I am not saying there is almost no ICM with 16 players left and top heavy payouts. I am saying that it isn't that big an issue. If you had a large stack going up against a large stack there would be big ICM issues.

I also don't agree with the way OP and some other posters focus on the mincash. OP's expected payout if you did an ICM chop is probably like $3000 and the mincash is $600.

If you were short stacked late in a tournament, without payout issues, then you would be pushing really light with 7xBB. I don't think you should change it much here, because people are calling much tighter than they would call a short stack if you pushed 7xBB far from the money.

As for pushing an average hand from CO for 6xBB, it isn't that weird. I don't know whether the software tools people are using today would tell you to do it, but I think they wouldn't because they don't consider maintaining FE and future benefits of a large stack. Nash doesn't consider that either.

I don't consider it just pushing by feel to make adjustments to what push/fold software tells you. MTTSNGs are tougher today, and I wasn't playing the highest stakes, but I was crushing by making better push/fold decisions than the software recommended, way better postflop play than most of the regs, and various tricks. I was offering coaching services I was qualified for at a fair price.

Lissi is a great player, but obviously has some leaks if he thinks that the key thing in tournaments is playing for the mincash. This hand is comparable to is you had 120K chips in the WSOP ME with 200 players left to cash. I don't think any good player would advise you to focus on the mincash then.

Please elaborate on the bolded

Think it is sort of obvious. If you get allin big stack versus big stack at this stage, the amount that you gain when you win is a lot less than what you lose if you lose and bust out. That is the essence of ICM.

When you have 7xBB and half the average stack, the ratio of what you would lose busting out to what you would gain doubling up to an average stack is less than that if you gambled a big stack allin.

my eyes are bleeding

ICM does take into account fold equity. Why? Because it adjusts calling/reshoving ranges depending on who is say utg pushing (how big) . Therefore a big stack will force more folds and tighter ranges. That property is naturally incorporated in the calculations. What icm fail to do is incorporate skill edge (like what happens if others make big errors per hand and you are almost never joining them in big errors restricted only to tiny ones) (therefore we need to evaluate better what the true equity of going to 15.5bb is for example or 9.5bb because the larger your stack is the harder you make it for others if you are better. Its hard for them to make big errors vs you if you are small, even if they still make errors vs each other that can benefit you. ICM also fails to capture ideas like where 2-3 call your small push and check it to river etc. It may also be failing card removal effects when eg all 6 have folded before. ICM has many problems like that but its definitely a better step above chip EV ideas.

When down to 16 with 12 paid ICM (that can be applied to many but often is limited to 10 in links and software packages) does make a difference. You can kind of estimate how it is by assuming you have 2 tables that each pay top 6 out of 8 and split the prizes in half for each table and imagine they were playing separately if the total stacks in both tables were close and the distribution was also similar (nothing spectacularly different from one table to the other). If there are differences the results obtained this way would have to be rethought a bit or adjusted.

The fact icm introduces differences even here is seen on the calling range of the BB for example that needs 40%chip wise but 45% in terms of tournament equity vs hero pushing range. That is a big difference that may expand the range from 15% to 25% for example.

If i were to make a guess here for 7bb without having been given yet the total number of players that started and the prizes paid i would say that his equity is ~50% min cash and 50% the rest above at this point given its 1/2 below the avg stack. So there is plenty of incentive to risk but still not like a cash game. Post links to some pay structure and number of players that started to tell more. My guess is hero has about 5% (1/20) equity here (100% all prizes) (a substantial indication that icm does make a big difference in his equity vs some naive 1/16/2=1/32 on chips alone)

With 16 left ICM is definitely an issue especially because you get paid 3x the initial buyin, masque covered basically all the theoretical work in detail. I still think this is a shove because of practical ICM rather than theoretical ICM (usually irrelevant). Most of this is market dependent and the nature of MTTs is most people have no clue what they're doing with ICM in the most major of spots.

Let's say this shove has a .1% edge in theoretical ICM calcs, I think it is more if you take into consideration that hero is going to be hitting the BB soon and the blinds go up way more quickly in turbos obv, so there is an exponential loss of fEQ as more hands are played and players are lost. Even a slightly -EV ICM shove UTG is usually better than a breakeven or slightly +EV ICM shove on the BTN as long as you're at a pretty full table, because you'll probably see better spots. So if hero were on the BTN I would advise folding the bottom of his range that shows a profit, especially because people are more likely to call widely and therefore accurately.

It all comes down to how widely people will call hero in this spot and I think generally they show up with a tighter range than they should, because even sharp regs who know the right calling range vs. a range that contains 98s can't pull the trigger by calling the bottom of the theoretically right ICM range b/c they 1) don't have a big enough edge to risk crippling their stack and 2) they don't know for sure hero has 98s because he could be a nit shoving half as many hands as hero would, and therefore calling wide would be making a massive mistake.

However, if they're completely clueless and are calling it off on BB with 22 or A3o or something similar then shoving is a disaster. Every spot is different and it is all statistical chaos without a lot of info on particular players, but I still think this is a lot more profitable shove in practical play than it is in a theoretical sense.

I guess it is good people have such trouble understanding this. ICM and Nash do not consider maintaining FE for the future. Also, to my understanding there are not good models for chip values at this stage.

If you fold here with 7xBB, it probably won't be passed to you with a better hand before you hit the blinds. If you don't play a hand in another orbit, assuming the blinds do up, you will have about 3.5xBB in the same position next round. That is what I mean by losing FE and getting blinded out.

