The Freakonomics of Tournaments, Chapter 2: Chaos Theory, the Butterfly Effect, and the Fundamental Theorem of Poker

(I posted this on 2+2 as well.)

Chaos theory in its most elemental version suggests that the forces of nature and reality are intertwined in such a way that what we do now will affect what happens in the future even in ways we may not see or comprehend. One of the ways chaos theory is most commonly expressed is by the "butterly effect". "If a butterfly flaps its wings in Peking the weather in New York changes the next day" or something like that. Among other things, it's a great reminder to a poker player not to be results oriented, and to only concern yourself with factors you can control.

How does this apply to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker, and more specifically, tournaments?

Well, the Fundamental Theorem of Poker states that every time your opponent plays his hand differently than he would if your cards were face up, you gain.

One big reason I play so loose is because I feel tournaments are absolutely about accumulating chips. The Fundamental Theorem of Poker speaks to the flipside: The other reason I play so loose is that it disguises my range so well and makes my hands hard to read. I induce more mistakes from my opponents than a predictable player can because their hands are much more readable with the information available. And that's the secret: My moves may be individually -EV on a particular hand, but they induce my opponents to make bigger mistakes than I make, because my hands are much harder to read than theirs.

Here's an example particular to me: Let's say we're in the mid stages of a tournament, antes are in and many people have Ms between 12-15 if not even shorter. A tight player opens in MP; his range may be, for example's sake, is 99+, AQ+. It folds to the villain in BB who has AQ. Now against a tight player it is usually right to fold because his range is such that AQ is being crushed. Now, my range in this spot might be 22+, 76s+, AJ+, ATs+, KQ, or some such. (My range is never set in stone; it depends on many factors, which is part of my style.) Now if the observant opponent knows me, he knows it's proper to push over me given the range I open with. As a result I usually have to fold the hands near the bottom of my range. I lose a small amount when I fold, but when I have a hand near the top of my range, I call and get the money in as a good favorite, and it's a much bigger pot than I would have been able to create otherwise. I generate more EV for myself this way, and I've found the huge mistakes I induce in my opponents when I have big hands make up for the small ones I make (frequently) preflop.

In addition, my aggressiveness at the table can occasionally induce others to play hands differently than they otherwise would against OTHER players. I've observed the following effect: After I raise several hands in a row, or, say, raise the same person's blind two or three times in a row, he may mentally decide "This is the hand I'll take a stand." So, say the next time I get garbage and throw it away. Someone else, a much tighter player than me, raises the blind, and the player who has already decided to take a stand does so again, and gets called by a much better hand and gets crippled or busts. In a tournament, where everyone's equity is affected by what happens on other hands, this can be huge. Instead of a simple blind steal or small pot, now someone is knocked out and we move up a pay spot.
The effects aren't always that pronounced, but they do exist.

This is a pretty rough draft and I'm sure needs work but I was thinking about this the last couple of days and so far this is the best expression of one of the benefits I've found of playing loose.

Questions, comments, and thoughts appreciated.