Hi,

Is it possible to calculate more than 15 players' equities on the ICM calculator? How does ICMIZER handle so many players' equities but the calculator only 15?

Thanks

Current ICM calculator uses very old code, it was released way before MTT ICM calculator and other changes ICMIZER saw over last year.

It will get a good update soon though (probably this week).

Regarding handling many players: precise ICM algorithm is only able to handle up to ~ 20 players tops. ICMIZER can handle way more than that because it uses special optimized fast version of ICM algorithm, which allows that many players, but is a little less precise than slow version.

I have same problem.

Account: Mishko,

Please at your earliest,

Thanks.

Will the update increase the maximum possible players? This would be pretty sweet.

CaulDRON_of_WisDoM, increased your limits, happy icmizing =)

CheezOnToast, I could do that, although I currently plan to leave 15 limit, but it will be an improvement, because in current ICMIZER version upper boundary is probably 11-12 tops, 13+ playrs and payouts will hang for hours/days.

Can you tell in which kind of case you would like to use ICM calculator for more than 15 players?

Specifically around the bubble in a 180-man, so around 28-35 players. Excuse my lack of knowledge in this area but wouldn't the less accurate algorithm be able to handle that?

Sure, it could. Just ICM calculator for that many players sounds like something, which will be VERY rarely used. You realize that entering 28 stacks is already a very boring and difficult task, then 27 payouts? =)

I'll give it a thought, but no promises here =)

I didn't think about the tediousness of entering all the stacks and payouts but a way to get around that could be to have a similar format to the ICM calculator over at holdemresources.net, where the user can paste the stacks and payouts in in one go. S**t would be so cash. You'd have the best ICM calculator in town.

when does future game simulation come?

bbfreak, I understand that a lot of people are waiting for it, and it has very high priority currently. However as it goes with difficult software I have to fight different issues, bugs, which seriously slow down new feature development.

My realistic goal would be to have it ready this summer.

I have something pretty exciting coming up, another long awaited feature, will be ready in near week, hope everyone will enjoy it.

ok thanks

where can i see what changes are made from 1.2 to 1.3
dont wanna miss any feature^^

I am covering minor updates mostly on facebook page.

Regarding 1.2 which was pretty major I have prepared this review article: http://www.pokericmcalculator.com/en...-calculations/

hi

a spot does confuse me, not sure if the calc is right

http://www.pokericmcalculator.com/icmizer/#uPKC

had this rare spot. strangely enough WITH the 845 chip shorty i can call with TT
but WITHOUT him
http://www.pokericmcalculator.com/icmizer/#bciN

i must fold. ingame it was WITH the shorty.

icmizer cant do 4 way allins, but looks like this is just a chance of a 4way allin (if utg calls)

i think my ranges are close to right. mp was spewy (in fact he had KQo lol....)

why is the result so different? the 845 chip guy does matter so much?

ty

In this case its very likely that 4 way all-in will happen. And ICMIZER doesn't take 4 way all-ins into account. So in this kind of spots results should be seriously questioned, as its very likely that they will be close to useless.

To be clear, on the first link big stack raised, and there are 2 all-ins already behind him, before hero. If you shove, ICMIZER will consider that utg folds 100% of the time, which will give you a wider range, of course.

ok thanks for your prompt reply

sick this call did cost almost 1/3 of a buyin


bugreport

http://************/image/n6lqjr1kd/

Yep, aware of it thanks. Will be fixed on monday tops I hope.

hi there, I cant seem to change the payout options. Whenever I change it, it goes back to default 9/10 max. What are the different meanings of the output?

Hey ThatsAGoodCard, that sounds strange.

Generally switching between payouts and performing calculations has no chance to switch it back to 9/10 max.

There is a chance that such switch happens when you parse a hand though, and sum of chips is equal to 13500 (default 9 max chips sum). Could you describe an exact scenario of how it happens for you.

