Let's talk about rake, late 2025 edition.

Last week I did a single one off rake tracking project, just for 1 hour at my 1/3 NL table. Not sure I have the energy to do a full project (like 10 samples) to get a better idea, but here are the results for just 1 hour at one particular 1/3 NL table:

35 hands with $185 in rake taken off (my table rakes 10% up to 9 dollars).

Now I'll admit, my guess was that overall this was a very good table. It remained a full 9 handed the whole time (i.e. not breaking down to 6 handed where the pots become smaller). It had a couple of guys who liked building pots preflop and a lot of loose players who liked seeing flops, so very multiway raised pots were the norm. So probably a ~much better than average table in terms of pots sizes (although if I'm table selecting correctly this is the type of table I should hopefully find myself on a lot). To be honest, I would have guesstimated the rake going north of $200 on a table like this, so I was actually semi-surprised that it didn't.

I was a little surprised by the number of hands, as this is slightly higher than usual (at least according to hand tracking projects I've done before) and I would have thought the multiwayness of the hands would have slowed things down.

One super interesting thing is that 14 hands reached maximum rake of $9, therefore 40% of the pots reached 30bb (as I say, probably an above average table). Which means that when we move to $10 maximum rake (my guess is that will happen some time next year), that means another $14 would have come off the table (i.e. 0.5bb per player on average, at least at this type of table). So these increases in rake size at these single digit / entering double digit points have a devastating affect (unlike, say, increasing the maximum rake from $100 to $101, which would have ~no affect whatsoever as there are ~no pots at that threshold).

Just one sample at an above average table, but still. There's a shitload of money coming off your typical LLSNL table and each $1 increase can have a devastating affect on your bottom line. My glory years in terms of winrate was back in 2012/2013, and I'll never ship results like that again. With my results drastically declining over the years, my original thought was that everyone simply got a lot better (if only in terms of sucking way less). But a huge part of it is simply the ~doubling of the rake; you're simply not going to beat a $5 raked game for remotely as much as a $9 raked game (and you're delusional if you think so).

GcluelessrakedenvironmentnoobG

Nice fast table. In Dallas, the time rake is $14/hr now so that probably works out to be about the same as a more average table.

I did a similar tracking project in 2023 for a 10%/$15 cap/8 handed/2-5 game on four different tables for an hour each.

Average hands per hour: 33.25
Average total rake per hour: $283.25
$15 cap met: 32%

In particular, then, I was looking at the impact of $8 compared to $12 cap, which amounted to an extra $54.50 being taken off the table on average per hour, with approximately another $35 being taken off the table with the jump in cap from $12 to $15.

I'd say that as a general guide for every $1 increase in cap somewhere between $12 and $15 extra leaves the table (in this case 2.5-3bb), although this ratio likely diminishes as the cap increases; so, for instance, with a whopping increase from a $15 to $25 cap in a 2/5 game I don't believe an extra $120-$150 would be taken off the table in rake, since there would be fewer pots in the $150-250 range than $100-150, although you don't know until you document the exact rake of EVERY pot for say an hour, over a number of different sessions, which is tedious to say the least.

I get it's a chunk of money, but if it's a business to you, well all businesses have expenses and focusing on the revenue side is IME the better place to focus. For a casino, poker is one of their lower (if not lowest) profit per square foot games. So they don't have a lot of reason to compete. I'm not aware of any casino that's ever lowered the rake.

If I were a pro, I'd focus my efforts on getting larger games going. For example, a casino near me has a $500 cap $1/$2, which is a decent game, and there are a handful of daily grinders trying to make a living. None of them has ever actively attempted to set up a big cash game. It's always us recs pushing to make the game bigger when we happen to be there. But often I'll be sitting at $1/$2 looking around the room and seeing half a dozen reggy recs and 3-4 grinders and nobody is even trying to get the $2/$5 game going, let alone the $5/$10. It seems to me that the politicking to build a healthy larger game that runs on a regular and predictable basis is probably one of the best uses of a pros time and a lot more likely to succeed than trying to convince a casino corporation to lower the rake $1.

