I heard P* has the best rakeback in the poker online:
I played NL5/NL2 and this is the result:
Soon I will get first rakeback from them for VPPs: 10 USD.
This is the best offer in the industry?
12,5 % ?
They have 80 USD from me and I will get 10 USD.
best efective rake in the market for sure.
this. It doesn't matter if you get 30% more rakeback if u pay twice as much rake.
Also with SNE you can get ~70-80% rakeback, so...
Originally posted by CharlesPkR
If you play NL2/5, you shouldn't care about rakeback.
i totally agree wits this, these games are easily beatable at 10-20bb/100 with some basic strategy and understanding of the game.
so it really doesnt matter at all if u get a RB of 1bb/100 or 2bb/100
u should start looking at RB at something like NL20 imo
when playing nl2-nl20 i suggest to play at site with flat rakeback, will be more proffitable.
Not paying the rake in the first place is obvs a lot better than getting a higher % of it back. 
Originally posted by mccol001
Not paying the rake in the first place is obvs a lot better than getting a higher % of it back.
not entirely true.
take enet for example. you pay very high rake but get 50% rakeback in return. if you breakeven you get alot in rakeback.
not paying high rake is only good if you're a winning player. if your slight losing / breakevenish high rakeback is goodfor your bankrolll
Originally posted by Phgrinder
Originally posted by mccol001
Not paying the rake in the first place is obvs a lot better than getting a higher % of it back.not entirely true.
take enet for example. you pay very high rake but get 50% rakeback in return. if you breakeven you get alot in rakeback.
not paying high rake is only good if you're a winning player. if your slight losing / breakevenish high rakeback is goodfor your bankrolll
But you would be a winning player on a low rake site if you are break even on a high rake site given the euqal player field.
And I don't believe that anyone prefers getting their profits in rb rather than winnings.
Originally posted by Phgrinder
Originally posted by mccol001
Not paying the rake in the first place is obvs a lot better than getting a higher % of it back.not entirely true.
take enet for example. you pay very high rake but get 50% rakeback in return. if you breakeven you get alot in rakeback.
not paying high rake is only good if you're a winning player. if your slight losing / breakevenish high rakeback is goodfor your bankrolll
nl10 on stars is 10.7bb/100 rake, with 12.5% rb the effective rake is 9.36bb/100
nl10 on microgaming is 14bb/100 rake, with 30% rb the effective rake is 9.8bb/100
And obv with stars you can move up VIP levels and get better rb....
I've no idea what enet rake is like but high rake with good rb isn't necessarily better
Originally posted by NightFrostaSS
Originally posted by Phgrinder
Originally posted by mccol001
Not paying the rake in the first place is obvs a lot better than getting a higher % of it back.not entirely true.
take enet for example. you pay very high rake but get 50% rakeback in return. if you breakeven you get alot in rakeback.
not paying high rake is only good if you're a winning player. if your slight losing / breakevenish high rakeback is goodfor your bankrolll
But you would be a winning player on a low rake site if you are break even on a high rake site given the euqal player field.
And I don't believe that anyone prefers getting their profits in rb rather than winnings.
imo in doesnt' matter if your winning pre rakeback or post / what matters is the balance in your account is increasing.
and it will never be an equal playing field because high rake sites will always be fishier because less grinders play there coz of rake.
case in point 888 / microgaming / euro sites vs stars
Fun Police is here
Just a reminder that we ask you not to talk about sites that we do not have an affiliation with.
• Our Poker Rooms
Regards,
Kyle.
