Re: I need PROOF!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It has nothing to do with ICM or anything like that It has nothing to do with ICM or anything like that (actually it isn't really a 'strategy' at all).
[/ QUOTE ]
I suspect you just don't understand what ICM means (which is OK, btw). First, ICM is not a "strategy". Second, anyone who has a strong ROI over long enough samples, is "using" some form of ICM, or a similar model, wheather knowingly or not.
As for having a style that is "a bit different" than normal 2+2 style, well, surprise, but there is no 2+2 style. There is an approach to the game and for many basic situations which you might call "2+2 style" maybe, which is nowadys basically the ICM oriented bubble/ITM game, but you must understant that people can be (winning) 2+2ers and still play rather differently, especially in early levels.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just saying I don't do the actual math or check HHs with eastbay's program. ICM is valid when it comes to open pushing which is obviously a huge part of STT play, I think it would benefit me in the future to do so. I said "it has nothing to do with ICM" because the difference in my style come from my play in the early game... I agree with most of the late game play which is advocated on this forum.
|