I understand that the Sklansky-Chubokov charts show when you can expect positive EV by pushing vs a single opponent (assuming your opponent knows your cards), but... EV isn't how I should be evaluating plays in a tournament.

Suppose it's down to four people in a SNG. And suppose the following stack sizes:

Villian 1 = 9BB
Me = 9BB
Villian 2 = 50BB
Villian 3 = 3BB

In a case like that, Sklansky-Chubokov might say that I'll be EV+ by pushing my K7o vs the other guy with 9BB, but that doesn't take into account that there's a short stack at the table. Rather than making a play where I'm, say, a 60% favorite (and thus 40% of the time I'm going to bust out and make no money), it seems smarter to give the short stack the chance to bust out first, when he's forced to play J5o, for example.

I know Sklansky-Chubokov is just a guide, esp. one that tells you if you're too conservative, but it seems to me that at times it would actually be too loose since it's using EV and not something like ICM.

Thoughts?

The Sklansky-Chubukov table is meant to be an equilibrium strategy for Heads Up play.

It doesn't take account of ICM, as it was never developed to be used at a table with more than 2 players.

ICM doesn't existing in heads up play. You can't ladder anymore

Hi,

As stated, no it does not so we shouldn't base our decision on it. Better off getting to know ICM and relevant ICM-based tools to familiarize with more on payouts, hand ranges, stacks, what factors are influencing what at which points in the tournament etc...

Feel free to post HHs/strat questions etc but as this has been answered and the example is very vague, we can close it down. GL!