High Rake Adjustments (1 Viewer)

[ontheriver51]

Obviously finding games with small to no rake is ideal, but If if you are going to play in a game with rake of 10% (5BB cap) what are some deviations from traditional strategy that can help avoid getting wrecked by the rake?

Obvious first one is to avoid small pots as the rake is a larger % of the pot, but anything else?

 

[BamaT8ter]

For me, it's all about minimizing the heavily rakes pots. Some things that occur to me are:

1. Don't buy short
2. Don't stay at the table if a large percentage of players are buying short
3. If it's "no flop no drop," winning preflop is better than post-flop. Also, chop unraised pots in the blinds.
4. Play fewer hands, and adjust toward preflop holdings that can flop big-pot hands.

 

[Machine]

I like to fade the rake by asking for alcohol, high end food and ice cream. Suggest coffee runs to Starbucks, or desert from a local place.

Seriously if all they offer is some shitty pizza and water, I don't need to play that badly.

 

[Rhodeman77]

The stacks need to be deep to overcome a high rake game as mentioned. You can’t be the only person with a 500bb stack, most need to as well.

Also pay attention to when the rebuys slowdown/stop. Once this happens it’s time to get out since no new money is coming in. The rake will devour the stacks on the table.

 

[Mojo1312]

Obviously finding games with small to no rake is ideal, but If if you are going to play in a game with rake of 10% (5BB cap) what are some deviations from traditional strategy that can help avoid getting wrecked by the rake?

Obvious first one is to avoid small pots as the rake is a larger % of the pot, but anything else?

Start a home game.

 

[mdt11]

More squeezing and three-betting to build pots or take it down pre (assuming no flop/no drop structure), with a tighter range weighted toward hands that can make the nuts. Offsuit broadways and aces get thrown in the trash while suited aces/kings and suited connectors get played more aggressively.

 

[JustinInMN]

You need to pick starting hands that will overcome the rake, so you do have to fold marginal connectors and one-gaps preflop that might show a profit in an unraked game.

Otherwise, you probably need to just push yourself stakes wise so the rake is smaller relative to the size of the pots you are playing.

 

[WideRange]

A corollary to what other folks have said - if the rake is high, coming to a game in the middle / towards then end when there’s more cash on the table is a way to practically play higher effective stack poker.

Also - one thing that may be obvious but worth mentioning - when you track your win/loss rate for each session, make sure to note / differentiate the rake somewhere!

 

[erdried]

I don't know if 10% up to 5bbs is beatable long-term. I don't know if should be played at all unless you're getting an incredible rake-back deal.

But for games where we are trying to overcome rake, in addition to the great suggestions above, would sizing up all our opens be helpful to? Like if my opening standard is 3x, maybe make it 4x? Is this a good idea?

 

[DrStrange]

10% up to 5bb is not anywhere close to the highest out there. Cruise lines are outrageous. Australia is reputed to have high rakes, but I am sure there are other nations that have high-cost poker.

"5bb" hides a world of difference depending on the stakes. Paying a 5bb rake on a $50 / $100 game is $500 per hand. In that case, Hero should just leave. For perspective, a typical Vegas $1/$2 or $1/$3 table often has a $5 rake plus a few dollar drop for promotions - somewhat less than 5bb max rake.

Bottom line, with a high enough skill differential, a Hero can beat any rake / fee situation. Sadly, most of us aren't so skilled. Fining an unraked game makes all the difference in most people's win rate.

If I were to play in a "high" rake game, I would tighten up and pick games with deep stacks. The house is bleeding a lot of money off the table. This is going to break a lot of typical casino type games. This is why cruise poker sucks so hard - the high rake paired with casual players buying in short means the house has raked the entire bankroll for the table in a few hours.

Finding a game with a seat charge rather than a rake can help, especially at higher stakes.

Also be mindful that illegal games often over rake. Pay attention to what the dealer is doing with your money. Don't pick a fight, just know it is time to leave when you see that happening.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Also be mindful that illegal games often over rake. Pay attention to what the dealer is doing with your money. Don't pick a fight, just know it is time to leave when you see that happening.

^^^ exactly.

I also only player a few hours if I think the rake is too high.

