Session Fees

[Whiter Sr 0]

They are looking at setting up a new card room in my hometown. It will only be used for Limit and NL Hold em cash games.Instead of having a rake they are looking at session fees. What are the norms for rakes and or session fees in your area? This would be for any stakes 1/2, 2/5, 5/10, 20/40 NL or with Limit Hold em.They are looking to charge $7 per half hour session fees in a 1/2 NL table. This to me sounds extremely high. I would like to hear your thoughts,Whiter

[elnino 0]

the 1/2 round here is 5 bucks every half hour

[Startled 0]

In 1-2, you'll get somewhere around 25-30 hands per hour dealt. If the rake averages 3-4 dollars, that's <$100/hour in rake.10 players x 14/hour = $140/hour. QED, high.

[sixhands 0]

Personally, I would refuse to play in any establishment that charges session fees.The way I see it is this ...I don't mind paying a rake if I decide to play a hand but I begrudge paying $14 if all I did was fold for an hour.I feel that session fees would force you to play hands you would not normally play.Session fees seem to favour the aggressive players that enter almost all pots.If you enter all pots and won (stay with me here!!) and the max rake was taken, that would be approximately $60 ($3 rake x 20 hands. Approx. # of hands per hour.)Session fee would be $14 for the same number of hands. The aggressive players, essentially, would be saving themselves $46I am not an overly aggressive player so I feel that this would not benefit me.In answer to your question, if it was possible to mirror the regular rake charged then that would be an acceptable session fee in my opinion.Sorry for the ramble, had an idea that kinda got lost along the way

[Whiter Sr 0]

the 1/2 round here is 5 bucks every half hour

What about for higher stakes. Does the session fee go up with the stakes. I wouldn't think it would because it costs the casino the same amount of $$ to put out a 1/2 NL game as it does a 20/40 NL game. Am I right?Whiter

[benhoug 0]

The casino by me charges $6/half hour at the $1/$2 NL table, and $7 or $8 at the $2/$5 NL table. Frankly I hate time charges vs. standard rake. I think $5/half hour may be approaching OK, but to charge $6 or $7 to fold cards for 30 mins is ridiculous to me.I put in a 4 hour session on Monday night = $48 dollars. That seems way high to me, but not much I can do about it...

[aucu 3]

A table charge is way better than a rake as long as it is not too high. At a club I used to play at it was $3 per 1/2hour, no dealer, we dealt our own cards. I would expect it to have gone up a bit.

[FourFlusher 0]

Only winners pay rake...everybody pays time charges. I think it sucks.

[aucu 3]

The big game has no rake, just a time charge.

[Sonicpb 0]

At the Commerce Casino in LA the time charge for 10/20 NL was $10 per half hour. The bigger games had to pay more time, but I think it capped out at $12 per half hour.About half the time everyone at the table payed their own time (even if you weren't at the table for the collection), and the other half the time our table would do a collection pot. The winner of the collection pot would then pay the time for all the players at the table. If you weren't dealt a hand for the collection pot you would be charged the normal time rake. For our the pot to qualify for collection it had to be over $400 (or 20x BBs).I personally like paying time with a collection pot better than any other option.

[Startled 0]

Time charges are inherently more fair. Should the winning players have to carry the cost of the cardroom? That's -ev if you're a winning player, and we all know that we're all winning players here, right? If everyone were equally "lucky" and equally skilled, it wouldn't matter in the long run, so the rake inherently disadvantages skilled or winning players over time.The real issue is that at $10-$14/hour in rake/time charges, it is pretty tough to beat the house at 1-2.

[Whiter Sr 0]

Time charges are inherently more fair. Should the winning players have to carry the cost of the cardroom? That's -ev if you're a winning player, and we all know that we're all winning players here, right? If everyone were equally "lucky" and equally skilled, it wouldn't matter in the long run, so the rake inherently disadvantages skilled or winning players over time.The real issue is that at $10-$14/hour in rake/time charges, it is pretty tough to beat the house at 1-2.

That is exactly what I was thinking.I was just thinking in terms of my 1/2 NL Cash game with friends. We would play for about 3 hours with 8 of us and have about $800 in the pot to cash out at the end of the night. Well that would mean with Sitting fees we would be paying $336 (8*3*14 = $336) out of the pot.Seems like the real winner here is the house. But I guess that's why casinos are made. To make $$ not to give it away.Whiter

[David_Nicoson 1]

Time charges are inherently more fair. Should the winning players have to carry the cost of the cardroom? That's -ev if you're a winning player, and we all know that we're all winning players here, right? If everyone were equally "lucky" and equally skilled, it wouldn't matter in the long run, so the rake inherently disadvantages skilled or winning players over time.

