Tournaments - a team effort?
I'm sure this has been covered in some articles or other threads somewhere. But, lately I have been considering where to focus my time/efforts/cash to maximize profits.
In doing so I began to think about risk verses rewards and how in tournaments the risk is distributed and the rewards are shared. In essence, the better players are inadvertently teaming up to share the rewards as they collectively eliminate the lesser players. Am I wrong, is my logic flawed?
As an example...a tournament of 150 players, $50 buy-in. Approximate prize pool of $6750. Skill levels of novice, intermediate, advanced, and expert for this level of tournament. For purposes of the discussion we assume 10 experts, 20 advanced, 40 intermediate, 80 novices for the distribution. And we also assume equal distribution across the tables.
So as the tournament begins, by default the experts and advanced players are working together to consolidate the chips. As the tables are consolidated the percentage of novices and intermediate players go down relative to the experts. Final table you hypothetically end up with all the chips, 2 experts, 3 advanced, 4 intermediate, and 1 novice. 20% of the experts make it, 15% of the advanced, 10% of the intermediate, an less than 2% of the novices.
Now the key here, is as a cash player I can only play against 9 other opponents at a given time. I only get dealt so many hands an hour and I can't capitalize on all the novices sitting at all the other tables in the room. But in a tournament it is an agreement that states, "You take as much money off the novices at your table, I will take as much money off the novices at my table, then later on we will meet at the hideout, lets call it the final table and divy up all the booty" Done with a large enough pool of novices the experts reduce their risk/variance and increase their profits.
Thoughts? Is this a no brainer, an "of course tournaments are lower risk and more steady than cash?" What am I missing?