How Much Do You Pay To Play?
PTR will soon be launching a comprehensive section dedicated to explaining the true cost to play at the online poker rooms we cover. In order to preview this information, let's look at the cost per 100 hands at the different levels of full ring games.
Rake is often difficult to quantify by just looking at the rake tables published online and trying to understand exactly how much the poker sites are charging you to play in their games. This table contains the amount paid in rake per 100 hands played by the average player. It’s a great way to compare the true cost to play at the sites.
Full Ring NL Holdem
| Stakes | Cereus | Bodog | Cake | Full Tilt | iPoker | Party | Stars | Stars.fr |
| 2NL | $0.17 | $0.24 | $0.28 | $0.18 | $0.20 | €0.34 | ||
| 5NL | $0.30 | $0.47 | $0.51 | $0.55 | $0.30 | $0.38 | €0.73 | |
| 10NL | $0.81 | $0.87 | $1.04 | $1.11 | $1.08 | $0.77 | $0.66 | €1.29 |
| 25NL | $2.03 | $2.31 | $1.37 | $1.82 | $1.46 | $2.64 | $1.59 | €2.83 |
| 50NL | $5.60 | $4.89 | $2.92 | $3.29 | $3.79 | $4.41 | $2.80 | €5.21 |
| 100NL | $10.24 | $7.82 | $5.27 | $5.98 | $6.80 | $6.62 | $4.94 | €8.54 |
| 200NL | $13.78 | $12.21 | $8.06 | $8.95 | $10.66 | $10.91 | $7.31 | €13.51 |
| 400NL | $18.77 | $16.42 | $16.54 | $12.48 | $16.72 | $15.13 | $10.95 | €20.90 |
| 600NL | $19.46 | $18.96 | $17.21 | $14.15 | $17.71 | $14.74 | $13.19 | |
| 1000NL | $20.86 | $13.15 | $15.91 | $14.40 | $20.06 | $18.33 | $15.54 | €22.48 |
You can see that the amount you pay to play 100 hands at the different sites can be dramatically different. The standouts in terms of cost are Full Tilt, Poker Stars and Cake, who are across the board the best in terms of the rake paid per 100 hands. In some cases, the cost to play at these sites can be as much as half of that of their competitors. This translates to significantly less bb/100 you need to earn in order to break even.
Cereus, whose basic rake structure is comparable to Tilt and Stars, takes extra money out of every pot in order to build the bad beat jackpot. We decided to include this cost in our comparison because it is so unlikely that you will ever win this jackpot. All but the tiniest percentage of players will experience the bad beat jackpot as a hit to their bb/100. We used the same reasoning for Party Poker's BBJ drop.
For all you Stars.fr players out there outraged about the increased rake at the French site, you can see very clearly how dramatic the increase in rake is. At 100NL you would need to earn over 3bb/100 more just to maintain the same earn rate.
In the future, we will be taking a look at how dealt vs contributed rakeback mgr calculation methods affect these numbers. It turns out that there are dramatic differences in your effective rakeback percentage depending on your VP$IP when playing on a dealt rakeback site.
Our new rake analysis section is now live. You can view similar information from other game types and structures there.
PTR,
Is the Cereus BBJP rake included in the above rake table?
If not, why is Cereus so much higher?
wow that pokerstars fr. rake is crazy
This should be done w/ the sites various rakebacks as well factored in.
We will be making that data available as well. This is just a start.
There is a huge jump in rake for Party between 10NL and 25NL. Therefore I assume that you have included the 25NL jackpot tables since they don't exist at 10NL.
I can't believe stars is getting away with screwing over the frenchies. If they think they can do the same in the US "IF" we get regulation, they are sorely mistaken. I am positive that Americans will stand our ground. Thank you PTR. I just hope your methods can hold up to any scrutiny.
As far as our methods go, this is a fairly simple one. We are going to look into things beyond the average price in the days to come.
@Donkey41
We did include the bbj for party as well but I didn't mention it in the article I will add that in.
dealt rake depends on VPIP ? that is a scam obv, and i kinda like the fact i changed my whole game from FT to PS even more now.next year i will get better $ with all stars promo than at FT rakeback even without supernova, FT reduces MGR for everything btw and feels like they even take $ of your payouts (dunno 4 sure, always used moneybookers)
who plays full ring, can you do a six max as well?
