Theoretical problem about coinflips

Degen · #1 10-31-2005, 02:50 PM

Gigabet had a great post on this awhile back...he is willing to take the worst of it at times, if the result will allow him to have a MASSIVE stack and walk over the table

Simplistic · #2 10-31-2005, 03:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Gigabet had a great post on this awhile back...he is willing to take the worst of it at times, if the result will allow him to have a MASSIVE stack and walk over the table

[/ QUOTE ]which is against ICM theory

se2schul · #3 10-31-2005, 03:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gigabet had a great post on this awhile back...he is willing to take the worst of it at times, if the result will allow him to have a MASSIVE stack and walk over the table

[/ QUOTE ]which is against ICM theory

[/ QUOTE ]
... and it will surely sometimes contradict a basic pot odds call as well, but it doesn't mean that it's wrong.

Just because it doesn't jive with the chip model that is commonly accepted within this forum, it certainly doesn't mean his play is wrong. He's just using a different chip model, and it may be better than ICM.

It's hard to argue with his success .

Simplistic · #4 10-31-2005, 03:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gigabet had a great post on this awhile back...he is willing to take the worst of it at times, if the result will allow him to have a MASSIVE stack and walk over the table

[/ QUOTE ]which is against ICM theory

[/ QUOTE ]
... and it will surely sometimes contradict a basic pot odds call as well, but it doesn't mean that it's wrong.

Just because it doesn't jive with the chip model that is commonly accepted within this forum, it certainly doesn't mean his play is wrong. He's just using a different chip model, and it may be better than ICM.

It's hard to argue with his success .

[/ QUOTE ]

Lori · #5 10-31-2005, 03:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gigabet had a great post on this awhile back...he is willing to take the worst of it at times, if the result will allow him to have a MASSIVE stack and walk over the table

[/ QUOTE ]which is against ICM theory

[/ QUOTE ]
... and it will surely sometimes contradict a basic pot odds call as well, but it doesn't mean that it's wrong.

Just because it doesn't jive with the chip model that is commonly accepted within this forum, it certainly doesn't mean his play is wrong. He's just using a different chip model, and it may be better than ICM.

It's hard to argue with his success .

[/ QUOTE ]

However his success has nothing to do with this problem.

Lori

ChrisV · #6 10-31-2005, 07:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gigabet had a great post on this awhile back...he is willing to take the worst of it at times, if the result will allow him to have a MASSIVE stack and walk over the table

[/ QUOTE ]which is against ICM theory

[/ QUOTE ]

Not against. The word you're looking for is outside.

There are certain situations where it's correct to overrule the ICM and take a stab. Typically they arise 5-6 handed and in situations where you won't be close to going allin.

FlyWf · #7 10-31-2005, 11:11 PM

Do you know what ICM theory is?
Hint: It's not normative. ICM doesn't tell you what to do, you can't go against ICM.

Simplistic · #8 10-31-2005, 11:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Do you know what ICM theory is?
Hint: It's not normative. ICM doesn't tell you what to do, you can't go against ICM.

[/ QUOTE ]my understanding of ICM is that it assigns tournament chips a certain value of the prize pool based on stack sizes and villain hand ranges. thus if you have XX hand and push/fold/call each will have a different value and you should choose the action which maximizes equity

FlyWf · #9 10-31-2005, 11:22 PM

ICM is just the assigning of value. It's fundamentally just an expansion of the very simple idea that holding all the chips doesn't mean you get all the money. It's useful for understanding basic concepts like don't coinflip early, but it doesn't tell you to fold Q3 where Gigabet called. To make call/fold/push decisions you need hand ranges and table context that are well beyond the scope of ICM.