Why Is There More Rake Generated At 2/4nl V. 5/10nl?

[WonderfulSplash 0]

So I was using a rake calculator to get estimates of my rakeback at FT and Cake this summer playing either 2/4(6max) or 5/10. I noticed you receive more rakeback playing 2/4 than at 5/10 and was wondering what that means. Does receiving more rakeback indicate paying a significantly higher amount of rake and therefore represents a larger portion of my net winnings? Does this mean that equivalent winrates (ptbb/100) at 2/4 will always be lower than at 5/10? General discussion of the merits of multitabling 2/4 versus 5/10 for a winning player would be appreciated. Wondersplash

[bdc30 0]

Does receiving more rakeback indicate paying a significantly higher amount of rake

I would think this would be fairly evident, given that the amount of rakeback you receive is directly proportional to the amount that you contribute.

[WonderfulSplash 0]

I would think this would be fairly evident, given that the amount of rakeback you receive is directly proportional to the amount that you contribute.

Significant being the key word. I dont understand how big of a difference I'm looking at.

[TravisG 0]

Are you asking if the the same ptbb/100 at 2/4 give you less money than at 5/10? maybe i don't understand the question but that seems kinda obvious (yes).if you want to ask if you can make more money at 2/4 multitabling than at 5/10 multitabling just because of rakeback, then no (at equal win rates, but even if youre just a small winner at 5/10 you should get quite a bit more than in 2/4 unless you crush those games for some reason)

[iggymcfly 0]

Are you sure you didn't make some simple mistake like look at the rake in terms of BB/100 instead of $/100? I can't imagine that you'd actually pay more absolute rake at 2/4 in the long-term. The only other explanation I can think of is sample size problems.Playing PLO, I get raked $31.34 per 100 hands at 2/4 and $36.89 per 100 hands at 5/10.