- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Its bad . I sent them an email asking if they can keep me on the old rake terms
Unless you have very loose players you will notice a sharp decline in earnings .
New calculation example:
If a player contributes $2 to a $10 pot, and AP collects $0.50 as rake from that pot, then t_rake = ($0.50 x $2) / $10 = $0.10
Can someone some provide CURRENT formula of example above ?
it basically means if you have good players you should see a drop in earnings as good players dont limp-in alots of the time (just call the min to see the flop – which most new players do) – so the less pots they play means lower earnings.
but if you have crap players, you should earn more.
over all i dont think it will make any difference for most affiliates
the only thing i can see that bad is now we will earn slightly less when our players are on the same table as prop players
Absolute has been using the contributed method for almost a year. These terms have been in their T&C’s for even longer. Maybe they intend to start enforcing some of them? They have always said they did but they never have. I’m not sure what they mean by deducting prop pay. I guess if your player plays at a 6 max table with 5 props then there is a 500% rakeback deduction? I don’t understand that term.
Expect bonuses to be deducted but that does not matter because most high volume players already bailed on Absolute when they went rogue retroactively changing bonus terms. Now they are changing terms on affiliates too. Nobody here really seemed to care when players got screwed. Now it’s time for affiliates to get a taste of what AP is about now.
Heres my prediction – everyone will see a 50% reduction in eanings at the end of february
i think that the reason absolute poker changed their rake terms is due to the fact that there are now more poker rooms(skins) sharing the network with AP. as such, in order to calculate how much rake is contributed by every player based on the poker room he is playing in, they’ve changed the terms…
meaning that the player’s contribution to the rake is proportional to his contribution to the pot at any given game. this way all poker rooms/affiliates are paid according to how their players play and how much they chip in for any given pot.
splinterfree wrote:i think that the reason absolute poker changed their rake terms is due to the fact that there are now more poker rooms(skins) sharing the network with AP. as such, in order to calculate how much rake is contributed by every player based on the poker room he is playing in, they’ve changed the terms…meaning that the player’s contribution to the rake is proportional to his contribution to the pot at any given game. this way all poker rooms/affiliates are paid according to how their players play and how much they chip in for any given pot.
Exactly my thoughts. Absolute and UB are “supposed” to merge. It’s not exactly easy if Ultimate Bet is using a different rake calculation, different bonus terms and different rakeback max. For those of you keeping up, rakeback max is now equal across the two platforms, both bonuses are moderately difficult to clear and now both use contributed rakeback minus bonuses. (This will at least keep players from switching from one room to the other based on bonus, rakeback, etc. see:Party/Empire)
I’m not a fan of the change. My site teaches players to play tight, and this will definitely dent my numbers.
I wish they could grandfather in affiliates, but to be honest, don’t really see how this is possible if they plan to merge with UB. Either AP or UB’s system has to be overhauled, and UB’s is much more profitable for the poker room (from my POV)… kind of a no brainer choice I suppose.
BTW, John, you’d noted that AP’s been using contributed for over a year? I remember when they updated their terms, but was of the understanding that nothing changed except the T&C’s. I definitely didn’t see a drop in earnings that would be expected in a transition from “dealt” to “contributed” rake.
If they’ve already been using contributed and this change just means MGR minus bonuses, I don’t expect I’d see a huge drop off. The new bonus is 3x as hard to clear.
Props went from a set per hand to contributed rakeback about a year ago. This was roughly the time that AP went from paying affiliates their share of 9 cents a hand to MGR. Before that point their software was unable to compute true MGR. Props were told when they went to % of rake it was dealt. Props proved this to not be true though and after discussing it with management at the time it was decided the software could not compute dealt rakeback and it was in fact contributed and it went for affiliates and props. It’s not Prima contributed, it is typical contributed. My Poker Tracker stats have shown this was in fact contributed as well. Some have argued about it in the forums. I’m just saying what I have discovered.
Pokeraddict wrote:Props went from a set per hand to contributed rakeback about a year ago. This was roughly the time that AP went from paying affiliates their share of 9 cents a hand to MGR. Before that point their software was unable to compute true MGR. Props were told when they went to % of rake it was dealt. Props proved this to not be true though and after discussing it with management at the time it was decided the software could not compute dealt rakeback and it was in fact contributed and it went for affiliates and props. It’s not Prima contributed, it is typical contributed. My Poker Tracker stats have shown this was in fact contributed as well. Some have argued about it in the forums. I’m just saying what I have discovered.I believe you. Thanks for the info….
:hattip:
