Confessions of a mediocre tournament player

McMelchior · #1 11-10-2005, 12:27 AM

I mostly play NLHE tournaments, and I don't do well in them.

I don't do horrifyingly either - thankfully it's been more than two years since I had to replenish my account. I've even been able to make a couple of cash-outs after big wins, and I have likewise had a couple of live tournament cashes, including one during the WSOP 2005.

So why am I unhappy? The problem is that I make a (relatively large) number of mistakes - in basically each and every tournament I play.

The mistakes seem to fall into two categories: Those caused by things I don't do (that is, I tend to play scared and way to passive when the conditions dictates a more active approach), and those caused by things I do (when I try to compensate for my too passive play by attempting aggressive plays that I'm not skilled enough to pull off).

The most inspiring thing I've read recently is about Sirio's "perfect poker" concept. For those of you who are unfamiliar with it I recommend checking his excellent blog.

Applying the concept in practice confronts me with a decission: I feel I play my best poker when I play within my "comfort zone"; a highly conservative/tight approach, with strong emphasis on preflop reads and play. I'm cable of making steals from LP, but by all means not in every orbit. Playing this way my game presents itself as un-inspired and way too claustrofobic; ultimately my results end up hinging to a very high extent on whether I pick up playable hands during the long mid-phases of the tournament or not. Playing this way leads to numerous, inconsequential cashes, that steadily depletes my bank roll. And yet it seems to be my strongest poker.

Alternatively in my quest for "perfect poker" I can choose to apply a much more aggressive, proactive strategy. Actually, I feel I must play this way at certain points in my tournaments, to counteract the thermodynamic heat-death of seeing my good stack losing it's power and potential as the blinds goes up and the average stack-sizes catches up with what was once one of the big stacks.

All my big finished and final tables have been due to grave errors, where I got lucky and hit 3-outers against strong made hands. I appreciate Harrington's oppinion (paraphrased from memory) that you can't win a tournament without at least once getting your chips in as a huge underdog and hitting a perfect card. But getting lucky shouldn't be a part of a basic tournament strategy aimed at getting my within reach of the money in the first place.

In spite of decent reads (I'm rarely wrong when I sense weakness in my opponent) and at least familiarity with the "dark tunnel bluff" concept, most of my tournament's end when I hand over a large part of my stack to an opponent during failed bluff attempts. My inability to play well post flop (unless I hit the nuts) and my insisting on making this kind of moves in spite of this typically devastates those tournaments where I manage to build a good stack early on.

Man, it's frustrating.

Here's one from tonight's $5 re-buy. I've been hovering as a nice-sized stack through the first 3 hours, but a spell of unplayable cards has frozen my stack, and it's suddenly at risk of getting - if not short, then average.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t1200 (9 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

saw flop|saw showdown

Button (t16400)
SB (t30560)
Hero (t43692)
UTG (t12131)
UTG+1 (t7677)
MP1 (t12520)
MP2 (t33652)
MP3 (t55106)
CO (t71684)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
7 folds, SB raises to t3600,

My history with villain here is, that he's been the second most aggressive player at the table for the last hour. I happily put him on a wide range of hands when he open-raises from the SB, and decide to risk a little more than 5% of my chips to "see the future" and maybe take the pot away from him:

Hero calls t2400.

Flop: (t7,875) J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)

SB checks,

I'm 90% convinced he's weak here. So I decide to put him to the test:

Hero bets t8,400, SB calls t8,400.

Dang, I'd much rather see him fold here. There are two spades on the board, and a possible str8. Unless he holds the absolut nuts with a flush re-draw (QsTs) the flat call makes no sense to me - or rather, it tells me that he's far from happy with his hand. With his history of aggression I have no doubt he would have CR'ed a flopped set.

Turn: (t24,675) 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players)

SB checks

Is it here I'm supposed to push? I'd hate for him to put me on a flush draw and call me down with Ax. And I get scared. What if I'm wrong, and he's actually looking at AQ or AJ, just being to donky to CR the flop? I decide that if I was the one holding a strong hand he's expect me to slowplay it here.

Hero checks (Meh...)

River: (t24,675) Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players)

SB checks,

Oh, that river is great. No way I can put him on a T or a runner-runner flush. But that is what he should fear from me! Let me see, he's got t18,000 left, enough to have a chance for a comeback if he folds. But moving all-in is like screaming "I don't want you to call me". I decide that 2/3 of his stack (that's also half the pot, and nice round amount) should be optimally difficult for him to call of, unless he's sitting on the flush or the str8:

Hero bets t12,000

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)