You missed an important caveat of my statement. I said “If your next hand should be profitable” then you should stay. Obviously, if having a large stack makes you -EV because you don’t play well in a deep-stacked situation, then leave. But don’t leave because you want to lock up that money or something like that. Basically, the point of my post was to make decisions based on mathematical EV (obviously it’s a gray concept, but you can approximate it in your head), not on silly random reasons.

-Nat

I believe you should leave if the situation is this:

1)You cannot force your opponent into making big mistakes in the huge pots.

2)Your opponent has the ability to cause you to make big mistakes in the huge pots.

Some players are great at picking up small pots, but they don’t have the experience to play extremely deep. The epidemy of this would be a player with 1000 big blinds who can’t fold AA for his whole stack on the flop…I am certain I would have an edge over this player if his stack was deep enough, but if we were shortstacked, this might not hold true.

I sometimes wonder why I even bother trying to help.

“Dollar cost averaging has been widely criticized by economists and academic finance researchers as more of a marketing gimmick than a sound investment strategy (a way to gradually ease worried investors into a market, investing more over time than they might otherwise be willing to do all at once). Numerous studies of real market performance, models, and theoretical analysis of the strategy have shown that in addition to having the admitted lower overall returns, DCA does not even meaningfully reduce risk when compared to other strategies, even including a completely random investment strategy.”

Which “top investors” actually do this?