Sometime ago Phaedrus posted a thread called Beyond ICM. I cannot for the life of me remember the context of the post but I did make good notes about the strategy he laid out. The intent, IIRC, was to layout a strategy to attack the low-limit regular speed SNGs middle/end game where standard ICM does not always fit. This is a repost of that thread with a few tweaks I have discussed with Phae (feel free to mod as needed man).
Following this strategy has allowed me to attain 22% and 13% ROI at the $1 and $2 since April - not spectacular but for a part-time, long-time losing player, I'll take it. Now if I could ever get traction when I move up - variance has a wicked sense of humor - I might actually eek out a profit.
5 - 6 Handed
------------
Yellow M
Open Raise Group 6+ from any position
Orange M
Open Shove Group 3+ from any position
Open Shove Group 4+ from BTN/SB
Red M
Open Shove Group 6+ from any position
4 handed
------------
Yellow/Orange M
Open Raise Group 6+ from any position - Add Ax from BTN/SB
Red M
Open Shove Group 6+ - Add Ax from BTN/SB
Comments
------------
Open raise amount should be 2.5 to 3 BB.
Be aware of a short stack left to act and adjust your opening range up accordingly.
If you are likely to get called in one or more spots, leaving you OOP, consider tightening your Yellow M opening range.
If you raise 3 consecutive hands and meet no resistance, consider a tighter range on the 4th consecutive hand. Someone is going to look you up and you do not want to give those "hard-earned" chips back.
Facing a 3Bet pre-flop, reshove 88+, AQ+. Fold everything else. You could consider flatting AA or KK. When you are OOP you could also consider flatting with 88, 99 and TT preflop as a stop and go. If you do that from orange M though, you still have to shove any flop, including an AKQ flop. You still want to be shoving JJ+ though, because you lose too much value from smaller PPs when a scary flop comes and they bail.
DO NOT CBet versus more than one opponent OOP. Now if it checks around and the turn comes a blank, consider a delayed CBet. If you are facing opponents that do not know how to hit the FOLD button, check and fold to any action.
Given the right table conditions - a string of tight players to your left - this strategy can be used 7 or 8 handed as well.
GL at the tables,
Chap
Tournament Indicator Forum
Online Poker Strategy and Software Discussions
Beyond ICM (Repost)
Moderators: sun137, Phaedrus75, sookmctourie, JP
27 posts • Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Beyond ICM (Repost)
by chap » Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:58 pm
It's not the winning hands you fold that cost you. It's the losing hands that you refuse to fold.
-
chap - Orange
- Posts: 227
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:06 pm
- Location: Florida
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by MoneyBag09 » Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:14 pm
aaaah, i remeber that post, i re-typed it and used it as a safety net nxt to my monitor, i know it off by heart now, was a great post, i used it before i read moshman and new anything about ICM, phea used the sklansky hand ranking group to help with mid and late stages,
is that post gone now?
Should of been a sticky
is that post gone now?
Should of been a sticky
-
MoneyBag09 - Grey
- Posts: 1022
- Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:36 am
- Location: Liverpool
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by Phaedrus75 » Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:43 pm
Nice post Chap. Thanks for the good work in reconstructing this. 
Let it be so
MoneyBag09 wrote:
is that post gone now?
Should of been a sticky
Let it be so
Poker?....I hardly even know her!!!
-
Phaedrus75 - Moderator
- Posts: 6107
- Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:49 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by Phaedrus75 » Mon Oct 12, 2009 2:37 am
OK,
I had a PM which asked if I could explain this a little more. Specifically, the whole strategy seemed a little loose. Well, I guess it is a little, depending on how tight you are used to playing. But the thing is, its actually a whole bunch tighter than ICM based play. And I think that is why it works so well at low stakes. People call too wide for pure ICM (assuming normal calling ranges) based play. Since they are calling too wide, you would still profit from adjusting their calling ranges appropriately and playing ICM. But its kind of difficult for most beginners (and intermediates) to do that well. So the alternative, is to turn to Sklansky's theory of game dynamics where he says at a tight table you should play tight but slightly looser than average and at a loose table you should play loose, but slightly tighter than average.
The middle and end games of SNGs are characterised by pretty loose play (compared to cash games that Sklansky was writing about) and this is an obvious an expected result of high blinds and short handed dynamics.
So essentially, the above strategy is aimed at keeping you sufficiently loose not to get blinded out, but slightly tighter than the average bear so that when you do get it all in, you retain some positive showdown value.
OK, so that is kind of an introduction to the whys and wherefores. Now for just a bit more detail.
