ICM? In Cake Mode, obviously. Can I borrow your diary please TK to answer a question somebody asked me in a chat box last night. So, playing last night, someone asked me why I play so differently at night than I do during the day. Almost immediately someone else at the table, piped up and said something along the lines of 'I've wondered that'. I said in the chat box, too long to explain whilst playing and to read the diary, so here goes. During the day, I find the games very much a challenge, there are some very good players who if at a table make it very difficult. I like that challenge, I like to try to play my best during the day. It's during the day that I play (usually!) a standard, solid game. Or as solid as I am able, anyways, that's how I play during the day. Evening time is a different matter entirely. I then play entirely 100% for fun. I enjoy the chat (if I'm able to participate) and donking certain people! I don't exactly play like a lunatic, but, I don't play in a way in which I would advocate anyone follows or replicates! I'll call light, come over the top with nowt if I think I can force a fold, I'll see more flops, I'll limp in etc etc. I have a stack size threshold, in relation to levels, in which I won't go below and will get my chips in the middle with average (to say the least) hands, when during the day, I'd be folding. Winning money playing this game has never bothered me one ounce. If I played my A game all the time, I'd possibly be a wee bit more profitable, but it's not enough to make any difference in the grand scheme of things anyway. Sorted. Posted by Macacgirl1
I just googled ICM and after reading about it for five minutes, I have almost lost the will to live. Posted by Macacgirl1
!
It is a bit "heavy", but it is essential to know.
However, many people instinctively "feel it", which is fine.
It's like the maths & odds in NLHE, people argue about a few %. Thewy, for example, does not "know" any of the exact numbers, but has a perfect "feel" for pot odds. I would imagine Matt bates, Scotty, TommyD & the like are the same.
I do smile a little when I see a PHA debate arguing about a few % points. It's all guesswork UNLESS we exactly know villain's hand.
ICM is a bit uphill to learn at first, but once you get a feel for it, you sort of no longer need it - because it gives you the logic, the theory, the "feel" of what we should do.
And you soon know who does not understand it, when they limp-fold from a, say, 4 BB stack, or call 80% of their stack when, in reality, they can - or SHOULD - never fold now. Betting 1,000 from 3,000 & a player with 1,200 flat calls is a bit bizarre, but we see it every night.
Had an interesting comment in the chat last night. There was an UTG raise and then 3 calls. I pass my BB and UTG guy says something like, you seriously folding there you're getting 7/1. Playing my last 10 or so BBs it's like 25% of my stack and with K6o and that action it's never going to be pretty. I can shove of course but I'm getting at least one call in a BH there, I can wait.
The maths of it doesn't not only apply to that instant decision, there are reverse implied odds of calling there, and a loss of fold equity that I retain by keeping the extra chips for the following hands. A lot of the %s we need to make the correct decisions must be estimated, so for most situations a 'feel' for it is enough.
Had an interesting comment in the chat last night. There was an UTG raise and then 3 calls. I pass my BB and UTG guy says something like, you seriously folding there you're getting 7/1. Playing my last 10 or so BBs it's like 25% of my stack and with K6o and that action it's never going to be pretty. I can shove of course but I'm getting at least one call in a BH there, I can wait. The maths of it doesn't not only apply to that instant decision, there are reverse implied odds of calling there, and a loss of fold equity that I retain by keeping the extra chips for the following hands. A lot of the %s we need to make the correct decisions must be estimated, so for most situations a 'feel' for it is enough. Posted by bbMike
Agree.
There was a similar comment in a PLO8 DYM last night, when the BB folded to an all-in shove of 2 Bigs, (one caller already) even though it was very little more to call. He is not OBLIGED to call here if he has spanners.
The SB maybe should call here, but.....the shortie was a very good player.
The thing here is how wise is it to treble up a very good player, especially at a stage when we are all playing relatively shallow, around 8 Bigs average?
I found myself in the same spot later when the Shortie SB shoved on my big, & I folded to a chorus of "really?"
Back to fun for a moment, I deliberately made a horrendous play last night, when I was monsta chippie, I just could not help myself. I knew how terribad it was, but I could not resist, especially as Twiglet was in the BB.
So I potted it with the old A-A-A-A, then showed after they all folded.
