Hey, great breakdown on the loyalty program angle! I’ve been tracking similar stuff myself, mostly digging into how real-time odds shifts and reward structures play out across different gambling formats, but your poker tournament focus got me thinking. That 1.5% ROI bump for mid-to-high tier players makes total sense—those rakeback percentages might not sound huge, but over hundreds of MTTs, they’re quietly stacking the deck in your favor by cutting down the house’s take. I’ve seen something parallel in sports betting, where cashback or bonus structures effectively lower the vig over time, though it’s less consistent than poker’s rakeback model.
Your point about the edge coming from cost reduction rather than skill is spot-on too. I ran some numbers a while back on a smaller sample—about 200 MTTs with buy-ins ranging $20-$75—and found no meaningful difference in ITM rates or final table appearances between loyalty tiers. It’s all about that net cost grind-down. The 2% ROI boost in higher buy-ins is intriguing, though. I’d guess it’s because the rake as a percentage of the buy-in tends to shrink as stakes rise, so the loyalty perks stretch further. Have you looked at how this scales in the $100+ range, where fields get sharkier but prize pools fatten up?
One thing I’d toss into the mix: variance. Loyalty programs don’t shield you from swings, but that steady rakeback can act like a buffer, keeping your bankroll afloat during dry runs. I’ve noticed in my own tracking that players who max out reward tiers tend to stick around longer—less burnout, maybe? Curious if your data hints at retention or session length differences tied to those ROI gains. How do you see this playing out in softer fields versus tougher ones, like Sunday majors?
