Contemplating the ultra-short tournament

One of the wonderful things about poker is that there is no absolutely correct way to play. The correct way is always changing, and it's sometimes pretty hard to keep up. Last night, I only lasted six hands in the second tournament I entered. How could that have happened? On the face of it, that's playing horribly. But is it really? Looking at the specifics, I don't think it was in this case. I actually got it in good on hand six - after the flop, I had an 82.93% chance of winning the pot. Unfortunately for me, my opponent hit a second pair on the turn. Even though I only lasted six hands, I actually played better in that tournament than I did in some of the others where I lasted longer. How could that be? It's simple; my average quality of decision was higher. As long as you're making high quality decisions, you shouldn't care too much about whether you win or lose. That's accepted poker wisdom, and I don't dispute it.

buy_in entry_fee num_players num_hands place winnings

 45000      5000           6        48     3        0
 45000      5000           6         6     6        0
 45000      5000           6        14     4        0
 45000      5000           6         1     6        0
 45000      5000           6        21     4        0
 45000      5000           6        68     1   175500
 45000      5000           6        15     4        0
 45000      5000           6         5     6        0

delta: $-224,500
tournament balance: $2,342,590
balance: $9,225,289