Rake question for pot limit

[Nick C]

I was asked a question regarding calculating the bet size for a pot limit game. When $2 is taken from a $22 pot and an additional $1 for a bad beat jackpot...do we count the actual pot ($22), or figure the pot to be minus the $3?

Actual pot is $22. The dealer takes $2 (10%) then takes $1 for the bad beat jackpot (leaving $19 in the pot). After the flop, the first player to act declares "pot" how much can he wager? $19 or $22? Seems simple enough but for some reason I couldn't give a good reason for it to be $19 when the actual pot size for rake procedures is $22.

Maybe in the morning it will come to me, but for now, I'm thinking it's a good question.
Goodnight

[K-Lo]

I believe the pot should be the pre-rake/jackpot take pot.  It doesn't make sense that the maximum wagers in the hand could change depending on the rake %, or the fact that you are collecting on the fly. Another way of thinking about it is that you should calculate pot-sized bets and raises as you would assuming that you actually collect the rake, etc. when the hand is completed.

[Nick C]

Hello Ken,

I'm glad I asked the question. Your absence on the Forum had me worried. Your answer is certainly logical but I can understand how some players may question a bet that is larger than the pot at the time of their "pot size bet."
Proper rake procedures for cash games might vary but, I like to teach dealers to wait for a betting round to be complete, burn and turn, sweep the bets into the pot, start the action, and then take the rake. The end result, will allow the dealer to take the proper %(or amount), before the next round of betting. Counting the pot after the final betting round, and taking the rake while pushing the pot to the winner, is poor dealer practice and not recommended.
Don't want to get too far off the subject, just trying to establish an easy way to justify the larger bet than the amount in the pot at the precise time the "pot size" wager is announced.
Taking the rake on a "time session" as opposed to a flat percentage with a specific max take-out, would never affect the size of the pot. Might be a good solution for pot limit.

[K-Lo]

Don't be worried... I am around!

Yes I agree in practice it is best to collect the rake while the hand is in progress, but I don't think that alone should affect the deemed size of the pot. The rake isn't dropped until the end anyway, and certainly say if the rake was 10%, you wouldn't take $10 from the pot when $100 goes in, and then consider the pot to only have $90, and wait until another $110 goes on before taking another $10, for example.

Or let's say the blinds are $1/$2 and the rake is set at $3 fixed on the flop (I've seen this).  If everybody folded to the small blind who just calls and the big blind checks, it wouldn't make sense that the maximum a player could bet would be capped at $1.

Anyway, I' don't think there's really any confusion to consider chips set aside for rake to be considered part of the pot for the purpose of determining the maximum or a pot-sized wager while the hand is still in progress.  It is possible to set aside chips while a hand is in progress and still determine it to be part of the pot without confusing the players.

[Nick C]

Thanks for your reply.

I'd like to add a note regarding the 10% rake...there is a cap of $5 max...so any pot size over $50 has already been raked to the max. Years ago, we would take a 5% rake ($1 on $20) with a $5 max. $1 on 10, $2 on 20, etc. The max was met when the pot hit $100. I do remember players telling me I over-raked the pot! That was something we never wanted to do. I was always relieved when we would count down the pot and there was $94 in front of the winner. I would tell him  "the house took $5 and you gave me $1 tip!

As far as the #3 on the flop. I believe that started with the #3 rake chip that I introduced in 2003. They still use that at the local Seneca Casino's in Upstate New York. They also take $1 when the pot hits $40.

[K-Lo]

I'd like to add a note regarding the 10% rake...there is a cap of $5 max...

I still remember playing briefly in some European casino on a vacation many years ago, maybe in the early 2000s - I think it was in Holland or some such place.  10% rake. No cap. 

[Nick C]

Brutal !!!

[Tristan]

I agree, pot should be calculated on the actual pot...not pot minus rake.

[Brian Vickers]

Actual pot size pre-rake.  We might separate it to ensure we end up dropping it at the end, but it's still part of the pot.