[Closed] AJo is bad push for ICM!

Got slightly different range from holdemresources NASH:

BU 10.3%, 77+ A9s+ ATo+ KJs+ KQo

and even this range is kinda tight, I would definitely add all pocket pairs and here considering that next hand we have to post 800 as BB and call with a worse hand.

The problem is that BB will call us fairly often but AJ is strong enough here.

ICM is not a panacea or some almighty axiom that is always true. It is just a model for optimal play (opposed to maximal play). There is an article in strategy section about ICM, it's pros and cons. If I remember correctly not taking into consideration the fact that player must pay blinds next hand is one of ICM flaws.

Originally posted by Steelbrewer
Got slightly different range from holdemresources NASH:

BU 10.3%, 77+ A9s+ ATo+ KJs+ KQo

and even this range is kinda tight, I would definitely add all pocket pairs and here considering that next hand we have to post 800 as BB and call with a worse hand.

The problem is that BB will call us fairly often but AJ is strong enough here.

ICM is not a panacea or some almighty axiom that is always true. It is just a model for optimal play (opposed to maximal play). There is an article in strategy section about ICM, it's pros and cons. If I remember correctly not taking into consideration the fact that player must pay blinds next hand is one of ICM flaws.

Thanks steelbrewer ♠_thumbsup:, i remember something about nash equilibrium they said that if two players play perfect nash then none will make any profit in long term 0% equity......Does this apply to ICM too? Does the push ranges follow the nash equlibrium? ♠_confused:

Actually any so called ICM or NASH calculator is a combination of both ICM gives you an idea of how much your stack worth comparing to prize pool and the ranges are NASH ranges that suggest an optimal play.

The true goal is not memorize all the situations that may occur(it is impossible anyway) or blindly follow calculator's results, because the calculator is assuming all of the players follow the same strategy, which is hardly ever true.

The goal is taking into consideration ranges that are given by program adjust them to your current situation and then make a decision based not only on this default range but also on your reads, table dynamics and so on.

As one of the judges pointed out in some recent post, their job would be a lot easier (in fact any judge presence would be pointless) if those calculators were 100% correct all the time.

good posts steelbrewer!

the ICM trainer is an equilibrium program. it is not as accurate in the micros or at extremely high blinds because the opponent ranges will often be a little skewed from reality.

THIS is why it is telling you to push so tight.

if you fold, SB shove 100%, BB calls 33%.

The nash calculation tells us that the SB and BB will clash 33% of the time if we fold. (which is a huge overstatement)

in reality most BBs will call very tight if we fold, so this benefit is reduced. Thus, we must push wider than nash even here where we have very little fold-equity.