FT's fr tables are 9-handed, is that taken into account here?
FT vs Stars numbers including better VIP program at stars = I know where I am going once I cash in my points at FT.
Good job again, imo. Maybe PTR makes money with information you´re not supposed to have/obtain in the first place, but whether that´s true or not (regarding the supposed to have part), you seem to make an honest effort to give back to the poker community. Thats worth respect, and even moreso because you´ve proven useful a couple times already.
Haters gonna hate, please keep telling people the truth.
@ Shevtshenko
We calculated based upon the average number of players at the table so the differences in the max players at the table will be taken into account.
@lolwhat
Thanks for the support. We'll do our best.
Could you at all classify what you mean by 'average player' please?
We took the total rake paid in a huge number of games and divided it by the total number of players in those games to get the amount paid per player per hand on average. Looser players will obviously pay more and tighter players will pay less in reality. We're going to include ways to figure out the true cost based on your style in the future.
are the .fr numbers in euros or something?
Yea they are actually Euros. Changed the symbol. Makes the cost even higher if your thinking in dollar terms.
Same for short handed?
Dear PTR: Please create a poker site with half the rake of the other sites. Please?
I think France pays more because Pokerstars is taxed heavily there.
One thing we can dream about is the possibility of the US legalizing poker and having Google and or Facebook, Yahoo run rake free real money games making profits from ads.
"Internet super-behemoth Google seems to be wasting little time positioning themselves to profit from licensed internet gambling in the United States by investing in “social gaming”. Both the New York Times and Techcrunch are reporting that Google has agreed to purchase “Slide”, a software development company specializing in Facebook apps involving the exchange of virtual money."
Cool article. Thanks!
rake must go down
Any chance for such a table for LHE?
seperate question, any chance of all in ev being added to peoples pages?!
Why is the bbjp included in Cereus stats when you can choose not to play these tables, if your gonna include bbjp table rates, then you should have rates for non bbjp tables, same with Party. Those non-bbjp tables aren't raked the same.
Wow thanks so much PTR! This information can be so useful in helping someone decide on what site to play. It is true that Cerus does offer non BBJ tables, but below 200nl they are almost non existent and there might be 1 non BBJ table for every 50 that is. At 200nl there are a lot more options but below its 99% BBJ.
But all the worst players are on the bbjp tables. all the shittiest 25NL players move up to play 50NL in hopes of winning.
I used to play it and they all used to talk about how the other 25nl'ers were stupid not to play the bbjp tables.
The French thing is ugly. And In Belgium they are trying to get it the same as in French.
Very bad news (for me)
I honestly think they should keep it low in taxes. if you earn less than a certain amount/year.
I think these things is very bad for poker in general. less people will play i guess.
Would love to see a 6max table like that ;-)
i would love if you could make a rake calc about ongame, will you ever start traking it?
so is this correct:
@ 200nl at cereus you pay about $5 more per 100 hands than fulltilt.
so that's 2.5 big blinds per 100 that you lose at cereus correct?
SEEMS LIKE A LLLLLOOOOTTT
Can you break it down by hu, 6max and full ring. IPoker should be a lot more expensive for HU because they have cap of $1 and stars and tilt have cap of $0.5.
This is the reason that overall total is higher on iPoker.
Pokerstars rake is 28% less than FullTilt but FullTilt gives 28% rakeback. It's all in the VIP system they offer.
the higher u go the less rake you pay. just one more reason why we should be moving up in stakes ASAP.
With regards to Cereus, I understand that you will never actually be in the BBJP hand, but if you are playing the same stakes as the BBJP hand when it hits, you get a cut for every table you were dealt in. While this still doesn't happen frequently, if you're a regular, you're definitely getting that cut a few times a year.
Have always said ft is a rip off, they are crooks plus their rake is to high even with rakeback. I hope reports like this get more and more people to switch to pokerstars. Screw ft a bunch of criminals own the site.
Thank you ptr you guys do help us out in so many ways.
