What I remember most is that I was doing pretty well each time, and both AA hands I was up almost double my starting stack and just got it into against an even bigger stack...ahead.
Imagine how happy I would be if those went the other way, the way the statistics say they should go... I would have had double the next stack in the tournament, been able to pick my moves for a long time... On the cash table I would have doubled up + ~$40 to around $440, and would have been ecstatic... and definitely played a couple more orbits before pocketing the win
This still doesn't tell me a lot. It's hard to say if you're making mistakes without knowing your overall approach to the game or even the specifics of these example hands. Having twice the starting stack is pretty nice in level 1, but can be meaningless or even a bad thing in level 13, and it does matter how you got that stack. I also can't help but notice that every hand you've mentioned is a top 10% type of starting hand, and that leads me to believe you're playing some variation of the tight-aggressive strategy that everyone "knows" is "correct" even though it's only correct for certain situations.
This is reminding me of a guy I play with semi-regularly in a local $30 tourney that typically runs 2 tables. It's mostly older people who play nitty poker, and this guy is the nittiest and most predictable of them all. A couple months ago, we played a hand where it was my 55 versus his 66 all-in preflop. I caught a 5 and busted him, and he still talks (read: whines) about it to this day. In the big picture, though, it was not even a truly significant hand. It was a must-shove, must-call spot that said nothing about either of us.
What he doesn't talk about are the 13 times I stole his big blind, while he shook his head and muttered "Nah, can't play this" or "You probably got me out-kicked" before folding a better hand than mine. He doesn't talk about the 9 hands where I used position to steal small and medium pots from him on the flop and turn. He doesn't talk about the 5 hands where he lost major value by betting into me instead of checking and letting me bet.
He also doesn't talk about how obvious it is when his big-ace hand misses the board or his small pair fails to spike a set. He doesn't talk about how little attention he pays to stack sizes and implied odds. He doesn't talk about how easy it is to get value out of him with strong hands because he gets mega-sticky if he has top pair or better. He doesn't talk about the fact that any half-adept player who has sat with him for more than a couple hours could read his range with hilarious accuracy.
I'm not saying you're this guy—whom I like as a person, BTW, despite my brutally honest assessment of his game. What I'm saying is that there's
so much more to this guy's game that he's not seeing because he chooses to only focus on the big hands where "My aces got cracked!" or "I can't believe you played 9-high for a raise!" That's pretty much all I'm seeing in your posts so far, and it's not much to work with. I can sympathize with running into shitty luck, but I'm sure there was much more to your sessions than these four hands.