Two interesting spots came up in the £11ers last night. In the first, I had doubled up early - too early really, so with low blinds, a long wait followed. Every now & then I'd find a hand, potted it, everyone dutifully folded, & I'd maintain my healthy stack. Unusually, & with good reason, I "showed" my hand every time so they knew I was only playing premium hands. Then I found A-K-9-2 DS, so potted it, & got re-raised. We can never be in terrible shape here, but did I need to risk it? I can fold & still be chip leader, & to make it more awkward, the raiser - Gelders - was 2nd in chips. Pre-flop I'm pretty sure I probably have the better hand. Bit of an awkward spot, but I could not find the fold, & was never peeling, so in they went, & I got turned over. It was quite a spectacular bad beat, (or so I thought at the time) but it never bothered me a jot, & I never complained, just typed "N1 Gelders". A geezer not in the pot then pipes up " you should have folded pre, for ICM reasons ". He may have been right, in truth, though the timing of his comment was a tad off I thought. Several people typed "WHO should have folded?", lol, as the two hands were very different. Anyway, maybe I should hsave found the fold? Dunno, my hand was really strong. I looked it up later on an odds calculator, as I was intrigued. I was 54% - 46% fave pre-flop in equity terms. I scoop 35% of the time, v 29% the "villain" scoops. So, remarkably, I'm not THAT far ahead pre-flop, though I'd love to take that match up 10,000 times. Perhaps a bad play in a DYM, & a great play in a Cash game? On balance, & with hindsight, think I should have folded pre. Goodbye £11..... Posted by Tikay10
It all depends on table situations. ICM can be helpful in some formats of the game however in hi lo dyms I feel it to be a negative factor. The reason for this is because it can lead you down the wrong path. What ICM can't tell you is about table situations and I feel table situations is the biggest factor in this form of the game. Its OK saying the percentages say x y z, and if you want to play and make small profits here and there then yes use ICM and fold the hand. However to be more advanced you have to get a grip of situational play. For example, I noticed very early on that geldy was playing with a wider range than normal. Now in the pot talked about if noticed that has to be taken into account and even gives tiks more fuel to make the call even if ICM is saying differently. Therefore its a call for me. Trust me play the situation and not the stats in this game you will be amazed just how clearer this game becomes instead of the confusing mind blowing world of ICM
I was playing in a PLO8 MTT on Sunday and got to final table. It became quite obvious that the chip leader was playing hands more suited to PLO than PLO8 (Broadway type hands,etc.) Ended up losing to him HU.
Given that there is always a Hi winning hand, what do you think of this type of play in an MTT?
The other interesting (?...) spot was versus Hotwheals. We both had full stacks, I had good Aces, A-A-2-x, can't recall exactly. We both know & understand each others ranges. He knows I am strong here. As he had opened, I re-potted, & he flatted, I'm pretty sure he had a combo hand, some combo of A-K-Q-2 or A-K-Q-3. I can, pretty closely, assign a range to him here. He's never going to show up with a weirdo holding. The flop raised a red flag immediately - paired Kings, K-K-x. I insta thought "does he have the King?" The King forms a sizeable part of his range in this very specific spot, so yes, he can have it. But if I check, or show weakness, even without the King, he can steal it off me. I dithered momentarily, & decided to press on, even though he re-potted me. He does not HAVE to have the King. But he did. Think his hand was the very respectable A-K-3-2 or somesuch. Think I should have folded when he took off on that flop, but that's easy to say with hindsight. He is huge fun to play, & a real test. I generally keep out of his way, but if I have a hand, we'll go to war. Posted by Tikay10
Now I have explained situational play here is a good example of it. If I had been playing tiks hand I would have given up once I had seen the K. The reason for this is because tiks already has two of the aces and he knows my game well enough to know that I have something decent so with that in mind the likelihood of me having one king is almost certain in this spot, so yes in this situation it has to be a fold.
In Response to Re: Can an old dog learn new tricks? : Now I have explained situational play here is a good example of it. If I had been playing tiks hand I would have given up once I had seen the K. The reason for this is because tiks already has two of the aces and he knows my game well enough to know that I have something decent so with that in mind the likelihood of me having one king is almost certain in this spot, so yes in this situation it has to be a fold. Posted by Hotwheals
Thanks Hotty, & yes, I eventually realised that I made the wrong decision.
The fact that I lost the hand is irrelevant, of course. It was just a piece of poor judgement.
Against some players, it would be the correct play, of course. A serial tea-leaf, (mention no names) can easily try & rep the king here.
