BB's vs. Harrington's M in STT SnGs (Long)

[Jbrochu]

I've often seen posters in the STTF incorrectly criticize and even berate other posters for using M instead of using the number of BB's as a measuring stick for applying the appropriate level of aggressiveness to the current game conditions. Oftentimes, these posters equate using the number of BB's to the proper use of ICM, and equate using M to the improper use of ICM. That is wrong as ICM can be correctly applied no matter if you choose to use BB's or M as your measuring stick.

The fact is, BB's and M are different tools for measuring the same thing: how a chip stack compares to the blinds and antes, and therefore how aggressive one needs to play. As a matter of fact, M is actually more meaningful once antes come into play because the BB measuring stick ignores them. (All good SnG players "recalibrate" their BB measurement once antes come into play.)


Example Hand:

Stack size: 2,000
Players remaining: 5
Blinds 100/200

Number of BB's = 10
M = 6.6

The appropriate level of aggressiveness for this situation where your number of BB's equals 10, your M equals 6.6, and all other conditions are equal is exactly the same. The only difference is that under these conditions a good player using M will likely be making push/fold decisions with his M around 6, while a good player using the BB measurement will likely be making push/fold decisions with his BB measurement around 10.

Any ICM calculation performed under the conditions as described in this example hand would return the same result whether or not the player happens to be applying BB's or M as his "aggressiveness barometer." Telling a SnG player to "use ICM not M" is wrong and demonstrates an incomplete understanding of the M and ICM tools.


Justifiable Caution regarding M:

If you use M in conjunction with the "Zone System" as described by Harrington in Harrington on Hold'Em, Volume II to make end game decisions in STT SnG's you will find yourself making lots of $EV mistakes. The reason for this is not strictly a problem with M but the fact that Harrington has his M figure calibrated for the typical MTT payout structure which usually heavily rewards finishing in the top 2 or 3 percent of the field. This results in hyper aggressive recommendations, especially at full or near full tables, as compared to the "correct" move in a similar situation with the flat STT payout structure. To successfully use M in STTs you must ignore many of Harrington's recommendations and recalibrate your M figures.


So Why do We Recommend Using the Number of BB's Over M...?

- Convention

As almost every STT SnG player uses BB's instead of M when discussing hands in the STTF you will get more accurate and informed responses when talking BB's instead of M for posted hands. (A big reason this came to be is a few years ago most SnG structures did not include antes, plus Harrington’s M measurement had not yet been published.)

- Simplicity

It's just plain easier to calculate the number of BB's than it is to calculate M and that is important when multitabling. Good players adjust their BB measurement, and thus their aggressiveness level, when antes come into play.

[taipan168]

Good post. One spot where I do think that M vs BBs matters is between the 100/200 and 100/200 ante 25 levels on Stars. Using BBs does not capture the antes which can make quite a big difference to push/fold decisions because of the additinal dead chips in the pot.

[ger664]

I use the following to calculate effective BB with antes in play.

(antes + blinds)*2/3. Use the result as your BB.

Excellent post and some of it could be added to the FAQ.

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]
(antes + blinds)*2/3. Use the result as your BB.


[/ QUOTE ]

I never really tried to come up with a quantifiable means of accounting for antes when using the BB method like you and beano suggested. That's a good idea.

I usually just go, oh I have 8 BB's plus there are antes so.... push/call looser.

Of course the antes get taken into account when doing pot odds and ICM calcs so they're not totally unquantified.

[DevinLake]

I use ger's method.

[PokahPokah]

[ QUOTE ]
I use the following to calculate effective BB with antes in play.

(antes + blinds)*2/3. Use the result as your BB.


[/ QUOTE ]

could you put an example down , im pretty retarded at maths [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Jbrochu]

This is what I think he means:

Blinds 100/200 + 25
Assume 4 players


SB100 + BB200 + Total_Antes100 = 400

400(.66) = 264


So if your stack was 2000 your effective BB is 7.6 instead of 10.

[MikeMcQ1]

Very good post for the n00bs. FAQ quality! Too bad Tigerite isn't here to appreciate it.

[PokahPokah]

nice post jb

[beano583]

Newb to the site...playing on PStars

One thing I do to incorporate both theories into one...

I add 2 BBs to my short stack zone when antes kick in. so I'm pushing at 12-14 BBs instead of the normal 6-10 range.