ICM Calculation Help

[Ryski]

I've been playing for about a year and have a pretty good feel for the game at the low limits. However, I can rarely back up what I think is the right move with the math and I'd like to improve upon that. Last night I was watching a $1000+ buyin between some of the top SnG players ( according to sharkscope leader board even though it is still early 2009 ) and I found a hand that was interesting to me. I'm sure it is very standard but I wanted to work through the math anyway just to see if I am doing it right. Here is the hand.

Blinds 100/200 Ante 25

Stack sizes before Ante/Blinds posted:

BU ( 1780 )
SB ( 1860 )
BB ( 2950 )
UTG ( 4090 )
CO ( 2820 )

Hand Summary: UTG raises to 475, CO pushes. BU, SB, and BB fold, and UTG snap calls and flips up 99.

I'm not going to say yet what CO flipped up because the result doesn't matter and I want to view this problem through the eyes of the UTG who snap called.

What does he have to estimate his opponents range to be to make this call correct? My first thought on him calling with 99 barring any read which he may have was "Why?" With the chip leader UTG raising, for CO to push over being the third stack and no where near in danger, I'd say he has to have a pretty good hand and is definitely not pushing wide....so why would he call with 99 and MAYBE be flipping. Help me with the ICM calcs?

If UTG folds he has 3590 for 25.03% equity ( percent of the prize pool or same thing? )
If he calls and wins he has 7285 for 38.46%.
If he calls and loses he has 1245 for 11.76%

So to make the call correct he has to be x = ( fold - lose ) / ( win - lose ) = ( 25.03 - 11.76 ) / ( 38.46 - 12.1 ) = 50.3%

From Pokerstove:

640,028,592 games 407.687 secs 1,569,901 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie
Hand 0: 40.636% 39.69% 00.95% { 99 }
Hand 1: 59.364% 58.42% 00.95% { 88+, AQs, AQo+ }

Widen that range and it still seems -ev. In fact it seems to be only +ev if UTG put him on exactly overcards or pocket pairs under his. Did I do something wrong here b/c I saw this at high level and I thought it was one of the biggest mistakes I'd seen in awhile. Maybe they have a read on each other and that's why but lets just say for this problem there are no reads. How is my logic?

[taipan168]

I haven't double checked your ICM calculations but they do seem right at a first glance.

The call may not be such a big mistake as it would be at lower buyins. The thing is, at this level you can get players who play each other all the time and therefore need to "out-level" each other with levels of thinking. For example:

- UTG thinks: Everybody will respect my UTG raise because I'm raising from UTG.
- CO thinks: Hah, UTG thinks that everybody will think he's tight because he's raising from UTG, but he has the big stack so he's probably bullying with crap. Therefore, if I shove over he can't call wide with his crap, plus he will really respect my shove because he'll think I've got a monster hand because I shoved over his UTG raise.
- UTG thinks: CO will be thinking that I'm bullying the table with crap, he'll think that I can't call with my crap so he may be shoving over very wide. Well, I have a real hand that stands up very well against his crap so I'm going to call:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 72.057% 71.67% 00.39% 9019433616 49284558.00 { 99 }
Hand 1: 27.943% 27.55% 00.39% 3467431668 49284558.00 { random }

[Ryski]

Tai-

Yeah I completely thought about that as well but it just seemed a pretty weird spot to do that and the risk vs reward was not that great. I mean he goes from chip leader 5 handed to last and then the blinds hit him the next hand. I would think he would pick a better spot and wait for one of the other shorter stacks to bust and exploit the bubble a little.

Btw CO turned up AQs and hit. This is almost like your example ICM calculation article now that I look at it.

First 5 games back tonight:

KK into AA first hand.
AA cracked by QJ all in and then JJ into QQ next hand and out 5th.
Bubbled A6s vs big stacks J9 <- I may not have been a good call but I'm sure he was pushing any two. I'll have to look later.
2nd
3rd

I run bad -- looks like I picked up where I left off 8 months ago!

Thanks for the feedback.