Quote:
Originally Posted by Roushie
Wrt the 88 spot, do you just follow pure ICM in making your FT decisions or would a large enough EV gap between chipEV and ICM models convince you to make a -ICMEV call?
ICM clearly isn't a perfect model since it doesn't take into account future edges, i.e. us being pushed around until the shortie busts and us being able to push others around after winning the flip with 88 (a +350bb/100 hand in chipEV).
I've heard a few good regs saying that they don't follow pure ICM in every situation, but I've yet to stumble upon a robust process of deciding to what extent we should follow ICM.
Would appreciate your thoughts!
Hey man, very good question of course, for me personally I'd like to know what the ICM output will be in a certain spot and then adjust from it with something I'll call the 'FTG-factor' (F-This-Guy-factor).
The FTG-factor is an imaginary model that takes into account the significance of the buyin/payjumps of a certain mtt in regards to your roll/life situation (I don't play backed). It also takes into account how vamoo you feel at the time, the feelings you have towards the chipleading reg and of course as you said the difference in future EV wrt doubling up vs folding.
I need to perfect this model for sure
but jokes aside, this is pretty much what it comes down to. What you personally think your treshold of taking $$$-variance is and how significant a certain spot is for you. If this was the FT of the milly I'd prob fold 99. In this spot I think I would have ended up calling 88 as well, but like I said would fold 77 quickly. Fwiw ICM says fold AK as well and I don't think I would've done that either. If I was up 10k for the month, I likely snap AQ
FTG-factor, I will commercialize this at some point I think
Quote:
Originally Posted by rotisseur
even thinking about folding 99s seems absurd there to me, but ICM sometimes is absurd sort of.
congrats to the score btw!
Yeah, it's really gross to even think about
Thanks man!