I want to cover the Sklansky ranges and ICM is just a bit more detail.
The Sklansky ranges are not the only hole card ranking system, but it is pretty well established and is inbuilt into TI, so its a good system to use for that reason alone.
So working through the Mzones we start with Yellow M. This is a typical mid game Mzone. I have looked at yellow M in considerable detail relative to Independent Chip Values (details in another lost thread). The conclusion was that stealing is important, but maintaining a workable stack for later is more important. Hence, we are stealing pretty light, but we will run away from a fight pretty quickly without a strong hand. Whether or not to Cbet is a difficult judement call and should be based on board texture, villains fold to Cbet stats and our own hand strength (we want to be Cbetting bluffs and strong hands mostly, and checking behind with marginal hands).
As you drop to Orange M you are usually down to 5 or 6 players. This requires loose play not to get blinded out, but you also have very few chips left for post flop manoeuvering. When you consider ICM chip value implications, you actually have even fewer chips to play poker with than you think (this is because ICM dictates that each chip in your current stack is worth more than the chips you hope to win and because you are usually close to the bubble at this point where bubble factors are higher and hence the value differential between existing chips versus chips to be won is greatest).
So, our bubble factor indicates that we really don't want to bust out before the bubble (promoting tight play) but this same pressure on our opponents, combined with high blinds, encourages loose stealing play. However the wider we steal, the worse our image becomes and the lighter we will get called. When this happens, our steal equity (or fold equity) decreases.
Accordingly, we have to strike a balance between capitalising on our steal opportunities, without damaging our image too much, but to also avoid playing so tight that we are not stealing enough and get blinded out. This is where our Sklansky ranges come in. By sticking to those ranges, you are letting the random distribution of the cards dictate how often you are stealing and by playing the prescribed ranges, you do ensure reasonable showdown value if called.
I mucked around with different ranges for ages (always using Sklansky groups though) and finally settled on these ranges based on trial and error mostly.
Once we get to Red M, we are shoving any group 6+ from any position. Yep, that's right, that means shoving this crap from UTG -----> 66, AT, 55,86s, KT, QT, 54s, K9s, J8s, 75s
So why so loose?
Basically 2 reasons. We can start with Harrington's Structured Hand Analysis (SHAL). In HOH V2, Harrington looks at a situation facing 4 players with a mix of tight and loose shove calling ranges. He then looks at how often all players will fold to a shove, and how a specific holding (T8o) will perform against their calling ranges. Based on the combination of fold equity and showdown equity (as crap as it is) Harrington mathematically proves that shoving T8o from Red M is positive EV.
Exactly the same principles apply from Red M in SNG where we are mostly relying on fold equity, but if called, our group 6+ range seeks to ensure we have some value for straights, flushes, live cards and not being dominated.
The second reason is ICM. And this makes for a good segway to get to that aforementioned ICM discussion
OK, so ICM stands for Independent Chip Model. It means that the value of each chip in a tournament (and most particularly a SNG) is non-linear. I am not going to explain it is full detail because I have done so at least 3 times previously so hopefully the archives can dredge up at least one of those posts. But essentially, it works by calculating tournament equity as an expression of stack size and then figuring out the percentage chance you will come in 1st, 2nd and 3rd and what the monetary value of each of those percentages is. Your total tournament equity is the sum of all money places times the likelihood you will finish in that place.
But understanding that chip values change is key to understanding loose shoving from red M. When your opponents are presented with a shove, they can elect to call or fold. Against thinking opponents, who understand ICM, they consciously realise that each chip they hope to win is worth less than the value of the chips they are putting at risk. This essentially effects their pot odds very significantly so that they are still forced into calling with a pretty snug range even if they know 100% for sure that you are pushing any two cards (ATC)
At the lower levels this doesn't work quite as well. The players at the low buy-ins frequently don't understand ICM. Rather, they get far enough along the logic trail to work out that you are pushing ATCs, but that makes them think they should call with hands like K7o because its better than a random hand. Essentially that just means that you have to tighten your shoving range - which is basically what a group 6+ range is. Its a TIGHT shoving range compared to what you would be shoving with using ICM versus good opponents.
