betting/raising and the rake

trigs

i wanted to hear some people's opinions on this. as we all know, the larger the pot the more money gone to the rake (to a set limit). now my question is, does the amount of rake being taken influence your betting/raising?

for instance, let's say that you strongly think that your opponent has the same hand as you and the pot is going to be split. would you just check it down and split the pot, or do you bet/raise even though when the pot gets split you'll just lose more money to the rake?

i've had opponents pretty much know it's a split pot and then just push all in on the river to have me call, split the pot, and then just lose more to rake.

GTA Poker

irrelevent

compuease

At 1/2 the rake typically maxes out at a pot of $50. so can't see the concern, wouldn't you always max out prior to realizing you may have the same hand? as GTA says, irrelevent... :) I just say it nicer...

ReefAquarium

The rake is a huge factor in the way I play.

I don't understand why people say it's irrelevant. If you play a lot, you'll end up spending $30,000+ a year in rake.

For example,

At Seneca, the rake is 10% max 4+1

Since they take $3 on the flop and $1 at 20, you can't play small pots profitably...

compuease

I certainly don't claim the rake is irrelevant.. However it is irrelevant to how I play a hand once I'm in it.

screenman

While playing, the rake is not a consideration. Before playing it is a factor that I look at.
While we had the Fat Diamond Automated Table in the casino in California, rake became an issue. Play at the table was so fast that we had to reduce the rake from 10% to 5% and introduce a no flop no drop element. I mention this to point out how significant the rake online is without our notice. Hands per hour go from average 30 per hour at a dealer table to 75 hands per hour in automated play. The compensating factor is the dealer tip. That is a bug with me. Some dealers are outright miserable while others are patronizingly polite. I resent the peer pressure to tip in some cases.

ReefAquarium

compuease;222307 wroteI certainly don't claim the rake is irrelevant.. However it is irrelevant to how I play a hand once I'm in it.

For me the rake is a huge factor in how I play.

For instance If you're at Senca 1/2NL,

If you bet $10 preflop, and get one caller,

The rake is $3+1(jackpot)+$1 (tip)

That mean's you're betting $10 to win $5-8 (depending on the blinds).

Very few hands are profitable if the rake takes up to 50% of your profit.

1/2NL regulars pay about $30,000 a year in rake.

ReefAquarium

screenman;222355 wroteThat is a bug with me. Some dealers are outright miserable while others are patronizingly polite. I resent the peer pressure to tip in some cases.

If other players hint that you should tip the miserable dealers ...

Maybe we should start tipping the good dealers $2 and the bad dealers $0.

Tipping $1/pot works out to about $5000/year if you play a lot.

compuease

ReefAquarium;222376 wroteFor me the rake is a huge factor in how I play.

For instance If you're at Senca 1/2NL,

If you bet $10 preflop, and get one caller,

The rake is $3+1(jackpot)+$1 (tip)

That mean's you're betting $10 to win $5-8 (depending on the blinds).

Very few hands are profitable if the rake takes up to 50% of your profit.

1/2NL regulars pay about $30,000 a year in rake.

So given that the rake is a fixed factor, do you advocate raising more or less? I still don't understand how it factors into your betting pattern... At Seneca, once you take a flop, most of the rake is already removed so why is it a consideration in how you play the hand. To me rake is only a consideration in where I play...And only one of the considerations, table selection is 100 times more important..

trigs

this thread is in the online forum...if that makes a difference.