Where ICM is lacking?

[KyleH186]

ICM doesn't lack. The only time ICM can even be refuted is in a situation where taking a slightly -EV call in order to have a bigger stack and abuse ICM more later on.

Skill in SNGs comes down to how well you know ICM. Don't fool yourself into thinking you can outsmart someone playing an unexploitable strategy.

It is unexploitable. SNGs are a mathematically solved game. They are very different from cash games in this respect.

You can make preflop raises that are all in if the blinds are not big, but once those blinds get up to where you have 10-15 BBs, you better be pushing and folding.


Edit: As far as giving up +EV spots for better ones later, that is a flawed concept. ICM deals with +$EV, which means that you will make more money by making the plays. Folding +$EV hands will lose you real dollar value in the long run, its as simple as that.

[ChipLeader]

[ QUOTE ]
ICM doesn't lack. The only time ICM can even be refuted is in a situation where taking a slightly -EV call in order to have a bigger stack and abuse ICM more later on.

Skill in SNGs comes down to how well you know ICM. Don't fool yourself into thinking you can outsmart someone playing an unexploitable strategy.

It is unexploitable. SNGs are a mathematically solved game. They are very different from cash games in this respect.

You can make preflop raises that are all in if the blinds are not big, but once those blinds get up to where you have 10-15 BBs, you better be pushing and folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

So your answer to my post is "its unexploitable because it is?"

The point I made in the "C.)" section explains why i disagree with what you just said. ICM, as I understand it, does not take into account future opportunities, it only calculates the one at hand. If it is truly exploitable, I would like to hear how. The whole point of the OP was to point out where I think it IS exploitable. If you can show me why im wrong id love to see it.

[KyleH186]

It is unexploitable because if I am shoving correctly, and correctly assessing what hands you will call me with, the only way you can cause me problems is by hurting yourself equally or more and spite calling.

[tshort]

[ QUOTE ]
It is unexploitable because if I am shoving correctly, and correctly assessing what hands you will call me with, the only way you can cause me problems is by hurting yourself equally or more and spite calling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kyle,

You are being short-sighted and the OP is correct. There are spots where even though you probably have the correct range and it is +ICMEV it could be better to make the other play.

[ADLinden]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is unexploitable because if I am shoving correctly, and correctly assessing what hands you will call me with, the only way you can cause me problems is by hurting yourself equally or more and spite calling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kyle,

You are being short-sighted and the OP is correct. There are spots where even though you probably have the correct range and it is +ICMEV it could be better to make the other play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think by this you mean tho that you will have a more +EV move in the future, which is essentially still using ICM

[ChipLeader]

[ QUOTE ]

I think by this you mean tho that you will have a more +EV move in the future, which is essentially still using ICM

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct, you are still using ICM [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] The overall point I am trying to make is that ICM only determines that in a vacuum, a push/fold is right in this instance. It does not, however, make it the BEST play. Our goal is to to make profit, it is to MAXIMIZE profit, correct? So while a push is +EV now, it may still not be the BEST play if we can get even higher EV by waiting.

Suppose you were HU and the opponent was going to push any two. You pick up AK. However, the dealer has promised me AA next hand. While this example is absurd, the point I am trying to make it that a +EV hand can still be an incorrect play if there will be better chances later.

[KyleH186]

Why not push the AK this hand, and then the AA next hand?


edit: I think the future opportunity implications are easily negated by the fact that each successful ICM push, should make the following opportunities even more lucrative due to the increase in your stack size.

[KyleH186]

The whole point of ICM is that it calculates the effect of a short term play on your long term profit. Thus, following ICM cannot be short sighted.

[tshort]

[ QUOTE ]
The whole point of ICM is that it calculates the effect of a short term play on your long term profit. Thus, following ICM cannot be short sighted.

[/ QUOTE ]

ICM models equity in tournaments according to current chip stacks. While it has shown to be close in most situations, ICM does not perfectly model your equity.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The whole point of ICM is that it calculates the effect of a short term play on your long term profit. Thus, following ICM cannot be short sighted.

[/ QUOTE ]

ICM models equity in tournaments according to current chip stacks. While it has shown to be close in most situations, ICM does not perfectly model your equity.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, ignoring the real-world corrections I addressed in another post for the moment, ICM undervalues big stacks slightly (steal equity) and overvalues micro-stacks slightly (loss of fold equity).