So there you have it. I hope it helps and I have explained it well enough. Basically what I am trying to get across is, despite the concerns of my private messager, this strategy is actually a pretty tight strategy compared to what is needed at buyin's of $20 and above. Except once you get into those buy-ins and higher, alternative theories (such as block theory) can provide a counterbalance to ICM based play and people can still wind up calling you pretty light for pretty sophisticated reasons, as opposed to the $1 donks who often make the exact same calls for entirely the wrong reasons
I had a PM which asked if I could explain this a little more. Specifically, the whole strategy seemed a little loose. Well, I guess it is a little, depending on how tight you are used to playing. But the thing is, its actually a whole bunch tighter than ICM based play. And I think that is why it works so well at low stakes. People call too wide for pure ICM (assuming normal calling ranges) based play. Since they are calling too wide, you would still profit from adjusting their calling ranges appropriately and playing ICM. But its kind of difficult for most beginners (and intermediates) to do that well. So the alternative, is to turn to Sklansky's theory of game dynamics where he says at a tight table you should play tight but slightly looser than average and at a loose table you should play loose, but slightly tighter than average.
The middle and end games of SNGs are characterised by pretty loose play (compared to cash games that Sklansky was writing about) and this is an obvious an expected result of high blinds and short handed dynamics.
So essentially, the above strategy is aimed at keeping you sufficiently loose not to get blinded out, but slightly tighter than the average bear so that when you do get it all in, you retain some positive showdown value.
OK, so that is kind of an introduction to the whys and wherefores. Now for just a bit more detail.
I want to cover the Sklansky ranges and ICM is just a bit more detail.
The Sklansky ranges are not the only hole card ranking system, but it is pretty well established and is inbuilt into TI, so its a good system to use for that reason alone.
So working through the Mzones we start with Yellow M. This is a typical mid game Mzone. I have looked at yellow M in considerable detail relative to Independent Chip Values (details in another lost thread). The conclusion was that stealing is important, but maintaining a workable stack for later is more important. Hence, we are stealing pretty light, but we will run away from a fight pretty quickly without a strong hand. Whether or not to Cbet is a difficult judement call and should be based on board texture, villains fold to Cbet stats and our own hand strength (we want to be Cbetting bluffs and strong hands mostly, and checking behind with marginal hands).
As you drop to Orange M you are usually down to 5 or 6 players. This requires loose play not to get blinded out, but you also have very few chips left for post flop manoeuvering. When you consider ICM chip value implications, you actually have even fewer chips to play poker with than you think (this is because ICM dictates that each chip in your current stack is worth more than the chips you hope to win and because you are usually close to the bubble at this point where bubble factors are higher and hence the value differential between existing chips versus chips to be won is greatest).
So, our bubble factor indicates that we really don't want to bust out before the bubble (promoting tight play) but this same pressure on our opponents, combined with high blinds, encourages loose stealing play. However the wider we steal, the worse our image becomes and the lighter we will get called. When this happens, our steal equity (or fold equity) decreases.
Accordingly, we have to strike a balance between capitalising on our steal opportunities, without damaging our image too much, but to also avoid playing so tight that we are not stealing enough and get blinded out. This is where our Sklansky ranges come in. By sticking to those ranges, you are letting the random distribution of the cards dictate how often you are stealing and by playing the prescribed ranges, you do ensure reasonable showdown value if called.
I mucked around with different ranges for ages (always using Sklansky groups though) and finally settled on these ranges based on trial and error mostly.
Once we get to Red M, we are shoving any group 6+ from any position. Yep, that's right, that means shoving this crap from UTG -----> 66, AT, 55,86s, KT, QT, 54s, K9s, J8s, 75s
So why so loose?
Basically 2 reasons. We can start with Harrington's Structured Hand Analysis (SHAL). In HOH V2, Harrington looks at a situation facing 4 players with a mix of tight and loose shove calling ranges. He then looks at how often all players will fold to a shove, and how a specific holding (T8o) will perform against their calling ranges. Based on the combination of fold equity and showdown equity (as crap as it is) Harrington mathematically proves that shoving T8o from Red M is positive EV.
Exactly the same principles apply from Red M in SNG where we are mostly relying on fold equity, but if called, our group 6+ range seeks to ensure we have some value for straights, flushes, live cards and not being dominated.
The second reason is ICM. And this makes for a good segway to get to that aforementioned ICM discussion
OK, so ICM stands for Independent Chip Model. It means that the value of each chip in a tournament (and most particularly a SNG) is non-linear. I am not going to explain it is full detail because I have done so at least 3 times previously so hopefully the archives can dredge up at least one of those posts. But essentially, it works by calculating tournament equity as an expression of stack size and then figuring out the percentage chance you will come in 1st, 2nd and 3rd and what the monetary value of each of those percentages is. Your total tournament equity is the sum of all money places times the likelihood you will finish in that place.
