Matusow would call me sick.
I love Tournament Poker. Specifically, I love Multi Table tourneys. I'm sick, I know. If you don't think that this is a sick way to play poker, let me run down my last five tournaments.
First, I've made the money 3 times in these. I've made the final table once, the final two tables another time, and the final three a third time. Of course, I got furthest in the cheapest entries, but c'est la vie.
Friday night, in the 14k (24/2 entry) on Full Tilt, I finished 17th of 660ish. That was good for 85 bucks, or about 60 bucks profit. I felt I played quite well, I just took a beat to go out. Saturday, I felt I played pretty mediocre, but still managed to finish 20th of 330 in the 30k on FT, 100/9 entry. That was good for about 180 bucks. I netted an additional $100 for eliminating Full Tilt Pro Erick Lindgren, as his AK was no match for my TT.
Sunday, in the 500k on Stars (200/15), I did not last more than 20 minutes. 89 died to 66 after I got the player to commit a significant number of chips on the 997 flop. He spiked a six on the turn, and I paid. In the 60k on FT (200/15), I finished 61st of 360 as I fell to another poor play. Weirdly, I thought while I was in the tournament that I was playing simply horridly, I was just lasting because I went 2-2 in coinflips.
Yesterday, in the 14k on Full Tilt (24/2 again), I finished 6th of 660, good for 753 bucks. Again, for whatever reason, I felt I was playing mediocre poker, I was just getting some cards.
Anyway, the moral of the story? 3 cashes in five tourneys, including a final table. Net profit? Less than $530. I'm fucking nuts.
As an aside/postscript, I felt I played nothing more than mediocre yesterday and poorly on Sunday, but looking back, I actually played pretty damn well. I took a LOT of pots I had really no business taking with good understanding of table dynamics and well timed bets and raises. I think the moral of THIS story is that you can never truly analyze your play until after the fact.
3 Comments:
That is, of course, if results (aka $) define quality of play. ;) ...But I'm partially teasing.
Only this week, have I finally realized that I'm 'sick' too. I'd rather play a multi-table tournament over a ring game any day.
I'm struggling to find my ring game holes. 'Cause I'd really like to make this hobby more than profitable. ;)
Results never define quality of play. What I mean is that you can only truly assess your play after you're able to see it from distance. Sometimes, while you're playing, all you see are trees. Afterwards, you can see the forest.
I gotcha. I wasn't sure which you were originally saying.
Post a Comment
<< Home