[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]

0,0,0,1: 0.266667; icm = 0.195756; delta = 0.0709111; std err=0.0189215; N=90


[/ QUOTE ]

Is this the situation when the big stack is to your right so you get to act just after him? (I want to make sure I've got yout 0,0,0,1 down). It is interesting that in this you far outstrip the ICM average (more than any other 4-handed situation). It seems either there is a larger advantage to being behind the big stack than I thought, you excel vs. other smallish stacks when the big stack isn't playing the hand, or that the large difference in delta could be an anomoly.

Believe it or not I have been eagerly awaiting this thread for some time and along with Aleo, would be *very* interested to see what one comes up with when analyzing 4-handed play on Party Poker with random participants.

I'm interested in what else you think your numbers may mean other than ICM cannot take into account position to the big stack. Would running this to determine equity of pushers 4-handed or folders 4-handed be meaningful in any way (i.e. on average is it better to push rather than fold, and if so how close is it)? Would this be some sort of factor of the buyin you're at (55s I assume?) where general tightness/looseness would determine the equity of each action?

I'm also interested to know if anything meaningful can be gleaned from the equity your opponents had vs. the big stack -- I'm wondering if the average player may generally outperform or significantly underperform in different situations vs. the big stack and/or with the big stack. Hmmm, perhaps this question is better answered by running ICM vs. actual equity #s for 4-handed hands with random players.

Also, do your numbers mean you're making an extra 4% ROI from bubble on and making 14% by just getting to the bubble with a playable stack?

Very intersting stuff Eastbay, major props to you.

Yugoslav