All Categories› Poker Chat

You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Rake why??

kidwiz10kidwiz10 Member Posts: 569
edited October 2012 in Poker Chat

Was just thinking about this...

eg On a NL50 table it all goes in pre we both have AK so split pot yea?

The rake is 65p!

Yea might not sound much but when playing more than 1 table for hours on end that soon adds up.

Why do we get charged rake for split pots? if anything it should be money back eg not be in the loss for it.

Not a rant was just curious to why this is

· Share on Twitter

Comments

  • Lambert180Lambert180 Member Posts: 12,197
    edited October 2012
    Because you're paying for the priveledge of using the site's software. The only time you don't pay rake is if the pot is ended before you see a flop (which is why you don't get C4P for these hands).

    With 2 all-ins, you see the full hand to showdown so you pay rake. When you play cash you have to beat your opponents and the rake.
    · Share on Twitter
  • percival09percival09 Member Posts: 3,804
    edited October 2012
    so youre saying you should only pay rake if somebody wins a hand outright? 
    · Share on Twitter
  • Padzz77Padzz77 Member Posts: 143
    edited October 2012
    In Response to Rake why??:
    Was just thinking about this... eg On a NL50 table it all goes in pre we both have AK so split pot yea? The rake is 65p! Yea might not sound much but when playing more than 1 table for hours on end that soon adds up. Why do we get charged rake for split pots? if anything it should be money back eg not be in the loss for it. Not a rant was just curious to why this is
    Posted by kidwiz10

    I hate this too.  I aint saying its unfair or a rip off or anything like that.  BUT would be a nice (and cheap) advertising gimic for Sky to say that it will ensure that, in split pots, no "winning" player ends up losing cash due to rake.

    ie it would not have to be that Sky got no rake at all on the hand.  But they could agree to limit themselves to a maximum of all the dead money, and let the splitters get all of their stakes back.






    · Share on Twitter
  • FCHDFCHD Member Posts: 3,178
    edited October 2012
    I've mentioned this before. There should be no circumstance when you have a winning hand you end up losing money. It's just wrong.
    · Share on Twitter
  • robbie1992robbie1992 Member Posts: 725
    edited October 2012
    I totally agree! how can u have a hand you win (jointly) and end up losing money lol
    · Share on Twitter
  • RLT16RLT16 Member Posts: 1,433
    edited October 2012
    i disagree rake isnt applied to a persons winnings it is applied to the pot amount before anyone has won or lost anything so there really is nothing wrong.
    · Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.