At the risk of incurring the unholy wrath of whatodds, I think I can answer this one.
I think the argument when it comes to tournaments is that an online poker room would benefit from the action-inducing hands by encouraging players to risk their stacks against one another to speed things along. The sooner that individuals are eliminated from one tournament, the sooner they would register for another. The sooner one tournament is over, the sooner another could fill up and get underway.
If a tight player is in a tournament for three hours, there would only be one buy-in. If the same player is eliminated in the first fifteen minutes when he is dealt KK only to lose to someone else dealt AA (or someone getting the perfect cards on the board), he could pay twleve buy-ins in the same three hours.
So, theoretically, even though the poker room wouldn't be increasing their rake on individual hands by creating huge showdowns, they could (again, theoretically) increase their income from the buy-ins by keeping the tournaments shorter and having more of them running in the same amount of time.
Theoretically...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by VA Poker
You just claimed the hands were pre programmed to create more rake. You were playing in a one dollar tournament that might not even have a rake (I know some of those big micro tourneys dont have rakes sometimes). So either they got 10 cents from every player or nothing from every player. Either way, if you could please please explain to me how you losing that hand creates more rake for the site. You don't need to call me names or anything just please explain to me why you losing that hand made FTP any more rake? Or if any of the other people who swear its rigged know the answer, feel free to enlighten me.
|