I have heard that doubling up first hand of a 50$ mtt only earns you 20$ more on avg. I was wondering if this changes if its a turbo or hyper, cause then you are sooner into middle/late game and having a double stack there is worth more then 70 right?

That seems WAY too low. Assuming $50 in prize pool (50+5 for example), the ICM value of a full double is closer to $40 than $20.

Nope, its worth 60-70 at best

I think you are both over generalizing. I think we absolutely need to know the number of players in the field and the prize distributions to determine the ICM value of an earlier double. In a three table MTT it will be worth a lot more ICM value than in the WSOP main event. In a top heavy payout structure, it should be worth less.

Sure, structure matters.

I don't get the top heavy quote; at the extreme, a winner take all, it is 100%. In a super flat structure, like a satellite, it is worth less. Size of tournament absolutely matters, the bigger the tournament, the less a double is worth as mentioned.

If you think the risk premium in those so high, you shouldn't even be playing the early levels. Getting it in with AK vs 72o would be a losing proposition. This in itself proves you can't be right. Tournaments would collapse.

If I was an online player, so we could do this, I'd crossbook myself at this rate anytime I get the 2x early. You can sell it to me at $75 and see how you do.

You even doubled down and 60-70 at best. At 60, you'd be losing $ getting it in with an overpair.

I trust https://www.raiseyouredge.com/tourna...to-study-first more then I trust a random donk on 2p2

Then why did you even pose the question here?

That advice is so bad, its laughable. Seriously. If I were to show whoever wrote this dreck the math, they'd laugh and say 'I was exaggerating to make a point'. Do you really think any competent player would just fold AK if someone shoved 72 and showed his cards? Would you?

I don't mind being called a random donk. Whoever wrote that is surely a better player than I am. But they just as surely don't understand the math of tournament poker if they think the right range is 60-70.

I read the article to which this advice comes from. He doesn't specify some structure that might emphasize his point. He just says 'in a $50 tournament'.

I'd love to see the 'real' math here, as best as it is with the current state of the art. I don't have access to some big ICM solver, but maybe someone who does can help here.

FWIW, in a 15 player tournament, ICM says a double takes your chip stack from $50 to $94.76, that's with 20% of the field paid, 370/210/170

That link is probably for large field slow non-PKO tournaments assuming everyone plays GTO or something, I was wondering if that might change alot for smaller fields and hypers? How does time control impact it?

This is so obviously wrong, and a good example for why you don't just take someone's word on the basis of him being an (alleged) expert on the matter as a person. It actually doesn't change the math at all who says it and with what authority, the calculation is the only thing that matters.

I imagine the bigger the field, the less you gain from doubling up at the very beginning, but I'm not really sure about that. Similarly, the flatter the payouts, the less a double-up benefits you (obviously most seen in satellites). But at the same time, you can't really start passing up massive edges just because it's early in the tournament.

Even in a $50 tournament where we assume doubling up the first hand takes your equity from $50 to $70, you would need 71.4% equity to break even on getting your stack in (and that's without any pot odds). That makes KK close preflop, but I mean, how often are you even getting the opportunity to get it in preflop on the first hand? (Especially since so many tournaments will allow you to re-enter at that stage.)

So I wouldn't worry as much about ICM early in a tournament because the decisions it affects are so rarely going to come up. Mostly you need slightly better than break even to make an all-in call profitable, until you get close to the money bubble where the ICM effect spikes, before flattening out again until you get close to the final table.

I think the usual estimate for ICM factor / bubble factor in large MTT is < 1.1 at the start of the tourney. 1.1 would make the value of chips won 1/1.1 x chips risked so a double up would be worth 1.909 x starting stack - so something like $95 for a $50 tourney

$95 is the number of one my gurus suggested as well.

And assuming that calculation is correct, you would need 52.63% equity to break even on a call.

So, slightly more than breakeven by chip EV, but not so much so you should be making major adjustments.

And that, of course, is on a call you'd normally need 50% to break even, which is never actually the case because of the pot odds. If I did the calculation correctly, for example, if you're getting 2:1 on your call then you would need 35.71% instead of 33 1/3% equity to break even.

This also presumes you're risking your entire stack, so the calculation changes a bit if you're not; there is still an ICM effect, but less so. (Practically speaking, since your last chips are your most valuable ones, you really don't have to worry about ICM much outside of the bubble and final two tables if you're not putting your own stack at risk.)

I just build my own ICM simulator and seems 90-95 is right for 50 turney. Wonder how they got the 60-70 figure though or what assumptions they use

I am getting 95$ of double up even for 2000 man turneys, case closed

If you are willing to listen to a donk, go back and read my earlier post. You’ll see why he came up with this number.