To make it as a poker pro in 2025 with no other source of income

1)love poker and play 200+ hour months
2) specialize in PLO (the fish prefer plo, bigger pots, more action)
3) be insanely disciplined, never tilt. Study the game hard. Don’t squander winnings or have BR leaks.
4)be willing to move to new markets when they legalize and open up
5)play bigger to avoid the rake trap. And yes you should tip at least 1 dollar per hand you win

You’re welcome

No one is playing 200+ hours a month consistently

BTW, is PLO really that good of a way to make a living?

I'm not saying this is the case, but it seems entirely possible that's a game where you could sunrun your first $100k and then quit your job and run your mouth on Twitter just in time for the two year b/e stretch.

200 hours/month is only 46 hours a week. That's a lot less than I work at my day job, if you aren't willing to work 50+ hours a week, you probably shouldn't work for yourself doing anything.

Playing a fairly new room with trouble getting one game going, so no choice. I play morning/afternoon, but I don’t think it’s much better late night. You definitely have to sharpen your shorthanded play and nobody is winning enough to make a living.

I wonder about dealer error….

Just played circuit seniors (maybe shoving the flush draw was a bad idea = snap call and it was definitely a bad idea) and the small blind was $1500. I put out $2000 and would never have gotten the $500 change without speaking up and then the dealer looks pissed at me.

I’m usually in a cash game:
So, does anyone pay attention. I honestly don’t know. The dealer is slinging cards and puts some rake to the right and some to the left. Should I be watching where the rake is going? Does anyone do this? They could be taking an extra dollar a hand and I wouldn’t know, nor would most players is my guess.

I think with 1/3 you can learn to be profitable, but you would be hard pressed to make a decent living when it’s the only game in town. I think I would follow the WSOP circuit and play cash games if I was a young pro.

lmao 200 hour months

the whole forum is fan fiction

Exactly.

If you don’t have the passion and energy to play at least 200 hours a month when you’re young then keep poker as a hobby or side hustle. You probably won’t make it as a true pro.

I played 300 hours per month from 18-30 and I did it effortlessly because I loved it and didn’t want to be anywhere else. I don’t know why the younger generation is so soft and entitled. Obsessed with “studying” but not grind/volume.

Poker isn't like a normal job, reading emails or whatever ... there's basically no downtime and your mental state will directly affect how much you are getting paid. Going to the bathroom, eating, or even just taking a 10m walk don't require you to lose money at most jobs.

Also even at 1-2 it's not a job where you can work whenever you want for the same hourly, 9pm-3am on a Fri/Sat are pretty much always going to "pay" better than 11am-5pm on a Mon/Tues. Post pandemic nowhere near me is open 24 hours anymore, so that also limits your monthly hours.

I have spoken a bit to one guy who won the "most hours played in a month" challenge at MGM springfield two years running (I think they've stopped doing it now). He did around 250-300 hours each time IIRC, got there at open every day he played and his life was scheduled around getting from/to the casino and the most basic human needs (like showering and food).

Worth mentioning that while he obviously liked poker a lot, both times he seemed miserable and said 150-200 hours was a lot more doable. Also after the month was over he took a couple of weeks off from playing, both times.

That's 46 hours a week of PLAYING. That's not the same as 46 hours of work.

I'm way ahead of you, pal!

I mean, I do completely agree with you that our first world asses act entitled to playing a card game for a living while being a B student who took no math courses past their freshman year of college and studying an hour a week. That's why the quality of play in a certain country is basically inversely correlated with their GDP.

That being said, I think this is much more a point about actually studying and not just doing all grind and volume. I mean, if you wanna be at the casino 10 hours a day playing 1/3NL because you can't so much as beat 25z and the juicy 2/5NL games that you're an actual $30/hr+ winner in doesn't spread more than a couple days a week, then be my guest. Spending actual time on your game so you can beat most games spread most anywhere at just about anytime for actually large margins post rake isn't an objectively inferior life choice and certainly isn't "lazy."

All that being said, playing poker is supposed to be fun. Working as hard at poker as a finance guy in a big 5 firm just to make $68k a year with no healthcare, 401k or long-term job prospects is just straight up a bad life decision. I'm glad you see work itself as virtuous because that's the only virtue in that lifestyle.

I only get paid for the product of my labor and my job is extremely intense, that's why I play poker to unwind.

I agree it's a lot. I wouldn't want to play poker 8-10 hours/day 5-6 days a week, but I chose not to become a poker pro because I like poker, I don't love it enough to commit that much time. You have to love poker that much to be a pro. If you don't, then find whatever it is that you don't mind spending 10-12 hours a day doing on a regular basis because that's how much time it takes anyone to be truly great at anything. That's life.

There are plenty of places that have games going nearly 24/7. If you don't live in a good place to be a poker pro, and you want to be a poker pro, move. It seems to me that it's a profession that benefits from being transitory so you aren't playing the same people every day. And yeah, the politics of getting into (or creating) a good game is definitely part of the job. There are parts of my job I despise too - including the politics part, but again that's life.

If you're going to run a business, you have to do a ton of things that aren't fun. And if you're turning poker into a business, it will consume all of your time, all of your energy and it's going to be work. If you aren't willing to breathe, eat and sleep poker, then maybe it isn't the profession for you.

I can't imagine working only 200/hours a month. My business would die. If that's the lifestyle you want, work for someone else. Nobody who runs their own business is ever truly taking a day off and they are frequently working 70+ hour weeks and when they aren't actively working they are thinking about work.

It isn't for everyone.

Quantity doesn't necessarily equal success - I work for myself and realistically probably work 15 hours a week of focused computer work, and maybe another 5-10 hours of taking a phone call/email here or there. I think the 40+ hour work week has been drilled into our heads so much that we think this is the way of succeeding and generally it isn't. Smart work > hard work everytime.

I should disclaim in case it wasn’t obvious to all the hustle and grinders out there that the person I was referencing absolutely has burnout issues lol

hey, it me 😃

Additional important caveat that just because you love it as a rec doesn’t mean you’ll love it 5 months into being a pro (much less 40 years lmao)

its just such absurd larp its difficult to take it seriously

Because intelligence makes more money than low level grinding - would you rather play a 1/3 game making 20/hr or a 5/10 game making 80/hr? When I was younger I use to think hard work would win and it does to some extent but you can only get so far with it. Smart work > hard work otherwise construction workers and other tough jobs would all be multi billionaires.

Anyone who is the best at what they do is "working" a lot more and doing it willingly because it's what they love to do. If you're just looking for enough money to maintain a lifestyle, poker is probably one of the harder options to do that. You can go learn any of a dozen trades and work whatever works week is necessary to make whatever amount of money you want.

If you want to be competitive in any game at a pro level it's going to take an enormous time commitment. Poker is perhaps unique because you are often competing against amateurs who put in zero time. If you want to be a pro golfer you need to swing at thousands of golf balls every damn day, if you want to be a professional chess player you're going to have to study chess as hard or harder then every other pro. Because you're going to be competing against people who will be putting in the effort.

I don't think expecting to put 60 to 70 hours a week into anything that you're going to consider a profession is unreasonable. And if you don't love what you're doing enough to put in that kind of time, then why are you doing it? I could be a billionaire and I would still do what I do. And I think if you don't have that same kind of passion for poker, there are a heck of a lot easier ways to make money just to pay the bills.

I probably give too much benefit of the doubt because, on an individual level, people are super unlikely to be pathological liars.

But if you create a public forum with an incentive structure where whoever makes the most plausible claim at having made 7 figures playing poker gets rewarded with a small amount of attention, then the 10 people with the most acute case of BPD will probably find their way here eventually.

is unfortunately the issue with pseudonymous environments. people can just say stuff

the thing is successful people super unlikely to spend time on this forum (with a few obvious exceptions) at this point

If you truly enjoy that many hours you're a God amongst men - there's limited time in this world. When you're young it's all about you but as you get older and have kids there's more important things to spend time on. To each their own - my only point was you don't need to work 50+ hours a week to be successful at something, depending how you define success.

He's talking about me, guys, I just know it.