ICM Data Question...

xGoreDudex · #1 10-29-2005, 10:16 PM

By nature I am definatley not a "math" guy, infact I literally fog over occasionally when complex math is discuessed. Frankly, the ICM calculations by Bozeman are baffling to me, but after some re-reading and more re-reading I think I am beginning to understand what the purpose of this calculation is.

The part which is apparently hotly debated is that it assumes that all players are of equal skill level, and therefore theortically incorrect, how do you modify the skill factor in order to come up with a stack value that is truely represented from the calculations?

bluefeet · #2 10-29-2005, 10:20 PM

I personally only view ICM calculatioins in regards to calling/pushing. I don't see where "skill" is a factor in the equation. It's simply an adjustment to the call/push ranges.

Ps. I suck at math too.

Freudian · #3 10-29-2005, 10:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I personally only view ICM calculatioins in regards to calling/pushing. I don't see where "skill" is a factor in the equation. It's simply an adjustment to the call/push ranges.

Ps. I suck at math too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have never done a single ICM calculation. But I am always thinking about my pushing range against others calling ranges and vice versa. While it is math and some of it may be unintuitive without the pure math, I don't think crunching numbers over and over again is needed to understand the concepts.

That said, of course I have been helped by all the forum talk about it. I picked up a lot of stuff by reading about ICM sitations.

microbet · #4 10-29-2005, 10:26 PM

How to put in a skill factor is also hotly debated. If you search and find results, be prepared to fog over.

bluefeet · #5 10-29-2005, 10:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
How to put in a skill factor is also hotly debated. If you search and find results, be prepared to fog over.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmmm, is this a "pass on this call here despite proper ranges/+EV, cuz we have made skills to pwnd later"?

xGoreDudex · #6 10-29-2005, 10:29 PM

Then I should also ask,
what then is a good way to find a push/fold/ range without having to break out a million calculators?, do you need to be a math guru in order to play at a higher level of sit & go's? or is their a "for dummies" way to quickly and efficently compute / understand ICM situations and be able to play half decent?

Slim Pickens · #7 10-29-2005, 10:29 PM

here

I'm also working on a positional correction.

microbet · #8 10-29-2005, 10:40 PM

I only ever calculate ICM when analyzing a hand. Never while playing. The poster "eastbay" has a program which is easy and very helpful and if you look up his profile you will find a link.

microbet · #9 10-29-2005, 10:42 PM

Somthing like that, but I'm not a big believer. My current position is that good players are good because they don't miss the +$EV plays.

I do think the positional corrections are good for high blind situations.

splashpot · #10 10-29-2005, 10:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I personally only view ICM calculatioins in regards to calling/pushing. I don't see where "skill" is a factor in the equation. It's simply an adjustment to the call/push ranges.

Ps. I suck at math too.

[/ QUOTE ]
The way I see it, skill factors in when determining how much equity you have. For example, ICM might say fold a certain hand because he'll have $23.67 equity when he folds, but ICM only gives him $21.48 equity for a call. Those numbers asuume that the remaining players have equal skill. Obviously his true equity won't be $23.67 because he should be more skilled than his opponents. If this is true, his equity is higher than that. But since skill is not measurable, we can eliminate that factor by just assuming equal skill levels.