Rake system?

I was thinking last night

If i were to run a poker game with rake
instead of raking it each hand when the game is playing i would rake it when the player cash out, so say they cash out $100 then i'll take $10 from the $100 that'll be 10%
is this fair for player? i kno the house won't be making as much compare to raking it each hand...

Comments

  • It's fair to the losers who cash out with nothing, so they pay you nothing.

    You're punishing winners by raking cash-outs only. You'd be better off raking buy-ins.
  • Both are illegal. I wouldnt post either on the forum.
  • Raking the winners only is ridiculous.
  • TNORTH wrote:
    Both are illegal. I wouldnt post either on the forum.

    What's illegal about a hypothetical question?
  • Rake at the end and the dealers won't get tipped. Unhappy dealers.

    Rake at the start and it discourages people from sitting down. Unhappy everyone.

    Rake each pot. It is not as 'noticeable' by most players since it is a small amount each time. Dealers get tipped. You make waaaaaaaaaay more money since the chips cycle through so many times in a game. Just like our economy and taxes. (There's a reason they do things the way they do you know...)

    If you feel bad, make it a small % or a small maximum per pot. Everybody happy. What's the problem?
  • Hey guys,

    I also have my thoughts on rake, but the only constraint is regulations. The above mentioned of illegal is actually true; all rake and/or session charges in Ontario are in the Gaming Act and Casinos do not have the right to change or alter rake and/or session charges as they wish. The Casino industry is highly regulated for a reason, namely to protect the integrity of the game and the Casino (along with the 10s of thousands people's jobs). The intent of the Regulators is to provide a level of consistency in the Casinos and force competition based on good service rather than sales and discounts. Absolutely every venue in North America that has legalised gaming also has a strong set of regulations that cover the revenue side of the business that includes: rake, session charges, house edge on games, house hold on slot machines and so on. Looking at the alternatives, I would hope most folks would prefer a regulated system.

    Cheers,

    Lee
  • Lee, while it's a highly regulated industry discussion on changes that would be beneficial to the game are always good. Trying to avoid re deals on mis deals, rake/session fee structures, dealers interaction with players etc should always be looked at and if improvements can happen then certainly it can eventually happen.

    I'm all in favour of letting the casinos charge whatever session fee/rake they want along with tourney fees as long as you get a clear idea of where the money goes. I know right now there is a limit to the buy in of any tourney in Ontario. Let us always work to improve the game we love.
  • Casinos and force competition based on good service rather than sales and discounts

    <chuckle> If that was true then they wouldnt be so stingy about handing out new licenses.
  • Hey Joe,

    No question that discussion is good and often results in beneficial changes. Somehow the regulators have to be brought into the discussion if true constructive change is to happen. Regardless of the jurisdiction, the regulators have the final say, in many cases the only say. There is a cap on Tournament entry fees in the Charity Casinos, we for instance are limited to $200 entry ... however I will be holding a $500 entry event and a $1000 entry event later on this year, it took us 5 years to get there but it happened (as a promotion). The commercial casinos (2 Niagaras, Windsor and Rama) do not have the same restraints. They have chosen not to hold high buy-in Tournaments for their own reasons that I am not privy to. All of the Poker Rooms in the Province are doing all they can to improve the game, but keep a very important point in mind, we are independent as is Rama, but all of the other facilities are wholly owned by the government (both Rama and GBH are 1st. Nation Casinos) and that's why they are so stingy with licenses bbc...if you held a virtual monopoly would you be generous and allow competition. This is not an anomaly in Ontario but is the same right across Canada and the U.S.

    Cheers,

    Lee
Sign In or Register to comment.