You're assuming that winning players tend to collect more total money in pots. A winning player is one whose total wins exceed his total losses. He may very well be pulling fewer gross dollars than a losing player.A rake encourages tight play. A time charge encourages loose play.

[akoff 0]

in AC most if not all1/2 no limit they rake2/5 and up is time 5 per 1/2 hourlimit it raked up to 10/20 then turns into timei know them as time bomb. 25 from the 1st pot over 200 and 25 from the 2nd... time paid. in the 2/5 games you always have several over 200.

[rgold79 0]

I personally like paying time with a collection pot better than any other option.

[ukwildcat09 0]

If you are winning a lot of pots, then the session fee actually helps you. People forget that. When you are losing, it's the worst system in the world. When you are winning, it's a great system. If they are raking, and you win 3 pots in hour, the rake takes $15. 1 hour in a session fee game might only cost you $10,12, 14 an hour. Think about that.

[blueodum 0]

In limit poker, losing players will win more pots in the long run, and that's because they are much more likely to chase to the river.With no limit, the more aggressive players win the most pots (some are winning players, some are not).

[fleung22 1]

They are looking at setting up a new card room in my hometown. It will only be used for Limit and NL Hold em cash games.Instead of having a rake they are looking at session fees. What are the norms for rakes and or session fees in your area? This would be for any stakes 1/2, 2/5, 5/10, 20/40 NL or with Limit Hold em.They are looking to charge $7 per half hour session fees in a 1/2 NL table. This to me sounds extremely high. I would like to hear your thoughts,Whiter

Holy crap! That IS high. I biitch about paying $5 per half hour at Fallsview. Even the $5-5 game only pays $6 per half hour.Oh well, they'll charge it, you'll ***** and it will still be full.PS I disagree with sixhands. For NL I definitely prefer session fee. Limit I'll go with rake.

[sixhands 0]

Holy crap! That IS high. I biitch about paying $5 per half hour at Fallsview. Even the $5-5 game only pays $6 per half hour.Oh well, they'll charge it, you'll ***** and it will still be full.PS I disagree with sixhands. For NL I definitely prefer session fee. Limit I'll go with rake.

I expected someone to disagree with me I'm honoured it was you ...Isn't the rake capped in NL games? I was basing my post on limit games though.

[13CARDS 0]

What about for higher stakes. Does the session fee go up with the stakes. I wouldn't think it would because it costs the casino the same amount of $$ to put out a 1/2 NL game as it does a 20/40 NL game. Am I right?Whiter

Actually, higher stakes pay higher session/rake. That is the norm. As for what it costs the casino, a table, 10 chairs, two decks of cards and 1.5 dealers. It doesn't matter what game you run (1/2 NL, 50/100 NL, 5-10 L or 100-200 L) the cost to the casino is the same. However, since the higher stakes pay more session/rake, the higher the game that the casino can run (and maintain!), the more money the casino makes. That is why tables get merged. It costs the casino more than twice as much to run 2 tables shorthanded as it does to run 1 table full (or even 11 handed!) assuming there is a session fee.

[seemorenuts 0]

I've sworn off b&m casinos unless I have a roll of $20K or more to sit down, or if there's some known maniacs close by.There's just no way to make money with rake or session fees for games under $2/5 NL or under 3/6 nor even 4/8 limit.If there is, the casino or venue better have easy access and great service to make it worthwhile. Try this:Get your friends together at a home with wireless net access. Everyone brings their own net-enabled laptop.To prevent arguments, everyone agrees to deposit real cash at worldpx.com or any rakefree site, in contradistinction to a play money table at a raked site...Play together for real cash, zero rake, and you get to socialize. You might have to clear it with the pokersite.No cheating, no complaining, no tipping... completely legal.Also, no pokertracker etc. if you want to agree on this, and that's easy to monitor face to face.

[Startled 0]

I've sworn off b&m casinos unless I have a roll of $20K or more to sit down, or if there's some known maniacs close by.There's just no way to make money with rake or session fees for games under $2/5 NL or under 3/6 nor even 4/8 limit.If there is, the casino or venue better have easy access and great service to make it worthwhile. Try this:Get your friends together at a home with wireless net access. Everyone brings their own net-enabled laptop.To prevent arguments, everyone agrees to deposit real cash at worldpx.com or any rakefree site, in contradistinction to a play money table at a raked site...Play together for real cash, zero rake, and you get to socialize. You might have to clear it with the pokersite.No cheating, no complaining, no tipping... completely legal.Also, no pokertracker etc. if you want to agree on this, and that's easy to monitor face to face.

Or, you know, you could tell everyone to leave their laptops at home and bring a deck of cards. That works too.