This site uses cookies to improve your browsing experience. By continuing to browse the website, you accept such cookies. For more details and to change your settings, see our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.

Discussion Thread: Chip Value

• Bronze
Joined: 22.09.2010
Chip value

In this module you will see...
• ...what is the real value of chips in SNGs
• ...what is the ICM and how it may help you to evaluate your stack
• ...how to use the ICM when it comes to evaluating decisions
• ...what is the risk premium concept and how to use it

Lesson The principle of diminishing chip value

Article
Quiz
Video

Lesson The Fundamentals of the Independent Chip Model

Article
Quiz
Video

Lesson Application of the ICM

Article
Quiz
Video

Lesson The Risk Premium Concept

Article
Quiz
Video
• 15 replies
• Bronze
Joined: 30.10.2007
rly nice , thanks for this one! it help alot to understand the chips
• Bronze
Joined: 23.02.2010
You're very welcome, feel free to ask any questions you might have
• Gold
Joined: 25.02.2011
Whoever is behind those videos in tradimo.com and here in pokerstrategy is very good, very didactic.
• Basic
Joined: 23.04.2014
Does anyone knows if a similar program as ICM explorer exist on poker tracker 4?

Regards,

Jaquare
• Basic
Joined: 26.06.2014
In the example from "Chip Value (3): Application of the ICM" where Hero is in SB with 32o:
Folding is a mistake costing Hero \$1.42. Who are these "dead money" being leaked to? I would make sense to me if it was spread out over the remaining players around the table, but if so, is it spread evenly or does stack stack size equity again come into play here?

Thank you for a great read.
• Super Moderator
Super Moderator
Joined: 02.09.2010
Originally posted by BArGaInChem
In the example from "Chip Value (3): Application of the ICM" where Hero is in SB with 32o:
Folding is a mistake costing Hero \$1.42. Who are these "dead money" being leaked to? I would make sense to me if it was spread out over the remaining players around the table, but if so, is it spread evenly or does stack stack size equity again come into play here?

Thank you for a great read.
Hi, BArGaInChem...
Welcome to PokerStrategy.com !

To answer the bolded question:
The \$1.42 he "loses" if he folds, does not get lost immediately.
In the scenario given, he misses the opportunity to win it.

The ICM (Independent Chip Model) assigns a \$ value to each chip in your stack based on your overall probability of winning. By not pushing, he lowers his overall probability of winning by \$1.42 according to the calculations in the article.

If you like you could put that another way and say that the probability of the other players winning increased by that same amount.

May I suggest that you take a moment to introduce yourself. Other members may be interested in who you are, where you're from, what games & limits you play.

Best of luck,
--VS
• Basic
Joined: 26.06.2014
Thank you for the answer. What I was looking for it what you say about the probability of winning for the other players will rise. Sorry for not introducing myself, I will do that shortly in the thread you link to.

Best
BArGaInChem
• Basic
Joined: 09.12.2014
Ok
• Bronze
Joined: 24.02.2015
It seems that the closer one is to the bubble the more \$EV is geared towards stack size dynamics. I find this very intuitive and I feel that most thinking players are already working within the conclusions of ICM without necessarily knowing about the mathematical model.

Is risk premium generally higher the further away one is from the bubble, especially in long handed games? It's reasonable to think that the gap between cEV and \$EV is bigger when one's probability of placing higher is not increased significantly by an action. Would this concept possibly become bloated in the early stages of MTTs?

I am sure cEV and common sense are better guides during the early to mid stages of MTTs, but I am very curious.
• Bronze
Joined: 25.12.2010
Can someone please help me understand something? Its about the lesson about the risk premium concept in the QQ call or fold example. In the equation of \$EV(call) you multiply \$18.30 * 52.37% because you are going to win 52.37% of the time. But then you add - \$9.88 when you lose, but shouldn't it be like -9.88\$ * 47.63% because you are going to lose only 47.63% of the time? Why is it that when you win you only take into account the % of time when you are going to win and when you lose you don't take into account the % of time you are going to lose? The same question goes for the equation for cEV(call). Any clarification would be much appreciated.
• Moderator
Moderator
Joined: 12.11.2008

I’m not sure what you mean with the \$9,88 here, because this is you’re chip value if you fold the hand. If you win than you’re stack has value of \$18,30 and if you lose it’s nothing.
You win 52,37% of the time \$18,30 and that’s \$9,58. If you lose you get nothing. So that’s 0.
So a call has a value of \$9,58+0=\$9,58.

So folding is in this example the best option, because you’re stack value is higher when you fold the hand.

Hopefully it’s now a little more clear for you. If that’s not the case don’t hesitate to ask it.

Best regards,
SDK1987
• Bronze
Joined: 21.01.2011
how chip value differs in MTT's cause i think the numbers should be really different there ?
• Moderator
Moderator
Joined: 12.11.2008
Indeed, but it depends already on with SNG you’re playing. Every prize pool is different and has consequents how you need to play based on \$ev.
On MTT’s you play pretty much based on Cev until the last 2 tables and than \$ev kicks in.
Most of the time it’s also a top heavy paid out structure. So than you play for top 3 or better most of the time.

Hopefully helps this a little bit, but if you have more questions don’t hesitate to ask them.

Best regards,
SDK1987
• Bronze
Joined: 22.07.2015