## Dealt Rakeback Rewards The Nits

Everyone knows that if MGR(Monthly Gross Rake) is calculated using the dealt method you receive more than your fair share of rakeback if you are a very tight player. It can be surprising however, just how different your effective rakeback percentage can be depending on your VP\$IP.

There are two different methods for calculating rakeback. One uses the “dealt” method, where an equal amount of rake is credited to each player dealt into the hand. The other is the contributed method, where the site calculates how much you contributed to each pot and credits you with rake based upon that contribution. Full Tilt and Poker Stars use the dealt method, where most other sites use the contributed method.

For this analysis, we will be looking at what we call your “Effective Rakeback Percentage,” which is the amount of money you receive in rakeback divided by the amount of rake you actually paid. In contributed rakeback systems, your effective rakeback will be very close to the percentage published by your rakeback provider, unless you tend to put in huge amounts of money and win very few pots. For dealt methods, your effective rakeback percentage can vary quite significantly from that published number.

The following table contains three \$10NL 9-max players from Full Tilt Poker who have different VP\$IP stats. The player with the 12 VP\$IP is fairly tight where the player with the 25 VP\$IP is fairly loose. All numbers are calculated using the commonly advertised 27% rakeback percentage for Full Tilt.

### Effective Rakeback Percentages

 Player VP\$IP Hands Rake Paid MGR Rakeback Effective RB% Player 1 12 363,498 \$1,965.74 \$3,686.66 \$995.40 50.7% Player 2 18 120,894 \$1,340.85 \$1438.44 \$388.38 28.97% Player 3 25 11,477 \$172.41 \$141.36 \$38.17 22.14%

You can see that the tight player is receiving over 50% in effective rakeback. He is getting over half the money back that was taken out of the pots that he won. This is due to the fact that he is receiving extra MGR from the pots that his looser opponents are participating in. Our loose player however, is only receiving 22% effective rakeback, lower than the advertised rate.

Dealt MGR clearly incentivizes nitty play. A super tight player can receive more than his fair share of rewards, just by sitting back and allowing his opponents to mix it up. My question to you is, should poker sites be providing extra incentives to those who give the least action?

1. 54h546h45 on 09/26/2010 12:56 p.m.

Wow. That difference is huge. A wider spectrum of samples over different stakes would be very interesting.

2. joeypoker on 09/26/2010 1:49 p.m.

Regardless of this rakeback matter nitty play should be exploited.
Poker used to be fun and more unpredictable.
Bring back the days of many many fish pls. X

3. MrPeterNorth on 09/26/2010 1:59 p.m.

yeah, no doubt the nits can be exploited, but its tough to squeeze blood out of a turnip.. bring back the fishies...

4. Sorokin on 09/26/2010 2:52 p.m.

i don't care

5. sokol2381 on 09/26/2010 2:53 p.m.

[:||||:]

ty, CO

6. xbrokekidx on 09/26/2010 2:57 p.m.

i knew about this loong ago. nothing will change so there is no point of talking about it. but its a good article to show people how nits makes lots o money.

7. enya_noronzi on 09/26/2010 4:40 p.m.

allright, i'm gonna become a nit now.

just kidding, i'll kill myself before

8. my bank manager on 09/26/2010 4:51 p.m.

Would be good if you could use players who have played similar amounts of hands so as to keep the control of the sample accurate

9. danidino on 09/26/2010 5:06 p.m.

How many hands were play? if they play the same amount of hands i realy dont understand how come the different is so big. can you try explain in a simple way?

Thanks

10. xbrokekidx on 09/26/2010 5:50 p.m.

@danidino the difference is because the nit pay less rake and they get the same mgr as everyone else. if you don't understand that then...

11. madeinchin4 on 09/26/2010 7:01 p.m.

lol u ppl dog on nits as if it's easy and noobish playing style, but it takes loads of discipline and self-control to play tight consistently. if you are all the great poker player that you think you are, go play 6max and HU and make god plays. if you have the stamina to put in 350K hands in a stake, you deserve to get more rake.

12. mr_sam on 09/26/2010 7:50 p.m.

Ridiculous. If a site advertises 27% rakeback then it should be 27%, not some nebulous percentage which depends on your VPIP. Shit like this is yet another argument for better regulation and policing of the industry. The variable amounts of rake charged, ridiculous methods of calculating rakeback and utter raping of the micro players is just ludicrous.

This is also really backwards from the sites point of view. If anything their rakeback structure should encourage people to play looser. By giving nits the most rakeback they're essentially rewarding their stingiest customers whilst crapping on the people who pay them the most.

