[eanderson85]

I raised to 3 planning to not play against the big stack, he shoved, I called.
I am now the 2nd biggest stack at the table, and my M is high enough I can now fold 98% of hands until the big stack is no longer on my left.
ICM is NOT GTO. It is based on a horse racing formula.
It does not include positions.
It does not include the player’s M.
It does not include table dynamics and player image.
It does not include the playability of stacks before or after hand.
It does not include future game.
It does not include tells.
It assumes everyone is playing perfectly.
In 5 years ICM will be treated like a 3BB open, and we need to keep up with the changes.
We need to always be looking for exploits, especially with a theory that is partially developed. Even when we can include ICM into the GTO models, we are still limited by computing power (limited # of bet sizes and game tree options) and memory retention.
GTO and ICM are not perfect, and poker is not solved. These are the best mathematical solutions we have at the moment though, and we need to study these situations to train our brain. We need to know how our opponents are playing in order to find exploits. We need to look for exploits, and not just “follow the solver”, because the solver is not perfect, and will change in the future.
Luck is when Preparation meets Opportunity.
Our brain is still a better computer, and sometimes our “gut feeling” is the right answer. Ever notice beginners making more GTO plays than the other players at the table?
If our opponent is playing perfectly, shouldn’t the “correct” answer to their limp/shove be indifference?

[taylormaas]

I’m either just limping or jamming. My first reaction was to jam.

[elvida]

I would tend to agree with Taylor, without knowing too much more about the situation, I think limping behind or jamming it in seems best.