[apefish]

I had been trying to figure out how to say this and then it crystallized when I read MLGs thread about taking the worst of it.
Shaniac replies there that one of the intangible aspects of tournament play is finding "good" situations to take the worst of it.
From watching Nath thru some tourneys I have been repeatedly reminded of how often he is getting in "better" bad situations than many players I see. the 74s hand is one example.
He ends up in a coin flip with the shortest stack on the table which is the best possible "bad" situation he can find here.
On the surface it is a pretty unremarkable posting of a hand
where arguably Nath's play is -EV. (slightly maybe)
However if there is this concept- let's call it N where N= the ability of Nath to get what he wants (chips) in a tournament, this play is quite possibly a great example of the how and why of it. Probe enough to find the "bad" spots that arent so bad and they likely appear. Lather, rinse, repeat.
First- it doesnt take running incredibly hot in these "bad" but not extremely so situations for them to contribute to incredibly deep tournament finishes- in any given tournament running better than normal in close situations can have a huge impact.
The flip side is- if they are for rather manageable/small portions of your stack you have to run bad for them to noticeably hurt you.
Second- the totality of the plays he makes has some upside that you can't just measure in terms of slightly -EV here and there.
If he gets in more "good" bad situations than others, I think it becomes a bit more clear why he can also get more "good" good situations than many players. Show down 47 suited and I cant imagine how many times he gets in with AQ for a good portion against a worse ace etc. I would think he is much more likely to get better good situations than he is a truly bad ones when playing well.
Finding spots like this one seem to be a key part of the arsenal.