tournments = lucky?

hi don't you think poker tournments are mostly based on lucky? the most common thing to see is people being eliminated on coin flip... usually people don't go all with without a 77+ pair or AK/AQ, unless they're short stack and then we probably have a coin flip... or some dominated hands like AK vs AQ or KK vs QQ (and no one can blame the AQ for going all in, even if he knew his opponent was tight)

Certainly, a lot of donks play micro-limit SnG's and push all-in a lot in the early rounds. So yes, if you go up against them during this period, often times it's nothing more than a coin flip. Personally, I am not willing to risk even a measly $3 to this idiotic tactic, so I typically wait for the donks to be eliminated and start playing real poker from then on. It may not work well 100% but it's pretty close. Sometimes 1 or 2 of the donks will get lucky enough to make the final few players, but usually the smart & patient players are the ones that end up there.

I like going into the freeroll 5000 player tournaments, the only place where you can watch 3500 fools fry themselves by going all in with a 3 5, Sadly though I have also seen those players beat prime pockets.

all skill imo

kinda easy to say when u just finished 3rd in a $3+r

You have no idea of the kind of crap i had to face the last couple of weeks. Mostly because donkeys lucked out.
Some hand i've had:

- I had three time the hand QQ and some one lucked out with a hand like 35 suited and hit his flush (big raise pre flop from me)

- I lost KK vs. K7.... He floped two sevens (pre flop all in)

- On a very tight table someone has had it and starts to gamble with TJ just when i have KK and the flop 9 - Q -K and i lost (big raise pre flop)

- I losed a lot with AA vs. a lower pocket pair or something like AJ suited

- And most painful was this hand:
I had KJ of harts in BB and no one had raised
Flop - 9 hart - T hard - K spades - I had top pair - flush draw - inside straight draw.
He went all in (about half my stack) and i call. He turn 88 (no hart) and the only card that could save him was the one 8 that was no hart. and of course he hit it.

And than a lot of hand where i went in on the flop with a better kicker and lost to two pair.

Now there may be some hand where i lost because i was dominated but 9 out of 10 times someone luck out on me.

i tried everything from raising minimum to over betting and just going all in pre flop with these monster hand but i keep getting sucked out.

does anyone has had something like this as well before???

yes, that's exactly why I asked that
I played about 15 tourneys in the last 2 days, and got second place in 2 on at least 10 tourneys, I lost being favorite

check this one: I got AK vs KJ and was very happy when I saw he was dominated
I swear the flop was [J J J] (I don't recall the turn/river)

but this one was actually funny what I get mad is losing AK to QJ (those donks go all-in with QJ)

but the worse is that it seems that I'm the only one bad beated it seems I never win a hand that I'm not favourite

again... now I got [Ac Js] and called an all-in (I was short stack, high blinds)
my opponent had [As Th]

Board [Tc 5c 2c 3d 6h]

of course, no clubs for me on the turn/river
and his nice T on the flop

I'll say what I usually say to people when they ask the skill/luck question for tournaments. Skill gets you to the final table, luck wins you the tournament.

Skill and luck both play a part.

Though it seems the question is really only being posed as a prelude to a bad beat rant.

And what's the difference between KJ and QJ? They're both terrible to go all in with. BUT every move should depend on your position, chip stack, etc..


There's a lot of luck in tournaments, but you won't consistently win them without skill.

That last part, about going all-in with AQ even if we know he is tight. Umm unless we have less than 10xbb or why would we ever do that? Maybe, just maybe if it is suited, but that isnt much help if he is tight. If he really is tight and he shoves pre-flop, I think that AQ is an easy fold.

I will phrase it this way and I hope people understand I'm not trying to be an asshole. Online tournaments are so much more about luck than skill. I know someone that is extremely good at poker (he's top in the world online). Still I have the same ITM % than him. What makes us different? He is better than me for sure, but he also plays a lot more than me! If our ITM% is the same than why can't I just start playing the limits he is and do what he does? I can't loose that kind of money and he can. Live poker is where it's at! I'am up $2000+ live over the last 6 months live (I am poor so I can't really risk too much cause I don't gamble what I can't afford to loose). Online I'm down just about the same amount! Why can't I play as well online? I have had some crazy bad beats in cash games and I also think I may have been cheated out of a decent sum of money once too.

The biggest LUCK TOURNAMENTS are turbo's! No matter what limit! Basiclly if you lose any kind of chips early your phucked! The people that win those things is the person that gets the right cards ealry and gets lucky as well.

brent, MTT success has extremely little to do with ITM%. like, at all. there are people with 25% who don't make money for junk, and most of the best in world have an ITM% around 15%. it's because they're fearless in the middle stages and on the bubble, so they bust short of the money more often, but when they make the money they go deep way more often. that's what separates them

Sorry, but this isn't true either.