Regarding output
1) Chip EV - pretty straightforward, shows ev in chips
2) ICM %EV - shows EV in ICM % of total prize pool
3) ICM $EV - you need to enter tournament prize pool (without rake) in this mode. Then it will multiply ICM %EV values on prize pool size and you will see exactly how much money each hand will make you.

This can be helpful for MTTs where its hard to guess how good "0.01%" of prize pool can be.

idk i am super frustrated. running ridic bad and then in addition such spots which cost so much that i cant overcome it.

http://www.pokericmcalculator.com/icmizer/#WTSn

i never know what to do in such spots. thats why i asked for future game.
going allin does cost 0.9 % of the pricepool? sick
should i wait for the bb? what do you suggest ty

Well you clearly want to take a negative EV (single hand analysis) shove in spot like this. Playing only +EV would be a mistake when your stack is as shallow as 2BB like here.

Check your EV fold, its 8.83%. EV of 98s shove is -0.9%, but next hand BB hitting you will roughly take away half of your equity, if you choose to fold (you cant fold, but it should make sense what I am talking about). So I would assume that open shoving at least -1% EV would be a smart move in such spot.

Like this
http://www.pokericmcalculator.com/icmizer/#LwYJ

Maybe more, but of-course you open up your shoving range once you get to this spot. Next hand you are commited with ATC to call against anyone.

Think about next hand. Once you post blind you will have to call a shove with ATC against anyone, so immediate thought without any analysis is that if you shove top 25% hands now you will be making a smart tournament move.

Correct shortstacked plays from early positions do affect your ROI. However generally your equity is quite slim once you get in this stage, and even playing super great won't likely turn your 2BB stack in a lot of cash. Correct push/fold plays as big and medium stack will guarantee you pretty solid foundation for being a +EV player. Then you can polish less important spots, like short stack play in hands like this.

wow many thanks i know its not your task to answer that. you def. keep your customers happy^^

i am happy that the play was ok. since the payout structure is not topheavy, i thought its important to outlast others, but my equity wasnt great anyway. in fact it was a frustration ship bc i lost QQ the hand before (thats why i have 2bb now).

everyone says that a -1% is a huge error (in your latest article too^^).

would you say that a -1% mistake at a 9man is the same as -0.2% in 45man?
(and -0.05 in 180s)
both does cost 8.3 % of a buyin. so if the roi is 4.2% i burn profits of 2 tournaments?

my buddy did today a -1% mistake in a 180s FT which should be 20x as bad than at 1-table!?


ps: found another bug: send you per mail: new players got seated at a fulltable, but they got no cards. so it was 7handed in reality (instead of 9way). the HH load did not work

ty for your answers. i love it^^

Ok basically when I go to the options tab, I select the payout tab and choose another option, for example 'hu/winner take all'. But I can't save this option, and once I leave the options menu it returns back to default 9 max.

ThatsAGoodCard , Hm. Just change payout from main ICMIZER window.
You can't really change payout from options tab. Let me know if you have any troubles, I guess you didn't quite understand idea of ICMIZER user interface and I thought it was very obvious. Or maybe I still misunderstand you.

bbfreak Regarding article, note that there we analyze a very specific spot, in which it makes little to no sense to take negative spot.

In case when we analyze open shove from UTG with 2 blinds, and only take 1 hand into account you basically face a limitation of ICMIZER which currently looks at situation as if there are no future hands, which is fine in 98%+ cases. However when you are left with 2 BB on UTG, its an exact spot where this limitation leads to misleading results. So you fix this limitation by manually widening up the shoving range.

To evaluate error size just multiply it on prize pool. Thats the error cost. Just again, sometimes its error, and in case when you have 2BB UTG its a program limitation, where its completly different.

I am able to change the payout structure if im using icm$ev or icm%ev but not for chipcev. is that normal?

In Chip EV there is no payout structure. Calculation is performed in chips, and you ignore actual payout.