The Batfaces played in a tournament Saturday and did poorly. One year ago, we would have detailed this on Dan Michalski's
web site. The reason The Batfaces site exists is because most of us are fascinated by how the confluence of math, personality, and luck conspire to make poker so addictive. The reason this site exists is to explore this (as well as to chronicle other poker-related b.s.), and Dan, bless his heart, isn't capable of understanding this. He believes if you win, you are good, and if you lose, you are bad, and that is the heart of what makes posts such as
this so funny, in a sad sorta way. Taking my play as an example, he doesn't realize that I played better in this tournament than I did in a 50-person Platinum Room tourney a few weeks back, even though I came in fourth in the PR tourney. To him, that is impossible. To place 25th is worse than placing 4th, therefore you must have played worse. To argue this point with him is to argue with an
anthropomorphic bong.
Quick example of how results don't indicate good decisions: I went out in 25th-or-so place in both this weekend's tourney and the TBR tourney last year. Both times I was all-in pre-flop with 99s against A-10 suited. Both times a 10 came on the flop and I was out. In the TBR, I played the hand horribly and felt awful. Here, I played it the only way I could and got out-raced.
At the TBR, I was in early position and, for some reason (scared of everyone behind me, looking to hit a monster if I tripped up, something stupid like that) simply called the BB. Three others called before Adam raised it in late position. Now, I should have folded here with everyone to act behind me. OR I should have raised before the turn and had a better read of what was going on. I did neither, obviously. At this point, I re-raised all-in, was called by A-10 behind me (who thought I was trying to steal), and I lost heads-up. I hated the way I played the hand.
Saturday, however, it was pretty simple: I had been crippled when someone decided that, even with Kings, he was going to push all in after the flop with an ace and after I raised all-in. He was in fuck-it, go home mode, and so even though I made a sound play to represent the ace, I didn't take his mood into account and was properly punished for it. After that, I only have 5 times the BB, so when I see 99, I push in, am called by A-10 suited, 10 comes, that's life.
At the TBR, I played a hand poorly and was punished. At the Invitational on Saturday, my biggest poor decision was not to re-raise a too-aggressive player in an earlier post-flop situation, which would have given me enough chips to survive the mis-read I made on the guy ready to push and go home. Seemingly similar last hands and place-finishes had nothing to do with a self-evaluation of my play.