Check out our brand new Local Poker Communities! Get updates and interact with poker players in your area.
Visit the United States Poker Community | Visit the California Poker Community | Read more about the Launch of P5s Local

Hyper-turbos: Propose a graduated rake structure!

Reply to Thread
  1. a2z1to3 a2z1to3 is offline

    Fort Collins, CO
    United States

    Posts: 30
    Joined: Dec 06

    Nov 21st, 2009 (11/21/2009 8:13pm)

    I've proposed to stars having a graduated rake structure for the hyper-turbo SNGs, just like is done for any other type of poker (SNGs, cash/ring, MTT). There are many reasons its done for those games that benefit both the site and the players, and they all apply to the hypers. So please join me in asking stars to change hyper rake. See below for specifics.

    New Suggested Rake (Buy-in: rake):
    420: $4.00
    212: $2.12 (or 2.00)
    86: $1.25
    54: $1.00
    44: $0.80
    Below 44: ~2% of buy-in (ex. 22: $0.44)

    Some reasons include:
    - Even numbers for buy-in amounts ($87.72 is a wierd amount).
    - Currently, as players have improved, even before rake there are now razor thin margins in hypers, with the margin decreasing with time.
    - Encourage climbing up the stakes ladder. Just like with cash games and tourneys, competition at higher levels is better and rake is more, but it is offset by a lower RATE of rake, so players are encouraged to put in increased cash volume. This benefits both players and Stars, and gives them a reason to move up the ladder.
    - Encourage non-regulars. Many players play to satellite into the bigger tourneys. An improved rake would further encourage this.
    - Highly skilled regulars now have incentive to play much more regularly, as a reasonable profit margin is once again attainable. Margins are now so small due to improved general play in hypers and the introduction of rake, that it is starting to make little sense to continue putting in volume at the hypers unless rake changes. Similarly, at the top levels, such as the $420+8.40, the level is play is so good that it makes little sense to play because it is nearly impossible to beat the rake long-term. A lower rake percentage would encourage players to move up and stay.
    - Publicity. Word would get around poker forums about improved rake, encouraging increased volume and participation.

    Lets write them en mass and try to do this.
     
  2. jeppg1111 jeppg1111 is offline Disabled account

    Posts: 3,705
    Joined: Jan 05

    Nov 21st, 2009 (11/21/2009 8:16pm) in reply to a2z1to3

    ill cosign, but dont hold ur breath mayne
     
  3. OhAaT OhAaT is offline

    El Paso, TX
    United States

    Posts: 1,215
    Joined: Jul 05

    Nov 21st, 2009 (11/21/2009 8:20pm) in reply to a2z1to3

    I have yet to ever see where these hyper turbos are found. Help please
  4. a2z1to3 a2z1to3 is offline

    Fort Collins, CO
    United States

    Posts: 30
    Joined: Dec 06

    Nov 21st, 2009 (11/21/2009 8:45pm) in reply to OhAaT

     
    Originally Posted by OhAaT View Post

    I have yet to ever see where these hyper turbos are found. Help please

    stars. Go to the Sit&Go tab. Then go to the Satellite sub-tab. (if you dont see them, make sure your view filters are opened.)[
     
    Thread Starter
  5. fpdog fpdog is offline

    Newton Center, MA
    United States

    Posts: 526
    Joined: Mar 06

    Nov 21st, 2009 (11/21/2009 10:56pm) in reply to a2z1to3

    how about we get rid of hypers instead - theyve destroyed the satty system drawing players away from other satties - even with ur system rake is ridiculous given the variance alone - take the 86 sng - a person needs to win over 40% just to break even - thats just downright retarded to even think thats possible - that is why new people dont join
  6. stevie444 stevie444 is offline

    Posts: 1,531
    Joined: Jan 07

    Nov 21st, 2009 (11/21/2009 11:05pm) in reply to a2z1to3

    Disagree that it would encourage the non-regs. Fish who play hyperturbos dont care about rake...other than that I agree, solid argument.

    cosign
    91 12
Reply to Thread

Similar Threads