[jukofyork]

[ QUOTE ]
In the hypothetical scenario both moves have (hypothetically) the exact same $ value. It doesn't matter how often you bust out later.

If the $EV calc is done with perfect reads and an appropriately modified ICM model which takes into account the value of doubling more often when you call and short-stack skills etc etc, so that we truly are comparing like with like, then you should prefer to call because the only difference you can possibly make is in your hourly rate.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I can see that, but how does this have any relevance to choosing edges? With a perfect $EV, from a perfectly corrected ICM model, with perfect reads then there would be no need for an edge in the first place as you would simply use a zero threshold for all cases.

The whole idea of the OP was that the ICM output is not perfect and the best you can do is estimate your likely future gains and use it together with your chance of busting (or if possible, consider the different outcomes as mentioned in point 3. of the OP) to help decide on a suitable edge to use (which can be viewed as a correction factor on the ICM model's output).

I think IFoldPktOnes example does a good job of showing a real world situation where the OP's ideas may be helpful in evaluating the non-perfect ICM model's output aided by an estimate(s) of your advantage over your opponents.

Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]