Yes turbos are faster, and they require a slightly different skill set, but they're far from being "all luck".

I strongly agree with the above post. Right now I'm primarily playing turboo 45 man sit n go's and I can tell you that they are not all luck. They require different playing styles no doubt but if played correctly they can be far more profitable then normal speed tournaments as you are able to play more. I also find them alot more fun as you only have to commit about an hour to play one as opposed to two or so.

Playing perfect poker is no guarantee of winning. If you get your money in with the best percentage, you can be sure that (in the long run) you will win more than your opponents. You'll never win as much as you'd like though.

Also, I think a lot of these "tournaments are all luck" players only look at their starting hand. If someone gets all your chips in after your big hand has been cracked... well, that's not a bad beat anymore. You got outplayed.

I think the single most important skill an MTT player needs is the ability to lay down a good hand when they're beat. Gambling all your chips in a 70-30 spot is ok, but going 55-45 over and over again will eventually get you knocked out.

My main problem playing big MTT is getting sucked into go allin preflop. It is hard to lay down AA, but sometimes going allin with someone with KQs will cripple you when they get lucky. I much rather prefer seeing the flop, even with monster starting hands. Putting my tournament life on one or two hands is not something that I am in the habit of doing. Does this mean that I fold AA if faced with an allin? Not always (not usually this should say), but when there are 3 people already allin and one or two of them have as many chips as I do, or close to it, I really think about what it means. Because if even one of those people out flop me, I may be eliminated or crippled to a point with no chance of coming back. This is one of the reasons that I am not a fan of the turbos at all. They dont match up to my playing style. I like to bide my time and outplay people after the flop. To me, even when I am a heavy favorite, putting my tournament life on the luck of the flop, seems like a risk that I am not comfortable taking. I still do it, but time after time I end up crippled after losing 2 allin preflop hands in a row. It is a tough decision when it reaches that point in the tournament when all the short stacks (and even many of the bigger stacks) start pushing hand after hand. It is impossible to tell when they really have a hand or if they are simply trying to steal the blinds or get lucky. Many times I have seen big stacks get sucked into facing off with these guys, trying to get their chips and also trying to knock one more person out, to lose a few of these hands and cripple themselves. Turbos are even worse in the fact that they encourage this behaviour faster. Some people flourish in this environment. I cannot get myself to be comfortable going allin preflop with 33 or KTos. I try to get into the hands where no one pushed and hope to catch a flop. I do believe that you need a large ammount of luck to finish in the top few spots in a MTT, but the best players will usually make it farthest. What I mean by this is that when you get to the final table, it will usually be some of the better players in the tournament, but they surely had to get lucky once or twice to make it. Many players of the same skill level were knocked out and they skated through. It seems to me that it takes skill to make it deep, but it takes luck to win.

My two cents.

The fewer options you have, the more you must rely on luck. In the later stages of tournaments, with ever-increasing blinds/antes, you can make fewer and fewer plays. This means you need to get lucky.

Also, tournaments (rebuys excluded) don't give you a chance to recover should a bad beat eliminate or cripple you. They also move you around so your image/reads become useless. These also limit your options/tools, thereby making luck more important.

In comparison, at cash game I can choose where I sit and with whom. The blinds never go up so I never get desperate to make a move. If I get felted I can rebuy and use that experience to enhance my play at that table. I never get moved from the table so my reads and image are good until my opponents leave. Also, it's not a "him *or* me" scenario, so I don't *need* to break anybody to make a profit. All these extra options means that luck is less of a factor.

But keep in mind that luck is a short term concept. If you continue to play well at tournaments, your profit from wins *could* overcome your losses from losing in unfortunate situations.

I say *could* because the tournament payout structure is biased toward the top seats, and there is a definite strategy to getting a top seat rather than a top 10 seat. A lot of good players can consistently get close, but they lack what it takes to get on top (an all-or-nothing fearlessness coupled with great reading skills and understanding of when the proper late-term moves should be made).

Harrington on Hold'em Volume II has seriously improved my endgame (http://www.cardschat.com/f39/pokerstars-3-buy-100-added-thurs-apr-17th-111365/). A lot of things I interpreted as stupid and lucky are actually calculated moves based on chip stacks, action, and position. Yes, there is luck, but knowing how to reduce the influence of luck, and knowing when to take a chance is skill.

