I'm one of those people who roots for RIO, I really want it to succeed, but yet I haven't played a hand on the site. It's not because of any of the reasons most other players gave earlier (when there was no table resizing, people hating STP, hating anonymous games, wanting regular rakeback etc.). For me it's more of an EV thing. Yet I'm one of the players RIO should be appealing to most: I usually play 4-6 anonymous tables and I rarely play tournaments. So why don't I make the step? I played on a lot of different sites, so it's not like I'm attached to Pokerstars for some reason.
I guess it's a rake thing. I'm not sure RIO is the best, or even an competitive option for me, compared to some other sites that offer my stakes (20/50nl). Yes, there is 51% rakeback, but the rake is higher than on practically every site around and the cap is also reasonably high. Then there is STP, wether you like the format (I think I would like it a lot), it pushes the avarage pot size up, and therefore the rake.
Don't get me wrong. I don't want this to be a 'let me tell you what I dislike about RIO Poker' post. I would like to see some numbers. What is the avarage rake bb/100 (I get this differs quite a bit per player, but still it's the only reasonable way I can think of to compare sites). Are there any regs with an reasonable sample on my stakes? Can someone from the site weigh in maybe?