TheKnightClinic

It's actually not a vague question. It's a very specific question about one particular situation. It's a live tournament with 20 minute levels.

Thanks for the detailed response. You are correct that each tournament is not winner-take-all and ICM is definitely a consideration. The point system for each tournament is...
1st - 16, 2nd - 11, 3rd - 8, 4th - 4, 5th - 3, 6th - 2, 7th - 2, 8th - 1, 9th -1, 10th - 1

*Also, only your top 8 finishes count for points

As for prize distribution at the end, the winner gets an entry to a major tournament in which he receives 60% of whatever he wins at that tournament, and the remaining 40% is distributed between 2nd to 10th place finishers (with 2nd receiving the highest percent, 3rd receiving next highest, etc.). So while that is a small consolation to people who don't win, I am personally treating the final prize distribution as winner-take-all (because the difference in value for me finishing anywhere below 1st is trivial to me).

I would say I'm playing vs a field that has very little understanding of ICM. I understand that this means that I can't adjust to ICM strategies as much as I could if my opponents also considered ICM (but this doesn't mean I shouldn't adjust at all). I'm also speculating that there may be an added benefit to tighter play when you're at a table of players that neglect ICM (because when two players involved in a hand together collectively neglect ICM, the rest of the table benefits. So it's good to not be involved in these "mutually deterimental" pots, isn't it?).

Thanks again for the recommendations.

Edit: Watched Sam Grafton's "Thinking about ICM" and it was excellent.