In Response to Re: Can an old dog learn new tricks? : It all depends on table situations. ICM can be helpful in some formats of the game however in hi lo dyms I feel it to be a negative factor. The reason for this is because it can lead you down the wrong path. What ICM can't tell you is about table situations and I feel table situations is the biggest factor in this form of the game. Its OK saying the percentages say x y z, and if you want to play and make small profits here and there then yes use ICM and fold the hand. However to be more advanced you have to get a grip of situational play. For example, I noticed very early on that geldy was playing with a wider range than normal. Now in the pot talked about if noticed that has to be taken into account and even gives tiks more fuel to make the call even if ICM is saying differently. Therefore its a call for me. Trust me play the situation and not the stats in this game you will be amazed just how clearer this game becomes instead of the confusing mind blowing world of ICM Posted by Hotwheals
That was the first thing I considered - the fact that Geldy has widened his range.
Against, say, Alexis74, or Pompeynic, & most others "Team Solid Crew" I NEVER make that play.
I'm a little distrustful of all that GTO stuff, I think individual opponents need to be treated differently.
Much appreciate the advice, by the way, thank you.
This is not in any way dissing Geldy, it's just something that was relevant to the play. He has widened his range, so I can widen mine.
It was too good a spot to turn down. Or so I thought.
Hi Tony Question for you: I was playing in a PLO8 MTT on Sunday and got to final table. It became quite obvious that the chip leader was playing hands more suited to PLO than PLO8 (Broadway type hands,etc.) Ended up losing to him HU. Given that there is always a Hi winning hand, what do you think of this type of play in an MTT? Cheers Mick Posted by VespaPX
Personally, I'm not mad keen on that. I prefer some insurance at both ends.
Heads up in an MTT though, the options do change significantly, as we need to widen our range considerably.
Sorry hottie but I'm not buying the argument that tikay should call just because he is well ahead of my range. He is risking his dym on an unnecessary gamble. i totally agree that he can try to get me to fold but the ICM of getting it all in vs the other big stack is so -ve ev. i am definitely in Suzy's camp with that one.
Sorry hottie but I'm not buying the argument that tikay should call just because he is well ahead of my range. He is risking his dym on an unnecessary gamble. i totally agree that he can try to get me to fold but the ICM of getting it all in vs the other big stack is so -ve ev. i am definitely in Suzy's camp with that one. Posted by GELDY
That would be VERY exploitable Geldy.
If I should ALWAYS fold there, then you (or anyone else, with ANY holding) would ALWAYS reraise a big stack there & force them to fold. That can't be right, can it?
The equation is a basket of things to consider.
ICM
The Opponent's likely holding
The % chances of winning or losing.
The % chance of forcing villain to fold.
They all need taking into consideration.
Don't think we MUST fold just because ICM says so, it feels more "informal" & position specific to me.
Sorry hottie but I'm not buying the argument that tikay should call just because he is well ahead of my range. He is risking his dym on an unnecessary gamble. i totally agree that he can try to get me to fold but the ICM of getting it all in vs the other big stack is so -ve ev. i am definitely in Suzy's camp with that one. Posted by GELDY
Its just a way of thinking and what has improved my game massively. I would have even called with a wider range than what he had in that spot purely because of the situation. Next pot could of come up the same against someone different and I could well fold. Its situations styles of play were up against and different scenarios. On average I have taken my game from a 55% ish player to a 65% ish player by playing less ICM and more situations, but each to there own
In Response to Re: Can an old dog learn new tricks? : Its just a way of thinking and what has improved my game massively. I would have even called with a wider range than what he had in that spot purely because of the situation. Next pot could of come up the same against someone different and I could well fold. Its situations styles of play were up against and different scenarios. On average I have taken my game from a 55% ish player to a 65% ish player by playing less ICM and more situations, but each to there own Posted by Hotwheals
>jealous<
There's a road to that 65%, but my sat-nav keeps sending me the wrong way.
In Response to Re: Can an old dog learn new tricks? : />jealous< There's a road to that 65%, but my sat-nav keeps sending me the wrong way. Posted by Tikay10[/QUOTE
The road is forever long and winding lol, has lots of bumps along the way too haha
In Response to Re: Can an old dog learn new tricks? : That would be VERY exploitable Geldy. If I should ALWAYS fold there, then you (or anyone else, with ANY holding) would ALWAYS reraise a big stack there & force them to fold. That can't be right, can it? The equation is a basket of things to consider. ICM The Opponent's likely holding The % chances of winning or losing. The % chance of forcing villain to fold. They all need taking into consideration. Don't think we MUST fold just because ICM says so, it feels more "informal" & position specific to me. Forget last night's hand, I'm talking generally. Posted by Tikay10
i agree totally
what i meant was if you knew i would call then shoving just because you are ahead of my range i don't think is a good idea.
