Where ICM is lacking?

[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.

[ChipLeader]

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

[/ QUOTE ]

HES pushing any two. But even if i said hes CALLING any 2, its a terrible move. Do you really not see how giving up a small edge for a huge one is the right play? AK is going to be 70/30 at best, AA is going to be 75/25 at WORST, and usually 85/15. Unless blinds were a HUGE portion of your stack, and theyd have to be MONSTROUS, waiting one hand is an easy play.

[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).

[IFoldPktOnes]

Interesting discussion, thanks for clarifying a few things for me pineapple.

One concept I have trouble applying is when to take slight -EV pushes, you alluded to this above:
[ QUOTE ]

Part of the skill of STTs is understanding how important each of those five factors become in various situations, to set your minimum edge correctly. This min edge can range from quite large to potentially slightly negative (on very tough tables where the sizable blinds are about to hit you).


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

ICM undervalues big stacks slightly (steal equity) and overvalues micro-stacks slightly (loss of fold equity).

[/ QUOTE ]
So we should make slightly negative EV pushes to prevent losing our fold equity when large blinds are about to cripple our stack? An example of when this is correct would really help me out. Sometimes I find myself doing this intuitively and later look back at my HH and wonder if it was the right play.


Btw ChipLeader look closely at how you worded your example. If you meant to say the 1st toss is a "fair" bet and you have $2 after winning, then the whole example is pointless since a fair bet doesn't change expectation it only increases variance (this might be what you are getting at im not sure).