ICM endgame under 10bb: bubble vs final table

The previous lesson showed sub-10bb strategy at chip value. Published ICM-aware solver work (GTO Wizard, Part 2, July 2026) shows the same depths collapsing to *different* ranges once payouts exist — and the difference between a money bubble and a final table is a full inversion. On bubbles, ICM pressure piles on the SHORT stacks; on final tables it piles on the MEDIUM stacks. Every opening, calling, and defending threshold below moves accordingly.

  1. Name the pressure owner.Bubble → short stacks tightest; final table → medium stacks tightest — ask whose elimination hurts most.
  2. Reprice the double-up.Short on a bubble doubles from 0.5% to 0.8% win equity; at a final table the same double can buy a pay jump.
  3. Apply the risk premium.Add the premium to chip-EV breakeven equity — ~19% on bubbles versus as low as ~2% for the shortest final-table stacks.
  4. Respect the stop-and-go.Even 4bb stacks still fold postflop — don’t jam ace-high into a price that rewards calling with any pair.

Worked example: the same depth, four different answers

SpotChip-EV rangeICM range & why
HJ opens 8bb, bubble~30% shoves~12% — risk premium ~19%, suited ace-x dominates; AA traps with a min-raise, bluffs fold when raised.
CO opens 4bb, bubbleWide — position + 62.5% stack gain on a steal~19% premium most per stack depth — still tighter than chip-EV; the "race to survive" makes even 4bb play for the min cash.
UTG opens 8bb, final tableBaselineWider than bubble — risk premium only ~8%, and doubling buys real ladders; the 15bb LJ behind plays tighter than you do.
UTG 2bb, final tableChip-EV:Wider than chip-EV — premium ~2%, next hand is the forced blind, so shove almost everything (live rules permitting).

The first row's tightening is the article's headline comparison; the last row's inversion — a 2bb stack shoving *wider* under ICM than without — is its punchline.

Facing decisions invert too. The analysis measures a short 8bb stack facing an 11bb shove on the bubble folding TENS and ace-queen suited — needing roughly 65% equity (15% premium stacked on chip-EV's ~50%). The same stack facing a similar shove on a final table calls noticeably wider, because doubling turns the opponent into the short stack and moves YOU into medium-stack territory. Facing an OPEN, the divergence sharpens as you get shorter: on the bubble, an 8bb stack reshoves linear premiums while a 4bb stack tightens to a calling range (no fold equity); on a final table, the 4bb stack goes *wider* again, hunting the double.