You do know that QJ vs AK has a better chance of winning than AK vs KJ, right? I believe its about a 35% chance for QJ, and a 25% KJ.

I think some players are confused. Just because you're a favorite to win a hand, it doesn't mean you are guaranteed to win the hand. One thing to keep in mind is that if you're opponent has any chance of beating you, even just a 1% chance, it'll happen. Unless you are holding the absolute nuts, your hand can and will eventually be beaten. Take a look at some hand examples if 2 players went all in PF:

AKo = 61% chance to win vs 3/2s = 38% chance to win
AKs = 65% chance to win vs 8/10o = 33% chance to win
AA = 85% chance to win vs 7/Jo = 15% chance to win
QQ = 78% chance to win vs 3/5s = 21% chance to win

So, you can see that while you maybe a favorite in these examples, it clearly doesn't mean that you are guaranteed a winner. In the AKo vs 32s, 32s has about a 40% chance to win if all the chips go in PF. Just to simply things, but it really isnt an accurate reading, that means that hand will win 4 out 10 times.

When it comes to MTTs, there is a mix of skill and luck involved. More so skill than luck, but there is not a doubt in my mind that luck is a factor. Except for when it comes to Combuboom. He is pure 100%, unfiltered skill. We all need to lucky sometimes. Both in poker and IRL. The thing is, luck doesnt always happen. And thats where skill comes into play. Knowing what hands to play in certain situations, knowing when to fold, when to raise, when to trap, etc are all necessary skills you'll need to do well on a more consistent basis.

If you remember from the hand examples, the best hand PF was always the favorite to win, never the other way around. If you always have the bigger edge, you will win more often. Its as simple as that. So, continue to get your hand in with the best hand. The beats will happen and they will hurt sometimes, but keep in mind that skill > luck in the long run.

Agynus - alot of the time we feel like this. Get a hand tracking program like Poker Tracker and analyse where you loose. I thought I was continually been beaten by suckouts but upon analysing my "loosing" hand I realised I was over valueing certain hands. Not only this but its supprosing how many time we "suck out" too. Try all in on the turn with JJ board is Q J 3 and villain turns over QQ....river a J; suckout of note. I dont mean to patronise and you seem to have sort of HH but check it out.

As to the question IMHO luck can beat skill but over a long period skill will dominate luck. The whole game is based on knowing when and how to get your chips in the middle. Sure its not a guaranteed win but we can hedge our bets

Anyways Good Luck on the FELT

RAT

Have to agree with you rileyl. Yes, luck is probably somewhat more of a factor in the turbos, but not usually as much as some poeple think. You're right though about ammending your strategy. I typically see a lot of donks and maniacs pushing really hard in the first couple of round of blinds. Unless I have a close to unbeatable hand, I'll just sit back and watch them knock each other out. Granted, I play about 75% O8 and only 25% NLHE, but the same basic concept applies to both. By the time most of them have been eliminated, I may well be down a couple hundred chips but I almost always am able to come back from that and win or cash a reasonable % of the time. For me, it's all about being patient and picking your spots to take stands. I've had good success with this at 180-player regular NHLE, as well as 45, 18 & 10 player O8 & NLHE turbos.

Yeah, you know, I never really thought if it that before but I think you have a valid point there. I think this is why I typically finish ITM in the bigger tournaments, but never high enough to get a huge $$$ return.

Examples:

- 180 player $4.40 NLHE SnG's on PS... I am ITG about 70% of the time, but it's always been in the 10-18 payout range, in which the $8+ prize only doubles your entry fee (for about 2-3 hours work).

- The big ~3,000 player $1 & $2 tournamnet on PS. Again, almost always ITG, but sometimes just barely making the bubble. Best finished have been 11th-15th several times, but still has a payout under $20 (for 4-5 hours work).

I keep thinking that I can break that final table and make some real $$$ but realistically, it probably won't happen unless I change my style of play. The problem I have is indeed in that mid range... where, like you say, you could get busted out but you could also make the killing needed to finish top 5. I just can't seem to make myself risk getting no $$$ for the "possibilty" of making it higher up the payout chain. This is something I really need to work on. If you think about, even 1 finish at say 3rd place would probably be more payout that 7-8 finishes in the 10-18 slots (or just beyond the bubble area), but it's still really hard for me to get into that mindset. Well, I have had good success with the smaller SnG's so maybe if I build a big enough BR, I will get more gutsy in those big tourneys.

it both plays their part really well when you have nuts hands you win unless suckouts happens

^^^ Agreed. Really good post.