I wish to present the argument that various interest and groups, notably including PSFTFBIDOJ has sold to the players a “quasi-doctrine” which teaches, in effect, that “less is more” or that (in other words) “raked poker is better than not raked poker”.
…let us define “PSFTFBIDOJ “to be descriptive of a “school of thought” that originated at the time of Black Friday on April 15 2011.
“PSFTFBIDOJ ” would favor the existence of a “manipulative” state establishment of raked poker and poker skin which would continuously seek to achieve “raked” objectives with comparatively little regard for the long term reputation of the poker economy and the associated effects of that on the reputation of online poker.
It seems to be relevant to the politics of poker site decisions that affect the rake promoted by sites that there are typical popular attitudes in relation to it.
All over the world varieties of sites make claims to have systems very properly or even ideally devoted to the interests of the professional or recreational players of those sites and always an externally located critic can argue that the site is actually a sort of despotism.
PSFTFBIDOJ implicitly always have the argument that some good managers can do things of beneficial value, operating with the skins, and that it is not needed or appropriate for the players or the “customers” of the chips supplied by the site to actually understand, while the managers are managing, what exactly they are doing and how it will affect the “ROI” circumstances of these players.
…while they have claimed to be operating for high and noble objectives of general poker welfare what is clearly true is that they have made it easier for their sites to “print money”.
…by speaking of “rake targeting” these responsible officials are effectively CONFESSING that, notwithstanding how they formerly were speaking about the difficulties and problems of their functions, that it is indeed after all possible to control rake by controlling the supply of chips
…we may become irrational in thinking about EV and fail to be able to reason about it like a technology
Here the key viewpoint is methodological, as we see it. HOW should the poker society and the poker site authorities seek to improve economic poker welfare generally
…rake should have the function of a standard of measurement and thus that it should become comparable to the watt or the hour or a degree of temperature.
…although that scheme for arranging for a system of rake with ideal qualities would work well, that, on the other hand, it would be politically difficult to arrive at the implementation of such a system.
…it is sometimes remarkable how poker strategies can evolve
(1): Games with transferable utility.
(2): Games without transferable utility
(or “NTU” games).
In the world of practical realities it is money which typically causes the existence of a game of type (1) rather than of type (2); money is the “lubrication” which enables the efficient “transfer of utility”.
…generally if games can be transformed from type (2) to type (1) there is a gain, on average, to all the players in terms of whatever might be expected to be the outcome.
…this parallel makes it seem not implausible that a process of poker revolution might lead to the expectation on the part of players in the “great game types” that they should be better situated to be able to understand whatever will be the rake policies which, indeed, are typically of great importance to players who may have alternative options for where to place their “deposits”.