A heated discussion ensued in the regulars' Discord, which resulted in Patrick leaving the server.
"Pads left the HS server after users disapproved of his "no money, but hang in there" slogan and started accusing Coin of screwing them with their policies" Boris Grabowski reported on his Telegram channel. "As a reminder, at the beginning of the year, their slogan was "Bring cash games back to players," and Pads himself declared that he "will never support unbreakable rake."
As it turned out, his entire disapproval consisted of "I won't promote people to play high rake," after which he went on to tweet that Coin is no worse than any other, and that the tournaments are simply fantastic."
"It seems like everyone's interested in my thoughts on rake and the current cash game ecology, right?" Patrick addressed his Twitter followers. "Ask any questions in the comments, and I'll write a long post later where I'll try to answer them all. I'm temporarily declaring myself a cash game expert, although in reality, I don't know much."
"I'm genuinely baffled as to why they even made these changes," a PLO CARL regular marveled in the comments . "It's completely beyond my comprehension. But I'll give them time, maybe they'll change their minds. They deserve it."
In a recent social media review, we talked about his phenomenal success at CoinPoker.
– "Why do you think that none of the poker-loving billionaire philanthropic types have ever decided to just create rake-free platform?" one player asked Patrick.
– "It wouldn't work. Low rake environments have been tried a lot and failed unfortunately. Would love it to work, but liquidity is all about marketing / retention of VIPs."
– "Do you think online cash game pros (that playing regulated sites) will survive the next 3 years?"
– "Honestly and unfortunately (I came up with cash games) no. I wrote this 6 years ago."
– "First of all, thanks for caring about the poker ecosystem. I genuinely believe you play an important role in the poker community, and that’s something I really respect.
That being said, a few months ago you promised you wouldn’t support a site with unbeatable effective rake."
– "Why do you think I'm supporting? I wrote very clearly in HS discord (that you're in right?) my stance, I then left because of absurdity of position of others.
I went there first instead of social media out of respect for those guys and now addressing here too."
A screenshot from a Discord thread was posted in the comments, in which one of the regulars shared that he played a short session of heads-up PLO-6 and paid 59bb/100 rake at the $10/$20 limit and 14.5bb/100 at the $25/$50 limit.
A few hours later, Patrick wrote a long post on the burning issue. The post has since been deleted, but we have this translated version of the tweet which should closely align with what was written.
– "As promised, I'm expressing my position on cash games, the ecology of this format, and why I even consider it possible to represent a room that has introduced "preflop rake" and other similar things.
I spent the first four years of my professional career playing cash games. I dreamed of becoming Tom Dwan, Andrew Robl, Phil Galfond, Phil Ivey, and so on. Tournaments weren't my thing back then. I loved moving up in stakes; it was like a new level in a computer game. Playing 50k at NL25 and moving up to NL50 is much cooler than winning a donation. Deep down, I still consider myself a cash game player and would love for cash games to be at their peak again.
I want to point out an important point: high-stakes regulars are greatly underestimated. Not only are they the smartest (cash player brains >> MTT brains), but they also always act in the best interests of poker. When they band together, they:
– They provide very useful feedback on software, rules, general ideas, and so on.
– They help find cheaters, and for this they only need tens or hundreds of hands, while the rooms might need thousands.
They are true heroes, and others should look up to them. The Romanians underestimate them and don't fully understand the importance of these players, even though they essentially serve as employees who should be paid millions for their work. Moreover, employees with such skills are simply impossible to find.
Unfortunately, communication isn't their strong point. Some interacted with room representatives so much that it's now practically nonexistent.
When Fedor Holz was still a GG ambassador, he was also very active on Discord and tried to help. But he eventually gave up due to the flood of negativity and lies. I hope contact can be restored in the future. I've always supported the idea of creating a players' union or some kind of ethics committee. George Froggatt, Matt Marinelli, and several other players have long been trying to build bridges between the rooms and the players. The rooms should pay them, or at least listen to their opinions.
Cash games are the perfect format for computer game enthusiasts. You start at NL10, move up to NL25, and simultaneously watch the NL5k tables with the thought, "One day I'll be there too." It's the perfect approach for attracting players who love chess and are motivated by constantly improving their rating and playing against increasingly strong opponents.
I still remember moving up to NL1k and facing tim0thee (Timothy Adams). I tried to three-bet him, but he destroyed me. I had to drop back. Back then, I didn't even know what rake was. I just opened PokerStars (I didn't play any other rooms), followed my own bankroll management rules, and tried to make sure my red and green lines looked as good as possible by the end of the session.
It feels like back then everyone played cash games and only occasionally ventured into tournaments. Now it's the other way around.
Overall, the cache is currently experiencing huge problems, and they haven't emerged recently. I wrote about this back in 2020.
I tried to come up with ideas that would work for both the poker rooms and the regulars. Both sides tend to come up with extreme ideas that only benefit them, but you need to try to find a middle ground where everyone benefits. I can't say I've found the right path, but I think I've chosen the right direction.
