I should know this but I don't. GTO ICM guys help required

StayOrGo

OK, so in the main event today.

9 players left, 4 on my table, but I have set it up in the image as one nine player table. UTG (Effectively CUTOFF) shoves 60K (15BB's)

I am chip leader of the tournament 230K, blinds 2K/4K (see image with approximate stacks) have AJo in the SB, and Snapshove says in a vacuum and in a chipEV situation that AT+ is a call.

In this situation, and assuming the standard SkyPoker M/E pay jumps (ignore the bounty factor for now) does it mean that I should be calling lighter or tighter than the AT in this spot. Lets assume villain is playing GTO.



I don't have an ICMIZER subscription, I just used it to show the stacks.

So Snapshove says, ATo+ is a call, would ICM factors change it say down to A9o+ or up to AJo+ for example?

The Cutoff, Button, SB and BB are the only guys on my table the other five are the approx. stacks on the other table.

It's not so much, whether it's a call or a fold in this specific scenario or what the actual range is, but just the general principle of should it be "tighter" or "lighter" than a ChipEV situation?

Any help for this ICM twit would be much appreciated.

@chicknMelt I know you are a whizz at this stuff, so perhaps you could advise? Or any other GTO ICM guys out there for that matter

MP33

Hi Graham , Hope your well

I,ll leave it to the better players to comment but was just wondering - don,t you get 1 free calculation a day on ICMizer even if your not subscribed.

P

Doooobs

Theoretically others should be tighter because of ICM, and therefore you should be looser to take advantage. So here you should shove on BB more as he is in a bad ICM spot (mid stack with a real shortie at the table. I don't think the original shover should be making many adjustments as he is short and 9th to 8th is unlikely to be a big deal and folding decent shove hands until the real shortie busts is likely to be more detrimental to him than any ICM. So I'd just assume he isn't making massive ICM adjustment, so going with snapshove in a freezeout is fine. Sky payouts are really top heavy, so I would make lower ICM adjustments vs elsewhere anyway.

FWIW because this is a bounty hunter, the bounty is more significant than any ICM considerations, so you should definitely be looser. Given you should looser because of ICM vs big blind, then this looks an easy shove and you can go looser than snap shove says. I know you didn't ask for it, but it is hard to ignore it. In order of significance I'd say the fact this is a bounty hunter is more important than ICM considrations vs BB and ICM considerations vs BB are more important than those vs the original shover.

Would be interested to see how others see the relative importance of ICM vs the two others, bountes etc.

In game I am more likely to just go "oooh AJ, shove" and not go through this, but it is good to think about it. This all assumes I don't have copious notes telling me the original shover only ever shoves aces.

ValueJL

Hi StayorGo, interesting question you pose.

First off, the calculation you have inputted is incorrect. There are no antes involved, therefore making the price to call worse, and the shoving range significantly tighter (less to win). I would also assume the average player on Sky at the final 2 tables is shoving a lot tighter than ICMIZER suggests.

*I'm no bounty expert*
ICM wise, you rarely want to call if off in marginal spots unless he has a significant bounty in comparison with the pay jumps. The value of your stack as chipleader is in leveraging that stack by pushing on the shorter stacks, calling off is always pretty meh.
An important factor I can't see included in your calculation is the payouts and the bounty in question. Factor this in and you will see a more accurate answer.

N.B. You can make it 4handed and click MTT mode and input the other stacks into another table, this doesn't impact the ranges too much, only slightly.

GL

fishhhhh

As others have said here already, what should be a profitable call entirely depends on if villain is shoving correctly. Are they even aware that there is a 3bb stack on the other table for example as this should significantly alter their shoving range into 3 stacks that cover them.

ICM wise, even with bounties AJo is a fold (assuming average bounties ICM wise it's AQo+, AQs+, 99+ and 99 is borderline).

StayOrGo

Interesting replies, thanks guys for taking the time.

I'm guessing the jury is still out, with some saying tighter and others lighter?

giesahaun

Hi @StayOrGo

Actions are:
1A Hero Call and BB Call Allin
1B Hero Call and BB Fold
1C Allin with BB Call
1D Allin with BB Fold
1E Fold with BB Call
1F Fold with BB Fold

I do not anything about using Snapshove or ICMizer or GTO. Also my background is not in Bounty Hunters so again a -ve to what I have to say. Finally I do not play as much MTT poker at the moment as I used to so being chip leader in a similar situation seems like a very long time ago. My views on the hand would be old school and need more information on the two tables, so probably useless.

Most relevant is that there is 5 players on 2nd table so if Allin from CO or BB is knocked out the next UTG from the 2nd table will join your table and if this was the short stack of 11.8k the most relevant. If this was the case here I would be Allin a lot wider than you suggest, probably any 2.

