$5,000 WCOOP Final Table
Posted by Richard Gryko
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Resume Video
Start from Beginning
Watch Video
10
Loading 15 Comments...
Really good video, I feel like I have a semi natural understanding of ICM as I came up playing on party poker in plo mtts since about 2012 with very small fields so I get more ICM xp than an average player on Pokerstars but you really mentioned some interesting things that I maybe have thought about but in different ways, Cheers again, not too many videos on this site about PLO MTT's so this is great and from such a high level is amazing, thanks
Np, glad you enjoyed :)
Great video, great format!
Obv I'm biased but I agree :) tyty
This was great content. All of the tourney considerations and icm theory I think are valuable to both plo and nlh.
Agreed. There will obviously be some differences - fewer preflop allins, easier if you're careless to get yourself into a post flop collision etc - but the less quantifiable stuff like assessing seat value and factoring in future game, as well as obv the underlying theory behind the ICM model will move pretty smoothly across formats.
Great format! ICM heavy PLO situation in general seem very unintuitive and hard to study.
Do you think there is any merit to choose a pot size RFI sizing in most spots, especially not as chipleader, since we want to play pretty tight and we probably not folding vs the ultra shortstacks when they jam over our RFI anyway?
Maybe even having limps from earlier position in order to be able to VPIP hands w/ out an A in them (like Akus' TT99ds)?
from what I've seen, a lot of ICM sims favour sizings on the larger end in a lot of spots, but I think that may have at least something to do with the fact that in their "mind" the tournament concludes after this hand. I think its very stack distribution dependent and there are some spots, like opening BTN into SB/BB with significant ICM pressure, where its almost certainly correct, but applying it as a general rule I'm less sure about, especially if its an event where you feel like you enjoy an edge amongst the remaining players and have an interest in decreasing volatility.
EP limps is something I've experimented with and use in a few cases but generally dont like, which isn't to say they're "wrong", I think at this point theres sufficient lack of certainty for it to be a matter of personal preference. Its also the thing where you might want them in certain lineups and not in others, so I guess really its just about having them in your bag of tricks and pulling them out when you decide the situation calls for them. I do limp a bunch from BTN/SB, but those are obv different spots.
Honestly these two paragraphs being somewhat vague is primarily down to how dynamic MTT environments are which is one reason I find them interesting - at 8pm limps and full pot can be best, then at 8.01 something happens to tweak your assessment of best approach and at 8.02 you switch to 2.25x or fold, and if you missed the 8.01 event and full pot on autopilot you can be making some reasonably sized errors.
Very good points. Totally agree with the ever-changing nature of the table dynamics in tournaments, I mainly was curious about this because it seems that something like a 2x-2.5x sizing is used as a default by everyone on almost every occasion when effective stacks are >10bb even at high stakes and it doesn't seem intuitively correct.
Again great vid and I'd love to see more of that in the future :)
dpsd05 agreed, I think this is simply a product of PLO MTTs being understudied, so theres a general idea amongst a lot of players that they want to reduce volatility and in NLMTTs ppl open to sizings in that range so probably it cant be too bad and thats more or less it. In NL you often see a thing being done by everyone always, and then deviated from by a few ppl sometimes, and then those few ppl do very well so it catches on more and more, etc. I think PLO is on the same path but we're still at the first stage bc it just doesnt make sense for someone who plays, lets say, 25/50+ regularly and plays HS PLO MTTs when they, somewhat occasionally, run to devote their finite study time to relatively small EV gains in the latter.
it was great to be able to watch the replay on youtube and then to come over here and hear your thoughts.
last hand ,the one Naza opened the AK86ds; solver showed that SB dosent 3bet much and mostlly call, do u think it might be because solver want to give BB(alex) better odds to call and by that increasing the chances of Naza busting?
def not gonna be a thing you want IRL, as a big stack you have no particular interest in busting an extreme short stack, esp if the tradeoff is alex busting him and chipping up with direct position. took a look at the sim - basically the coldcalls are generally the more marginal continues, so whn SB coldcalls BB plays mainly squeezes, so to keep BB sqz frequency under control SB also includes some traps (bunch of ds AA unblocking squeezes etc).
Thanks for this video - it's incredibly useful. I've been playing midstakes omaha mtts forever and digging into these icm spots illuminated some concepts that were pretty counterintuitive and useful for me to see. Keep up the good work!
awesome, hope we dont play together soon then :p
Great video,there are so many factors you talk about that I never considered before.The seating,which stack your defending vs,bb distributions,the different ICM implications for short stacks.Feel like I learned a lot here and expanded my thinking for when I wind up on a final table!
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.