Much as I'm dubious about PTR's business model, I can't fault you guys for putting information like this in the public domain if it gets the sites to buck their ideas up a bit.

13. Cleaner44 on 09/26/2010 8:08 p.m.

@mr_sam
Regulation and policing of the industry will do nothing except drain money off to politicians. Looking to the State to solve your problems is a mistake. If you feel that you are being raped by Full Tilt or anyone else, stop playing there. You are not forced to play poker and you are free to quit at anytime. If you still feel it is worth it to play, you can always adjust your style to be more profitable.

I suggest you take action for yourself instead of hoping that regulators and politicians will solve your problems, becuase they won't. If you don't believe me, just ask the thousands of people that lost over \$30 BILLION to Bernie Madoff while hoping the government regulators were protecting them.

14. 24802 on 09/26/2010 9:10 p.m.

i knew that the first week i got rakeback, i got \$62.00 and i was a bit surprised, i knew no way did i pay \$180.00 in rake that week! i guess the tight play pays of like it should.

15. 24802 on 09/26/2010 9:14 p.m.

when you say nit do you mean tight weak? because good luck trying to exploite a tight aggressive player! i really think the tag cant wait for the super agg to try and get him off his monster that he has been waiting for for the last 80 hands(lol) he will 4 bet you so fast it will make your head spin(lol)

16. journeyman54 on 09/26/2010 10:27 p.m.

This is weird I thought not all hands are raked. Only hands where you see a flop. At least this is what I was told my by rakeback provider. So... Because of this I figured that the looser I play... the more rakeback I will get due to seeing more flops... Sooooo wtf? I am very very confused now. Please help?

17. -F3rZ3nD3- on 09/26/2010 11:08 p.m.

60% contributed RB - idc!:D

18. danny on 09/26/2010 11:22 p.m.

very interesting, i just think the majority of people who visit this site probably play 6max so you should cater to them. Im sure the principle still applies, but just saying

19. brewcitydrew on 09/27/2010 1:12 a.m.

FFS, does anyone just play POKER anymore?

20. mr_sam on 09/27/2010 7:56 a.m.

This is also why I prefer plo to nlhe. A nitty style is way, way easier to exploit when preflop domination is so much less of an issue, so while they take the rakeback you can just keep outplaying them when they 3bet their bad aces oop.

21. danidino on 09/27/2010 8:38 a.m.

I understand that giving for every player who is dealt cards is unfair.

However when i see that 1 guy played 363K hand Vs. 11K hands, the huge different in rake look normal to me.

As i said i understand they get same rake for hands they didnt contrubuted same amount of money but why the hell you compare guy that played 363K hands with 11K??

22. 66jimmy5 on 09/27/2010 10:27 a.m.

Which big sites use dealt rakeback?

23. icandodgebullets on 09/27/2010 12:12 p.m.

11,477 hands? small sample size imo.

24. Chris MintZ on 09/27/2010 12:22 p.m.

just keep making it hard to make chedda.... We want more fish!!

25. imlucky_18 on 09/27/2010 1:27 p.m.

Cleaner44 says: I suggest you take action for yourself instead of hoping that regulators and politicians will solve your problems, becuase they won’t. If you don’t believe me, just ask the thousands of people that lost over \$30 BILLION to Bernie Madoff while hoping the government regulators were protecting them. ----

It's actually encouraging to see someone who thinks for themselves! Rather than wait for everyone else to think FOR them...

26. ACEvivKING on 09/27/2010 1:46 p.m.

@ Mr SAM, go to tools and then to top winners, and compare nlhe players to the plo players. A good nlhe player can make 3-4 times more then a good plo player. I wanted to switch to plo too, but when I saw that I changed my mind.

27. mimaos on 09/27/2010 1:47 p.m.

This site is definitely doing everything to kill online poker.

Security issues, rake issues, anything possible to make the fish feel bad about online poker and leave the game.

28. dave on 09/27/2010 2:23 p.m.

Mimaos,

This article intended to have the opposite effect. I don't think it's fun for a recreational player to encounter tables full of nits every time they log on to play. Reward structures that encourage more action will be good for the game.

29. KephreN85 on 09/27/2010 2:29 p.m.

I highly doubt it makes up for all the blinds they lose to steals by playing tight.

30. Cleaner44 on 09/27/2010 2:33 p.m.

@mimaos
Why would you think the fish visit PokerTableRatings? Do you think the fish care about playing well? Do you think they care about their opponents? They are FISH!

31. RabbitFish72 on 09/27/2010 3:18 p.m.

66jimmy5 says:
September 27, 2010 at 10:27 am
Which big sites use dealt rakeback?

