do u guys use Harringtons' M value?

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
thats all?? man ive been using M for years.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol...exactly

[tytygoodnuts]

M is the ratio of your stack to the blinds and antes. For example, if you have 2,100 chips and the blinds are 100/200 your M would be 7. Harrington goes into deal in vol. 2 on how the size of your M dictates how you play.

[splashpot]

M is the ratio: (your stack size)/(blinds+antes)

[transmitt]

In STT's I do use M, in multi's I tend to go with Q. Really in a sit and go, M is a good reflection of fold equity. If your M gets too low, you are going to get called w/ garbage regardless. I'd rather bust 6th or 5th trying to get chips w/ a KQ or reasonably ranked hand v. folding to the bubble where first time I push the BB calls regardless (unless he is a donkey).

[tigerite]

007 wouldn't like it if you go with Q. He'd have nobody to make him his gadgets.

[transmitt]

lol. Didn't even think of THE Q when reading the book.
Nice Post!

[wahooriver]

I thought Harrington's discussion of M helped me a great deal. I understood the concept intuitively, but he helped me think through the details. His book is "chock full" of example hands and situations. While we each must find our own style, reading his discussions of how and why he would proceed should help any but the most experienced players.

I agree that the main point here is that once the blinds hit either 75/150 or 100/200, I must "pull the trigger" more easily. I do start pushing with any reasonable hand, understanding that either I will steal the blinds or be in a coin flip (or slightly worse) situation. When the blinds starting eating you, you have not choice. M just quantifies the damage!

So I do use M as a construct. More important than M is reading Harrington's thought process.

[swiftrhett]

I think M doesn't really make sense in Party SNG's because everyone's M is low when the blinds get big, so everyone is in the "Red Zone". It makes more sense to just use ICM. I think that M is a more usefull concept if you're in a big MTT, and players have M's ranging from 50 to 3.

[Nicholasp27]

M is not the same as thinking in terms of how many bbs you have, as M is sb+bb (+ antes, if applicable)

800 chips, 100/200 level
=4bbs
=2.66 M


also, he says u should use EFFECTIVE M, so you multiply M by the % of people left at table...so your M is halved if there are only 5 left...but in a SNG, that doesn't work too well, because

5 people left

you have 4000 chips
blinds are 200/400

M=6.67
effective M = 3.33

you really aren't in the red zone with 4k chips with 5 people left in an 8k chip tourney...that's why sngs don't use M (especially effective M) as well as deep-stack MTTs


also, we use ICM to guide our decisions when u are <10bbs, so no need for M when ICM is more accurate and applicable to sngs

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]
M is not the same as thinking in terms of how many bbs you have, as M is sb+bb (+ antes, if applicable)

800 chips, 100/200 level
=4bbs
=2.66 M

[/ QUOTE ]

You are correct in that they are not the exact same thing. Obviously, 4 bbs is not 4 M in your example. However, they are tools used for the same thing in that your level of aggressiveness in a given situation should be the same if you had an M of 2.66 or 4 bbs.

Think of them both as aggressiveness meters that give you the same answer if they're calibrated correctly. Which meter you use is a matter of personal preference.

ICM has nothing directly in common with M or # of bbs. M (or # of bbs) can indicate if you should think about ratcheting up your aggression level. ICM will tell you if a move you're contemplating is likely to be correct based on $EV.