So you need pushbot with whatever halfway decent hand you have here. I would push a lot worse hands than this. People will call reasonably tight, and it is cEV+ with much worse hands than this. If you steal, you maintain a good pushbotting stack. If you double up, you have a good chance at the top places. If you just get blinded out, you probably have a worse chance at the mincash, as well as throwing away decent equity in top place finishes.

Well now since Masque found some associates HSMTT would sink in pages of hot rhetorical discussion and treatises on theoretical poker.

I wonder if you have ever played a single hand inj two-card game . No offense, jk.

(Bikram + Masque + Chiefblackfoot) = NSB/Betgo

kind of cannibalizing your coaching business by giving so much schooling for free arent you betgo?

Don't have a coaching business now, never did coach much, and was charging less than my hourly rate from playing. Not a sicko or anything, but have expertise at turbos.

Do wonder if I should give so much information here though, but not because of coaching, as so many are so insistent about not pushbotting light with 7xBB because it is near the money. I guess now you are supposed to get blinded out because of ICM or something.

Lissi says the key in tournaments in to play for the mincash. I guess he would agree with Chainsaw's approach.

#segues

Not sure I get it. What is the contradiction? Was discussing something from a couple of years ago.

Lissi implied that my coaching was lacking in value or fraudulent. Was explaining a case where I helped players avoid making a clear error by blindly following software.

Lissi obviously doesn't understand some things about bubbles, turbos, and tournament play in general, as he was implying that I was wrong to imply that the mincash wasn't the big issue in this situation.

I had a problem before where someone was maliciously posting in my coaching listing. I was put in a difficult situation, as I couldn't post my recent MTTSNG stats publically. I wouldn't offer coaching that I didn't think was a good deal.

Do you even read what people post?

Yes, we have half the average stack here. Why should we get blinded out trying to mincash?

The post you quoted doesn't say we have to get blinded out trying to mincash, nor does it say playing to mincash is the key in mtts.

You have 7xBB in a turbo. As I explained, if you fold for a round, you have about 3.5xBB at this point next round. If you steal once in the round, you have at most 6xBB at this point next round.

I don't know what Lissi is suggesting except getting blinded out if we don't pushbot any playable hand here. You can't wait for a top 10% hand. As I explained also, the mincash is not the main part of our equity here.

I suppose I am supposed to be generous in interpreting what Lissi's approach is here when he is being blatantly insulting to me.

Lissi didn't suggest anything except that you have to take into account the mincash, which is obv true/correct; he didn't say that should be your only goal or anything like that.
Your post he quoted was just a bunch of nonsense sentences (‘you have to play for top3’, ‘you have to push real light’) strung together with zero reasoning, argument or math to back it up; it’s no wonder people called you out for it.

And we all now you are an ICM expert, except when you *feel* its results are wrong or make you do funny stuff like fold AK, so no need to repeat that in every thread.

I didn't say or imply to ignore the mincash. What I said was that the mincash was not the main issue. You have half the average stack, so you should be playing with the top places in mind, not just the mincash.

I said if you double up, you have a good chance at the top 3. I didn't say you have to play for the top 3. You have 7xBB, so I said you have to push real light, lighter than 98s.

I am not clear what your strategy is at this point in the tournament if you don't pushbot light. You either do that or you will wind up defending the BB with a 2xBB pretty soon.

What does some hand I posted 4 years ago in the STT forum where I folded AK big stack versus big stack and said I wasn't sure if it was a mistake have to do with this thread? Also, what is the relevance of whether or not I am an ICM expert? I do have some expertise in turbos, and I am totally right about what I have posted in this thread.

22+, A2s+, K7s+, Q8s+, J9s+, T9s, A2o+, K9o+, QTo+, JTo

This is my range here. But after reviewing it I think that I need to correct it...
Anyway I think 98s should be closer to fold.

Are we preferring some of those hands because they have blockers? 98s should play better against a calling range than JTo, QTo, K7s, K9o, and Q8s.

just put in j6o in there as well, its in the betgocrush2008$15sequilibrium pushrange

In the example I gave, you had 6xBB in CO and people were calling very tight. If you folded for an orbit, you would have 3xBB. If you stole or doubled up, you would have a chance to run over the table. I don't care what the software says, I am going to try not to get blinded out. You have to look at the big picture and what will happen on future hands. Those equilibrium models don't consider that.

I was crushing $15s in 2011 playing that way. I don't know how it would work now. I am not saying I am that good, but what I am saying is not BS.

That's the point, you didn't say or imply anything noteworthy, you just posted some *feel* stuff without anything to back it up (except a claim to your authority).

I didn't even refer to a specific hand, it's just that you always question ICM when it advocates doing counterintuitive stuff, not because you have a solid reasoning for it, but just because it's counterintuitive.
Also, you mention your results from the poker stone ages every chance you get, so I'd say posts from 4 years ago are fair game (not that I know what post you're referring to).

You said I folded AK when I shouldn't have. I very almost never fold AK preflop in turbos. I thought that was what you were referring to.

I responded about my results from 3 years ago and why I thought I was crushing then because Lissi questioned my coaching at that time. As you know, I had someone posting in my coaching listing and so on. I felt I had excellent qualifications for the services I was offering. I have good results now too.

I wasn't posting feel stuff here. If you do ICM or whatever calculations of your stack value, you will find it is way above the mincash. Not sure if everything can be quantified here or that most of the other posters were posting in terms of numbers. No one has posted any Nash or whatever numbers here, not that I think they would be accurate. I have tried to explain as clearly as I could why it is important to avoid getting blinded out here.

Yea they block the powerhouse range like TT+ that you have horrid equity vs with 98s