Time Collection vs Rake

Ryan, a survivor from the Cloyne home game where I first learned to play poker, asked the following question in a comment he recently posted: "I remember some time ago that you had mentioned that you liked playing at the Oaks because it was by the hour. I was just wondering if you opinion has changed since then? Personally I prefer to play when there is a rake. My thinking is that if you plan to fold most of your hands pre-flop, why pay until you are ready to play?

There are two main ways that casinos charge you to play in their poker games. The first way is a "rake." The way a rake works is every hand, the dealer takes (or rakes) a predetermined number of chips from the pot. At the end of the hand these chips drop into a locked steel box attached to the table. The boxes get emptied every 8 hours, by men the size of small SUVs in security uniforms. Usually it's $3 (sometime $4) regardless of the amount you're playing for (at the very lowest games like $1/$2 limit it's $2.50). Some places have a rule that if the hand doesn't make it to the flop the casino won't take any money. In the lower limit games (anything $9/$18 or less), in addition to the standard blind structure the player on the button puts out $3 (these are the chips that are physically removed from the game and end up in the steel box). This money "plays" for the player on the button and counts towards any bets they make before the flop. So for example if you're playing $3/$6, there will be $1 in the small blind, $3 in the big blind and $3 on the button. If no one has raised, the player on the button gets to see the flop without putting in any more money.

In some of the dreary, ass backwards poker rooms in Nevada where there are three poker tables sitting in a space that has all the glitz and glamour of an area used for broken slot machine storage, they do the rake a little differently. Instead of taking a flat $3 they take 10% of the pot with a max of $3 (or sometimes $4). This approach works great online and is in fact what almost all of the websites do. In person it doesn't make much sense because it means the dealers are always fiddling around with quarters and dimes and loonies and twoneys and whatever. It's a big pain in the ass for the dealers and since now there are quarters on the table they get tipped 50 cents sometimes instead of a dollar.

At the bigger games the casinos get their money a little differently. They do what is called "time collection." The way this works is every half hour the dealer collects a fixed amount of money from each player. This amount varies with the amount you're playing for (it's $6 at $15/$30, $7 at $30/$60, $12 at $100/$200 etc.). An easy way to think about it is, the players are renting the seats for the half hour.

In the past the Oaks Club was one of the few places that took time collection instead of a rake for all of their games.

Ryan's question is, is it better to pay time collection or a rake in low limit games. The argument for rake is that if you're using proper strategy you'll be playing fewer hands than your opponents, thus winning fewer pots and paying less than everyone else. While this sounds good, this theory has a few holes. First of all let's look at the math for a standard $3/$6 game. Time collection costs each player $8 an hour. Easy right? For a game with a rake it's a little more complicated. A standard dealer will deal 35 hands an hour so with $3 a hand coming off the table in rake we're looking at $105 per table per hour. In a nine handed game you're looking at $11.67 ($105/9 players) per player, per hour which is clearly more than $8 an hour (it's $10.20 per player for a 10 handed game).

But wait, we're playing tighter than everyone and you only pay when you win a pot right? The problem is when you add that extra blind on the button it becomes correct to get involved in many more pots. A third of the hands you're going to be in one of the blinds and even when you not, the action that this extra blind stimulates is going to force you to play more hands. Another way to think about it is in a time collection game you're paying $4 a round in blinds while in a rake game you're paying $7 a round in blinds. If you fold every hand for three rounds all of a sudden you're stuck $21 instead of $12.

Let's say you've found a game where they don't make you post that extra blind and just take $3 out of the pot anyway (a few places do this). You're still going to end up paying more. Your share of the pots is about 4 an hour (3.5 an hour for a 10 handed game). Even if you play fewer hands than everyone else you're still going to need to win 3 hands an hour to come out ahead in the long run, meaning you're paying $9 an hour instead of $8.

Let's look at another consideration. In a rake game there is no penalty for being away from the table. Every time someone want to go to the bathroom or take a short break they get up the hand before their big blind and come back a full round later. Since there is no penalty for being away from the game, in practice at least 1, if not 2 or 3 players are always away from the table. In a time collection game if you're away from the table, you're paying anyway so people have a tendency to stay in the action. Not only is a full game generally preferable, if a few players are missing in a rake game all of a sudden the number of pots you're due to win per hour goes way up. If you're in a game where there are an average of 7 players being dealt into every hand all of a sudden you're paying $15 an hour instead of $8.

Another consideration is it's good to have plenty of money on the table. I can tell you from experience that the games where everyone has three racks in front of them are way better than the games where everyone is nursing 2 stacks. Even if you were paying the same or slightly less than everyone else, If the casino is taking more money, there will be more short stacks and the game will not be as profitable.

While it may hurt to shell out those extra dollars, especially when you're losing, time collection is much better.

Another question might be "why are you squawking on and on about pennies? Who cares what the rake is?" I'll have to address that in another entry about "The evil power of the rake" (AHHHHHH hide the women and children!)