There is no 25NL on ipoker
Totally agree with hotwax about the the cut off the BBJP when playing the same stakes.
The comparison of rake is a very good idea. But the data is useless in my eyes since the amount of rake depends on the looseness of the players at the table. On smaller sites are less regulars, so the action is looser and the rake higher, even if the rake-calculation is exactly the same.
Wow this is very interesting. How about Stars : is their VIP Program (Thier rakeback system in fact FPP's and such) deducted from this rake structure?
Very good job guys, this publication will cause some serious discussion all over the wen i guess
The rakeback deal of 27% at fulltilt is not included in this calculation right ?
short handed pays 33% more in rake, there is no good reason to play short handed games, they are set up for impatient players who need action ,and the play does not translate over to real live casino poker, casinos do not have 6 player tables.
correct FTP are crooks
but PTR's analysis close but I wouldn't ever say accurate
Great article. I agree though that the bbj numbers should not be included in the cereus numbers. A lot of us go out of our way to NOT play these tables because of the extra juice. The cereus number should be put both ways, with and without bbj as to be fair.
PTR u guys r amazin
And Pokerstars.fr already DID REDUCE the rake since they opened...
The only advantage is that you get a lot more VPP...
full tilt is a rip off. I see why they give rakeback.
Is the 10nl rake on stars from when they only raked >1$ pots 5% or the one thats there now 0.1 per 0.20on pot?
It's from after the changes.
While its true at Cereus most people will never hit the BBJ its not that uncommon for the jackpot to hit while your playing and at your stakes which will reward you with some of that money back.
Ty for doing this !!!!
Please make rake calculations for 6max also
Doesn't seem like much to go on until you run the hands from different sites through the other sites rake structures ss different sites play differently, ie stars so much more nitty because of the rewards system so this report i just useless to me.
wow 9bb/100 rake at party 50nl
6 max please
Please make 6 max calculations also. Correct me if Im wrong but this chart could be a misrepresentation of the rake. If a bunch of random hands at a limit were taken at each site and looked at what the rake was paid, it seems stars is the cheapest and cerus or stars.FR pays a lot more in rake. In reality it could just mean that those sites are so much more fishier that they average pots are larger, thus generating more rake...
What needs to be done is the same set of random hands put thru a rake calculator using each of the sites rake profiles, thus arriving at a more accurate result.
Could you add Pacific, they cap the rake at $4.
Stars has changed/increased their rake system for 25NL and lower recently (a few months ago). Does this chart apply to all times or a few months ago?
Thanks
I like this stuff. Keep it up!
would also like to see 6max calculations, thx
Don't jump down FT's back so quick. PS just equaled their rake by not offering rakeback.
Although PS beats FT with their loyalty program, especially for cash game regs.
also limit calculations would be great as well, not just NL
Are all the tables on Cereus bad beat tables? Can you choose to play at tables that don't take a bad beat rake? Curious as I was thinking about trying it out.
about time for a report like this. the question about difference in contributed vs. dealt rake has been bogging my mind for the last year and a half. I am very interested to find out the rake i pay in bb. (50nl 30/25 vpip/pfr.)
You cannot count bad beat tables at UB when most players don't even play on them. That's just weird. I do love the idea of this article though.
This is borderline criminal imo... They are robbing us.
I just played like ~500 hands rush 6max on NL10 and paid more
than a half stack in rake! i mean srsly... wtf.
hotchilli that's the equivalent of 16.7 hours of live play. how many big blinds are you going to pay in rake and tips over that amount of time at a B&M casino. just to put it in perspective of which one's criminal.
AMAZING JOB, THIS IS SO USEFUL, HOPE TO SEE MORE OF THIS QUALITY MATERIAL!
POKERTABLERATINGS POKER POLICE!!!
i second that comment from themandude
good stuff
6M w/ MERGE NETWORK plz
Stars is raking 1c from every 20c in the pot, and still not offering rakeback. So while Stars only takes 75c from a $15 pot, Full Tilt is taking $1 even, but giving it's players rakeback. How is that calculated into this equation?