If you think i might fold then yes
to keep me honest then yes
to teach me a lesson then yes
but just because you are ahead of my range not so sure
In Response to Re: Can an old dog learn new tricks? : i agree totally what i meant was if you knew i would call then shoving just because you are ahead of my range i don't think is a good idea. If you think i might fold then yes to keep me honest then yes to teach me a lesson then yes but just because you are ahead of my range not so sure Posted by GELDY
All agreed Geldy, but it's never ONE thing we base our decison on, is it? It's always a basket of different elements - opponent, stack sizes, ICM, likely range v range match up, da de da.
Anyway, enough talk, it's time to play some pokerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Comments
It is a bit "heavy", but it is essential to know.
However, many people instinctively "feel it", which is fine.
It's like the maths & odds in NLHE, people argue about a few %. Thewy, for example, does not "know" any of the exact numbers, but has a perfect "feel" for pot odds. I would imagine Matt bates, Scotty, TommyD & the like are the same.
I do smile a little when I see a PHA debate arguing about a few % points. It's all guesswork UNLESS we exactly know villain's hand.
ICM is a bit uphill to learn at first, but once you get a feel for it, you sort of no longer need it - because it gives you the logic, the theory, the "feel" of what we should do.
And you soon know who does not understand it, when they limp-fold from a, say, 4 BB stack, or call 80% of their stack when, in reality, they can - or SHOULD - never fold now. Betting 1,000 from 3,000 & a player with 1,200 flat calls is a bit bizarre, but we see it every night.
There was a similar comment in a PLO8 DYM last night, when the BB folded to an all-in shove of 2 Bigs, (one caller already) even though it was very little more to call. He is not OBLIGED to call here if he has spanners.
The SB maybe should call here, but.....the shortie was a very good player.
The thing here is how wise is it to treble up a very good player, especially at a stage when we are all playing relatively shallow, around 8 Bigs average?
I found myself in the same spot later when the Shortie SB shoved on my big, & I folded to a chorus of "really?"
My hand was 4-4-4-4.
The thread is rocking & rolling today!
Back to fun for a moment, I deliberately made a horrendous play last night, when I was monsta chippie, I just could not help myself. I knew how terribad it was, but I could not resist, especially as Twiglet was in the BB.
So I potted it with the old A-A-A-A, then showed after they all folded.
They were not even suited.
Them's me dancing shoes.
Question for you:
I was playing in a PLO8 MTT on Sunday and got to final table.
It became quite obvious that the chip leader was playing hands more suited to PLO than PLO8 (Broadway type hands,etc.)
Ended up losing to him HU.
Given that there is always a Hi winning hand, what do you think of this type of play in an MTT?
Cheers
Mick
The fact that I lost the hand is irrelevant, of course. It was just a piece of poor judgement.
Against some players, it would be the correct play, of course. A serial tea-leaf, (mention no names) can easily try & rep the king here.
Against, say, Alexis74, or Pompeynic, & most others "Team Solid Crew" I NEVER make that play.
I'm a little distrustful of all that GTO stuff, I think individual opponents need to be treated differently.
Much appreciate the advice, by the way, thank you.
This is not in any way dissing Geldy, it's just something that was relevant to the play. He has widened his range, so I can widen mine.
It was too good a spot to turn down. Or so I thought.
LOVE this "learning together" stuff.
Heads up in an MTT though, the options do change significantly, as we need to widen our range considerably.
If I should ALWAYS fold there, then you (or anyone else, with ANY holding) would ALWAYS reraise a big stack there & force them to fold. That can't be right, can it?
The equation is a basket of things to consider.
ICM
The Opponent's likely holding
The % chances of winning or losing.
The % chance of forcing villain to fold.
They all need taking into consideration.
Don't think we MUST fold just because ICM says so, it feels more "informal" & position specific to me.
Forget last night's hand, I'm talking generally.
There's a road to that 65%, but my sat-nav keeps sending me the wrong way.
That picture of Twiglets is for a multipack.
They are a snap-fold.
£2.30 for 6 x 24 grams, which is 1.6p per gram.
The big 150 gram bags are currently £1. which is 0.7p per gram.
Proper ICM that.
Anyway, enough talk, it's time to play some pokerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
See you in a bit.