pokerstars Game #21228316040: Tournament #114427550, $55+$5 Hold'em No Limit - Level XI (600/1200) - 2008/10/15 21:12:37 ET
Table '114427550 5' 9-max Seat #9 is the button
Seat 1: StaxXL (3070 in chips)
Seat 3: Giant_Green (7720 in chips)
Seat 4: alesanre (7928 in chips)
Seat 5: fishilicious (1970 in chips)
Seat 6: FROGGERT (17090 in chips)
Seat 7: banty (13624 in chips)
Seat 8: rampage7777 (14378 in chips)
Seat 9: peirao (1720 in chips)
StaxXL: posts the ante 75
Giant_Green: posts the ante 75
alesanre: posts the ante 75
fishilicious: posts the ante 75
FROGGERT: posts the ante 75
banty: posts the ante 75
rampage7777: posts the ante 75
peirao: posts the ante 75
StaxXL: posts small blind 600
Giant_Green: posts big blind 1200
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to StaxXL [6d 6c]
alesanre: folds
fishilicious: folds
FROGGERT: folds
banty: folds
rampage7777: raises 12000 to 13200
peirao: folds
StaxXL: folds
Giant_Green: folds
Uncalled bet (12000) returned to rampage7777
rampage7777 collected 3600 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 3600 | Rake 0
Seat 1: StaxXL (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: Giant_Green (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 4: alesanre folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: fishilicious folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: FROGGERT folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: banty folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: rampage7777 collected (3600)
Seat 9: peirao (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)

Honestly, not good with icm. If you know nothing about ICM pls refrain from unnecissary flamage. Any help would be greatly appreciated on this hand.

yea, this is an easy fold

Wow...I'm really curious about this spot too. I'm guessing people will say call, play to win, etc. But does ICM dictate a fold just because if you do, you'll likely get 6th place money, whereas if you call and lose you get nothing? Awaiting replies....

Is everyone serious about folding?

I hesitate to say that if you "suck at teh ICM" as you say, you have a tough road in trying to make long-term profit from the $55 45 mans. There's a lot of regulars in those with good ICM knowledge who will +EV you to death.

Look at the stacks he is shoving against (the ones he has to get through). If you all have 3k like YOU do, this is a snap call a lot of times against bubble abusers. HOWEVER, the 7k stack that is yet to act behind him when he shoves is problematic, and usually means he doesnt mind a call, so prob fold is best here.

Nothing against the ICM guys, im sure they can come up with a way to say folding is always right even if you all had 2-3BB stacks, BUT 45man SNGs have very top heavy prize pools that you have a chance at winning less often than single tables. IMO in these multi-SNGs its more important to get top $$ than simply min cash them all. Therefore, take very +EV spot you can.

 

Originally Posted by mgerman23

Nothing against the ICM guys, im sure they can come up with a way to say folding is always right even if you all had 2-3BB stacks, BUT 45man SNGs have very top heavy prize pools that you have a chance at winning less often than single tables. IMO in these multi-SNGs its more important to get top $$ than simply min cash them all. Therefore, take very +EV spot you can.

This is kinda what i thought

If you fold, your equity is $173.02.

If you call and lose, your equity is 0.

If you call and win, your equity is $326.78.

ICM-wise, you must win this hand 52.94% of the time. (173.02/326.78)

If rampage knows what he is doing, he is shoving any two here, and you are in great shape:

<TABLE class=pptSimTable cellSpacing=0 border=1><TBODY><TR class=pptSimLabels><TH>Hand</TH><TH>Pot equity</TH><TH>Wins</TH><TH>Ties</TH></TR><TR class=oddrow><TD class=pptSpec>**</TD><TD class=pptEV>36.72%</TD><TD class=pptWinsHi>4,547,183,796</TD><TD class=pptTiesHi>147,180,264</TD></TR><TR class=evenrow><TD class=pptSpec>66</TD><TD class=pptEV>63.28%</TD><TD class=pptWinsHi>7,891,070,340</TD><TD class=pptTiesHi>147,180,264</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
If rampage is shoving a more typical 20%, your 66 is behind his range, and barely a fold.

