UB BBJ included as Rake?

[carr1]

Deep Blue:

Unless something has just changed on HEM's side the BBJ rake is still being included in the overall rake. My rake numbers are way higher than the rakeback I actually receive from my affiliate because of this inclusion of the BBJ rake on HEM. Of course BBJ rake does not qualify for rakeback.

I don't have the time to to re-crunch my numbers right now so I'm not sure what you're doing. but everyone else in this thread has had the same issue.

As far as whether you should play the BBJ tables, the short answer is those tables are a huge rake trap. Other people have estimated the additional rake is equivalent to roughly 2-3bb/100. This is a pretty huge as I said. Anyway, one way to figure this is simply compare your total winrate (including rb and other incentives) at AP/UB to other sites.

[DeepBlue]

Carr, thanks so much for getting back to me. I did some more tests and I conclusively found that the Rake figures in HEM do NOT include BBJ rake. Whether or not the rakeback is included is another question (i.e., if somehow the rakeback includes BBJ rake and is thus skewed - I doubt it).

Instead, I found that the regular rake was not being calculated right by HEM (I found a hand where it reported $0.25, but I had only paid $0.15 - or come to think of it, it was vice versa).

Also, I think the reason HEM reports so much more rakeback than is actually earned is simply because of the formula used. Dealt vs. weighted-contributed makes a huge, huge difference, unless one's playing very short handed (pretty much heads-up would make them the same result I think).

I wish it were that easy to compare! The problem is, I've found that most regs on Stars at limit anyway are lifetime losers, rakeback pros only. So it would be a theoretical comparison.

Whereas on UB, I can crush even the $0.50-$1 LIMIT game, even though the BBJ represents half a big bet in $5 pots! (and which, I calculate, is costing me 1.7 BB/100 - yes, 1.7 BIG BETS - on top of the regular rake rate of 2.5 or so BB/100 - this correspondes to the figure you gave of 2-3 bb/100) Perhaps "crush" is extreme, but I am averaging well over 1 BB/100 over 10,000 hands, so it seems promising thus far. I think on the NL side it's not that big a deal if one is truly taking advantage of the weaker competition (and at least there it doesn't kick in until 50NL, which I am not at yet on that site).

Anyway I know it all sounds confusing but HM support says they will look into the parsing issue when they have time, so until then I guess I just have to disregard the rake figures in HEM and manually keep tabs on my rakeback by the day in my RB provider's site. (which sucks since I have to check it daily and log it, othewise I don't know how much got added in any one day)

[carr1]

I'm working on some projects now so I can't confirm what you're saying. Obv. we need some more people to look into this. Shark- u there?

As for beating the .50/1 limit game straight out, most regs aren't because of the absurd BBJ rake. Congrats if you are.

[SharkSandwich]

I'm working on some projects now so I can't confirm what you're saying. Obv. we need some more people to look into this. Shark- u there?

Here and reporting for duty Cap'n.

OK, so I did my own calcs.

Rakeback should be added up on a pot-by-pot basis.
Total rake in a hand should be equally divided between everyone who contributed to the pot (including both blinds 100%).

Mini-sessions of mine. Listed hands only where I contributed (saw a flop or was in a blind)
4 hand session:
2 to the flop (SB also folded). Rake 0.05. My rake = 0.02
4 to the flop (both blinds). Rake 0.65. JP rake 0.50. My rake = 0.1625 (0.29 with JP)
HEM lists 0.31. Exactly right WITH JP included.

5 hands
3 to the flop (SB folded). Rake 0.80. JP rake 0.50. My rake = 0.20 (0.325 with JP)
4 to the flop (both blinds). Rake 1.60. JP rake 0.50. My rake = 0.40 (0.525 w JP)
HEM lists 0.86. Exactly right WITH JP included (both rounded up, 0.33 + 0.53).

Pretty conclusive guys.

It is 100% including JP rake as rake.

[SharkSandwich]

The thing is reading threads here, HEM now knows how to calculate your individual rake on a per site basis.

It knows UB is contributed, so it correctly works out total rake per hand / no of contributing players.

So if they programmed it rightly to remove JP rake (or to add it to a seperate column) it would work it out perfectly. To within cents or so. And if they use the same rounding process it would be accurate to the cent and massively useful for dealings with your RB provider.

Let's get 'er done.

[morny]

Thanks guys this is all documented and well get it fixed as soon as we can, couple of bugs ahead of it right now so i cant give an accurate ETA at this time

[SharkSandwich]

Thanks Morny.

FWIW my early calculations suggest everything is right with the calcualtions. It just needs the BBJ rake column NOT including.

Total Pot($21) | Rake ($1.05) | Jackpot Rake ($0.50)

[DeepBlue]

Shark I responded in the other thread - I think you need to be clear if you're referring to RAKEBACK, and not RAKE, as I think you are. As per my reply there, the contributed method is all about rakeBACK, nothing to do with RAKE...

As per my message above, I believe there is at least one problem, which is the basic RAKE is not being parsed correctly from the hand history file.

If you have determined my other point to be true (that rakeback is somehow including BBJ rake in its calculation), then my hat off to you for following up on this.

Just want to ensure HEM staff knows there are MULTIPLE and SEPARATE issues regarding the rake:

1. Pure rake is not being reported correctly.

2. Rakeback is not being calculated appropriately (whether due to either the fact they use the wrong method for UB, they include BBJ rake, or both).

Thanks!

[SharkSandwich]

I really don't want to derail this thread, but I need to get this issue back ON the rails.
Blue you're near definitely working this out wrong.

The contributed and dealt methods determine the amount of rake you are said to have paid (by the site) out of the total pot rake. Rakeback is simply 30% (if that's the rakeback %, as UB is) of your apportioned share of rake.

HEM is listing your share of rake (under the contributed method) but including JP rake as regular rake (when there's obviously no rakeback on any JP rake).

It's like your looking at the rake in your won pots or something. When it has no baring on how much you are raked out of pots you win. You could lose every pot you enter and you will still be aportioned your share of rake.

I've just done another two calculations (a 13 and 20 hand session). I worked out my HEM reported rake to the cent in both cases. If I'm wortking it out wrong how am I able to do this time after time?

I'll do you a deal, send or post a hand history (no more than say 20 hands) and I'll send it back to you telling you what your HEM reported rake will be, and why. On a hand by hand basis.

[DeepBlue]

Dude - rake is rake. The rake in the Rake column of the reports should equal the total rake taken out of all pots that you won. You do NOT get raked on hands you lost. Likewise, when you win a pot, YOU pay 100% of the rake for that hand! You're getting it twisted with the rakeback.

EDIT: Don't mean to be rude, but we're going in circles, so I apologize if this seems like an affront. In my eyes, the Rake column should list the whole rake taken out of all pots I won in a session, period. If this is not how it's supposed to be, then this is very big news to me!