I plugged the Sit-n-Go I talked about in my last post into Poker Tracker this evening. Just to paint the picture, perhaps, of just how passive this table was I offer up a couple of hands early on in Level I:
Second hand in BB with J-9. UTG folds and the next guy bets the minimum. The guy next to him calls and the rest fold to me and I check [Pot=t55]. Flop is Qh-4d-9d. I check, and the next guy bets the minimum - a big clue that he most likely did not hit the queen. He's on a draw most likely with an overcard and hoping to hit it. The guy next to him folds and now I have a decision. I have second pair plus a backdoor flush draw and a fractured gutshot strait draw.
I have two choices - raise or fold. Calling is not an option. I'm not giving up second pair for a minimum bet so I raise a) to protect my pair and b) to represent the Queen. I expected him to fold, but he called [Pot=t155]. This rattled me a bit. Maybe he had a Queen after all with a weak kicker, maybe he was on the flush draw, maybe he had a set and was playing me for a sucker. The turn was 7c and I checked - I wimped out. That check should have been a huge message to my opponent, but he gave me an even bigger message in return - he checked. My nines were good. The river was 2d - any other suit and I would have bet the pot, but if he was on the flush draw he just made it. I checked expecting him to bet big - but he bet a little less than half the pot. I decided to pay him off since it was relatively cheap to do so - good thing I did, my pair was good as he only had King high, flipping over K-T hearts.
That hand had me scratching my head. The next hand was the hand I described in my last post with the guy with the 8-2 clubs. I think that's where I began to get annoyed.
The next hand had a guy coming in for a minimum raise with Aces and a guy calling that raise with Jacks. Aces checked the flop which was Td-Qd-2s. Jacks bet 60 into a 75 pot. Aces called. Rinse and repeat for the turn - Aces check, Jacks bet slightly under pot, Aces call. On the river they both politely checked. I dunno. I guess there's really nothing wrong with how that hand was played - but that's another sample as to how passive the table was.
And looking at the hands in Poker Tracker, I really wasn't playing brilliant poker. I was just far more aggressive than most of the table. My Aggression Factor was:
Preflop: 1.87
Flop: 7.67
Turn: 2.0
River: 1.0
For a total of 2.57. Grrrrr.
As much as I would like to believe that I've "turned a corner" and reached a new level of skill in tournament play, I must take a reality check - and that's one great thing about Poker Tracker. My memory may have me playing brilliantly, but PT tells a slightly different story. I fumbled several times and had I been up against a tougher table, I don't think the results would have been the same. Chris confirmed he had a run of cold cards, which I'd suspected, otherwise I know he'd have given me a thorough run for the money.