If UTG Table 2 was 79.8k or 69.8k a Call or preferably Allin with AJ feels good.

Otherwise I would Call or preferably Allin with less entushiasm although when I started this reply I in real life I would Fold and hope for a Fold from BB. With top stack a better opportunity will easily appear in a hand or two

My view is I would much rather be Allin 1st than 2nd or latter in the very late stages of a MTT and with only the few seconds in this situation that is a good default start to any hand but the default is skewed by the ranking of stack size and by the ratios of stack size to both other players and BB size and as mentioned above by the distribution of players on tables with greater emphasis on any outliers, in this case both top and bottom stack.

Obviously the other information you have such as the knowledge of playing against the players on the tables and how they are playing on the night, how they perceive you from playing against them etc are other factors but not so important here I feel.

@giesahaun

chrisdonkb

In the situation you’ve given Graham, ignoring bounties as you said, you should be tighter than chipEV when calling off all-ins. Stack sizes dictate how much tighter you need to be but anyone taking a snapshove range and not adjusting is leaving a lot of money on the table. In your example you’d lean closer to AJo than A9o. Just because a call makes chips doesn’t mean it’s not losing you money

loosecamel

Absolutely no ICM guru, but i'd like to ask. How can there ever be a situation where ICM would make a call wider/lighter than a cEV standpoint? As far as I'm aware, all ICM situations would lead to a narrower range. Am I missing something?

StayOrGo

Many thanks @chrisdonkb and all who replied. FYI, this is the ChipEV SnapShove calling range, no anties, no bounties.




So we are saying AT is a no no?

Out of interest. Would you go with AJ/77 or does it need to be AQ/99 like @fishhhhh suggests in this scenario? (Assuming opponent is GTO)

StayOrGo

loosecamel said:

Absolutely no ICM guru, but i'd like to ask. How can there ever be a situation where ICM would make a call wider/lighter than a cEV standpoint? As far as I'm aware, all ICM situations would lead to a narrower range. Am I missing something?

This may be absolutely true, and a fundamental part of my question.

Do others agree?

gregkdy82

Wtf is going on in here. All these so called good players yet so much waffle. ICM considerations will never make you call lighter than chip ev. Quite often tighter but never ever lighter. It really is that simple.

StayOrGo

gregkdy82 said:

Wtf is going on in here. All these so called good players yet so much waffle. ICM considerations will never make you call lighter than chip ev. Quite often tighter but never ever lighter. It really is that simple.

Thanks for the confirmation. I did put in the title, "I probably should know this, but I don't."

Doooobs

You aren't calling vs BB, you are shoving on him, so it isn't just a straightfoward call situation. So you should call tighter than chip EV if you are in the BB, but it isn't that straightforward from the SB. Also.we need the size of the bounty to get a better idea and what do your notes say?

StayOrGo

Doooobs said:

You aren't calling vs BB, you are shoving on him, so it isn't just a straightfoward call situation. So you should call tighter than chip EV if you are in the BB, but it isn't that straightforward from the SB. Also.we need the size of the bounty to get a better idea and what do your notes say?

Yes indeed shoving rather than calling. Would be very unfortunate for the BB to wake up with a better hand, so not a major consideration at least, as I see it.

The question I posed wasn't really about the hand itself, but the general question of whether I call tighter or lighter with ICM over ChipEV which I think has been answered.

Now I know that in a GTO example it's tighter and I can make adjustments for bounties, player styles, notes etc accordingly, it was just to get a baseline rather than the specifics of the hand itself.

I really do appreciate everyone's input. Something I clearly should have known, but didn't.

All the best, good luck in your games, and you can shove on me wider now.

chrisdonkb

@Doooobs, CO has jammed and therefore we have a call/fold spot in Graham's shoes. Yes BB would have to call tighter than chipEV as well as you've said.

People are mentioning bounties but that isn't what Graham is asking.

@StayOrGo The calling range you have there will be based on CO jamming a snapshove 15bb range. In game once there are ICM considerations the CO shouldn't just be jamming chipEV either. This is where icmizer etc come into play

chrisdonkb

@Doooobs Ignore last message i misunderstood what you were saying

StayOrGo

chrisdonkb said:

@Doooobs, CO has jammed and therefore we have a call/fold spot in Graham's shoes. Yes BB would have to call tighter than chipEV as well as you've said.

People are mentioning bounties but that isn't what Graham is asking.

@StayOrGo The calling range you have there will be based on CO jamming a snapshove 15bb range. In game once there are ICM considerations the CO shouldn't just be jamming chipEV either. This is where icmizer etc come into play

Thanks Chris. Guess I'd better work out how to use it.

First time I ever used it was getting the image on the OP here and that was just for the view of it, not calculating anything.