Thanks. I had read most of the thread but missed or forgot that part. At these stakes I would expect a lot of villains to wrongly cbet/fold hands with counterfeited A2.

Do you read thread? Hero was the pf-aggressor and checked the flop for whatever reason.

Sorry for my substandard posting lately. I misunderstood "He raised pre which makes a gigantic difference" which obviously meant Hero and didn't recheck the action as I should have.

The OP said "Villain is competent player who has ability to bet counterfeited A2 and naked A3 type hands after we check it to him," but I'm not sure how our XR would be interpreted. Probably since it's a strange line, more likely to get a curiosity call. Even so if we're never folding, even a tiny bit of FE is golden.

OTOH if you cold called IP with A2Q9 and bet a T62 flop when checked to, would you feel good about calling off? For half your stack on the bubble (even if you can't be eliminated this hand)? So I think we have a little FE, and that's all we need to make it correct.

not to pile on because you are posting...putting your opinions out there,and that is commendable
however ( hopefully being helpful)
although OP made it necessary for you to 'invent' a payout structure and the stack-sizes of the 6 players at the other table, I agree with the other poster the prize pool distribution u chose is a little wonky 30% and 19.75% for 1st and 2nd doesn't seem unreasonable but the 11th and 12 0.24% doesn't seem right. additionally, your decision to have 'the invented stacks' mirror the table we see, does not represent OP's claim hero's stack was 8 of 12.
with more chips in play then you chose and hero's chips as a percentage of total chips being less will undoubtedly alter the ICM conclusions drawn.

No worries. I don't feel piled on. (Just annoyed with myself about making a bad assertion about ICM upthread and being overbearing about it. Although I still think way too many players try to fold to the mincash when they shouldn't.)

It would be nice in threads like this if people could type what data they have into a public ICM calculator. If anyone cares, I just grabbed this chart from the Borgata and knocked out the 12th place payout. It shouldn't have been 0.225%, rather 2.25% (or 0.0225) of the prize pool. It sounds as though I typoed it, so yes, that would screw up the ICM badly.

Anyway, I love peer review and appreciate those who caught the errors. Let's try some better ones. This time I hacked that Borgata 10-payout structure to 11.

Before the hand: 7.9% https://www.icmpoker.com/icmcalculator/#OQld
If we fold: 6.9% https://www.icmpoker.com/icmcalculator/#nOab
If we scoop: 12.1% https://www.icmpoker.com/icmcalculator/#QUqu
If we shove and get scooped: zero obviously.
Even split: 8.2% https://www.icmpoker.com/icmcalculator/#oQlw


If this were a single pot game we'd need about 57% chip equity. Having a two way hand reduces that number substantially so 50% seems like a good guess. The range in the OP doesn't seem reasonable--for example, I think it's hard to see villain folding KKQQ or AKQJ and we're ahead of both of those. I'd expect most villains to call any A2x here.

The ICM picture makes the flop much closer than I thought, but in the big picture I still think the mentality of playing marginal hands on the bubble and then folding with good equity is a pretty big leak for many players. No doubt moreso in bigger tournaments.

Not errors, but definitely small issues

Overall number of chips are different for the "before the hand" table = 448, and other tables 459.

I don't think that for stack so small like 3,8 BB or 6,2 BB we should make round off for two digits only.

Hope it doesn't change much.

More important - opponent range. We all play at different rooms and stakes and have different population reads. Especially for "Villain is competent player" and being on the buble

As you saw mine 2%-10% and topic starter is rather close with his (A[2-3]$w, A$w$w$B, A$w$L$B, A$w$w$L)!AA
You also could see that opp has very good 3% hand and didn't 3bet us in position, for me it's also the sign of tight opponent.

From your calculation fold on the flop and all-in on the flop is very close for range this tight, it's about 6,9% and 7,1%

i used the prizepool distribution established by AKQJ, and *basically* used the same stacks as he did for the unknown table


at start of hand (for reference only)
https://www.icmpoker.com/icmcalculator/#qUtD

hero=7.861% of prizepool



if hero folds preflop and btn steals the blinds (and no chips are exchanged at the unknown table)
https://www.icmpoker.com/icmcalculator/#BoWI

hero=7.895% of prizepool

if as played preflop and hero c/f the flop (and no chips are exchanged at the unknown table)
https://www.icmpoker.com/icmcalculator/#bpfi

hero = 6.865% of prizepool

if as played preflop and hero leads the flop and btn folds (and no chips are exchanged at the unknown table)
https://www.icmpoker.com/icmcalculator/#RWpo

hero = 9.38% of prizepool

hero goes to showdown with btn and scoops (and no chips are exchanged at the unknown table)
https://www.icmpoker.com/icmcalculator/#weMJ

hero = 12.055% of prizepool

hero goes to showdown with btn and busts (and no chips are exchanged at the unknown table)

hero = 0% of prizepool

hero goes to showdown with btn and split 50/50 (and no chips are exchanged at the unknown table)
https://www.icmpoker.com/icmcalculator/#gzDa

hero = 8.217% of prizepool

the % for the reference condition is different because AKQJ had a typo of 30 when he intended 40. (my supposition).
otherwise our figures match.

however with regard to a conclusion:

relative to folding his hand preflop (risking and losing no chips)
when hero goes to showdwon with btn:
-when Hero scoops, hero gains 4.16% of prizepool
-when Hero busts, hero loses 7.895% of prizepool
-when Hero and btn split, hero gains 0.322% of prizepool

consequently, if hero and btn were to go to showdwon 100% of the time hero didn't fold preflop
a breakeven outcome distribution would have to resemble something like hero scoops 38.75% split 39.25% and bust 22%.
and to be better than folding hero would have to scoop or split more often than that while busting less frequently, and that represents maybe an impossible range advantage for hero.

you can play around with ranges for btn in this PQL query to see how wide btn must get it in the flop for it to be +TEV for hero to go to showdown on that flop.

select
count(scoops(hero)),
count(scoops(btn))
from game='omaha8',
board='Tc2c6d',
hero='Ad4dQs6s', btn='40%6h!2%'

although hero seeing the flop and getting Btn to fold to a flop bet gains 1.485% of the prizepool

but of course hero chose to check the flop and
hero folding on the flop forfiets 1.03% of the prizepool relative to folding

BTW the hand at the other table DOES occur, chips at the other table are exchanged, so i'm not sure an analysis where we keep the other table static is a good thing.