burntherake
burntherake
Joined: Mar 25, 2012
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 12
March 25th, 2012 at 1:44:16 PM permalink
Quote: Pokeraddict

First, the OP is spam. I hate to enter into dialogue with a spammer, but this idea is so bad that it is absurd. If the HIGHEST burn card is a 2,4,6,8 then there is no rake. Think about this, for a player to get rake free hands, the highest card must be a middle card out of three cards. It doubles if any of the highest burn is an odd card, including an ace. This is 5-4 in favor of double rake, even before you consider that every odd card is higher than its counterpart even card, and there is an extra card with a four trumps. At first glance, it would appear that if the high card is not a ten value card, 2/3 of the time a player is going to pay double rake.

If any player at the table decided that they would take this option, others at the table will just ridicule them. This would also slow the game down, which would slow down the overall rake taken from the table if few take your double rake options. The sharks do not want the fish money going down the drain. I also see legal issues here that I don't think the spammer, er, I mean the inventor of this game does not get. The max rake in cash games is set by law in most jurisdictions. I would think that this rake format would have trouble getting approval where the law specifically sets a max rake.



Max. rake in most jurisdictions is law, because the casino has submitted such amount in their internals. I know of Florida, Arizona and Washington that the operator must submit their amounts wanted. There is no max rake set into the gaming laws.

And on average, with one burn card double the rake will be 1:2.6 not 2:3.

And as far as spam I didn't believe this violated the policy, as I am not selling you guys anything.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 190
  • Posts: 10517
March 25th, 2012 at 2:00:32 PM permalink
Quote: burntherake

And as far as spam I didn't believe this violated the policy, as I am not selling you guys anything.

It had all the indicators of spam.

You're a brand new member and provided no information about the topic you're asking about, except for the web address.

I too thought it might be spam, but decided to look at it before labeling it.

For the record, I would hope that this thread does not get purged for being labeled as spam or whatever.

The idea and question are interesting and intriguing.

And, frankly, I personally think Burn The Rake is such a terrible idea, that I hope as many people as possible see this thread.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ 覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧 Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
bigfoot66
bigfoot66
Joined: Feb 5, 2010
  • Threads: 54
  • Posts: 1582
March 25th, 2012 at 2:05:44 PM permalink
I think there is more potential here than most posters are seeing. I think the idea needs something extra to make players go for it: A Jackpot. Not sure exactly how to implement it. Maybe if the two burn cards are a royal match (KQ) in spades then the player wins an extra $1000. Obviously I have put very little thought into the specifics here but most side bets need a big prize at the top to be attractive.
Vote for Nobody 2020!
Tiltpoul
Tiltpoul
Joined: May 5, 2010
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 1573
March 25th, 2012 at 2:06:53 PM permalink
Not that it matters, but what does the casino do if there is an exposed burn card, either by dealer error, or a boxed card becoming the first burn card. Does that nullify the burn the rake promotion? If that's the case, players will FUME if the boxed card is a 2,4,6,8.

Obviously, you are sold on this idea. You've knocked down most concerns that POKER PLAYERS have brought up. So good luck with your idea. I'm sure it will be a success. I'm sure the side games at the WSOP will be clamoring to take on this endeavor.
"One out of every four people are [morons]"- Kyle, South Park
bigfoot66
bigfoot66
Joined: Feb 5, 2010
  • Threads: 54
  • Posts: 1582
March 25th, 2012 at 2:06:58 PM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

And, frankly, I personally think Burn The Rake is such a terrible idea, that I hope as many people as possible see this thread.



Really? We can't be more polite to a new member than this?
Vote for Nobody 2020!
whatme
whatme
Joined: Apr 28, 2011
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 192
March 25th, 2012 at 2:16:53 PM permalink
Burntherake I think you should answer one question on your site that I didn't see.

How many hands per hr should a poker table have with this system?

On the side of the casino they care about this as it tells them how much $ they should make an hr. While players who take poker seriously will not like the unknown people who are gamblers and not poker players may try their luck. For the record the argument on whether poker is luck or skill is up for debate I find gamblers and those against it say its luck, Those who take poker seriously and understand math and brain games will tell you its skill. For the casino it's just $.

