The term \"late stages\" in multi-table tournaments denotes the period starting from when the bubble bursts and culminating in the crowning of the champion at the final table.
What steps can we take to enhance our chances of advancing far in a tournament?
Table of Contents
Understanding ICM Implications
Due to ICM The implications of independent chip modeling indicate that the anticipated outcomes of specific plays will fluctuate based on the tournament's progression. Typically, the highest ICM pressure arises during the bubble However, this pressure dissipates shortly after, as the subsequent payout increases tend to be smaller and occur more frequently.
As competitors near the final table, ICM pressure starts to rise again due to the significant financial incentives for the top few finishers. Generally speaking, the lesser the ICM pressure, the more a tournament resembles a cash game .
Following the bubble, our primary objective should be to quickly increase our chip stack, even if it involves the risk of going all-in.
Post Bubble Strategy
Until larger payout jumps materialize, every participant should aim to amass a substantial chip stack for the final showdown. For shorter stacks, playing cautiously at this point doesn't make much sense, especially after adopting a conservative approach prior to the bubble; now is the time to re-embrace aggressive play.
Busting out At this segment of the tournament, the risk associated with chip loss is not overly concerning, as the next payout increment is usually minor compared to the current. payout This situation starkly contrasts with the bubble phase, where the transition from zero profit to gaining an actual payout represents the largest jump in the tournament (effectively infinite when considering multipliers).
Naturally, players should avoid unnecessary risks while trying to enlarge their stacks, yet short stacks face added pressure since failing to act could lead to elimination due to blinds. Certain commitment choices may be justified, even if they seem detrimental from a chip-EV perspective.
Any decision anticipated to logically bolster our tournament earnings in the long term should be pursued.
Final Table Strategy
As the final table approaches, ICM pressure begins to intensify again. This will depend on how large the payout increments are. The greater the gaps difference between payouts, the more significant the ICM influences on the players competing at the final table (major jets create mini-bubbles).
In contrast, a \"winner takes all\" format behaves exactly like a cash game at any tournament stage, thus bearing no ICM pressure.
To simplify this concept for better understanding (without diving into detailed calculations), imagine there are three competitors remaining at the final table: maths Consider, for a moment, that we are player 2 and are informed that according to the tournament rules, we must engage in a flip
- Player 1: 5,000 chips
- Player 2: 10,000 chips
- Player 3: 15,000 chips
against a player of our choosing. Of course, such a scenario is entirely fictional, but hypothetically, who should we opt for? all-in
coinflip Without an understanding of ICM, one might mistakenly claim, \"it doesn't matter, we're putting in the same chips for identical equity.”
This perspective would, however, be fundamentally flawed.
We would always opt to gamble against player 1. Why is that?
Let's break it down, considering both potential outcomes:
We’ve now clinched second place and have a more favorable chip count to go after player 3.
Against player 1 -
We win –
If we lose – That's unfortunate, but we still have 5,000 chips and a solid chance of winning the event.
However, we haven't secured second place yet. If luck isn't on our side, we might still bust out in third place.
Against player 2-
We win –
Ok, we are now a healthy chip-leader If we lose – Our tournament ends here, and we've finished third. Player 1, who started with fewer chips than us, is guaranteed second place now.
In fact, if we assume the role of player 1, we actually want players 2 and 3 to engage in a head-to-head conflict. This way, we might secure second place without having to take any risks ourselves. However, if players 2 and 3 are playing cautiously, player 1 is under pressure to act or risk elimination from the tournament.
Player 2 can choose to adopt a more conservative approach, hoping player 1 gets eliminated without them needing to confront player 3.
Hence, when experienced players discuss \"ICM pressure,\" they are alluding to several types of pressure based on each player's standing at the final table.
The player with the shortest stack is consistently under greater pressure to make a play.
- Players prefer to compete against opponents they can outlast, avoiding jeopardizing their entire stack.
- Larger stacks often exploit the hesitation of others to challenge them.
- Mid-stacked players may choose to play conservatively, hoping that additional players will be knocked out or get eliminated due to blinds.
- We have examined a scenario with just three players to illustrate the fundamental impact of ICM pressure on players' choices at the final table. However, the implications extend to all players in the
and can influence decisions made prior to reaching the final table. final table Performing ICM calculations manually can be complex; therefore, most players opt to utilize software for assistance. Investing in an ICM calculator and practicing with various prize structures is advisable.
Getting Good with ICM
A solid comprehension of how the underlying math dictates the expected value of different actions, grounded in the ICM framework, will aid players in making informed estimates during gameplay.
Push/Fold Ranges During the late stages of a tournament, it is common to find oneself with a notably short stack. Typically, our choices will be limited to either shoving or folding when we take the first action. Therefore, establishing a comprehension system for these ranges is critical.
Many players utilize “Nash calculators” that provide equilibrium solutions for push/fold strategies. poker hands to shove can be useful.
While the resulting analysis may not always yield the most exploitative strategy, it can offer a helpful framework regarding how broad push/fold ranges should be across different situations.
It's perhaps not surprising that a
Final Table Psychology
is often vulnerable at the final table, usually due to heightened anxiety. The extent of this can vary from player to player, and in the heat of the moment, there is limited recourse to manage the situation. player’s mental game Nonetheless, the following points should be considered:
It is beneficial to refine our mindset for the final table prior to arriving there.
- Thorough preparation tailored to the specific structure of the tournament can mitigate nervousness.
- Over time, as we become more familiar with reaching final tables, nerves are likely to diminish.
- Timothy \"Ch0r0r0\" Allin is a professional poker player, coach, and author. Since starting in 2006, he has grown his bankroll from the lowest online stakes without making any deposits. After competing (and succeeding) against some of the toughest opponents worldwide, he now shares his strategies and insights with 888poker magazine.