Pokerstars v Full Tilt

[Limey777]

I noticed that recently there has been a change in the rake system on the micro tables at Pokerstars. It seems to have inspired some heated discussions on the matter, the micro grinders are freaking out. There's alot of talk of grinders quitting and moving to Full Tilt.

The problem seems to be on the $10 and less buy in tables(.05/.10).
It seems that Pokerstars has increased the rake for these low limit cash tables and are now raking pennies.
I am reading that Full Tilt has always had a higher rake than Pokerstars (this is a fact that I was not aware of) and even with rakeback 0.05/.10 players got a better deal on Pokerstars. The common opinion appeared to be that Pokerstars was the better deal until you started playing .10/.25.
Now the common opinion appears to be that Full Tilt + rakeback is the better deal at all levels of cash games.

But how true is that statement?

Pokerstars has the stellar rewards system, I would say that it is a fair statement that 5000 VPP’s is attainable for a 0.05/0.10 player, and that’s an extra $100, plus with a higher rake the VPP’s should be coming in a bit faster (fractionally faster anyway). My opinion is Pokerstars just made it fractionally slower to build a bankroll, which means grinders will be slower moving up in level, which I would assume long term actually means less rake for Pokerstars in the long run.

If I were to ask the question why do I play poker? I’d have to say for fun, to pass the time, to get a little extra cash and to buy goofy merchandise from the FPP store.

It was brought to my attention that rakeback providers deduct money from rakeback for spending FPP’s. I guess this means you pay for the merchandise and FT deduct the FPP’s. Now I ‘m starting to see why this whole deal with rakeback is so damn confusing. Plus awards/bonuses are deducted too?
Well, I can understand the concept of rakeback if your playing decent limits but for me, with the merchandise I’ve bought and the bonuses I’ve received at Pokerstars, it would be fair to say that if I had a rakeback deal for Pokerstars (yes, I’m aware it doesn’t exist, hypothetically speaking) then I would of received next to sod all in rakeback.
It’s a nightmare trying to figure out who/what’s the better deal.

Let me ask these questions to the Full Tilt players with rakeback. Do you ever spend your FPP’s on the site? and what about the bonuses? I’m assuming these are deposit bonuses. Can you give me a rough idea based on the stakes you play, how much rakeback you acquire over say a 3 month period?

My understanding was that FPP’s on Full tilt were acquired at a rate similar to Silverstar status on Pokerstars but the merchandise is more expensive, I’d be seeking enlightenment/confirmation on that statement too if anybody has actually managed to read this far down.

I’ll leave it at that for now and I’m looking forward to getting a decent discussion going on this subject.

[illphillllllll]

i play ring on full tilt but do not get rakeback. to answer 1 of your questions ( Can you give me a rough idea based on the stakes you play, how much rakeback you acquire over say a 3 month period?) you can probably go to pokertableratings and get an idea of how much rakeback someone gets. i know they list how much rake and rakeback you have earned while playing. this can probably give you some insight to your question. for example.


5,443 hands played

$86 rake paid

$28 rakeback

[Limey777]

Hi illphillllllll
I could be wrong but I thought Full Tilt rakeback was 27%. PTR shows 33%
I can’t find a calculator so I got to this the old fashioned way (pen and paper) please excuse any mistakes.
If I use my stats for this year I can make a rough guestimate that by the time I hit my $100 bonus my rake paid will be approximately $600.
Based on 27% my rakeback would be appoximately $162.
So I would deduct the $100 for the bonus from my rakeback. Now my rakeback percentage is less than 10%.

I will have attained 6000FPP’s (close enough). The value of these FPP’s is set at 1.5cents so 6000points = $90.
If I spend my FPP’s then from what I am led to believe this value will be deducted from my rakeback, leaving my rakeback at -$28 (does that mean I owe the affiliate $28?).

So my contention would be that (leaving personal preferences aside) Pokerstars effective rakeback is still a better deal than Full Tilt’s system based on you spending the FPP’s.
Pokerstars still has a lower rake than Full Tilt so it would be faster to build a bankroll on Pokerstars.

The common opinion appeared to be that Pokerstars was the better deal until you started playing .10/.25.
Now the common opinion appears to be that Full Tilt + rakeback is the better deal at all levels of cash games.