Of course, I'd like all games to have low rake. Several rooms, including Run It Once, tried to implement such a model, but they failed. To have action, you need to learn how to attract and retain amateur players. It's no coincidence that for the last two or three years, the highest-paying games have been held at CoinPoker. The huge rake that's been all over the news is paid in games with amateur players. A significant portion of this rake is then paid to VIPs to keep them playing. In games between regulars, the rake is significantly lower. In my uninformed opinion, the rake in both cases is still too high, and I understand why players consider it unreasonable.
Let me try to explain how it works from the room's perspective: a tournament with a $5 million guarantee is held, $500,000 is spent on attracting players. A random whale wins $20,000, goes to cash games, and loses to a regular in 100 hands. The room gets $100, and the whale never returns. I'm exaggerating here, but the room is categorically unwilling to accept this scenario. Any site would try to avoid this and keep the VIP as far away from cash games as possible.
Another problem with cash games is that players open multiple rooms in the hopes of finding good action. There's nothing wrong with that, and it doesn't violate the rules. However, the auxiliary software some use—scripts, mining, and sites like Statname—is a violation.
Many regulars are categorically against this and report violators. But last week, as an experiment, I sat down at cash tables in three different rooms, and the tables filled up in 0.1 seconds. As soon as I sat out, everyone else left too.
Can you imagine what this looks like from an amateur's perspective? Players claim none of this would happen if the rake weren't so high. I disagree. In low-rake rooms, tables are also instantly filled with fish. The situation there is probably even worse because their security is weaker.
When I agreed to promote Coin, I set a few conditions:
It's important to take care of the environment. I wrote a huge letter (I'm attaching a blurred version, but you can appreciate the length) to management, outlining my thoughts on how to make the game profitable for everyone and maintain fairness and ethics in our relationships with users."
"I would never agree to promote something I don't play myself. I think that's a good approach for any ambassador. I can place an accumulator bet on football and post it on social media. But I would never promote slots or casinos, even though they are an important part of the gaming business.
I'll continue to talk about other rooms. Stars and GG are our competitors, but I constantly post videos and hands from there. My posts that don't promote Coin have received over 100 million views. During the series, I often post about other rooms because I'm just doing what I would do without a contract. My horses have paid eight figures in rake across all the rooms—that's how I increase liquidity... My goal is to develop the industry as a whole and to prevent poker from becoming a monopoly. I always talk about bots, poor security, and so on.
I write more about SCOOP/WCOOP than any of the PokerStars ambassadors, but you won't hear a single positive word about CoinPoker from the ACR/GG/PokerStars ambassadors. So, I'm shocked to read accusations of corruption.
When Coin announced a rake increase, I did what I would in any similar situation – I started researching everything to separate truth from fiction. That day, a ton of AI-fueled news stories surfaced with calculations that didn't correspond to reality.
I didn't waste time arguing on Twitter, but instead went directly to the players affected. I have nothing to apologize for here.
The industry has changed a lot in recent years, and preflop rake is now standard at major poker rooms. I remember the days when people 3-bet or folded preflop to avoid paying rake. Even back then, it seemed strange to me that poker rooms weren't adapting. In my opinion, the game should be as loose as possible so that more players get to the flop and amateurs with suited hands aren't squeezed out of the pot by squeezes.
I've talked about a similar problem in MTTs many times. When a bunch of people late register for 15bb, the average stack gets small, all the action shifts to preflop, and the amateurs don't have any fun. Taking the rake only postflop encourages very aggressive play. I'm really glad that GG has been consistently running 9-max tables with antes for the last year. I played around with the software for a bit and discovered that, even with a high rake, you should still call a raise with 53s. Mamma mia, I like that!
Antes and creating incentives for people to play with high VPIPs and see more flops are all huge benefits for the game. But I don't think this is achieved solely by the additional rake; it's just one factor.
In discussions like these, I often think of my own mother. Early in my career, I'd say to myself, "This game would be perfect for her. It's a shame she'll never try it." Would I want her to play cash games on CoinPoker? Of course not. Would I want her to play cash games on other poker rooms? Also, no. It's a dysfunctional format now, where people live by the laws of the jungle. That makes me very sad."
Boris Grabowski wrote a series of posts about the new rake on his Telegram channel. In one of them, he calculated how much an amateur would realistically have to lose to allow other players to profit under the new conditions:
– So, in an average 6-max table with an amateur, the table pays 65-70bb in rake (52-55 regs and 12-15 amateurs).
Furthermore, for the table to be profitable for all players, the worst positions must also be profitable.
With an average amateur loser of 60bb, the room will take 12-15 bb, and the regs will take an average of 9bb per player. But since the player in the best position takes more and the player in the worst position takes less, the distribution will be more likely such that the two worst positions take 6.5-7bb. Remember, the rake is about 11bb, and the rakeback is between 3.3 and 5.5.
So, in the best case, with a good deal, this will be +1.5bb/100 pts.
And now, the most important thing for an amateur to lose 60bb or more is for them to play 50+ ppip. A typical coin-player with a 45 VPIP loses on average around 35bb and doesn't even come close to covering the rake, even in good position. Players fitting this description would likely make up 20% of the entire pool.
Therefore, I recommend anyone who doesn't think they're beating regs along the way to show their disinterest in this setup and stop playing near-breakeven tables.
P.S. At 1k, the rake is even higher, and you need to be even more careful when selecting.
