Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusemandingo
It's a little of each I guess, but more of the latter. I know that I'm an above average player so I take the equity that an average person would have in this situation and adjust. I don't think you can say that because you have x% ROI so you can add x% to what average equity is. Like I said before, these numbers are not scientific and not exact, but I have a feeling if we could somehow do an experiment, my handicapped ICM at a certain point of of a tourney would be closer than the ICM calculation.
Was out while this whole thread happened, but interesting analysis of the "Folding AA preflop" theory, thanks for starting the thread.
I recall the beginnings of a debate in the old DON thread on the adequacy (or inadequacy) of ICM in these type of STTs, but I don't think it really got anywhere near any conclusions or alternatives.
Ruseman, it would be ridiculous to for anyone to attempt argue that your system (above) doesn't work for you, because your results definitely prove otherwise, so I wonder if other players may want to (or even be able to) use this model to develop their own sense of how they are doing in a particular game. If it were ever turned into some sort of concrete method rather than just instinctive feel, then instead of being calculated every time from a mathematical principle in the manner of ICM, perhaps such a system as yours would have a huge lookup database of actual results.
It would have to be some kind of multi-dimensional table though, considering stack size, relative stack size, strength of opposition, blind level, number of players. Some sort of colossal pivot table perhaps.
Might not be +$ev to spend time on it at the expense of actually playing though unless you could sell it at the end. I suppose there really is no substitute for experience.