman to help burst that bubble. But it's going to burst of its own accord anyway, and there is value for the community in correcting misinformation. He won't be able to say so, but I'm sure he and anyone else reading will see that you are correct.
 
Back
Top