4 handed on the final, blind on blind

[TightEnd]

but hold on a sec, no one is doing ICMs to that detail at a live table. taking into account knowledge of player (active, loose), a view of his range and the stacks you can't tell me its a definitvely -EV shove sitting there without a lappy and an ICM programme to hand!   

is it not an idea to analyze these type of situations so that when similar ones occur your decision making will be better?
the more you use icm,equity,ranges to analyze your sngs + mtts using it to work out your bubble play and where you stand chips to prize when in the money , some of these decisions become easier and reqire no lappy or icm calc as you get used to the numbers..

that's why I posted the thread, but I think its a bit strong to describe it as a clear -EV shove situation.

As it happened mentally crunching the range/stacks/situation at the table last night for 90 seconds or so, it appeared to me like a shove, which I did 

[noble1]

i never said it was a CLEAR -ev situation when i 1st looked at it i thought it was close...

BUT when after crunching the numbers and looking at the pay outs it was a mathematical fold,the reason i started to do icm was i because i dabbled in sngs and the top boys know there icm/equity backwards..It is useful to know it,but is not the be all end all...i just thought you might want to see if it was actually a good shove...

[TightEnd]

thanks, my apologies


BTW he had J10 off. Which was in your range, and slap bang in mine

[noble1]

so equity wise 1.22 you made a good call , but it is when we take into account the pay structure that we actually needed maybe 1.5 to 1 to make it mathematically correct...

but the question is did your pair hold up ?   

[Michigan Jeff]

Rich,

Dont laugh but i would consider pass in this situation especially if the other players are playing v tight.  I feel aggression is key and the sb has made the move with at least two overs to a pair of .

I would get my bb the very next hand!!!!!


Of equal importance the playoffs have been fantastic!!!! I was in the Hardrock in Tampa watching the Giant fans cry...hahahahaha

PS:  Well done on the luton result

[cia260895]

dont larf

 but what is stove and icm?

[mondatoo]

dont larf

 but what is stove and icm?

Poker maths tools that can basically be manipulated to say anything can be mathematically correct to fold,seriously though i don't think icm is that relevant in this spot but gl to you Mr noble

[TightEnd]

dont larf

 but what is stove and icm?

www.pokerstove.com for estimating ranges, determing hand odds with respect to those ranges

ICM calculations..take a look on the Learning centre for a series of posts by Longy and others on ICM theory. Here's one example of an ICM tool

[cia260895]

dont larf

 but what is stove and icm?

www.pokerstove.com for estimating ranges, determing hand odds with respect to those ranges

ICM calculations..take a look on the Learning centre for a series of posts by Longy and others on ICM theory. Here's one example of an ICM tool

cheers will do

[noble1]

dont larf

 but what is stove and icm?

Poker maths tools that can basically be manipulated to say anything can be mathematically correct to fold,seriously though i don't think icm is that relevant in this spot but gl to you Mr noble

i didn't use a tool to manipulate the icm based on the pay structure? the only thing i calculated was villains hand ranges and then used the maths.

4th is £350 to 3rd £520 is it worth racing.
interesting spot...
           ICM Equity
rock1 - 24.5147  50000 chips
rock2 - 27.5318  65000 chips
villain  - 20.3807  33000 chips if tightend folds
tight  - 27.5318  65000 chips if he does not call or go all in

[MANTIS01]

The only calculation I'd be interested in here is....best hand+fold=nit.

[noble1]

TY - just thought that seeming icm works well 2 to 5 players left , that if we saw if it was +ev or -ev we might learn something,my mistake it seems..

ps
i am not a nit  lmao

[MANTIS01]

TY - just thought that seeming icm works well 2 to 5 players left , that if we saw if it was +ev or -ev we might learn something,my mistake it seems..

ps
i am not a nit  lmao

Nah, I'm not suggesting you are. Just trying to keep my posts shorter is all

I don't like these calculations in short handed poker. You see they only really take account of this one hand in isolation, but this is about winning a tournament. If you jam with 4-4 and win, the dynamics of the tournament shift dramatically in your favour. From this point on when you raise your oppos will be reluctant to play back at you...cos they know you call jams and win races...so they will fold. That is good for you short-handed. When the villains finally wake up you would have already set sail for home and they'll be battling for 2nd place. So the chip power and psychological edge you get from winning this pot is pretty big. Certainly big enough to swing -EV to +EV imo anyways.

Alternatively, if you fold your wired pair on your blind in a short-handed format you will make winning the game more difficult. The villains will see you have a hand and yet still take the cautious route, so they will be more inclined to play back at you and raise your blind in future hands. This is bad for you. Also the whole mindset you get from folding what is very likely to be the best hand will be more sinking than swimming, and this is also bad in a format where aggression is king. I would fold to some oppos but not standard villains because the complexity of the game changes thereafter and there isn't a calculation that can show that. Tournament poker concerns winning the game rather than winning one hand. Suppose this theory works better live though.

[EvilPie]

I don't think you're ever going to get in to these sort of situations often enough for ICM to ever apply here.

ICM is great for sngs because you play thousands of games so eventually the maths will work in your favour.

In live tournaments the cards matter much more than the maths so this is a shove. If you get in a race so be it.

[Longy]

I don't think you're ever going to get in to these sort of situations often enough for ICM to ever apply here.

ICM is great for sngs because you play thousands of games so eventually the maths will work in your favour.

In live tournaments the cards matter much more than the maths so this is a shove. If you get in a race so be it.

Erm...... Wait, What?

ICM is as relevant whether it was over 1 hand, 1 tournament or 1000 tournament, What is +ev or -ev will remain so, variance has no impact whether ICM is right or wrong.

The cards and the maths of poker are the same thing, I don't see the difference. Live tourneys are different from other formats but for none of the reasons you have stated.