Hey, how's it going Herek?
I decided to explain my call here as I knew the hand made you mad at the time, and you seem like a good guy.
Whilst I'm obv fully aware of ICM and necessary calling ranges, you can't be so rigid as to say 'ICM is always right'. This hand is a good example imo.
It also never hurts to throw a few curveballs to the regs so they don't think they can just bowl you over every time they have a minor chip advantage over you (however, metagame is overrated in stts imo).
Anyway, what you failed to mention was that the other two players weren't 'unknowns' (not to me anyway). One is a mega-passive limpy fish type player, whilst the other one was a spewy uber fish.
I was therefore presented with a scenario whereby I could make a slightly -ev (on the bare face of it) call which would either a) bust me, or b) knock out the good reg at the table (you), and leave myself 3 handed with 2 players whom I know I can and probably will crush, especially with such a huge chip advantage.
I know you're shoving ATC here so I already knew at the time that if every player were of the same ability, I'd need something like 77+, a9s+, etc to call. (Again this depends on how you decide to calculate the 4 remaining bounties.)
So I called because calling here doesn't just gain you a flat chip advantage, it gains you a lot more when you recalculate future equity after this hand is played. Yes, of course anything can happen after this, and there are no guarantees of winning a single further hand. But poker is about expectancy, and in this case I feel my potential winning expectancy was increased by calling here, to negate the ev I lost by getting my chips in in what is normally a -ev situation.
A similar example of this is when you're playing a headsup stt against a totally passive, massively fishy, non aggro donk (they're very rare now but they used to be about everywhere you looked ♦). If they shove allin blinds 25/50 for 1500 chips, ICM (which is unable to take into account player ability & table dynamic) will probably tell you to call with Ax, 44 or 55+, maybe KQ, KJ etc. But which is better, to call now with some marginal hand and win 54% of the time, or stay in the game and realise your true expectancy against this type of player, and win 70%+ of the time?
So that's why I called. 
ps, I will sometimes do weird looking stuff at the tables. This is because I'm either tilting a bit, or trying to keep myelf focused & motivated by making some more unusual type plays. I've been full time for 5 years now and it can get pretty testing at times 
Cya at the tables and gl!
9 
K 
Q 