FTP and Stars? I know that iPoker doesnt use it.

32. RAYBOX111 on 09/27/2010 3:39 p.m.

THE ANSWER TO THE PUBLISHERS QUESTION DEPENDS ON WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING TWO CATEGORIES YOU FALL INTO.

1. THOSE WHO HAVE A FINANCIAL INTEREST IN THE STARS / FTP COMPANIES, and PLAYERS WHO ARE NOT NITS

2. NITS

Of course these sites have all thought about this issue and FTP and Stars being the best at what they do have chosen the right option.

If all the nits received less rakeback and as a result meant they had to stop playing then that would be disasterous for the poker sites.

'Cause after all who are the players that put in the highest volume of hands??? The NITS!

And who are the players that PAY THE MOST RAKE to these poker sites due to their high volume of hands??? The NITS!

So these poker sites NEED the nits and therefor have chosen the correct method of rake.

And are there enough looser players / gamblers / those just playing for fun care enough to make a stand and choose not to play on Stars or FTP? Maybe a very very select few. But Stars and FTP dont give a S#@T since they are making probably hundreds of millions of dollars per year in extra revenue by keeping all the BE and slighly losing nits at their tables.

From everyones point of view that play on Stars and FTP who are not nits... YES!

From the point of view of Stars and FTP and the nits... NO!

NUFF SAID!

33. mimaos on 09/27/2010 4:01 p.m.

@Cleaner44

Of course the fish visit PTR..

First, ppl mention PTR at sites all the time these days. Even the fish can google PTR and see how rigged poker is for them. Or realize how much they actually lose.

Second, ppl write such bs on this site, like " a confirmed hit n runner" and other totally naive bs, that they are only fish themselves who don't understand the nature of poker. So the presence of such writings is a proof that fish indeed populate this site , probably even more than the poker tables.

34. mimaos on 09/27/2010 4:14 p.m.

Also, Stars have their whole rewards system built on as much volume as possible. The more you play the better rewards you get. The fish can NEVER reach supernova statuses and so on.. This only goesw to show that the industry leader for example clearly prefers volume in their reward system.

A casual writing on a site that tries to destroy online poker is not causing antyhing else than harm again.. Sites are definitely not changing the reward systems that probbaly work ok for them, the only consequence is that among other things the fish that see this post are now also hating the nits that try to get their money..

They also see negative news all the time here which makes them wanna quit.

I have recently played a lot at Boss and Microgaming that are not supported by PTR.

Tons of fat tuna fishes.. Coincidence? Maybe.. Or maybe they have gotten tired of ppl stalking their stats and noting how bad they are in poker :(

35. aise0603 on 09/27/2010 7:38 p.m.

The only person who pays rake is the person that wins the pot. Fish lose a lot more pots than they win. Therefore, the system screws the really good LAGS. Since being a great LAG is the most profitable way to play, and the sites don't want people to be profitable, these are the ones they are going after.

36. KoldShadow on 09/28/2010 12:14 a.m.

As someone who has yet to open a poker account with rakeback, I enjoy this type of article, but the discourse that followed is even better. Furthermore, as a self-proclaimed NIT, I can confidently say that I don't care whether the rakeback I get at Power Poker is dealt or contributed, because I will be funding my bankroll with no-deposit bonus funds from other sites, soo WOO-HOO!

37. zocketpocket on 09/28/2010 2:29 p.m.

nits get more in rakeback but they lose more in horrbile post flop play. sooo soorry.

38. thankyoufishy on 09/28/2010 8:11 p.m.

Is there a difference between stars and ft rakeback styles? Does stars do the rakeback share model as well for their FPPs or VPPs or whatever they are called?

39. kara on 09/28/2010 10:25 p.m.

On stars depending on how much you play you get more or less rakeback. Basically if you play a lot of hands play on stars. If you dont play alot then FTP is the better deal.

40. kara on 09/28/2010 10:37 p.m.

The way they set up the examples is sooo misleading. If you multiply player #2's hands by 3 he will have played almost exactly as many hands as player #1. Now multiply player #2's rakeback by 3 and you (shocker) get more than player #1.

So if we assume both players have played 360k hands of 10NL and both players are 3ptbb/100 winners in those games

Player #1 makes \$2160 in earnings and \$995 in rakeback for a total of \$3155

Player #2 makes \$2160 in earnings and \$1164 in rakeback for a total of \$3324

While its true player #2 will be playing more pots and paying more rake he will also be winning more pots! Remember were both 3ptbb winners, we just happen to play different styles.

41. 149203 on 09/30/2010 5:18 p.m.