While I would not take the chance b/c for me I make my $ on $20-50 pots the rake would just destroy me (bankroll), as well the slower pace of your system would mean I would need to play many more hrs. Others have pointed out casinos won't pay when they can simply do something for free (just raise the rake or use time).

However if you can prove and the casinos believe that they can make significantly more money with your system they may try it.

I will take this time to point out automated table. They were able to prove with a lower rake no dealer and more hands/hr the casino would easily pay for the table and have more in their pockets. How has that turned out?
burntherake
burntherake
Joined: Mar 25, 2012
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 12
March 25th, 2012 at 2:20:09 PM permalink
Quote: bigfoot66

I think there is more potential here than most posters are seeing. I think the idea needs something extra to make players go for it: A Jackpot. Not sure exactly how to implement it. Maybe if the two burn cards are a royal match (KQ) in spades then the player wins an extra $1000. Obviously I have put very little thought into the specifics here but most side bets need a big prize at the top to be attractive.



Bigfoot 66

There is a bonus when there are three are more burn cards used. Due to on-going proprietary action this will be resolved as an added element. Thanks
burntherake
burntherake
Joined: Mar 25, 2012
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 12
March 25th, 2012 at 2:22:25 PM permalink
Quote: Tiltpoul

Not that it matters, but what does the casino do if there is an exposed burn card, either by dealer error, or a boxed card becoming the first burn card. Does that nullify the burn the rake promotion? If that's the case, players will FUME if the boxed card is a 2,4,6,8.

Obviously, you are sold on this idea. You've knocked down most concerns that POKER PLAYERS have brought up. So good luck with your idea. I'm sure it will be a success. I'm sure the side games at the WSOP will be clamoring to take on this endeavor.



Unfortunately for game security as other games, the regular rake will be taken only and if there is a bonus it too will be null. Such as in a shuffler error in table games.
WongBo
WongBo
Joined: Feb 3, 2012
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 2126
March 25th, 2012 at 2:23:52 PM permalink
im getting so tired of self-styled game inventors with their half baked ideas for side action on every game.
In a bet, there is a fool and a thief. - Proverb.
burntherake
burntherake
Joined: Mar 25, 2012
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 12
March 25th, 2012 at 2:29:28 PM permalink
Quote: whatme

Burntherake I think you should answer one question on your site that I didn't see.

How many hands per hr should a poker table have with this system?

On the side of the casino they care about this as it tells them how much $ they should make an hr. While players who take poker seriously will not like the unknown people who are gamblers and not poker players may try their luck. For the record the argument on whether poker is luck or skill is up for debate I find gamblers and those against it say its luck, Those who take poker seriously and understand math and brain games will tell you its skill. For the casino it's just $.

While I would not take the chance b/c for me I make my $ on $20-50 pots the rake would just destroy me (bankroll), as well the slower pace of your system would mean I would need to play many more hrs. Others have pointed out casinos won't pay when they can simply do something for free (just raise the rake or use time).

However if you can prove and the casinos believe that they can make significantly more money with your system they may try it.

I will take this time to point out automated table. They were able to prove with a lower rake no dealer and more hands/hr the casino would easily pay for the table and have more in their pockets. How has that turned out?



The regular rake is taking out as done with the house's pot-raked methods and amounts throughout the hand as normal. At the showdown or when there is only one player left the dealer turns up all burn cards (1, 2, 3 or (4 burn cards for 7-card stud)). They will either put the amount collected back into the pot and push 100% of the pot, drop what was already collected or take the additional amount equal to what is already collected. This has very minimal impact on speed of game and should lose one hand a hour tops.

True a casino can just raise their rake amount like some in Illinois have gone to $7 max rake while others in area are $5 and 6 max.. But why make every hand be affected by such a rake increase and make all players pay for it, when you can make the players that take the chance to keep the rake pay for extra amount wanted by casinos.

  • Jump to: