MiamMiam

Hi Sam, thanks for the video; I would like to see a video where you show us some exploitative plays. There are already lots of videos around talking about GTO, constructing ranges etc; but not so much about exploitative plays.

It doesn't have to be a flashy bluff in a big pot like that 88 hand, it can also be exploitative folds like you almost made at 35:00 with JT.
I actually find the second one more interesting, these "crying calls spots" happen very regularly, and it's easy to talk oneself into calling because of pots odds, because "if I fold I'm so exploitable", because "he has many hands in his range he could try to bluff with here", etc. while the fact is: there are opponents who are never/rarely bluffing (at least not when they use a certain line or sizing)
Something I found difficult to do is to pick up reads on opponents and from there deduce what they can or cannot do.

Hi,

I believe there is another approximation in the ICM model, it's that the frequency of finishing at a given position is considered to be independent of the prize structure.

For example, if I'm the only shortstack of the table at the bubble, I will finish last more often than at a winner takes all tournament with similar stack sizes; because in the first case it is the correct play for the other players to wait for me to bust before fighting each other. But in the ICM calculations I have the same chances of finishing last in both cases, since this is calculated only based on stack sizes. If this was properly taken into account by the model it could change the results quite a bit... Am I wrong?

Yeah it's certainly better to check some hands. I didn't wanted to be too ambitious with the calculation at first.

It's a 9max table with antes and 10BB stacks. So, top line is the Nash resteal range wish I deleted (not necessary in the calculation). Then I set up a script to calculate the equity for varying call % given the actions on the flop. I have a set of different conditions for the BB jam and BU call on the flop. I looked at different kind of flop manually and with these conditions both ranges looked ok to me. BB jam with pairs, flush draws, straight draws, good gutshots. Bu calls with pairs, flush draw, straight draws, good overcards, and some gutshots like QJ on A98 w a backdoor draw (which maybe I should remove?). Here is the range I got! The equity kinda reach a plateau from there up to 100%, so possibly one can call even more.

Suitedness seems very important... maybe I play too much flush draws on the flop? 

It's true that ICM affects mostly the person who is not the aggressor, but the aggressor needs a stack that can be threatening for the opponent's tournament life. i.e. if you have 15BB in the BB and the BU has 60BB the ICM pressure is always on you even if you're the one who shoves.

Regarding the flatting with 10BB question, I said with "hands outside of your resteal range" just as a starting point to introduce flatting in our strategy. If I can just flat things without changing anything to my resteal range or without being concern about balancing my flat range, and still make it work, it's pretty easy to add to my current game right away, even if it's maybe not the most optimal strategy.

I bought CardrunnersEV yesterday to do that, and I'm now playing with it. I set up a Bu vs BB situation where Bu minraises the Nash range and BB shoves the Nash range, + BB flats some hands on top of that, and donk-shove flop when he hits a little something, which Bu call with "decent" hands. It changes with how wide players wants to stack on the flop, but yeah it seems to work! I'll be happy to show you my calculations if you are interested.

I'm also wondering if you can flat from the BB against a minraise with even shorter stacks like 10BB with hands that are outside of your resteal range. Currently that would be considered a "terrible play" by the MTT community... The only time players flat from the BB with 10BB is to do a "stop-and-go", which in the end is very similar to going all-in preflop.

Well I'm an MTT player and almost all regs ranges for calling the big blind are tighter than this, sometimes way tighter, even when the raise come from the BU. Regs will have a Nash-based strategy for jamming, but I don't think I've ever seen a call BB vs BU for 20BB with hands like T6s or J7o which were part of your flatting range in the video. It could be because of ICM issues which are always more or less present... but at the same times there are antes in MTT! Could it be like that in MTTs simply out of tradition? So yeah that's why I'm interested in the question basically. Maybe I should go spy on high stakes cash cap tables lol

How did you came up with the flatting ranges you present in the video? One approach to try to calculate that is to consider the equity of a given hand against your opponents raising range, then multiply that by an "equity realization" factor to take into account that we are oop without initiative and will have trouble getting to showdown, and then compare what you get with your direct pot odds. But I find it difficult to know how much of our equity we can realize with our worse hands. 50%? 80%? I have no idea really :-)

Thanks for the video! I would be interested in looking at what a BB flatting range could be facing raises from earlier positions. Do you think the BB can flat very wide as well or does it tighten up a lot?