CoinPoker is facing mounting criticism from online poker players after revising its cash-game rake structure, increasing some high-stakes caps by as much as 233% and introducing rake on qualifying pots that end before the flop.
The changes have triggered public criticism from established players and commentators, with even one of the site’s own ambassadors promising to investigate the decision.
The controversy raises a question more important than any single percentage: can experienced players still beat the games after paying the revised fees? That depends on how often they hit the cap, how the new heads-up rules apply and how much of the cost they recover through rewards. CoinPoker has previously promised to maintain beatable games, a commitment now receiving fresh scrutiny.
CoinPoker rake caps rise by up to 233%
At $25/$50, the cap for pots involving three or four players has risen from $12 to $40, a 233% increase. The two-player cap at those stakes has jumped from $5 to $15.65, while the cap for five or more players has climbed from $20 to $62.50. In other words, the highest amounts CoinPoker can take from certain pots are now more than three times their previous levels.
The changes are not confined to $25/$50 games. At $10/$20, the three-to-four-player cap has increased from $9 to $16, while $5/$10 games have seen several double-digit percentage increases. The table below highlights a selection of the published changes.
| Stakes | Players | Previous cap | New cap | Increase |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $2/$5 | 3–4 | $4.80 | $5 | 4% |
| $5/$10 | 2 | $2.50 | $3.80 | 52% |
| $5/$10 | 3–4 | $6 | $10 | 67% |
| $5/$10 | 5+ | $10 | $15 | 50% |
| $10/$20 | 3–4 | $9 | $16 | 78% |
| $10/$20 | 5+ | $15 | $25 | 67% |
| $25/$50 | 2 | $5 | $15.65 | 213% |
| $25/$50 | 3–4 | $12 | $40 | 233% |
| $25/$50 | 5+ | $20 | $62.50 | 213% |
These are maximum amounts, rather than fees collected from every hand. A rake cap sets a ceiling on what a poker room can deduct from a qualifying pot, and larger caps will have the greatest effect on pots sufficiently large to reach them. Saying a cap has increased by 233% is therefore not the same as proving that every player’s total rake bill has risen by 233%.
Preflop three-bets no longer escape rake
Another significant change concerns pots won before the flop. CoinPoker now collects rake in qualifying hands that include a three-bet or further preflop re-raises, even when the action ends before community cards are dealt. An uncontested open raise followed by folds still attracts no rake.
That distinction matters to regular cash-game players because aggressive preflop play is part of how they generate a winning edge. Previously, a successful three-bet that forced an opponent to fold could win the existing pot without paying the house. Under the revised rules, some of that profit can be reduced by rake, affecting the economics of bluffing and re-raising.
The standard ante at affected cash-game tables has also increased from 0.16 to 0.25 big blinds. More forced money in the pot can produce larger average pots and cause the rake cap to be reached more often. CoinPoker has also reduced certain minimum buy-ins, from 40 big blinds to 25 in No-Limit Hold’em and 30 in Pot-Limit Omaha, as part of its wider table adjustments.
Does heads-up play now cost more than 20 bb/100?
The most striking calculation circulating online came from MobiusPoker, which used a rake calculator to estimate an 18 bb/100 charge per player in a heads-up game with 5% rake and a three-big-blind cap. The account suggested that preflop rake could add approximately another 3 bb/100, taking the model above 20 big blinds per 100 hands before rakeback or additional jackpot and splash-pot fees.
It is an alarming estimate, but it is not a verified average taken from a representative database of newly played hands. Crucially, it also does not describe every heads-up matchup on CoinPoker. The site’s official heads-up rules specify a default cap of three big blinds when its reduced Battle Caps are not active.
CoinPoker says Battle Caps activate when two players it classifies as Battle Players sit down together. At $10/$20 and $25/$50, the published reduced cap is 0.25 big blinds, and players can check whether it is active in the table specifications. This is a dramatic difference from three big blinds and must be included in any serious assessment of the new heads-up pricing.
Even with that distinction, questions remain about who qualifies for the lower cap and how frequently a typical player encounters the higher one. Any assessment of big blinds per 100 hands also needs to separate gross rake paid from the net amount after player-specific rewards.
Witteles and Kuhn lead public criticism
Todd Witteles called CoinPoker a “rake disaster” while criticising wider developments in online gambling. Rob Kuhn questioned the reported 233% increase, then highlighted the decision to rake preflop three-bet pots in a separate post. Another player, ZarKeoZ, argued that operators have little reason to lower rake while people continue to play.
Behind the anger is a straightforward economic concern. A winning cash-game player needs an edge large enough to overcome both variance and the amount removed from pots by the operator. When rake grows, some marginally profitable strategies can turn unprofitable, even if the games themselves remain active and attractive to recreational players.
CoinPoker ambassador Bobby James plans a video
CoinPoker ambassador Bobby James has also publicly acknowledged the controversy. In a post on X, James said he expected to make a video addressing the rake changes. He indicated that he would explain any convincing reasons supplied by CoinPoker, but make his own opinion clear if its explanation did not stand up to scrutiny.
That is not a resignation, an accusation of misconduct or a completed condemnation of the new policy. It does, however, put a recognised representative of CoinPoker in the unusual position of awaiting an adequate explanation for a change that is attracting widespread criticism. His eventual assessment could become an important part of the discussion.
CoinPoker’s earlier promise comes under pressure
In a January 2026 statement on high-stakes games, CoinPoker committed to maintaining games in which players could remain profitable while rewarding the action players who helped them run. The operator also said it would work with the community if its approach proved mistaken. Those promises provide an obvious benchmark against which to evaluate the October changes.
CoinPoker representatives have been discussing the revisions, including the increased antes and changed buy-in limits, in the operator’s official Two Plus Two forum thread. But an explanation of the mechanics will not fully answer the central question. Players need to understand why the revised charges are justified and what proportion is returned through rakeback, leaderboards and individual rewards.
It is possible for a room to charge a substantial headline amount and return meaningful value to particular players, while others still face a high net cost. Equally, announcing large rewards does not prove that every regular can overcome the new charges. Real hand histories, clearly explained eligibility rules and comparable after-reward figures would provide a more useful answer than either marketing claims or a single calculator screenshot.
For now, the argument is set to continue. CoinPoker’s next detailed response, any adjustment to the published caps and James’s promised video will reveal whether this is a short-lived dispute or a more serious challenge to the operator’s reputation among experienced cash-game players.