But understanding that chip values change is key to understanding loose shoving from red M. When your opponents are presented with a shove, they can elect to call or fold. Against thinking opponents, who understand ICM, they consciously realise that each chip they hope to win is worth less than the value of the chips they are putting at risk. This essentially effects their pot odds very significantly so that they are still forced into calling with a pretty snug range even if they know 100% for sure that you are pushing any two cards (ATC)
At the lower levels this doesn't work quite as well. The players at the low buy-ins frequently don't understand ICM. Rather, they get far enough along the logic trail to work out that you are pushing ATCs, but that makes them think they should call with hands like K7o because its better than a random hand. Essentially that just means that you have to tighten your shoving range - which is basically what a group 6+ range is. Its a TIGHT shoving range compared to what you would be shoving with using ICM versus good opponents.
So there you have it. I hope it helps and I have explained it well enough. Basically what I am trying to get across is, despite the concerns of my private messager, this strategy is actually a pretty tight strategy compared to what is needed at buyin's of $20 and above. Except once you get into those buy-ins and higher, alternative theories (such as block theory) can provide a counterbalance to ICM based play and people can still wind up calling you pretty light for pretty sophisticated reasons, as opposed to the $1 donks who often make the exact same calls for entirely the wrong reasons
Poker?....I hardly even know her!!!
-
Phaedrus75 - Moderator
- Posts: 6107
- Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:49 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by MoneyBag09 » Thu Oct 15, 2009 7:19 am
Great explination Phea, would it be possible to get the origional put on this thread or linked up, just so ppl know what you were refering to and gave a more detaild scale down of it, cheers
-
MoneyBag09 - Grey
- Posts: 1022
- Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:36 am
- Location: Liverpool
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by Phaedrus75 » Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:42 am
The problem is that the original is lost somewhere in the archives. After the forum upgrade a few months back, heaps and heaps of archived stuff got lost. So a big thanks to Chap for remembering it, and reconstructing it.
Anyway, I do recall that the original thread included a lot of comments saying words to the effect of "thanks... its working.. etc"
So I hope it continues to be the success it was for me.
Anyway, I do recall that the original thread included a lot of comments saying words to the effect of "thanks... its working.. etc"
So I hope it continues to be the success it was for me.
Poker?....I hardly even know her!!!
-
Phaedrus75 - Moderator
- Posts: 6107
- Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:49 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by MoneyBag09 » Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:52 am
Thats ashame, was a brilliant post, i still use it, its berried in my mind, have you read moshman sng book yet?
-
MoneyBag09 - Grey
- Posts: 1022
- Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:36 am
- Location: Liverpool
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by Phaedrus75 » Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:53 pm
Actually I haven't. I think Moshman is about the only significant poker book I have not read. I feel like I read it though, thanks to Ares' excellent summary 
Poker?....I hardly even know her!!!
-
Phaedrus75 - Moderator
- Posts: 6107
- Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:49 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by sun137 » Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:38 pm
If it is any help, all the original posts are still there, but you have to find the advanced search facility to find them as follows:
Go to the Poker Archives Section
Click on Search (the box is blank, doesn't matter)
You will get a full list of archive posts - ignore them and look for the 'advanced search' on the top left
Click on Advanced search - you will now be able to select posts by Phaedrus in the archives
Fill in the fields as follows:
Author.............................Phaedrus75
Search in forums.................The Poker Archives
Search within....................Topic titles only
Display results as.................Topics
Leave all other entries as they are displayed and click on 'search'.
You should get 6 pages of threads started by Phaedrus (285 matches to date).
The SNG posts are not too hard to find - I am not certain of the post you made Phae, but it could be in the 'I don't get SNG' thread.
Also:
If you click the back arrow and change the 'Display results as' to 'Posts', you will see the 285 posts listed in date order.
If you now click the back arrow and change the 'search within' to 'Post subjects and message text' you will find all 3322 posts made by Phae that have been transferred to the archives.
If you now click the back arrow and change the 'Display results as' back to 'Topics', you will see the 765 threads that contain the 3322 posts by Phae.
I am sure the keywords facility can be used to refine the search but this is as far as i went.
Also:
If you want to access ALL your posts, go to the members list and click on your name and search
Go to the Poker Archives Section
Click on Search (the box is blank, doesn't matter)
You will get a full list of archive posts - ignore them and look for the 'advanced search' on the top left
Click on Advanced search - you will now be able to select posts by Phaedrus in the archives
Fill in the fields as follows:
Author.............................Phaedrus75
Search in forums.................The Poker Archives
Search within....................Topic titles only
Display results as.................Topics
Leave all other entries as they are displayed and click on 'search'.
You should get 6 pages of threads started by Phaedrus (285 matches to date).
