I haven't played much at all, lately, but when I have, I've been running well. As, for instance:
Amazingly, my Stars balance is now veddy veddy healthy for the piddly stakes I normally play, enough so that I can take a shot or four higher up. This one above was funny. It was my typical Das Boot performance, except this time the damn sub almost made it to dry dock. Short-stacked throughout, I had to suck out with 8-8 against Q-Q just to stay alive roughly halfway through, but from then on I kept getting the chips in with the best cards and having the cards hold up. Made some steals, of course, and leveraged my itty-bitty stack of chips as best I could while players dropped out around me.
I made it the final three, somehow, with less than a tenth of the chips in play, then doubled through twice against one of the others, a nice, but not very skilled, player. (Whaddya expect in a $9.90 tourney?) Suddenly I was heads up with just about 40% of the chips, and we got all the chips in right away, with me having A-K to the leader's A-J. Alas, the string of beats I faded earlier ended right there, as the jack flopped. But I'd been way ahead of the curve anyhow in this one, because you can only dodge the suckouts for so long.
I did a little ego-peeking at officialpokerrankings in recent days, a site I maintain is of marginal use anyway. Since I don't play much on Stars and play small anyway, I usually hang in the 60-65-70% range on the ROI rankings on that site. Therefore, I was curious: What would one good $9.90 final table do?
The answer: All the way to 96%. To which I say, no way. One lucky run in a $9.90, 360-player tourney should not be able to knock one's stats into the top 4% of all players, given that before the event, my ROI for the last 120 days (as that site tracks it) was something like negative two percent. Lies, damned lies, and statistics, all of it.