'In an effort to make our Rake Calculation fairer for players and affiliates alike, we are changing the method we use to calculate rake at Full Tilt Poker.

We are moving from the Dealt Method of calculating rake to the Weighted Contributed Method as of October 2010.

The weighted contributed rake method is the fairest method for determining a player’s rake as it credits the player based upon how much they have contributed to the pot.

For example if a player contributes 20% to the pot then they will receive 20% of the rake from that pot. If however, a player does not contribute to the pot then they will not generate any rake."

42. sittingout on 09/30/2010 5:20 p.m.

wtg ptr you bunch of ratards (hangover joke, not spelling mistake). ftp is changing their rakeback policy now, most likely due to this article. no more dealt rakeback, however much you contribute to the rake is how much you get back.

so playing rush poker is now pointless for rakeback

43. sittingout on 09/30/2010 5:25 p.m.

sry, however much you contribute to the pot is how much of the rake you get back. eg you contribute 10% to the pot, you get 10% of the rake.

44. breastroker59 on 10/03/2010 9:06 p.m.

This is similar to a discussion I've had between paying time v. paying the rake in live games. Paying time is greatly advantageous to those who play loose because you aren't getting money from every pot taken from you. However, if a time pot or collection pot is used, the LAG is at a drastic disadvantage as he is much more likely to win the pot and have to pay for everyone's collection.

PS... the fact that one person had 363k hands and the other 11k hands doesn't really matter since they are talking about RB PERCENT. Player 1 played about 33x as many hands as Player 3 and would have payed about \$3,700 less in rake with the equivalent number of hands played. However, he would have gotten about \$250 less in rake back... not really a good trade off, because player 3 would pay \$3,450 more than the nit.

45. breastroker59 on 10/03/2010 9:09 p.m.

I requested to play more than 16 tables on FTP but they said that is the max... is this true or is it merely true for me? I heard that Stars lets you play a lot more.

46. jen-sung tan on 10/11/2010 11:17 a.m.

Believe that is truth. Stars is popular among grinders because of the 24-table maximum.

47. TOPPIKK on 10/23/2010 9:06 p.m.

Listen to all of these people ripping apart the so called NIT, get a clue fish it's called playing good poker. Now I'm not saying that I'm any good at poker because I play tight, hell I think it might be sending me to an early grave because I am patient and wait for solid hands and I try to get my \$\$\$ in when I am ahead just to get Donked by some moron. The way I see it the tight player WAS getting rewarded for playing good poker, it's not the tight players fault if someone likes to play every hand, they could have realized thats not good poker and they could get more rake by not being a moron of course online makes them think they are good. I for one am not rich and I realized by play rush poker I could get more rake and I like to play tight 90% of the time and my rake was keeping me afloat and it was nice to get that rake because I would say 75% of the time I will end up busting because I get coolered by numbnutz that calls on a his draw or his bs hand and sucks out. In my eyes poker is a game of skill and patience, it's not funkin bingo like 85% of the people playing make it out to be. I'm pissed about this new bs rake back deal because it's going to take me out. Like I said I'm not rich but to love to gamble and love to play poker and these people with more \$\$\$ than they know what to do with can just piss it away with no regard and then bitch about a tight player getting more rake than them. But more power to the guy with more money cause they must have done something right in life but you all know it's damn hard to play online and keep a bank roll, I don't know.... I know the end is coming soon for me ever since this change went down I swear and I'm not trying to cry but I have been funkin coolered so damn many times and my bank roll is about gone. When it is I will be too but Fraud Tilt could give a flying funk about me anyhow. GL All!!

48. tammyb1212 on 12/22/2010 3:12 a.m.

wah wah wah, quit crying everyone. quit worrying about such crap. just play the way you know how and let the chips and rake back fall where it may. if you can stay ahead of the morons, the cut and the blinds then the rakeback is your profit. if you cant then quit playing.

49. ArtySmokes on 09/22/2011 1:18 p.m.

Any chance of an update to this article, using Pokerstars dealt method and comparing it directly with the weighted contribution method of another site? Personally, I don't like the dealt method, as it means nits can make more money (or FPP bonuses) from grinding 24 tables than they actually make from winning pots. Poker should be about playing cards to win money, not just sitting at a table and folding 90% of hands. I understand why Pokerstars uses the dealt method (it's like a loyalty card; players are rewarded for volume) but it does nothing to attract newbies to the game.

50. heinnnnn on 01/06/2012 8:04 p.m.

its good if your the nite, so i like xD

### Pingbacks

1. Algunos datos del rake que quiz on 09/28/2011 6:15 a.m.
[...] [...]

Pingbacks are closed.