[maddog2030]

Let me just state my intention wasn't to shoot your post down or anything like that.

[ QUOTE ]
But going by the number of people that didn't understand Gigabet's post a little while back, I thought it may be worth posting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's very hard at all to recognize a situation like this once you're in it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you like to provide an example?

As you pointed out, models like ICM only calculate a portion of your actual equity; namely your chipstack in the field. It doesn't calculate your equity including, say, your ability to generate more chips.

For example, a good player who has a good amount of experience to draw a reasonable conclusion can say "if I win this pot, I think I stand to win 1000 more chips in blind steals on average in the longrun because of the position this pot will put me in". You could try figuring this in to your ICM equity by taking this conclusion and adding 1000 more chips to the pot you would get if you won the hand. This isn't ncessarily accurate but I'm just stating it to show a point.

As I've said in previous posts I think you could only obtain a reasonable conclusion like above through experience. And that was essentially the point of my first reply. Somebody with enough experience ("feel") to make the move would already know the variables involved. Those who don't have enough experience could know the variables involved but still aren't going to be able to pull this off in the real world.