Author Archives: Barry Carter

How does ICM impact PKO strategy?

If you have read The Theory of Progressive Knockout Tournaments you already know why we can play wider ranges in PKOs than in regular MTTs. In particular, this effect is most pronounced at the start of PKOs where Bubble Factor is below 1 (something you don’t see in regular MTTs). This is because the upside of winning bounties is more than the downside of losing chips, so much so that we can play looser multiway than in heads-up pots. But what about when the payouts are looming in PKOs? How does the impact of ICM near the bubble or at final tables affect our strategy?

Multiway strategy in Progressive Knockout Tournaments

Progressive Knockout (PKO) tournaments are much more complex than traditional MTTs. The fact that players are incentivized to make high-variance plays for bounties often masks just how complicated they can be. One of the areas where players struggle in this regard is multiway pots. It is often correct to take seemingly wild gambles, and play in a way that would otherwise be unprofitable in regular tournament formats, when multiple bounties are on the line.

How ICM Impacts Postflop Strategy

Most players understand how the Independent Chip Model (ICM) in poker impacts their strategy preflop, especially at shallow stack depths near the end of a tournament. But what about postflop ICM? What do the GTO solvers teach us about playing the flop, turn, and river when at final tables or near the money bubble of a poker tournament?

What is the Bubble Factor in poker tournaments?

The Independent Chip Model (ICM) shows us the real money implications of tournament chip decisions. Most players on how tightly or how aggressively they should play. Calculating ICM in real-time at the tables is impossible. Thankfully we have a way of making informed decisions on the fly in the late stages using a concept called Bubble Factor.