The SNG posts are not too hard to find - I am not certain of the post you made Phae, but it could be in the 'I don't get SNG' thread.
Also:
If you click the back arrow and change the 'Display results as' to 'Posts', you will see the 285 posts listed in date order.
If you now click the back arrow and change the 'search within' to 'Post subjects and message text' you will find all 3322 posts made by Phae that have been transferred to the archives.
If you now click the back arrow and change the 'Display results as' back to 'Topics', you will see the 765 threads that contain the 3322 posts by Phae.
I am sure the keywords facility can be used to refine the search but this is as far as i went.
Also:
If you want to access ALL your posts, go to the members list and click on your name and search
-
sun137 - Moderator
- Posts: 4021
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:12 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by Phaedrus75 » Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:28 pm
The thread was called "Beyond ICM"
Apparently I have never posted a thread with "ICM" or "Beyond" in the title
Apparently I have never posted a thread with "ICM" or "Beyond" in the title
Poker?....I hardly even know her!!!
-
Phaedrus75 - Moderator
- Posts: 6107
- Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:49 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by sun137 » Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:43 pm
no you haven't - can't find it, so it must be lost - you are right.
Why I didn't just use the Advanced search link on the top right hand corner of the lobby I don't know - must be getting old..............
Why I didn't just use the Advanced search link on the top right hand corner of the lobby I don't know - must be getting old..............
-
sun137 - Moderator
- Posts: 4021
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:12 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by Chuy » Sat Nov 07, 2009 10:15 pm
http://www.tournamentindicatorforum.com ... 2c630d3e77
http://www.tournamentindicatorforum.com ... ccc00a9655
http://www.tournamentindicatorforum.com ... 9a01eae9f0
Those are the only links I found with "Beyond ICM" as the title.
http://www.tournamentindicatorforum.com ... ccc00a9655
http://www.tournamentindicatorforum.com ... 9a01eae9f0
Those are the only links I found with "Beyond ICM" as the title.
- Chuy
- Green
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:11 pm
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by Phaedrus75 » Sat Nov 07, 2009 11:36 pm
Chuy wrote:http://www.tournamentindicatorforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=39487&sid=d152a73a70b24cb4d763602c630d3e77
http://www.tournamentindicatorforum.com ... ccc00a9655
http://www.tournamentindicatorforum.com ... 9a01eae9f0
Those are the only links I found with "Beyond ICM" as the title.
When I try to open them, they all say "requested post does not exist"
Poker?....I hardly even know her!!!
-
Phaedrus75 - Moderator
- Posts: 6107
- Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:49 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by Chuy » Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:23 am
Phaedrus75 wrote:Chuy wrote:http://www.tournamentindicatorforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=39487&sid=d152a73a70b24cb4d763602c630d3e77
http://www.tournamentindicatorforum.com ... ccc00a9655
http://www.tournamentindicatorforum.com ... 9a01eae9f0
Those are the only links I found with "Beyond ICM" as the title.
When I try to open them, they all say "requested post does not exist"
Yeah, same for me. I thought it was in a forum that I'm not allowed to view. Anyway, I can't find an archive of those pages with Google Cache or WayBackMachine.
- Chuy
- Green
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:11 pm
Re: Beyond ICM (Repost)
by castizo » Sat Jan 16, 2010 1:21 am
First off, a big thank you to chip and Phaedrus.
I just have a couple questions, When you say
"Be aware of a short stack left to act and adjust your opening range up accordingly."
"If you are likely to get called in one or more spots, leaving you OOP, consider tightening your Yellow M opening range."
"If you raise 3 consecutive hands and meet no resistance, consider a tighter range on the 4th consecutive hand. Someone is going to look you up and you do not want to give those "hard-earned" chips back"
How much tighter should we make it? Like one group up?
Also what does flatting mean?
And lastly, how does your strategy correlate with turbos? Should we be opening up our range a little higher?
Thank you,
castizo
I just have a couple questions, When you say
"Be aware of a short stack left to act and adjust your opening range up accordingly."
"If you are likely to get called in one or more spots, leaving you OOP, consider tightening your Yellow M opening range."
"If you raise 3 consecutive hands and meet no resistance, consider a tighter range on the 4th consecutive hand. Someone is going to look you up and you do not want to give those "hard-earned" chips back"
How much tighter should we make it? Like one group up?
Also what does flatting mean?
And lastly, how does your strategy correlate with turbos? Should we be opening up our range a little higher?
Thank you,
castizo
- castizo
- Green
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 9:37 pm
27 posts • Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Return to Sit and Go Certified
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest