Forums

Re: The Reason I Don't Play Ready-Go's

• imperialrock 217 Posts

  Mon, Jan 2 2012 12:47 PM

  NOTE: For some players, a lot of this will be pretty obvious stuff.  I just wanted to give some people an idea of whether they should be dipping their toes in the money-play pool or not.

  The simple reason that I choose not to play RGs at this point is the Rake.  For those of you new to the site or those unfamiliar with the basics of wagering, the Rake is simply the fee that a game provider charges to the players for hosting the game.  In casinos, the house edge in a table game or a slot machine provides a rake (hosting fee) that ensures profitability for the house over time.  In WGT RGs, it works the exact same way - your 100 Credit entry fee is matched by 49 other players, you play the round, and 4000 of the original 5000 credits are distributed among the Top 30 finishers.  Some of them, incidentally, will receive less than their 100cr initial investment, but the winner gets 600 if I'm remembering correctly.  So in essence, the winner of the event gets $6, and WGT gets $10 for hosting.  WGT wins every RG that it hosts by collecting a 20% fee from the players as a group.

  I'm not at all against WGT collecting a 20% fee - - but I don't contribute to the pool b/c I don't think that at this point, my game is good enough to overcome the 20% over time.  20% is comparable to the fee taken out of most horse racing pools - depending on the state you're wagering in, or the bet you're making, it might be a little more or less, but 20% is about the average Rake on a $2 horse bet.  But much like horse racing, very few WGT players will beat the 20% takeout over time, so you need to be sure that you can before you get too involved.

  THERE ARE SOME PLAYERS WHO ARE GOOD ENOUGH TO BEAT THE 20%.  If I were them, I'd play RGs like crazy, and several of them do.  My basic thought, though, is that I'm not skilled enough to take a MAX 5-1 return on a wager that also has a 20% takeout.  If you're not, either, then you probably don't want to play.

  Incidentally, the players who probably shouldn't take on the RGs also probably won't read this, so its probably more theoretical than anything.  Happy hitting!!

  - Rock

• bazkitcase5 86 Posts

  Mon, Jan 9 2012 12:35 AM

  pretty sound logic

  I'm still pretty new here and learning the ropes, but for me personally, I don't like the fact that WGT takes a rake when the payout is credits which can ONLY be used here at WGT

  casinos and online poker sites take rakes, but the money you make is yours and can be withdrawn and spent elsewhere

  by taking a rake, WGT is basically double tapping its members for credits

  I'm all for them making money, as it keeps the game free for the players - its their business and they can do what they need to do to make money, but I don't see why they feel the need to double tap their members for credits that can only be spent here in the first place

  at times, I bet it is costing them the chance to make more money - for one, I think they would actually make more money if they lowered the rake, because more players would then play their tournaments - same goes for any kind of skins or match play challenges

• cycle1979 1,555 Posts

  Mon, Jan 9 2012 12:23 PM

  Also factor in the balls you need to buy to compete... VERY tough to break even let alone earn credits.  Fun to try though!! :-)

• LeonDelBosque 1,551 Posts

  Tue, Jan 10 2012 7:35 PM

  imperialrock:

  Some of them, incidentally, will receive less than their 100cr initial investmen

  The only thing in your post I take issue with is the word "some." Should be "most," or "at least half" (of the top 30). The payouts change depending on scores and ties, but In almost all of them you need to be top 10 to make more than you put in (10 players, not necessarily 10th place). A couple more break even or thereabouts.