 

[JustinInMN]

I don't know if 10% up to 5bbs is beatable long-term. I don't know if should be played at all unless you're getting an incredible rake-back deal.

But for games where we are trying to overcome rake, in addition to the great suggestions above, would sizing up all our opens be helpful to? Like if my opening standard is 3x, maybe make it 4x? Is this a good idea?

Sort of. Sizing up your opens probably has two benefits in terms of rake.

1) You probably benefit from no-flop, no-drop a little more often.
2) If you are being called, the rake will "cap" more quickly meaning the rake will represent a smaller portion of the pot.

But sizing up has the gameplay downside of losing calls that might be to your advantage at a smaller sizing. It's a valid consideration, but it's a give-and-take.

To explain the effect of the cap more, consider a 1-3 game with a 10% rake up to $15 as mentioned above. The rake effectively becomes "capped" at the point where 10% of the pot is $15, or $150 in the pot. Meaning all pots $150 and below are raking the full 10%, and that percentage starts to dwindle when pots get larger than $150 but no additional rake taken.

Examples

$100 pot: rake is $10 (10%)
$120 pot: rake is $12 (10%)
$150 pot: Rake is $15 (10%)
$200 pot: Rake is $15 (7.5%)
$300 pot: Rake is $15 (5%)

This should impact your starting hand selection, unless you are playing a stake where pots frequently go above the cap, in a raked game, you need to fold starting hands that have a +10% EV or less in an unraked game.

So really starting hand selection is a more important adjustment than bet sizing when considering rake impact. But bet sizing is a good consideration too, so long as you don't size up to the point you are encouraging your opponents to play too tightly.

 

[JustinInMN]

Bottom line, with a high enough skill differential, a Hero can beat any rake / fee situation. Sadly, most of us aren't so skilled. Fining an unraked game makes all the difference in most people's win rate.

If I were to play in a "high" rake game, I would tighten up and pick games with deep stacks. The house is bleeding a lot of money off the table. This is going to break a lot of typical casino type games. This is why cruise poker sucks so hard - the high rake paired with casual players buying in short means the house has raked the entire bankroll for the table in a few hours.

Just don't underestimate how high that skill differential needs to be. I think most rooms try to rake $120-$150 off the table in an hour. Meaning if someone is losing a $300 buy in every two hours, what profit there is in the game for the winning players has to come after that drop.

In other words, unless I am seeing two players dust off full buy-ins in that timeframe (or some equivalent combination across multiple players), I assume one of those players losing is strictly paying the house and I am hoping to play well enough to get a share of the profit that second player is leaving.

A $15 rake is less meaningful in a 2-5, 5-10 NL game, so the higher the stakes, given the same rake in actual dollars (not BB) the less the skill differential needs to be. This I think is the root of the belief that lower stakes games are not beatable. @DrStrange 's main point is right that any game is beatable given the right skill differential. It's just much harder to find situations with a big enough skill differential in lower stakes, and the rake effect is the biggest reason.

 

[erdried]

Sort of. Sizing up your opens probably has two benefits in terms of rake.

1) You probably benefit from no-flop, no-drop a little more often.
2) If you are being called, the rake will "cap" more quickly meaning the rake will represent a smaller portion of the pot.

But sizing up has the gameplay downside of losing calls that might be to your advantage at a smaller sizing. It's a valid consideration, but it's a give-and-take.

To explain the effect of the cap more, consider a 1-3 game with a 10% rake up to $15 as mentioned above. The rake effectively becomes "capped" at the point where 10% of the pot is $15, or $150 in the pot. Meaning all pots $150 and below are raking the full 10%, and that percentage starts to dwindle when pots get larger than $150 but no additional rake taken.

Examples

$100 pot: rake is $10 (10%)
$120 pot: rake is $12 (10%)
$150 pot: Rake is $15 (10%)
$200 pot: Rake is $15 (7.5%)
$300 pot: Rake is $15 (5%)

This should impact your starting hand selection, unless you are playing a stake where pots frequently go above the cap, in a raked game, you need to fold starting hands that have a +10% EV or less in an unraked game.

So really starting hand selection is a more important adjustment than bet sizing when considering rake impact. But bet sizing is a good consideration too, so long as you don't size up to the point you are encouraging your opponents to play too tightly.

Great responses, thanks so much.