Is it still much better to play at Stars for 25nl and below with this newest structure, or would we be better off on FT w/ RB? I recently moved from PS to FT, and have really noticed how much more money they take from each pot, but haven't gotten my RB yet to see how bad it really is.
Or in BB/100 (I'm not sure how well this will turn out without formatting, but here goes:
Excel formula for BB/100 =VALUE(SUBSTITUTE(A2,"NL",""))/100*2
Stakes BB Cereus Bodog Cake Full Tilt iPoker Party Stars Stars.fr
2NL 0.04 4.25 6.00 7.00 4.50 5.00 8.50
5NL 0.1 3.00 4.70 5.10 5.50 3.00 3.80 7.30
10NL 0.2 4.05 4.35 5.20 5.55 5.40 3.85 3.30 6.45
25NL 0.5 4.06 4.62 2.74 3.64 2.92 5.28 3.18 5.66
50NL 1 5.60 4.89 2.92 3.29 3.79 4.41 2.80 5.21
100NL 2 5.12 3.91 2.64 2.99 3.40 3.31 2.47 4.27
200NL 4 3.45 3.05 2.02 2.24 2.67 2.73 1.83 3.38
400NL 8 2.35 2.05 2.07 1.56 2.09 1.89 1.37 2.61
600NL 12 1.62 1.58 1.43 1.18 1.48 1.23 1.10
1000NL 20 1.04 0.66 0.80 0.72 1.00 0.92 0.78 1.12
Avg All 3.50 3.12 2.72 3.23 3.52 3.11 2.56 4.94
Avg 25NL 3.20 2.69 1.98 2.00 2.40 2.41 1.72 3.32
Run a conditional formatting over it and it'll look pretty;)
Best is Bodog 1000NL, worst is Stars.fr 2NL
Best avg smallstakes rake (arbitrarily 25NL): Stars
Grain of salt and all that (i.e. lack of rakeback in the calculations makes most of this moot).
If you want to stick with one site and don't have RB, then Stars is your goto site.
Woops, forgot this:
Avg All 3.50 3.12 2.72 3.23 3.52 3.11 2.56 4.94
Avg 25NL 3.20 2.69 1.98 2.00 2.40 2.41 1.72 3.32
Ahh, stripped html chars
Avg All 3.50 3.12 2.72 3.23 3.52 3.11 2.56 4.94
Avg lessthan-eq25NL 4.12 3.99 4.21 5.07 5.21 4.16 3.82 6.98
Avg greaterthan 25NL 3.20 2.69 1.98 2.00 2.40 2.41 1.72 3.32
PokerStars has by far the best rake back program. Supernova elites make over 60% rake back. You buy cash bonuses in their store with earned points.
MIght be interesting to see the tables without BBJ drop becasue certainly at Party you can find games with no BBJ and choose NOT to play them so if possible it may be an idea to split those sites which offer BBJ
On the full details page, for Fixed Limit, you label them as 100FL, 200FL, etc. Where do those numbers come from? How does that equate to the standard BB/SB structure?
@BigCheatsMcBeats
On party there is a lot of non-BBJ tables, on UB there usually isn't. especially at this moment.
So I think the difference is pretty obvious, considering a similar rake structure at UB, Party and FT.
IM VERY CONFUSED THINK MY HEAD IS SPINNING!!!!!
SO IS IT BETTER TOMPLAY AT FULL TILT WITH RAKEBACK OR STARS WITHOUT ???
@TIM
First of all: Is your keyboard broken?
What is better obviously depends on how much you play. If you play, let's say 10k hands 100NL a month, FT is probably better. In case you play a lot, Stars should probably be your choice.
dont know if anyone else mentioned that, but afaik ipoker has 20nl (as in .10/.20), not 25nl.
Stars has rake back way better than full tilt! It's just not called rakeback, it is a vip program in which you earn points and buy cash with your points. It is way better to play at stars, especially for higher volume players.
you need to account for the higher % of rakeback you get at other sites. also for instance UB converts pionts for money at much higher rate than other sites.
so quert,
Are you saying that if I play 30-60k hands per/month of 50nl or 100nl, it would be better to play at stars because the bonus cash that I could buy with my points is better then the rackback at FT. what about with the new black card store, assuming that you qualify for it?