<TABLE class=pptSimTable cellSpacing=0 border=1><TBODY><TR class=pptSimLabels><TH>Hand</TH><TH>Pot equity</TH><TH>Wins</TH><TH>Ties</TH></TR><TR class=oddrow><TD class=pptSpec>20%</TD><TD class=pptEV>51.87%</TD><TD class=pptWinsHi>1,357,727,352</TD><TD class=pptTiesHi>23,879,112</TD></TR><TR class=evenrow><TD class=pptSpec>66</TD><TD class=pptEV>48.13%</TD><TD class=pptWinsHi>1,258,766,304</TD><TD class=pptTiesHi>23,879,112</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
From a strictly ICM standpoint, so long as rampage is shoving more than 1/3 of the time, you can call.

However, what ICM doesn't account for is that the other two shorties are eating the blinds before you are, so your equity, if you fold, might be just a little bit more than what's on paper. If you did a future game simulation for the next 7-8 hands, you'll find that your equity, should you fold, is really around the $200 mark! Taking this into account, you are really risking $200 to win $126 by calling. That changes everything.

Because of the intangible that ICM doesn't account for, I would only call this if you feel that rampage does indeed have the skill to shove very wide here. One look at rampage's stats clearly suggests that he is a poor beginning player (-41% over 300+ games*), and is likely entirely too tight in this situation.

Conclusion: This is a CLEAR fold.

*Note to admin - I'm not quoting stats for the purpose of berating this player, but rather because it strongly affects the hero's decision on this hand.

The ICM calculator results in Easy's post only go to 5 places, so the results within are incredibly inaccurate. It's got the hero calling 44.8% of the time (44.8%, 22+ Ax+ K2s+ K3o+ Q3s+ Q8o+ J7s+ J9o+ T7s+ T9o 97s+ 87s), which would be an insane mistake.

 

Originally Posted by Jennifear

The ICM calculator results in Easy's post only go to 5 places, so the results within are incredibly inaccurate. It's got the hero calling 44.8% of the time (44.8%, 22+ Ax+ K2s+ K3o+ Q3s+ Q8o+ J7s+ J9o+ T7s+ T9o 97s+ 87s), which would be an insane mistake.

Discovered the nash icm calculator by reading countless posts by you, and have spent spent way to much time using it ever since. But it would only let me go to 5 places and then gave an error message after that. I thought it would be a close enough approximation, but obviously I was wrong in that assumption. My bad.

So what would the correct line actually be?
And how can I figure out more payout places then 5 in the future?

Easy

 

Originally Posted by Easy Duzit

 

Originally Posted by Jennifear

The ICM calculator results in Easy's post only go to 5 places, so the results within are incredibly inaccurate. It's got the hero calling 44.8% of the time (44.8%, 22+ Ax+ K2s+ K3o+ Q3s+ Q8o+ J7s+ J9o+ T7s+ T9o 97s+ 87s), which would be an insane mistake.

Discovered the nash icm calculator by reading countless posts by you, and have spent spent way to much time using it ever since. But it would only let me go to 5 places and then gave an error message after that. I thought it would be a close enough approximation, but obviously I was wrong in that assumption. My bad.

So what would the correct line actually be?
And how can I figure out more payout places then 5 in the future?

Easy

The Nash calculator is a great tool. Basically what happened in your post is that the calculator assumes $0 for 6th and 7th so that's what threw off the whole thing.

It would be impossible to replicate ICM using that tool for this situation because, indeed, the tool only goes to 5 spots.

If that tool could be used to go 7 spots, the line it would give is something like this:

Pusher shoving about 80% of all hands.

Hero calling with about 30% of all hands, maybe a little more.

But the reality of the situation is that the pusher is shoving 20%ish because he's not that good (most likely playing the cards in front of him rather than his position/stacks and waiting for a decent ace or good king to shove), and, ICM-wise, we can call about 7-8% because of this.

If you add in the factor that the shorter stacks eat the blinds before you (future game simulation), we have to be even tighter, perhaps as tight as 88, AJs+, AQo+ to call.

Hope that makes sense because it's really freakin complicated.

 

Originally Posted by Cashweekly

 

Originally Posted by Jennifear

If you fold, your equity is $173.02.

If you call and lose, your equity is 0.

If you call and win, your equity is $326.78.