Now here’s where I don’t understand and having absolutely no knowledge of Full Tilt I’m asking why Full Tilt + rakeback is the better deal. If bonuses are deducted and points are deducted (if you spend them) what would the real percentage of rakeback be on Full Tilt?

[scrawnybob]

hi all

ok this isnt a massive or long answer but as I understand it even after the recent changes to some of the calculations of VIP program on Pokerstars ...

PokerStars VIP program is still I think more valuable than Fulltilt 27% rakeback

as Ive said before the way some sites are running affiliate led rakeback system / rules etc etc is crazy and bad long term ... but there we are - that is a whole different can of worms that Im not going to get into - because its all to easy for players to thing they know what they're talking about (due to over simplification) when they dont (due to not being at the business end)

anyway as I understand it pokerstars vip program has a higher effective rate of rakeback then the fulltilt max allowed of 27% via rakeback affiliate signup only

also where I think players might be getting less points (therefore less VIP points) this is because they're actually paying less rake ... so that lower rake is like rakeback in effect

on fulltilt rakeback and their points - fulltilt sets the rules on that and they do deduct the rakeback off points ... in effect you get rakeback but pay full price for stuff in the shop ...

that has nothing to do with the affiliate deciding this - again trust me affiliates at the moment are getting a raw deal all round from certain sites ... where your damned if you do and damned if you dont - affiliates generally are getting dropped with more and more costs and chargebacks from the rooms that you would imagine - so looking at simple %'s gives a totaly false impression.

Again this is why I personally think the sooner sites take rakeback totally internal and tiered (like a VIP program) the better - at the moment there are far too many hoops players and sites have to jump through to try and do the best thing - with no flexibility

sites are fighting amongst themselves for signups, bending the rules and where the old status quo worked the recent no rules and inconsistent system setup is just a mess

all the delete cookie instructions, requirements to deposit min $10 within 60 days or never get rakeback etc etc - its complicated and most if not all new players are overwelmed with all these instructions, but will maybe find they want it at a later date but cant change or signups who are tracked to somewhere else but dont realise ... its a total mess ...

added to the fact that done the way it is at the moment rakeback wrongly creates animosity towards the wrong affiliates + most players would actually be making more and better off playing at smaller sites with much softer games rather than chasing rakeback deals at sites that have tougher games

anyway in short everyone automatically get the pokerstars VIP program signing up ANYWHERE - this is how it should be

other sites are a totally different and players need to be prepared to read instructions and follow them properly

cheers scrawnybob

[kingmotan]

Limey, if you're not playing volume and not living out of poker you should play on whichever site you like better (hint PS). You shouldn't move from a site to another just because they give 3% more in rakeback. The difference may come down to a few cents or maybe 1-2$ at the end of the month, so it's not worth it.
What I would do is open both tilt and stars and play the best tables on both sites instead of being committed just to one of them.
Also, if you want to play on tilt, don't use ur ftps. Leave them for until you want to take a break or quit for awhile and use them then, so you don't lose rakeback.

[scrawnybob]

hi

yep good advice from motan on saving your points and not using them

also agree site choice shouldnt be swayed on rakeback - its not half as valuable as just being able to find and beat soft games

play where you are comfortable - unless your the sort of player who is multitabling 6 tables etc etc and a nitty cash game grinder - chasing rakeback isnt the b all and end all of playing poker online

my personal prediction is that it will disapear over the next couple of years - sites will just absorb it into their VIP rewards or similar ... and maybe standardise rates etc to sites getting them a mix of signups.

then sites / forums like ours can get back to concentrating on providing useful info and we can stop having to keep looking over our shoulder, fighting against lazy greedy affiliates who want to cherry pick the most valuable players without putting anything into the industry by cheating and bending the rules etc

cheers scrawnybob

[BLINKY CHRIS]

I would like to play on full tilt but am stuck on poker stars as my one chanceto put money on a site so i picked pokerstars not lnowing there is other pokersites if your on full tilt and you are a generous person lol Send blinky Chris anything just to get me started on it thanks bye bye

[ospokerz]

From what I've always understood from the comparison of the rewards programs that Pokerstars is better for people that play 1/2 or higher and if you play lower rakeback+points/medal system on FTP is better.