What would you consider normal variance in a loose/fishy MTT?

[steamboatin]

I am trying to get a gauge on my play at the 10pm $15+1.50 at Pacific Poker. Last night I finished 343 out of 700+. I never won a pot. Here is a hand and I would like feedback about how I played.

I am in early posistion with AKs and open raise for $100+ and get one caller. The flop is T22 rainbow with none of my suit. I bet $108 and the caller comes over the top and makes it $216. I fold.

Is that a good decision?

Is this Pacific Poker tournament a good one for a learner or is there a better tourney for beginning tourney players?

I have a decent ring game not great but break even/ small winner.

I have played this tourney 5 times and finished in the money once, something like 50th and won $50.

I would like to know how often can a reasonbly competent player expect to finish in the money and what does it take to win or finish in the top ten?

[SixgunSam]

You need to post more info to really get a critique on that hand, like what are the blinds, any reads on the player, what the stack sizes were, etc. Taking a stab at the pot with that flop is pretty standard. If he re-raised it could be he has a PP. There's really not enough info to analyze it.

[Lurshy]

5 tourney's is way to small a sample size to consider your win rate. I typically look at field in money %. Typically if the top 10% of the field are in the money, you need to be in the money at least that often to win your share. Of the times you are in the money, you need to get to the final table at least as often as the % would dictate e.g. if 100 people make the money, you need to be at the final table > 10% of the time you are in the money. Getting in the real money is necessary to cover your buy-ins for all those times when you didn't cash. Usually 'getting-in-the-money' only means giving you 1-3x your buy-in back.

People may claim win rate percentages more than double what the absolute percentages would warrant. Whether it is true or not, and over what kind of sample size, I don't know. I've won 2 large field tourney's, have had several 2nd and 3rd place finishes, other final table appearances, and other in the money appearances. I don't think my overall win rate though is much greater than the percentages would predict, then again I haven't played in nearly 1000 tournaments, and I've won 2 ~1000 runner size tourney's.

Similarly, in ring games (10 seated), you need to know you are winning your fair share of hands (10%). If you get away from hands without losing big showdowns, you can have net winnings with as little as an 8% hand win rate, though that is normaly breakeven or slightly down for me. I rarely do better than 11-12% winrate in a large sample size, and that would usually represent winnings > 100% of my ring-game buy-in. Obviously we've all had runs of winning 20% of hands for 100 hands, but those sessions are fleeting.

To win a large field on-line tourney, you need to play great and get lucky, not for one hour or two hours, but usually 5 hours or so. Those times will be rare and memorable, even for great players.

[Bernas]

Is this a no limit tournament? If so, his reraise seems fishy. But even still, you can't get married to your AK here and I would probably fold as well.

I personally don't like Pacific. I just don't care for the software.

As one poster said. 5 Tourneys is just too small to judge your performance. Keep in mind, that if you continue reading and posting here your chances of winning will probably increase. Try posting some detailed hands you had problems with.

[steamboatin]

I don't like their software either but I am a marginal player, improving but marginal and I can beat the ring games on Pacific. I play some single tables and some two table tournaments, my thinking is they are good practice.

This last tournament, I didn't really have trouble with any hands, because I barely had any to play. I have the patience to wait for playble hands but I always seem short stacked. The last two hands were playable and I got sucked out on and was gone. That is bad luck and I don't like it but I understand that it is part of tournament play.

I have Tournament Poker for Advanced Players, I'd better give it another read.

I play single table tournaments on UB also.

[Cleveland Guy]

[ QUOTE ]


I am in early posistion with AKs and open raise for $100+ and get one caller. The flop is T22 rainbow with none of my suit. I bet $108 and the caller comes over the top and makes it $216. I fold.

Is that a good decision?


[/ QUOTE ]

What were the blinds and stack sizes? Also - why are you making $108 bets? stick with the standard, it always sends a flag up my flag pole when people make weird bets like that.

As for the actual hand - if you were short stacked, or he was it might have justified the call, but if both stacks are deep it was good to get away from.

I'm not sure he has you with the raise, as a Ten high paired board will usually mean the PFR raiser missed, unless you had a PP, or would open raise from early position with a marginal hand.

A different line to try, and one that tends to work for me quite often is go for a check raise on the flop. as the PFR, your check might let him make a bluff at the pot, but it would be very tough to call a re-raise if he doesn't have a premium hand. I doubt he pair his 2's, so most players would release here with anything less than a Ten, or JJ-AA. If his bet is too big, just fold and move on to the next hand.

If he calls your raise- go into check/fold mode unless an A or K shows up on the turn. If he re-raises, fold, but chances are you won't lose many more chips than the way you played it.

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
What would you consider normal variance in a loose/fishy MTT?

[/ QUOTE ]


Somewhere in the 43-47 range...give or take