|
|
|
|
 |
|
Online Tournament Poker Meltdown
|
Author: Marc Weinberg
You're going to think I'm crazy, first for having the gall to complain after winning three big multi-table poker tournaments in October (but that was so last month), and second for proposing the theory that too many chips early on in a long tournament is actually a bad thing.
I have been playing my best poker over the last month, and the results have been suitably spectacular: 2 tournament wins in Las Vegas, both against large professional fields, and 1 tournament win against 400+ opponents online. My best poker wasn't enough to help me earlier today at Caribbean Sun Poker, and the reason could well be that I hit the front too soon. How can this possibly be a bad thing, I hear you ask? I liken it to horseracing where pacesetters usually have a tough time hanging on to the lead, and this becomes more accurate the longer the race. It's a tactical nigthmare to lead from the front unless it's a flat-out sprint.
So, the sprint equivalent in the online poker world is the short-handed sit and go, or really any single table sit and go will do. If you grab three-times as many chips as your nearest opponent there is a good chance you can put your head down and at least make it into the money. Once you're in the final three there might be more work to do, but early chips is certainly no impediment. But for some reason if you accumulate chips early on in multi-table tournaments they are often your undoing.
It's almost as though you have to pace your move and hit the front late in the action. Now, this isn't true for everyone, and I have no clever explanation as to why it should really be true for anyone, but I play in these events every day and empirical evidence (well, my solitary empirical evidence) leads me to conclude that it happens a lot. I'm no man of science, clearly, but bear with me on this theory.
After the first hour of today's event I reached the break in 3rd place out of 275, and still I wondered if I was there too soon. Nonsense, I told myself, it's good to have chips at any point, and you'll thrive. Well, I played one hand poorly, and it cost me 2000 chips. I then got pocket Aces, and everyone folded to me, and then came my meltdown hand against a complete idiot. The reason it is bad to have a lot of chips early on is that you will find a number of players willing to gamble against you for all their chips, and while all their chips might only be 1/3 of your stack, it can send you into a quick tailspin.
Let's say you have 2000 chips, and the average stack is double. You've been this way from the outset, with no hand to move on. You're itching to go, you find KT and pull the trigger, moving all-in. If you win this hand (usually against a good poker citizen like me, who calls you with JJ or some other sad tale) what happens? Invariably you calm down! You now have 4500 chips, and you're ready to wait for premium hands. What happens to me by contrast? I just went from 7000 to 4500, I'm level with a bunch of fools who raise all-in with KT. I go ballistic and donate the rest of my stack.
Well, in my case I didn't go ballistic. I raised 1500 preflop with the blinds at only 100/200. I got called by the big blind. He checked the flop of T52, and I went all-in for 3000 chips. I held JJ by the way. He thought for a long time. He had 4000 chips in front of him at this point. He called. He turned over 58. I'm not making this stuff up, why would I? The turn was an A and the river was an 8. It's amazing that this guy "bob monk" on Caribbean Sun / BetFairPoker / InterPoker can tie his own shoelaces, let alone switch on a computer and operate a mouse. In an intelligence test between bob monk and a real mouse there is only one betting favorite.
Look, I think it's great that the mentally disabled (less-abled, whatever you call them) can play poker, and why should I stand in their way? But I wonder if life could have been different if this wasn't the third bad hand to hit me in five minutes. If only I didn't start the sequence with 7500 chips. See, if I start that specific hand with far less chips than him I go all-in prior to the flop, he folds, and I don't hate him with a passion rarely seen outside of the Slavic nation-states. I have 2000 chips and JJ, boom, I'm taking my 300 chips profit and I'm happy. But I couldn't risk my entire stack pre-flop on JJ. I needed to see a safe flop, make sure I had the best hand, and then lose my entire stack to this guy.
When you are eliminated unluckily from a tournament there are some things you shouldn't do:
- Don't go and play in a cash game. You want to, and you have the mentality to throw off more money, but fight that attitude.
-Don't stay online. Move away from the computer and take a walk outside or watch television.
-Don't type anything obnoxious or rude. Let it go immediately, because it just isn't worth it.
-Don't bore others with your tale of woe, unless you're making some larger non-bad beat related point.
The bad beat is truly incidental. What is interesting is how my stack size moved me into a situation where a bad beat became a real threat. Obviously it remains a positive to have a lot of chips at any point in a tournament, but if you get a lot of chips early on you need to reassess your style of play. You can use your stack to bully others, and there are times when you should do this, but you also need to know that kamikaze players will gladly smash into your stack at any opportunity, and you need to understand that no lead is safe!
Related Poker Articles And News Items:
> World Series Of Poker 2005 - Poker Hand Analysis
> Don't Start Out With No-Limit Hold'em - Work Up To It!
> How To Win At Limit Poker - Some Thoughts
> The Difficulty Of Measuring Success As An Online Poker Player
> How To Win Online Poker Tournaments
> Recovering From The Online Poker Satellites
> Poker Odds And Assessing Your Outs
> Harrington On Hold'em Rules!
|
|
 |
| |
|
|
|
Hot Poker Promotions
|
Online Poker Rooms Guide
|
|
|
|
Join Our Newsletter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