ICM-wise, you must win this hand 52.94% of the time. (173.02/326.78)

If rampage knows what he is doing, he is shoving any two here, and you are in great shape:

<TABLE class=pptSimTable cellSpacing=0 border=1><TBODY><TR class=pptSimLabels><TH>Hand</TH><TH>Pot equity</TH><TH>Wins</TH><TH>Ties</TH></TR><TR class=oddrow><TD class=pptSpec>**</TD><TD class=pptEV>36.72%</TD><TD class=pptWinsHi>4,547,183,796</TD><TD class=pptTiesHi>147,180,264</TD></TR><TR class=evenrow><TD class=pptSpec>66</TD><TD class=pptEV>63.28%</TD><TD class=pptWinsHi>7,891,070,340</TD><TD class=pptTiesHi>147,180,264</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
If rampage is shoving a more typical 20%, your 66 is behind his range, and barely a fold.

<TABLE class=pptSimTable cellSpacing=0 border=1><TBODY><TR class=pptSimLabels><TH>Hand</TH><TH>Pot equity</TH><TH>Wins</TH><TH>Ties</TH></TR><TR class=oddrow><TD class=pptSpec>20%</TD><TD class=pptEV>51.87%</TD><TD class=pptWinsHi>1,357,727,352</TD><TD class=pptTiesHi>23,879,112</TD></TR><TR class=evenrow><TD class=pptSpec>66</TD><TD class=pptEV>48.13%</TD><TD class=pptWinsHi>1,258,766,304</TD><TD class=pptTiesHi>23,879,112</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
From a strictly ICM standpoint, so long as rampage is shoving more than 1/3 of the time, you can call.

However, what ICM doesn't account for is that the other two shorties are eating the blinds before you are, so your equity, if you fold, might be just a little bit more than what's on paper. If you did a future game simulation for the next 7-8 hands, you'll find that your equity, should you fold, is really around the $200 mark! Taking this into account, you are really risking $200 to win $126 by calling. That changes everything.

Because of the intangible that ICM doesn't account for, I would only call this if you feel that rampage does indeed have the skill to shove very wide here. One look at rampage's stats clearly suggests that he is a poor beginning player (-41% over 300+ games*), and is likely entirely too tight in this situation.

Conclusion: This is a CLEAR fold.

*Note to admin - I'm not quoting stats for the purpose of berating this player, but rather because it strongly affects the hero's decision on this hand.

A few things here....

Clearly a "future game simulation" is useful here. I would be very interested in knowing how you get $200 doing this.

Knowing villian is losing player makes me ill, as I put any decent player on ATC.

Do you have an ICM calculator that does 7 prizes??

While it is well known what I think of ICM, (the jelly bean game) I think most people do not understand, that this is not a 50 30 20 sit n go, and ICM is alot closer to chip equity than most people think.

The $200 is an estimation. Our ICM equity is $173, but it's definitely going to be higher than that with the blinds positioned the way they are. I didn't do an actual future game simulation with this (it would be a REAL pain in the ass to try it!) but ICM definitely doesn't account for this.

Villain being -41% ROI is definitely the single most deciding factor in my fold. Makes me sick too! I figure a player like this to be playing the cards in front of him rather than the situation, and that's what is causing our range to tighten so darn much.

ICM Calculator: 10 places <<calculator with 10 prizes

It's a common misconception that ICM on the 45-man bubble keeps cEV and $EV closer together than ICM on the 9-man bubble. Shockingly to most, cEV and $EV are very different in many situations on the 45-man bubble, much like the 9-man bubble. It's a misconception because much has been written about the 9-man bubble, but not much about the 45-man bubble, so many people treat it as a cEV game.

I'll prove it.

Step 1:

ICM Calculator: 10 places

Try stacks of 7000 5000 3000 1000 in a 10-man SNG (prizes 50 30 20). 7000 shoves. Figure out how often 5000 must win in order to call.

Step 2:

ICM Calculator: 10 places

Try stacks of 18000 13500 12000 10000 5000 4000 3000 2000 in a 45-man SNG (prizes 154 110 77 55 44 33 22). 18000 shoves. Figure out how often 13500 must win in order to call.

You'll quickly see that the gap between cEV and $EV is very similar in both games!

Jennifear,

Have my babies?

Yours truly,
Camz

Insta-call

"I very much agree with you that ICM isn't the be-all, end-all. While it remains the best way to analyze SNG situations,"

Actually I think your "future hand analysis" or whatever you called it is often a better way..... alot of these situations modeling the next few hands is waaaay better than ICM. Most people will tell you that it is too complicated to make such models.....but an imperfect one of these is going to be better than "perfect" ICM